Exeedingly Sad

[OldRegular]

I came here simply to read, but Iconoclast made this absolutely false statement.

I have NEVER said Jesus came in sinful flesh. I have said Jesus came in the exact same flesh we have and was tempted in all points as we are, yet without sin (Heb 4:15). I have said Jesus took on the nature of the seed of Abraham and was made like unto his brethren (the Jews) in all things (Heb 2:16-18). This is perfectly scriptural.

I have never said Jesus had a sin nature, I do not believe we are born with a sin nature, although I do believe all persons develop a sin nature after they mature and knowingly and willingly choose to sin.

Folks misunderstand because they do not know that our NATURE or lifestyle is learned behavior. If you smoke cigarettes for example, you learned that by observing others, it was not something you automatically do.

As for the debate here, I understand exactly what Skandelon originally meant. He simply said if everything we do is determined, then it is silly for Calvinists to attempt to correct non-Calvinists, as obviously God has determined that non-Calvinists be non-Calvinists. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand this. It is a perfectly logical argument from Skan.

If Calvinism is true, a Calvinist is actually fighting against God when he attempts to correct a non-Cal, because he is fighting against what God has determined. If the Calvinist claims God has determined he correct the non-Cal, then you have God fighting against himself, as God determined the non-Cal would be a non-Cal. This shows how utterly ridiculous determinism is, but Calvinists are unaware of this.

HoS understands this too. It is folks like Iconoclast and OR who do not understand their own theology. They really don't.

Icon simply parrots what he has been told, he doesn't have a clue. OR is a little more thoughtful, but he is also oblivious to the logical conclusions of his own doctrine. As HoS has said, very few Calvinists really understand their own doctrine. They are completely unaware of this.

You are simply wrong Winman. You and Skan and "all the wanta be logicians" on board really are confused about the Doctrines of Grace.

1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

 

[Bronconagurski]

I can't speak for anyone but myself, but when I was under conviction, the power of the Holy Spirit (did not know it was the Holy Spirit at that time) was real, convicting me of my sin, telling me to repent, and to put my trust in Christ as the sacrifice for my sins, and in His resurrection for my righteousness, of which I had none. These things were preached to me and I had heard some of them before. But this time was different. I could not get away from that force in my life drawing me to the Saviour, nor that same force warning me of judgment to come should I reject Christ. But that did not save me, I still had to repent and turn to Christ, but were it not for God drawing me to the Saviour, and convincing of what He had done for me, I would not have believed. When I did believe unto salvation, the burden of sin rolled away and words can never explain it, nor did it need to be repeated. God instilled in my soul that He saved me, and that nothing could change that fact. After 30 years, I still do not know a lot of things, but that one thought and power sustains me when doubts, or operations, or any trial or tribulation comes into my life. I remember that last operation I had, the voice of God in my soul came thru so loud and clear and I knew there in the operating room that God was with me and no matter what, He always would be. That is something money can't buy, nor words express how grateful I am.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Isn't that what you did!

Who did I speak for?

 

[webdog]

Well put and so true. If only people would understand!

Yet according to your system we cannot unless determined. The irony.

 

[webdog]

Who did I speak for?

"Tom.... That commentary on the previous thread had one purpose & it was not to solicit an educated & scholarly debate."

 

[OldRegular]

But first a comment.....What the Cals call the "Doctrines of Grace" is, in my mind just a "buzz-phrase" that usually plainly identifies them. For Bible believers such as myself, Grace is indeed a doctrine but it is NOT a catchy phrase to identify some system of theology devised by any man. Simply put in my thankfully simple mind, God's grace is His unmerited favor by which He mercifully saved me after I exercised the faith He gave me to repent of my sin and believe in Him. Grace is a PRECIOUS commodity and should NEVER be used as cold terminology. IMHO! Simply trusting that His life,death, burial and resurrection were accomplished in my behalf was enough to make that grace operative in my life. That same grace also sustains me daily. I am thankful for it and I am also thankful for the Grace that God has shown all my many brothers and sisters in Christ. He wants to show that grace to every man because it is not His will that any should perish (2 Peter 3:9) though sadly, most will reject Him. (Titus 2:11) clearly says that God's grace "hath appeared to ALL men." I love the grace of God and thank Him for it often!

Now ...my question is...is there REALLY any point in continuing the mud-slinging contest that is currently going on in the thread?

Bro.Greg:saint: (P.S. - Bro.Icon...I haven't forgotten you...be patient! )

You say:

Simply put in my thankfully simple mind, God's grace is His unmerited favor by which He mercifully saved me after I exercised the faith He gave me to repent of my sin and believe in Him.

In my mind you here capture the essence of the Doctrines of Grace when you say God gave you the faith to believe. It is my op[inion and I have stated it many times on this Forum that the gift of faith is given at regeneration or the New Birth. [Ephesians 2:1-10; John 3:3-8]

Does every person believe? Of course not! Why don't they believe? Because God did not give them the faith to believe. That faith to believe is the fruit of election. [Epheisans 1:3-6; Romans 8:28-30]

There is nothing cold about what I call the Doctrines of Grace. They magnify the Love and Grace of God. They are a joyous celebration and exposition of that Love and Grace. They help us understand the reality we experience; that some believe and others do not. These doctrines are consistent with all of Scripture.

Do I understand God's choice of some to Salvation? No! Scripture does not tell us and, therefore, no one else does. That is why it is called Unconditional Election, at least in the mind of man!

Finally I would ask where I have done any "mudslinging" on this thread.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

"Tom.... That commentary on the previous thread had one purpose & it was not to solicit an educated & scholarly debate."

I spoke for myself .... that is my opinion, yesterday, a week ago & today. These are noted inflammatory remarks meant to start arguments...not debate. Now my opinion may be more, may be less, valid than the opinions of others.....but they are mine & I respectably stand by them.

I will tell you this.... I have never once taken upon myself to create a thread designed to denegrate anyone....no matter their religious persuasion. I will ask a question about something purely because I would like to know how others answer & so I can learn....but I dont attempt to start an argument by it....otherwise I would retract it if its getting out of hand.

For the record, I do not have a problem with soliciting dissent, even conflict because I believe two camps can come to an understanding, even if that understanding is to agree to disagree. But what happened on this thread was nothing more than a ball room brawl. Some like Old Regular kept there heads & dealt with it in a gentlemanly fashion, while others ..... well I will not go further, further discussion accomplishes little I'm afraid.

 

[OldRegular]

I can't speak for anyone but myself, but when I was under conviction, the power of the Holy Spirit (did not know it was the Holy Spirit at that time) was real, convicting me of my sin, telling me to repent, and to put my trust in Christ as the sacrifice for my sins, and in His resurrection for my righteousness, of which I had none. These things were preached to me and I had heard some of them before. But this time was different. I could not get away from that force in my life drawing me to the Saviour, nor that same force warning me of judgment to come should I reject Christ. But that did not save me, I still had to repent and turn to Christ, but were it not for God drawing me to the Saviour, and convincing of what He had done for me, I would not have believed. When I did believe unto salvation, the burden of sin rolled away and words can never explain it, nor did it need to be repeated. God instilled in my soul that He saved me, and that nothing could change that fact. After 30 years, I still do not know a lot of things, but that one thought and power sustains me when doubts, or operations, or any trial or tribulation comes into my life. I remember that last operation I had, the voice of God in my soul came thru so loud and clear and I knew there in the operating room that God was with me and no matter what, He always would be. That is something money can't buy, nor words express how grateful I am.

I believe God saves people one at a time. I suspect that the salvation experience of most people is different but all will have common elements. I see nothing in your experience that is inconsistent with the Doctrines of Grace. The simplest way I can express these Doctrines is that before the foundation of the world God chose certain people unto Salvation in Jesus Christ and that He will bring these people to Salvation. God brought you to Salvation did He not.

Grace is the unmerited favor of God and election is the unmerited favor of God.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I can't speak for anyone but myself, but when I was under conviction, the power of the Holy Spirit (did not know it was the Holy Spirit at that time) was real, convicting me of my sin, telling me to repent, and to put my trust in Christ as the sacrifice for my sins, and in His resurrection for my righteousness, of which I had none. These things were preached to me and I had heard some of them before. But this time was different. I could not get away from that force in my life drawing me to the Saviour, nor that same force warning me of judgment to come should I reject Christ. But that did not save me, I still had to repent and turn to Christ, but were it not for God drawing me to the Saviour, and convincing of what He had done for me, I would not have believed. When I did believe unto salvation, the burden of sin rolled away and words can never explain it, nor did it need to be repeated. God instilled in my soul that He saved me, and that nothing could change that fact. After 30 years, I still do not know a lot of things, but that one thought and power sustains me when doubts, or operations, or any trial or tribulation comes into my life. I remember that last operation I had, the voice of God in my soul came thru so loud and clear and I knew there in the operating room that God was with me and no matter what, He always would be. That is something money can't buy, nor words express how grateful I am.

I share a very similar testimony brother but it was the Grace of God that convicted you (and me) till we cried out, Jesus save me or else I perish. That was our response.

I would add that I had a great deal of shame for all my past sins....especially the very grave sin of Unbelief. But thank God he chose to save a sinner at a later stage of life (my life) & I am with you....I am exceedingly grateful.:love2:

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

You say:

In my mind you here capture the essence of the Doctrines of Grace when you say God gave you the faith to believe. It is my op[inion and I have stated it many times on this Forum that the gift of faith is given at regeneration or the New Birth. [Ephesians 2:1-10; John 3:3-8]

Does every person believe? Of course not! Why don't they believe? Because God did not give them the faith to believe. That faith to believe is the fruit of election. [Epheisans 1:3-6; Romans 8:28-30]

There is nothing cold about what I call the Doctrines of Grace. They magnify the Love and Grace of God. They are a joyous celebration and exposition of that Love and Grace. They help us understand the reality we experience; that some believe and others do not. These doctrines are consistent with all of Scripture.

Do I understand God's choice of some to Salvation? No! Scripture does not tell us and, therefore, no one else does. That is why it is called Unconditional Election, at least in the mind of man!

Finally I would ask where I have done any "mudslinging" on this thread.

I believe you are both an Elder of a Church & my Elder in life. I was taught by my parents & grandparents at a very young age to respect the Elders in our lives. If you personally comported yourself without experience & dignity (sometimes like I do frankly) I would have less respect for you....but happily you do not. What I see is a dignified intelligent person, a man of God & a person with a wealth of knowledge....allot that I personally covet.

To run you out of this forum would be a tragedy & I sincerely hope you do not go anywhere.....we could all learn from you dear brother.

I do sincerely value the time you have been here & I wish you every blessing our dear lord can provide.

 

[Benjamin]

Yes..it might be the same with some today....good posting despite the opposers:wavey::thumbs: They do not seem to enjoy the scripture as much as worldly wisdom:thumbs:

Youz guyz believing your Archie Bunker style of scriptural interpretations to support your Determinist’ view and then claiming your specially enlightened wisdom and victory in the debate because of it would be comical, if your methods weren’t so …………………..”exceedingly sad”. :thumbs:

 

[OldRegular]

I share a very similar testimony brother but it was the Grace of God that convicted you (and me) till we cried out, Jesus save me or else I perish. That was our response.

I would add that I had a great deal of shame for all my past sins....especially the very grave sin of Unbelief. But thank God he chose to save a sinner at a later stage of life (my life) & I am with you....I am exceedingly grateful.:love2:

As I said in an earlier post I believe God saves people [His Elect} one at a time. I also believes that he saves a person at a time of His choosing! Why this is so is not for me to question or doubt. How He brings a person to Salvation is not for me to question or doubt.

W. T. Conner, a professor at the Southwestern Baptist Theological seminary early in the 20th century writes of election as follows [Christian Doctrine , page 155]:

“It [Election] means that God has decreed to bring certain ones, upon whom His heart has been eternally set, who are the objects of His eternal love, to faith in Jesus Christ as Saviour. When a man is saved he is not saved as a matter of chance or accident or fate; he is saved in pursuance of an eternal purpose of God. God saves man because He intends to. He saves a particular man, at a particular time, under a particular set of circumstances, because He intends to.”

 

[MB]

It is exceedingly sad that anyone who has experienced the Grace of God in Salvation would accuse their brethren of believing that God through His Grace turns the crown of His creative activity, Man, into a mindless robot! I submit the following OP on the thread "The Conflicted Calvinist" as evidence:



The above quote is, to put it politely, an exercise in ignorance regarding the Doctrines of Grace. It is indeed exceedingly sad!
__________________

What's really sad is that Calvinist argue what isn't in scripture.
MB

 

[percho]

I do not find a thing in the writings of Paul concerning what one must do to be saved. Not one thing. I believe all of Paul's writings concern what was done to bring salvation, the gift of eternal life, of which God will give to whom he will and in the time frame of his will.

to-THE for grace YE-ARE ones-HAVING-been-SAVED THRU THE BELIEF (*FAITH) AND this NOT OUT OF-YOU(p) OF-God THE oblation (*gift)

* I added to scripture4all.org of Eph. 2:8

That verse has zilch to do with what one might covet. Has zilch to do with anything you might produce from your heart or mind to believe.

That verse concerns God the Father and his Son Jesus the Christ born of the virgin Mary and what was determined from the foundation of the world. The lamb slain and what was promised before time begin, grace of life, by which salvation could be given to the man yet to be created through the election of God his creator.

That is your faith and your hope. It does not matter what you think or believe. The above is your faith and hope.

1 Peter 1:19-21 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you, Who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God.

Faith was the lamb dying for you.
Hope was the grace of God his Father in raising the dead soul Jesus, his Son from the dead with an incorruptible body.

Life that withers not away, read the balance of the chapter.

 

[Luke2427]

That isn't what is happening....One CAN "argue" with such a person...you simply can't confuse your terms when you do so. The post has NOTHING to do with "Hyper-Calvinism" nor it's logically inconsistent form regularly taught today.....That isn't the issue. It isn't a "foolish" controversy. It's a real one. If you refuse to understand the objection as posed...then you should either listen more open-mindedly about what specific objection is being raised (it's a valid one) and then inform yourself about positive rejoinders to the objection:

EVERY debate (real debates) involve two things:
Negative objections (this is one)
which is an attempt to submit that a point of view is untenable due to the negative consequences logically necessary in its formation....this is called in a "defeater".

Utilizing a "defeater" in a debate forum isn't "unfortunate" it's fortunate...it's a good thing. Either what you believe is capable of withstanding a "defeater" or it isn't. Here's how you get away from Skandelon's (that's who it was, and he wasn't running away from it) "defeater"...

You either falsify the defeater by explaining how his argument or "defeater" is in fact invalid, or you pose a "counter-defeater" (philosophers call it a "defeater-defeater", and yes, it's an ungainly word). which is designed to "defeat" his "defeating objection"....

The second thing involved in debate is a "Positive" argument.
The "Positive" arguments are designed to support your propositions, and the "defeaters" are designed to "defeat" them.

Skan's argument is a proposed "defeater" to Calvinism and his proposition is designed to suggest that Calvinism is inherently incoherent in that it contradicts itself.

It is a valid argument form...I'm sorry you don't like it. But it has absoluely ZERO NOTHING and NADDA to do with the distinction between "hyper" Calvinism and whatever form you claim.....it is what it is.

"Hyper-Calvinism" simply has NOTHING to do with it. It is immaterial whether one is "Supra-lapsarian" or "Infra-lapsarian" or claims to be "double-predestinarian" or not...the objection remains regardless.

This is correct.

Skandelon's statemetn quoted in the OP is wrong, and I think I proved it sufficiently in the thread in which the post was originally made.

But it is NOT out of line. It is NOT "exceedingly sad".

It is NOT beyond the boundaries of reasonable debate.

I am thankful for the post by Skandelon here. It is well thought out and it is HELPFUL, absolutely HELPFUL to any Calvinist, like myself, who wants to know the objections to his beliefs and wants to sharpen his understanding of his own beliefs.

I commend, not condemn, Skandelon for that post.

I don't WANT to surround myself with a bunch of "yes men" who constantly affirm everything I say.

I WANT to be challenged.

We all should.

 

[Luke2427]

Skan's purpose in positing his thread "The conflicted Calvinist"...was ABSOLUTELY intended to be a constructive one. It's a good one. It was worthy of discussion.

I do not know Skandelon's intentions, but I do agree with the last two statements above.

 

[OldRegular]

What's really sad is that Calvinist argue what isn't in scripture.
MB

I don't claim to be a Calvinist since I reject a few things Calvin apparently believed such as infant Baptism. However, I am curious as to other things Calvinists argue that are not in Scripture!

 

[Winman]

You are simply wrong Winman. You and Skan and "all the wanta be logicians" on board really are confused about the Doctrines of Grace.

1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

Simply telling a person they are wrong is not an answer, you should explain why they are wrong.

You may not agree with my views, but I explain in detail why I think Cal/Reformed theology is wrong. I do not simply say it is wrong and not explain why.

If God has ordained that one group of Christians is Calvinist, and that another group of Christians is not Calvinist, then God would indeed be the author of confusion, because there would always be the question of which doctrine is correct. That is confusion. God would also be divided against himself, which Jesus told us God does not do.

God did not cause persons to be demon possessed, and then Jesus cast them out, that would be God's kingdom divided against itself.

Likewise, if God ordains one group of Christians to be Cal/Reformed, and ordains other Christians to be non-Cal/Arminians, then God is divided against himself.

 

[Herald]

I am so glad to see that a debate, that traces its roots to the 4th Century, has been settled on the Baptist Board. Too bad many of you showed up some 1600 years late. You could have spared us this whole ordeal.

 

[OldRegular]

Simply telling a person they are wrong is not an answer, you should explain why they are wrong.

You may not agree with my views, but I explain in detail why I think Cal/Reformed theology is wrong. I do not simply say it is wrong and not explain why.

The following quote from your initial post is incorrect! You obviously have no idea what my doctrine is though you have attempted to refute it for years.

HoS understands this too. It is folks like Iconoclast and OR who do not understand their own theology. They really don't.

Icon simply parrots what he has been told, he doesn't have a clue. OR is a little more thoughtful, but he is also oblivious to the logical conclusions of his own doctrine. As HoS has said, very few Calvinists really understand their own doctrine. They are completely unaware of this.

If God has ordained that one group of Christians is Calvinist, and that another group of Christians is not Calvinist,

Who said that God ordained one group of Christians to be Calvinist and another group of Christians to be nonCalvinist? Be specific please!