Flaws of Calvinism

[Iconoclast]

Spurgeon, like the earlier Puritans, believed in the sovereignty of God but realized that God has chosen to use means, often time ordinary means like the Word and preaching. He had no trouble, and neither did the Puritans, preaching that you needed to repent or you needed to strive to get faith. Some of these Calvinists on this site would go nuts if you said in a post that you need to strive for faith. That is a flaw, not really of Calvinism, but of Calvinists.

No one has said any such thing. You never answered what church you attended?
All the Calvinists on here have posted consistent with the list of puritans you mentioned. I have my doubts about what you are posting. We have had others claim similar to you but in time we find out they were not what they claimed to be.
You can of course post what you want, but I am a bit skeptical.

Prov.27:5 Open rebuke is better than secret love.

 

[DaveXR650]

All the Calvinists on here have posted consistent with the list of puritans you mentioned. I have my doubts about what you are posting.

No they don't. Calvinists are very diverse. Mostly it comes down to what they emphasize and how needlessly they will correct someone who doesn't say something exactly like they think they should.
Example:

We do not "personally have faith", but rather it is granted to us by the Spirit of God, then we exercise it.

Why would you say that? The Puritans and Spurgeon talked all the time about "having faith" and addressed it to individuals personally. Exercising faith is a fine way to put it too but you in that case chose for some reason try to make a parsing of words in order to make yourself look good and for what reason. This happens all the time on this site and I stand by my post that this is a problem for Calvinists and you have illustrated it perfectly.

So when someone comes up to you speaking things that are clearly not correct, how do you go about correcting that person? Do you do anything?
Do you just smile and say, it is all good? Do you offer a vague answer and side step the issue?

My original post was about someone coming up and saying they were thankful they believed the gospel. No, I would not correct them even though I know that their faith was the result of a work of the Spirit. But I guess you would so you prove my point.

 

[Iconoclast]

DaveXR650

No they don't. Calvinists are very diverse. Mostly it comes down to what they emphasize and how needlessly they will correct someone who doesn't say something exactly like they think they should.
Example:

Why would you say that? The Puritans and Spurgeon talked all the time about "having faith" and addressed it to individuals personally. Exercising faith is a fine way to put it too but you in that case chose for some reason try to make a parsing of words in order to make yourself look good and for what reason. This happens all the time on this site and I stand by my post that this is a problem for Calvinists and you have illustrated it perfectly.


My original post was about someone coming up and saying they were thankful they believed the gospel. No, I would not correct them even though I know that their faith was the result of a work of the Spirit. But I guess you would so you prove my point.

I will stand by what I have posted. Time will tell what is what here.
I am very skeptical and will comment accordingly, your post here I believe reinforces my thoughts here.
I have all of Spurgeons sermons [Metropolitan Tabernacle and New Park Street Pulpit]and know what and how he preached to urge sinners to trust Christ for salvation. He took liberties in parts of his sermons to encourage sinners to consider their ways.
I have not seen you offer quotes from any you claim to read...I have asked you 4 or 5 times to tell me which church you said you attended, for 10 or 12 years...I travel cross country and have visited many of the churches.
I do not hear any suggesting what you do.
You are of course welcome to your opinions, but then again, so am I.

 

[George Antonios]

I wonder why forums disproportionately attract Calvinists.

 

[AustinC]

I wonder why forums disproportionately attract Calvinists.

George, I have found that your observations apply most to free-will proponents.

You wrote:
The greatest COP-OUTS whenever cornered by scriptures are:
1) Subjectively reject the literality of the words of God, which is a polite way of denying them.
2) Hide behind your subjectively chosen version, or Greek & Hebrew words. [Copies & translations (Pro. 25:1, Lk. 4:21, Jn. 5:39, Acts 8:32, 8:35, 17:2, 17:11, 18:24,18:28, Ro. 15:4, 16:26, 2Ti. 3:15, 1Pe. 2:6, 2Pe. 1:19-20) can be given by inspiration. Humanism rejects that teaching.]

In fact, it has been brutal to see so many free will proponents plucking single verses as prooftexts, completely out of context. It is painful to see and very tiresome to have to try teach the context of a passage to them, in hopes that they will see their error. George, I observe this very tendency in you. You provide long winded youtube presentations that are empty of substance as you often pluck one verse and then try to expound your theories out of that one verse without any regard to the context of the passage where that verse is found. I tried to listen to your rambling, but honestly, it just disheartens me to listen to you as you so often miss the mark.

I truly wish you well, but I also wish you would rest in the full sovereignty of God.

 

[DaveXR650]

I have not seen you offer quotes from any you claim to read

Give me a specific example and I'll provide you with a reference. I don't think we should take up Van's thread for it but if you want to OK or I'll PM if you wish. What tends to happen on here is that most of the Calvinists have focused entirely on the TULIP and the argumentative skill necessary to defend it. I don't do it that way. I don't think it's helpful for instance to tell someone that faith is a gift and then beat them down James White style if they balk at that. I would rather go into detail of how Owen or Watson would describe our natural condition and how hard it is for us to understand, appreciate, or even comprehend the value of Christ and our need of him on our own. Faith is given to us by allowing us to do those things I just mentioned. I also give credit to a non Calvinist who says faith comes by hearing and the word of God. That general call and those means are real and not incorrect, but the Holy Spirit is necessary for us to have saving faith. I don't keep badgering a non-Calvinist with "faith as a gift" if I sense the are interpreting that to mean that it's like waving a magic wand. And I'm usually unsuccessful on here but if I can find common ground with a non-Calvinist I will. I also go out of my way to make sure that I explain that a non-Calvinist can be 100% Christian without any qualifications. I don't care if the Calvinist credentialing committee has not approved my posts.

 

[Iconoclast]

Dave, can you clarify what you mean by this?

I don't think it's helpful for instance to tell someone that faith is a gift and then beat them down James White style if they balk at that.

What do you mean by that?

 

[DaveXR650]

Sure. James White, who I like by the way, has a pit bull style of debate. His command of scripture and facts is second to none but his style is to hammer some mistake or weakness perceived in an opponent over and over. I noticed that just the other day when he was debating someone on Molinism. I agreed with him but you find you tend not to find him likeable. I have heard others, and I noticed it myself after reading him and Dave Hunt go at it in their book. White dismantled him but, like I said you end up not liking him very much.

 

[AustinC]

Sure. James White, who I like by the way, has a pit bull style of debate. His command of scripture and facts is second to none but his style is to hammer some mistake or weakness perceived in an opponent over and over. I noticed that just the other day when he was debating someone on Molinism. I agreed with him but you find you tend not to find him likeable. I have heard others, and I noticed it myself after reading him and Dave Hunt go at it in their book. White dismantled him but, like I said you end up not liking him very much.

So...he is correct, but he doesn't have that Joel Osteen spirit.

 

[Iconoclast]

Sure. James White, who I like by the way, has a pit bull style of debate. His command of scripture and facts is second to none but his style is to hammer some mistake or weakness perceived in an opponent over and over. I noticed that just the other day when he was debating someone on Molinism. I agreed with him but you find you tend not to find him likeable. I have heard others, and I noticed it myself after reading him and Dave Hunt go at it in their book. White dismantled him but, like I said you end up not liking him very much.

I am a friend of Dr. White. I have had the pleasure of hearing him at our local church, I have been to several of His debates, with Catholics, Muslims, Presbyterians.
I have seen him in small group fellowship settings and can assure you that he has a full range of personable traits.

If you only see him in his debate settings I know you and others might conclude as you have about him.

The fact is no one likes someone who has an answer for what they think is truth. Dr.White will read every book written by his debate opponent, listen to their preaching, and the result is as you know a complete dismantling as you have observed.
I know he is a target of critics because they envy what he can do, so they try and take him down. I have seen some horrible attacks directed at him,

Dave, have you noticed how a JW goes on the attack when you offer scriptural correction. They deny it, try and divert to other issues.
I think it is like that.
I will not speak against DR.White unless he departed from the faith or drifted into serious error, which I do not forsee happening.

 

[DaveXR650]

So...he is correct, but he doesn't have that Joel Osteen spirit.

Yeah. He should smile more and constantly blink.

 

[DaveXR650]

Iconoclast, my purpose was not to attack White. I almost never miss his podcasts. You should be proud to be a friend of his. I am saying that what tends to happen on here is that Calvinists who are well versed in the defense of the TULIP and can usually run circles around non-Calvinists in debate tend to hammer certain points using various scriptures that although true, just infuriate and confuse the non-Calvinist. The technique you or White might use when you are debating Hunt or Allen won't be of much help when you are talking to a Baptist who is new to all this. You'll kick his butt, and then he will hate you even more. I would rather try to explain why for instance we say faith is a gift than just embarrass someone with proof texts. If you think that's not the best thing to do I'm sorry.

 

[Iconoclast]

Iconoclast, my purpose was not to attack White. I almost never miss his podcasts. You should be proud to be a friend of his. I am saying that what tends to happen on here is that Calvinists who are well versed in the defense of the TULIP and can usually run circles around non-Calvinists in debate tend to hammer certain points using various scriptures that although true, just infuriate and confuse the non-Calvinist. The technique you or White might use when you are debating Hunt or Allen won't be of much help when you are talking to a Baptist who is new to all this. You'll kick his butt, and then he will hate you even more. I would rather try to explain why for instance we say faith is a gift than just embarrass someone with proof texts. If you think that's not the best thing to do I'm sorry.

I agree with you here on your post.
On BB. There is a posse of dedicated non cals....who have no intention of seeking a middle ground but simply to attack 24/7.
If you look in the archives you will see many such attacks by the same group

 

[DaveXR650]

Yes. There are 3 threads running right now with posters flat out saying if you're a Calvinist you have a false gospel. I just wish I could get them to spend a couple of bucks and get John Owen on an electronic reader and just read for themselves everything he said on faith. I am different than a lot of Calvinists in the sense that I think that a person can have genuine saving faith and not fully understand how they came to get it. I do worry though that some of the folks on here who have such a focus on their own choice and free will - if they are not meaning something else by it. A "faith" that is reserving any merit for yourself, even if it is just the fact that you had the good sense to believe could very well be a defective faith.

 

[AustinC]

I am different than a lot of Calvinists in the sense that I think that a person can have genuine saving faith and not fully understand how they came to get it.

XR650, my guess is most of us recognize genuinely redeemed brothers and sisters within many various faith traditions. Some have much theological baggage with their traditions that can add much weight to the spiritual journey. While I wish they could shed the traditions that hinder their faith, I will not abandon fellowship because they carry such baggage. I do, however, encourage them to study scripture and rest in Christ rather than rely on non-Bible traditions.

 

[George Antonios]

George, I have found that your observations apply most to free-will proponents.


In fact, it has been brutal to see so many free will proponents plucking single verses as prooftexts, completely out of context. It is painful to see and very tiresome to have to try teach the context of a passage to them, in hopes that they will see their error. George, I observe this very tendency in you. You provide long winded youtube presentations that are empty of substance as you often pluck one verse and then try to expound your theories out of that one verse without any regard to the context of the passage where that verse is found. I tried to listen to your rambling, but honestly, it just disheartens me to listen to you as you so often miss the mark.

I truly wish you well, but I also wish you would rest in the full sovereignty of God.

I also wish you would rest in the full sovereignty of God.

God has predetermined me to be so. I wish you would rest in the sovereignty of God and stop trying to change the decree of God.

 

[AustinC]

God has predetermined me to be so. I wish you would rest in the sovereignty of God and stop trying to change the decree of God.

Indeed, he has ordained your path. I do enjoy resting in the sovereignty of God. There is no decree I am trying to change.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

So George, what are some flaws in Calvinistic theology?

 

[George Antonios]

So George, what are some flaws in Calvinistic theology?

You mean beside making God out to be worse than Satan in arbitrary cruelty and injustice?

It's depravity, not total depravity.
It's conditional (based on faith, not works) election, not unconditional election.
It's unlimited atonement, not limited atonement.
It's resistible grace, not irresistible grace.
It's preservation of the saints, not perseverance of the saints.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

Wait a minute. Are you trying to change my theology?