Ohhhhhhh Boz.....don't even try....just use ignore.:BangHead:
I'm telling you for your own good.....and his as well. Don't enguage.
I'm telling you for your own good.....and his as well. Don't enguage.
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Ohhhhhhh Boz.....don't even try....just use ignore.:BangHead:
I'm telling you for your own good.....and his as well. Don't enguage.
He said that being "taught of God" is that God himself laid the desire for salvation on the heart. That is totally contradictory to everything you've said. Why can you not just admit that this anti-calvinist pastor disagreed with you? It's really not that hard.
Just when I think we are getting somewhere, you contradict yourself within a single breath.
You have repeatedly said that the teaching and learning from the Father in John 6 is hearing the gospel preached. If that is so (it's not) then everyone who hears will come to Jesus and be saved. That is what John 6:45 says, everyone who has learned comes. If that is the case, there is no "enabling to believe or reject" the message, there is only acceptance.
You have a serious problem if you can't see that your position is untenable.
How can you say you aren't twisting anything? You literally flipped Jesus' statement on it's head!
The scripture is clear, we are born again directly by God. This is regeneration correct? God "caused us to be born again" (1 Pet 1:3). Without being born again we cannot even "see the kingdom of God" (John 3:3). Regeneration is the giving of new, spiritual life and this occurs "when we were dead in our transgressions, [God makes] us alive together with Christ" (Eph 2:5). It is God who acts first. We react and our faith is a reaction to his grace and is even seen as a gift; we have "received a faith of the same kind as [the apostles]" (2 Pet 1:1) and "it is given [to us]... to believe on him" (Phil 1:29).
Even the text you keep quoting defeats your argument. Faith comes through hearing - absolutely! That means it is not within us until then. If faith comes through hearing that means we are not able to have faith until we hear the word of God and therefore it is not something that we can naturally do. It is through the God ordained means of the gospel message that we are born again and receive faith.
Being drawn, given, taught and learning from the Father are all different expressions of what we call regeneration. I don't even know why you brought that up. I never even used the term until this post. I guess you just want to try and muddy the waters as it were and cause confusion to distract from how badly you are doing in this conversation.
Regardless, John 6 is crystal clear that coming to the Son is a direct response to the infallible calling of the Father.
Then you again demonstrate your complete lack of understand of what you rail against.
You read it. You are the one who fails to understand that it is the servants who do the calling here, not the King.
But all those who are called by God in the John 6 meaning of the term will listen and they will all come. That is clear.
You're dreaming.
Jhn 6:37, 44 NASB - "All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out. ... "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.
All who come, were given by the Father. No one can come, except he is drawn by the Father. Clear parallelism, one in the positive sense another in the negative. All given will come - all drawn will come.
I didn't twist anything, and I showed were Albert Barnes a noted Calvinist theologian said the exact same thing.Here for example:
That is a deliberate twisting of the text 180 degrees.
Albert Barnes said:Shall be all taught of God - This explains the preceding verse. It is by the teaching of his Word and Spirit that men are drawn to God. This shows that it is not compulsory, and that there is no obstacle in the way but a strong voluntary ignorance and unwillingness.
Scripture?
You'll notice that you are the only one who has made two responses to a post in this thread. Each of my replies has been 1 post. Also, what does it matter? Of course as a conversation goes on there will be more information to consider and therefore longer posts. Stop being silly.
The effectual, inward call of God certainly is supernatural miracle as all of scripture agrees. That does NOT mean in any way that is some sort of visible, manifestation or revelation such as the false prophets of Islam and Mormonism claim. If you believe it is not different then you are truly incapable of understanding.
No one, including me, is trying to get you banned, least of all for telling the truth. First you would have to actually start telling the truth. Secondly, if I reported your post it would be for the purpose of your correction since you wrongly put Calvinism in the same category as the wicked false religions of Mormonism and Islam.
I've thought about it. It is like talking to a wall. Actually the wall might be better.
I respond mostly so that others who are actually seeking for answers to this topic will see both sides clearly and not be persuaded by his false teaching.
Of course this may be moot since he has openly put Calvinists under the anathema of Galatians 1 in another thread, which I assume is ban worthy. If not, it ought to be.
I could say the same thing of you, that it is like talking to a wall.
Look, you have bought Calvinist doctrine hook, line, and sinker. You cannot read scripture without inserting your Calvinist presuppositions into it. You are completely oblivious to your own bias.
I never said I have a problem with Galatians 1. Again, you display your basic inability to understand simple English, no wonder you don't understand your Bible.As for Galatians 1, I didn't write that, Paul did. If that scripture bothers you, maybe you should reexamine your doctrine.
But one thing is for certain, we are NOT preaching the same gospel. Non-Cals and Arminians preach that Jesus died for ALL men, five-point Calvinists preach that Jesus only died for SOME men.
That is not the same gospel. Somebody has to be wrong.
Frankly, your last response to me isn't worth replying to. It's literally the same repetition of the errors you have posted for page after page.
This however...
I am not oblivious to my bias. I am very careful to try my best to avoid reading with bias. Of course no one does that perfectly but I try. You again fail to remember, or believe, that I came to affirm Calvinism by reading the Bible carefully and thoroughly while I was an Arminian. My bias was against it, yet the scriptures were so clear.
I never said I have a problem with Galatians 1. Again, you display your basic inability to understand simple English, no wonder you don't understand your Bible.
What I do have a problem with is your foolish, and evil IMO, attempt to claim that Calvinists are condemned under that curse.
It's amazing how you can pack so much error into just a couple sentences. Do all non-cals and Arminians preach the same gospel then by your definition? Some say the gospel gives the spiritual gifts others say it doesn't. Some Arminians claim you can lose your salvation, do they preach the same gospel according to you, as those who believe in eternal security?
Again:I told you the truth, but you refuse to consider other views.
Your posts are FULL of Calvinist bias. Over and over you repeat the error that everyone who is drawn comes. I have seen this error from numerous Calvinists. "The Biblicist" would go for pages and pages insisting all that are drawn come. NO THEY DO NOT.
I do indeed read the scripture for what it says. Unlike you I do not have to jump all over the Bible to support my system, nor do I have to change Jesus' words.You need to take off those Calvinist glasses and read scripture for what it actually says. John 6:45 does not say men are supernaturally regenerated to come to Jesus, it says they are TAUGHT. Why can't you understand this??
You said one of us must be wrong, and then quoted Galatians 1:8,9, saying "someone is in trouble!" So yes you did say that, maybe not in those words but your meaning is plain.I did not say that. I said that ONE of us must be wrong. We are preaching a different gospel. I preach that Jesus died for ALL men. Five-point Calvinists preach that Jesus died for SOME men. That is not the same message.
I even posted a humorous (to me) video from Youtube demonstrating the five-point Calvinist gospel.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1ckoCBtXvU
This video is sarcasm, but it's 100% true. The best a five-point Calvinist can do is to preach that Jesus MIGHT love you, and that Jesus MIGHT have died for you.
How can you believe a complete uncertainty? How can you have confidence in a "maybe" gospel??
"Maybe" Jesus died for me????????? Not very assuring.
Do you really think that is a perfect, word for word repetition of what Paul preached to the Corinthians when he first arrived there? Wow...The gospel is what Paul said in 1 Cor 15:3-7, but especially verses 3 and 4;
1 Cor 15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:
6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.
7After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.
8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.
Paul preached that Jesus died for "OUR" sins. A five-point Calvinist cannot preach this message to unbelievers.
The best a five-point Calvinist can do is tell folks Jesus "might" have died for their sins.
That is not good news. There is nothing good or comforting in that message. That message leaves a person in complete doubt and jeopardy as to their eternal future.
We are not preaching the same gospel, one of us has to be wrong.
We act according to our nature. Our will is bound by our nature. We can not not breathe, because it's contrary to our nature. Sure, we can hold our breath, but we'll eventually pass out and automatically start breathing again.
God seeks us out, we were His sheep, having gone astray. Deut. 32:10....
Again:
You again fail to remember, or believe, that I came to affirm Calvinism by reading the Bible carefully and thoroughly while I was an Arminian. My bias was against it, yet the scriptures were so clear.
Your post is full of your bad interpretation an eisegesis not truth.
If it's full of "Calvinist bias", it is because the scriptures are full of Calvinist bias. John 6, from v35 to the end of the chapter, is about explaining their unbelief. They do not believe because they will not come to the Son, they will not come to the Son because they are not given to him and they are not given because they are not drawn. Those who do believe in the Son are given to him by the Father and those people are infallibly drawn by him. There simply is no other way to understand the text without tearing it apart.
I do indeed read the scripture for what it says. Unlike you I do not have to jump all over the Bible to support my system, nor do I have to change Jesus' words.
You said one of us must be wrong, and then quoted Galatians 1:8,9, saying "someone is in trouble!" So yes you did say that, maybe not in those words but your meaning is plain.
Now I see the problem, you get your theology from Youtube...
It is no maybe gospel. Whoever will call on the Lord will be saved.
Do you really think that is a perfect, word for word repetition of what Paul preached to the Corinthians when he first arrived there? Wow...
Again, you display your complete ignorance on that which you rail against.
Like so many other Calvinists, you got saved as an Arminian. Wow.
When I was coming to Christ, I thought I was doing it all myself, and though I sought the Lord earnestly, I had no idea the Lord was seeking me. I do not think the young convert is at first aware of this. I can recall the very day and hour when first I received those truths in my own soul - when they were as John Bunyan says, burnt into my heart as with a hot iron; and I can recollect how I felt that I had grown all of a sudden from a babe into a man - that I had made progress in scriptural knowledge, through having found, once for all, the clue to the truth of God ... I saw that God was at the bottom of it all, and that He was the Author of my faith, and so the whole doctrine of grace opened up to me, and from that doctrine I have not departed to this day, and I desire to make this my constant confession, I ascribe my change wholly to God.
Then you studied Piper, and MacArthur, OOPS, I mean the Bible and became a Calvinist. Right.
Explain HOW my interpretations are eisegesis. Anybody can make a claim without support.
When you tried to claim everyone who is drawn comes, I showed scripture in Proverbs 1 and Matthew 22 that shows men can refuse to come when God calls them. See, I present EVIDENCE for my view, and against yours. You just make unsupported claims.
You are presupposing your own argument. There absolutely is another interpretation, and I have given it. Men are drawn to Jesus when they are TAUGHT by the Father. And how are they taught? By the word of God, by the scriptures
Did you ever notice how Jesus refuted the Pharisees? He "jumped" all over the scriptures like I do. Did you notice how he answered Satan in the wilderness when he was tempted? He "jumped" all over the scriptures like I do.
You do actually. In ignoring that John 6 says the Father himself draws, and teaches the sinner, you say it is really the church/other Christians, thus essentially you define the Father in John 6 as the church. But what I was actually pointing to was your repeated flipping of Jesus' words. Jesus said one thing, you turned it completely upside down.And I do not change the definitions of words. Regeneration means "re" = over or again, "generation" = to make alive, give life to. The word regeneration means to make alive AGAIN. It does not mean to illuminate or teach, or to cause to understand, or to draw. It is YOU that is redefining the word regeneration.
Correct, you and I do not preach the same gospel, so one of us must be preaching error. One of us must be preaching a false gospel. That is exactly what I said, and exactly what I meant.
Nonsense. I can and have and do plainly tell people that if they will repent and call on Christ to save them then they will be saved. It is a certainty that those who truly believe will be saved.That video actually makes a good point, what kind of gospel says, "Maybe Jesus loves you" and "Maybe Jesus died for you"??
How do you depend on a complete uncertainty? How do you put your trust in a "maybe"?
You just don't get it.
If Jesus did not die for them then they will never call! That is literally the WHOLE point of John 6. Again, you show you have no understanding of Calvinism or the scripture.No, no, no. If Jesus did not die for you, you can call on him all day long and you will not be saved. Paul shows this concept in 1 Corinthians 15;
Honestly, your arguments get more and more absurd as you continue to lose these debates.1 Cor 15:14 And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.
1 Cor 15:17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.
If Jesus did not in fact and reality rise from the dead, then our faith is vain and we will all die in our sins. Believing Jesus rose from the dead does not make it so.
Likewise, if Jesus did not personally die for you, then your faith is vain and you will die in your sins. Your faith does not determine reality.
You could believe a gun is empty and put it to your head and pull the trigger, and if it is loaded you will blow your brains out.
Ignoring the stupidity; What do you think actually happened in the atonement?You seem to believe the Atonement is determined by your belief. :laugh:
Well that's absurd.Yes, I believe Paul looked unbelievers right in the eye and said, "Jesus died for OUR sins". Yes, that is exactly what I believe.
Now that is something you can hang your hat on. That is definite. A solid rock.
I've thought about it. It is like talking to a wall. Actually the wall might be better.
I respond mostly so that others who are actually seeking for answers to this topic will see both sides clearly and not be persuaded by his false teaching.
Of course this may be moot since he has openly put Calvinists under the anathema of Galatians 1 in another thread, which I assume is ban worthy. If not, it ought to be.
Here's Spurgeon's thoughts on that, infinitely more eloquent and precise than I could be:
Actually never read anything of Piper's until after becoming convinced of the DoG, and I still don't like MacArthur. Nice try though...
You assume your doctrine and read it into the text, irrelevant that the text disagrees. You literally go as far as turning Jesus' words on its head in order to support your false doctrine.
Right... except for all the scripture I have continually dropped on you, in this thread and others.
Proverbs 1 has precisely NOTHING to do with this discussion. There the one calling and being refused is the wisdom, not God calling in order to give salvation.
Matthew 22 has been explained to you at least 3 times. Yet you refuse to read or understand even the supremely clear meaning of the text.
So again you are back to your idea that the teaching in John 6:45 is being taught the scriptures by another believer, despite Jesus' statement to the contrary. That puts you in the impossible situation of affirming that everyone who is taught the Bible will be saved; because what did Jesus say was the result of learning and hearing from the Father?
Jhn 6:45 NASB - "It is written in the prophets, 'AND THEY SHALL ALL BE TAUGHT OF GOD.' Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me.
What Bible do you have!? Jesus rebuked Satan by quoting Deuteronomy 6 and 8, that is far from jumping all over scripture.
Mat 4:4 NASB - But He answered and said, "It is written, 'MAN SHALL NOT LIVE ON BREAD ALONE, BUT ON EVERY WORD THAT PROCEEDS OUT OF THE MOUTH OF GOD.'"
Deu 8:3 NASB - "He humbled you and let you be hungry, and fed you with manna which you did not know, nor did your fathers know, that He might make you understand that man does not live by bread alone, but man lives by everything that proceeds out of the mouth of the LORD.
Mat 4:7 NASB - Jesus said to him, "On the other hand, it is written, 'YOU SHALL NOT PUT THE LORD YOUR GOD TO THE TEST.'"
Deu 6:16 NASB - "You shall not put the LORD your God to the test, as you tested Him at Massah.
Mat 4:10 NASB - Then Jesus said to him, "Go, Satan! For it is written, 'YOU SHALL WORSHIP THE LORD YOUR GOD, AND SERVE HIM ONLY.'"
Deu 6:13-14 NASB - "You shall fear only the LORD your God; and you shall worship Him and swear by His name. You shall not follow other gods, any of the gods of the peoples who surround you,"
You do actually. In ignoring that John 6 says the Father himself draws, and teaches the sinner, you say it is really the church/other Christians, thus essentially you define the Father in John 6 as the church. But what I was actually pointing to was your repeated flipping of Jesus' words. Jesus said one thing, you turned it completely upside down.
And you mentioned that in reference to Galatians 1:8,9. That means you believe I and my other Calvinist friends, are all under the anathema of that text.
Nonsense. I can and have and do plainly tell people that if they will repent and call on Christ to save them then they will be saved. It is a certainty that those who truly believe will be saved.
If Jesus did not die for them then they will never call! That is literally the WHOLE point of John 6. Again, you show you have no understanding of Calvinism or the scripture.
Honestly, your arguments get more and more absurd as you continue to lose these debates.
1 Cor 15 is irrelevant to this discussion.
Ignoring the stupidity; What do you think actually happened in the atonement?
Well that's absurd.
other then Jesus, has there evr been ANYONE that merited approval by God by their good works, by being able to keep the Law then?
And how can a sinner be made right/justified before Holy God by keeping the Law, as you claim is a possibility, when God said that none shall ever get saved by that method?
Free will makes God seem impotent...
Free will makes God seem impotent...
One more thing Willis...
Which of the two examples below is more impressive to you?
1. A Chess player who ensures victory by playing both sides of the board...determining his "opponents" moves by the same hand he determines his own.
OR
2. A Chess Master who is so wise, so good, so fast, so powerful, so insightful, so masterful in every way that he soundly defeats each and every opponent who attempts to defeat him.
I suggest the first example is very impotent, yet it best represents the Calvinistic/deterministic view of God's governance over the world. Thus, your view of God is more impotent than ours...
You believe in the God who plays dice, and I in complete law and order in a world which objectively exists, and which I, in a wildly speculative way, am trying to capture. I hope that someone will discover a more realistic way, or rather a more tangible basis than it has been my lot to find. Even the great initial success of the Quantum Theory does not make me believe in the fundamental dice-game, although I am well aware that our younger colleagues interpret this as a consequence of senility. No doubt the day will come when we will see whose instinctive attitude was the correct one. (Albert Einstein to Max Born, Sept 1944, 'The Born-Einstein Letters')
//snip//
Quantum mechanics is certainly imposing. But an inner voice tells me that it is not yet the real thing. Quantum theory says a lot, but does not really bring us any closer to the secret of the Old One. I, at any rate, am convinced that He (God) does not throw dice. (Albert Einstein, On Quantum Physics, Letter to Max Born, December 12, 1926)
Albert Einstein Quotes on Quantum Physics: Quantum Mechanics, Theory of Light, Quanta, Particle-Wave Duality, History and Evolution of Quantum Theory
http://www.spaceandmotion.com/quantum-theory-albert-einstein-quotes.htm