Is Calvinism a False Doctrine?

[webdog]

Let me ask you a question. If one had not heard of Jesus Christ and the gospel, could it be rightfully stated that such a one 'has not believed' yet is 'condemned already because as a sinner 'they have not believed'?

Yes...they would have "exchanged the truth for a lie".

 

[DHK]

When the words 'believeth not' are used, does that necessitate the presupposition that 'all have had an opportunity to hear and respond to the gospel and as such have rejected the invitation,' or could it rightfully be said that those that have not heard also have not believed, up until that point at least, as well?

DHK: He that believeth not is condemned already.

What part of that verse do you not understand? What part do you not understand to refer to the rejection of Christ?

Again I ask you: What part of "believeth not" do you not understand? To throw in red herrings, such as, you don't understand how all the world could or could not have heard the gospel is totally irrelevant to the question.

Do you believe that Christ is the only way to heaven, and that no man comes unto the Father but through him? A truthful answer to that question will solve your problem.

Asking questions not relevant to the initial premise only clouds the question. For example you could have asked: What about the aliens that we haven't found yet on other planets and in other solar systems? Did the blood of Christ pay for the penalty of their sins as well. The answer is: non sequitor.
Don't keep bringing irrelevant tangents to the initial premise. Put your trust in the God of Heaven to work out the problems that you cannot. We understand what the Bible does say, not what the Bible does not say.

And the Bible says: "He that believeth not is condemned already."
It teaches that the only sin that condemns a man to hell is the rejection of Jesus Christ as Saviour.

 

[Bible-boy]

And now this one has crossed into the land of greater than 30 pages. So the closing thread warning is hereby issued. If you have anything to add to the discussion please do so because this thread will be closed within the next 24 hours. If you want to continue the discussion please feel free to start "Part II" in a new thread.

In Christ,

Bible-boy,
Forum Moderator

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

So anything that refutes the presupposition you bring to the text is now called a red herring. Such an approach only satisfies the mind that make up such falicious argumentation.

DHK: Do you believe that Christ is the only way to heaven, and that no man comes unto the Father but through him? A truthful answer to that question will solve your problem.

HP: Are you kidding? Jesus said, “I am the way the truth and the life. No man cometh unto the Father but by Me.” Christ is indeed the only way to the Father. What does this point have to do with the question I raised?

HP: Let me ask you a question. If one had not heard of Jesus Christ and the gospel, could it be rightfully stated that such a one 'has not believed' yet is 'condemned already because as a sinner 'they have not believed'?

Heeding the moderator’s warning, why don’t you start part two of this discussion with your response?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

HP: Let me ask you a question. If one had not heard of Jesus Christ and the gospel, could it be rightfully stated that such a one 'has not believed' yet is 'condemned already because as a sinner 'they have not believed'?

Webdog: Yes...they would have "exchanged the truth for a lie".

HP: How can one exchange anything they have never heard of?? The point I am trying to make is that you can only get the verse in question to support the Calvinistic notion of the damning sin being the rejection of Jesus Christ IF you approach the verse from the presupposition of ‘all have received of the gospel message,’ an unsupported notion not found in Scripture or reason.
Onward to part 2.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Many pastors have written directly from their church website with insulting, hate mail after reading the truths presented here. These pastors are obviously not born-again, Spirit filled Christians. They are fake Christians. Calvinistic preachers are our modern day Pharisees that put Jesus on the cross. They are wolves in sheep's clothing preaching "another gospel" that the Apostle Paul warned us about. They are in the ministry for power, control and money. They are certainly destined to spend eternity in hell. Their letters have revealed their corrupt hearts to the Holy Spirit.

I skipped every post just to make a quick comment on this statement. For the sake of integrity, I wish the author had included the letters in this accusation. I guess we just have to assume he is telling us the whole truth.

Also, the blanket statement about Calvinistic preachers is an overgeneralization. At first he seems to be addressing those who he says wrote him hate mail, but then blankets everyone who is a preacher and a calvinist.

There's no need to argue with the author's statement to try to prove he is wrong. These words alone from the author can inform the reader of the author's serious bias and anti-calvinism that has, I believe, colored his perceptions of Calvinist Christians and preachers, and his understanding of the Scriptures.

 

[webdog]

HP: How can one exchange anything they have never heard of?? The point I am trying to make is that you can only get the verse in question to support the Calvinistic notion of the damning sin being the rejection of Jesus Christ IF you approach the verse from the presupposition of ‘all have received of the gospel message,’ an unsupported notion not found in Scripture or reason.

One exchanges the truth based on desire (they loved the darkness). That's Scripture, HP, THEY (the reprobate) exchanged the truth...they had it. You cannot exchange anything without having it.