is calvinism based upon John Calvin, Or Upon Jesus And the Gospel?

[HeirofSalvation]

there is NOTHING in itthat is heretical teaching!

You can say that we misunderstand the bible, but NOT that we are heretics, as that suppossses not really saved!

You are a Calvinist.........and therefore you are a "heretic" Yeshua.

 

[Yeshua1]

You are a Calvinist.........and therefore you are a "heretic" Yeshua.

In good comany, Jesus/paul/Apostles, Spurgeon, calvin, owen/Edward etc!

 

[HeirofSalvation]

In good comany, Jesus/paul/Apostles, Spurgeon, calvin, owen/Edward etc!

Is that the "Spurgeon" that H.W. prays to for forgiveness? Or have you Calvinists not called upon him to repent yet?

 

[Van]

Your verses are out of context, do not support your beliefs!

Again, what about God being soveregn "bugs you" so much?

Note the generalization, your verses are out of context. He just makes up false charges folks, and posts them.

Then, as a direct and calculated insult, after I say God's sovereignty is something to worship, he again says it "bugs" me.

Calvinism is not based on scripture, it claims as its doctrine the opposite of scripture. Many are called but few are chosen, becomes few are chosen but many are called anyway.

God choosing people for salvation through faith in the truth, becomes God choosing foreseen people unconditionally.

Christ laying down His life as a ransom for all becomes Christ laid down His life as a ransom for all the elect only.

Calvinism is mistaken and irrational. It puts the cart before the horse. It redefines the meanings of words to pour its man-made doctrine into the text.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

He wasn't there.
You can say that again!

You falsified a quote in your argument Rippon..........I am not in the LEAST bit surprised.

 

[Alive in Christ]

The Gospel Deficiency of Reformed Theology
Do you remember the words, "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is"? Bill Clinton made this statement before a Federal Grand Jury on August 17, 1998, in response to allegations that he had previously lied under oath regarding a sexual affair with a White House intern. He further explained that the word "is" as understood to mean "is and never has been" would have an entirely different meaning than "is" as in "there is none". He argued that his former sworn testimony was "a completely true statement" because he had the second meaning in mind. My thought was that any politician who resorts to this kind of etymological hairsplitting to defend his integrity is desperate indeed!

Politicians are not alone in their ability to manipulate word meanings to their advantage. Theologians have done so for centuries in order to defend an interpretation of scripture or further a doctrinal agenda. Reformed theology is a case in point. One key issue is the meaning of the word "world" (Greek kosmos) as used by Jesus and the Apostles to describe the object of God's love (John 3:16) and the extent of the atonement (John 1:29). There is an interpretive axiom that says, "If the plain sense of scripture makes good sense, seek no other sense, lest you make the plain sense to become nonsense." The plain sense of "world" in John 3:16 is "humanity in its entirety (Jews and Gentiles without exception or distinction).

Reformed theology rejects the plain sense for another sense that is essentially nonsense, using a lethal mix of Aristotelian logic and misapplied scripture to arrive at a meaning of "world" that equates to the "world of the elect". It teaches that God loves only the elect and that Jesus died only for them, notwithstanding the plethora of scripture to the contrary. Reformed theology is truly Clintonesque in its attempt to redefine the "world" that God so loved, and reconciled to Himself through the death of His Son (II Corinthians 5:14-19).

At the close of His ministry, our Lord Jesus spoke these words: "I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness. And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world" (John 12:46-47). Jesus used the word “world” three times in these two verses. It cannot mean the "world of the elect" simply because Jesus included in that world every soul that hears His words and refuses to believe! In other words, the "world" as defined by Jesus consists of the elect and non-elect alike. The elect are those who believe; the non-elect are those who persist in unbelief. Jesus declared that He came to save them all, and that all were the objects of His love! These two verses alone, if properly understood in context by the intellectually honest student of scripture, destroy the entire Calvinistic system!

Reformed theology is a speculative philosophical system that suffers from a major gospel deficiency! The scriptures reveal that the apostolic gospel message consists of two main themes: the provision God made for the sins of mankind, and the offer of forgiveness and life to all who believe it. The provision is expressed in the words "Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures" (I Corinthians 15:3). In this passage, Paul was restating the core message he had preached to the Corinthians before they were saved, which is the same message he preached to every unbeliever he evangelized.

The offer is expressed in the words, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house" (Acts 16:31). The validity of the offer is absolutely contingent upon an actual provision for sin. So the only way Paul could have extended the offer to include the jailor's household was a conviction that Jesus had provided a sin satisfaction for every man in His vicarious death. Reformed theology is incapable of such conviction, and is therefore hamstrung by a gospel that only partially resembles that which Paul declared to the Gentiles.

Brethren, Jesus and the apostle Paul both proclaimed a universal offer of salvation backed by a universal provision for sin! Anything less is a departure from apostolic doctrine. Reformed theology, because it suffers from a gospel deficiency, should be rejected by every Bible believer. It was Jesus Who commanded the gospel to be preached to every creature. If there are some for whom Jesus made no provision for sin, how then can there be a gospel for them? And if the gospel offer is not backed by an actual provision for sin, how then is it possible for a Just God to hold the 'non-elect', for whom Christ did not die, accountable for rejecting a gospel that is 'non-applicable' to them.

....
.....

 

[Rippon]

as a direct and calculated insult,

Calvinism is not based on scripture,

It redefines the meanings of words to pour its man-made doctrine into the text.

You utter these contempible lies so often when gets almost used to it. But then,I say,"Never feel you have been personally slighted on this board." You have no right to say that in the least when you take the time to type your junk. Not when you continually drone on with your slanderous and shameful ways.

 

[Rippon]

You are a Calvinist.........and therefore you are a "heretic" Yeshua.

According to Roman Catholics, who are like many Fundamental Baptist ---Arminian to the core.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

According to Roman Catholics, who are like many Fundamental Baptist ---Arminian to the core.

That statement doesn't make sense Rippon.

 

[Rippon]

Christ laying down His life as a ransom for all becomes Christ laid down His life as a ransom for all the elect only.

As I have said by the authority of the word of God over and over again:Christ laid down His life for the sake of,in the stead of,in the place,substitutionally for the sheep;not the goats,wolves etc. Christ laid down his life for His Church --His Bride. He did not die for the Church and everybody else too.

There are those He knows,and those that He has never known.

 

[Rippon]

That statement doesn't make sense Rippon.

But yet it is the truth. As a matter of fact many Fundamental Baptists are closer to that of the semi-Pelagian kind of soteriology --just like most Roman Catholics. (There have been exceptions in the R.C.fold over the centuries like the Jansenists.)

 

[HeirofSalvation]

But yet it is the truth. As a matter of fact many Fundamental Baptists are closer to that of the semi-Pelagian kind of soteriology --just like most Roman Catholics. (There have been exceptions in the R.C.fold over the centuries like the Jansenists.)

O.K. Man. Go you

 

[quantumfaith]

One does not have to think Calvin was a saint to believe in God's sovereignty. Also, believing in God's sovereignty does not go counter to Baptist distinctives. Maybe you failed the matching test.

Also remember SN (I know that you do) that one who does not hold the position of DoG fervently believes as much in God's Infinite Sovereignty as well. Blessings

 

[Alive in Christ]

Yesua1 posted...

You can say that we misunderstand the bible, but NOT that we are heretics, as that suppossses not really saved!

No worries.

I CERTAINLY do not consider all calvinists lost.

 

[Thomas Helwys]

We do not care!!! Enough of this talk about a sinful man who can't save anyone!!!

Help us Mods!!! I demand a ban on all calvinism topics in the General Baptist Forum. :laugh:

Give them a tiny lil section down after Health and Wellness.:tongue3:

I agree, which is why I will not be found participating in this thread, beyond this post.

 

[Van]

Logical Fallacy

You utter these contempible lies so often when gets almost used to it. But then,I say,"Never feel you have been personally slighted on this board." You have no right to say that in the least when you take the time to type your junk. Not when you continually drone on with your slanderous and shameful ways.

Here we get a typical Calvinist defense of the mistaken doctrine of Calvinism. A straight up personal attack, attempting to undercut an opponent's view, by attacking him or her personally. This is all they have, folks. Count the charges, then count the evidence. LOL

1) Christ died for all mankind, 1 John 2:2, 1 Timothy 2:4-6, which of course includes all those actually saved. This view is not slanderous or shameful.

2) The Calvinist doctrine of penal substitution is simply a Trojan horse for Limited Atonement, it is mistaken and unsupportable in scripture. Christ's death was substitutional, He died for us. Anyone spiritually placed in Christ and washed with His precious blood has their sins taken away. The sins were not taken away when He died, the Calvinist fiction, but when we are spiritually place in Him. This view is not slanderous or shameful.

3) Calvinism is mistaken doctrine, as shown by verse after verse, such as:

(1) Total Spiritual Inability is shown false because everyone would be as the first soil of Matthew 13:1-23, but scripture teaches some men have lost all their natural ability to understand some spiritual things, the milk of the gospel, i.e. the first soil, but other men, i.e. soils 2, 3 and 4 still have limited spiritual ability and therefore can seek God and understand the gospel.

(2) Unconditional Election is shown false by 2 Thessalonians 2:13 which teaches we are chosen for salvation through faith in the truth. This view is not shameful or slanderous.

(3) Limited Atonement (and Penal Substitution) are shown to be false doctrine by 1 John 2:2, 1 Timothy 2:4-6, and John 3:16 (whoever believes teaches the reconciliation is available to all.)

(4) Irresistible Grace is shown to be false doctrine by Matthew 23:13 where men are entering heaven (and therefore according to Calvinism under the influence of Irresistible Grace) who are blocked by false teachers teaching false doctrine.

There is no need to personally attack individuals when truth is on your side. ​

 

[Yeshua1]

Here we get a typical Calvinist defense of the mistaken doctrine of Calvinism. A straight up personal attack, attempting to undercut an opponent's view, by attacking him or her personally. This is all they have, folks. Count the charges, then count the evidence. LOL

1) Christ died for all mankind, 1 John 2:2, 1 Timothy 2:4-6, which of course includes all those actually saved. This view is not slanderous or shameful.

2) The Calvinist doctrine of penal substitution is simply a Trojan horse for Limited Atonement, it is mistaken and unsupportable in scripture. Christ's death was substitutional, He died for us. Anyone spiritually placed in Christ and washed with His precious blood has their sins taken away. The sins were not taken away when He died, the Calvinist fiction, but when we are spiritually place in Him. This view is not slanderous or shameful.

3) Calvinism is mistaken doctrine, as shown by verse after verse, such as:

(1) Total Spiritual Inability is shown false because everyone would be as the first soil of Matthew 13:1-23, but scripture teaches some men have lost all their natural ability to understand some spiritual things, the milk of the gospel, i.e. the first soil, but other men, i.e. soils 2, 3 and 4 still have limited spiritual ability and therefore can seek God and understand the gospel.

(2) Unconditional Election is shown false by 2 Thessalonians 2:13 which teaches we are chosen for salvation through faith in the truth. This view is not shameful or slanderous.

(3) Limited Atonement (and Penal Substitution) are shown to be false doctrine by 1 John 2:2, 1 Timothy 2:4-6, and John 3:16 (whoever believes teaches the reconciliation is available to all.)

(4) Irresistible Grace is shown to be false doctrine by Matthew 23:13 where men are entering heaven (and therefore according to Calvinism under the influence of Irresistible Grace) who are blocked by false teachers teaching false doctrine.

There is no need to personally attack individuals when truth is on your side. ​

HOW can there be a penal substutionary death of jesus on behalf of ALL sinners though? He substituted Himself to the father in their stead, so wouldn't ALL sinners thus be saved?

the father accepted His death as propiation for sins, and reconciled sinners to Himself thru it, so IF for all sinners he died, are you a Universalist?​

 

[Rippon]

1) Christ died for all mankind, 1 John 2:2, 1 Timothy 2:4-6, which of course includes all those actually saved.

Christ died for those He actually died for. That does not include those in eternal torment and those who will be in eternal torment. He did not die for Esau, Pilate, Cain, Judas, those who perished in the Great Flood, etc.

Christ died for all types of people from around the globe. He did not die for everyone without exception, but everyone without distinction. He bought many from among all tribes, languages and nations.

2) The Calvinist doctrine of penal substitution is simply a Trojan horse for Limited Atonement, it is mistaken and unsupportable in scripture.

Rmitchell just posted a statement from the SBC. In it was a statement that they believe in the penal view of the atonement. Do you hold to the moral influence theory or what?

The sins were not taken away when He died, the Calvinist fiction.

I think you are coming up with the fiction. What Calvinist hold to that view?

 

[Rippon]

Would say the latter, especially in the books authored by the Apostle Paul!

I like the following quote by R.C. Reed (1951-1925)in his book The Gospel As Taught By Calvin.

"We believe that the apostles and their immediate successors were Calvinists of the deepest dye. How could John have escaped Calvinism after listening to the discourses of Christ which he records in the sixth and tenth chapters of his Gospel? How could Paul have written the eighth and ninth of Romans, the first of Ephesians, and, in fact all his other epistles, unless he had been a Calvinist? How could anyone but a rank Calvinist ever have preached such a sermon as Peter preached on the day of Pentecost? (See especially Acts 2:23)" (p.124)

 

[Van]

1) Limited Atonement has no support in scripture, but Christ dying for all mankind, laying down His life as a ransom for all, is supported in verse after verse.

2) What part of Penal Substitution is a Trojan Horse for Limited Atonement does Yeshua1 not understand.

3) Next we get the chestnut off the Calvinist pile of falsehoods, that Christ did not die for all men because those who had died and in Hades were excluded. Twaddle. God accepted Christ's sacrifice for all men, thus anyone placed in Christ will have their body of sin removed. Christ is like an eternal fount, anyone placed in the living water gets reconciled, whether one or one million, or everyone. The reconciliation is limited by who God places in Christ, not the sufficiency of Christ's sacrifice. Again the Calvinist argument is a cart before the horse argument.

4) I believe in the Biblical Theory of Reconciliation, everyone spiritually placed in Christ is reconciled to God. They are baptized spiritually into His death, undergo the circumcision of Christ, and arise in Christ a new creation, born anew from above. This makes them perfect, holy and blameless, and then they are sealed in Christ with the Holy Spirit forever. Christ's death resulted in Him becoming the propitiation for the whole world, and thus everyone and anyone sprinkled with His blood has the penalty for their sins, past, present and future, forgiven and remembered no more forever.