Is Calvinism's "Total Inability" and Biblical Hardening Compatible?

[Luke2427]

Amen.

Amazing how he attempts to contrue himself differently in his own mind, all the while slandering me, with his personal attacks, while calling it a joke?

Like a madman who throws Firebrands, arrows and death, So is the man who deceives his neighbor, And says, "Was I not joking?" Proverbs 26:18-19

Right.

I actually like Skandelon. Of all the "non-cals" on bb I think he is the most consistent and sound.

But one of his problems is a too ready willingness to correct others while fainting that he himself occupies the high ground of generosity and amiableness.

He needs to be consistent. Get down here in the dirt and fight (figuratively of course) with me and abandon this "holier-than-thou" status which drive him to correct all Calvinists every time they get a little rough...

or...

...maintain that "holier-than thou" status and never be snotty or demeaning or personal in any way. Just stick to the issues and leave off ALL comments that address the person.

He literally said of Aaron, not of his COMMENTS, but of Aaron himSELF, "You are incorrigible, Aaron."

That's personal. I don't have a big problem with it, but when you do that kind of thing then you are absolutely no better than those you reprimand.

Get dirty or stay clean.

But don't walk around baptistboard like you are Mr. Clean when you roll in the mud every chance you get.

 

[preacher4truth]

Right.

I actually like Skandelon. Of all the "non-cals" on bb I think he is the most consistent and sound.

But one of his problems is a too ready willingness to correct others while fainting that he himself occupies the high ground of generosity and amiableness.

He needs to be consistent. Get down here in the dirt and fight (figuratively of course) with me and abandon this "holier-than-thou" status which drive him to correct all Calvinists every time they get a little rough...

or...

...maintain that "holier-than thou" status and never be snotty or demeaning or personal in any way. Just stick to the issues and leave off ALL comments that address the person.

He literally said of Aaron, not of his COMMENTS, but of Aaron himSELF, "You are incorrigible, Aaron."

That's personal. I don't have a big problem with it, but when you do that kind of thing then you are absolutely no better than those you reprimand.

Get dirty or stay clean.

But don't walk around baptistboard like you are Mr. Clean when you roll in the mud every chance you get.

You're correct, he needs to remove the log out of his own eye, then he can see clearly. Like, seeing the cheerleaders longer leash, perhaps, and his own double-standards and personal innuendos?

Yep. He holds himself as this loving, kind, gracious, non-malicious, goody-goody victim. He gets personal very often, with the Calvinists of course.

 

[Rippon]

But one of his problems is a too ready willingness to correct others while fainting that he himself occupies the high ground of generosity and amiableness.

I'll willingly correct something. It's feinting,not fainting.

 

[Rippon]

He get's personal very often, with the Calvinists of course.

It's gets,not get's.

 

[Luke2427]

I'll willingly correct something. It's feinting,not fainting.

Thanks. :wavey: :thumbsup: :jesus:

 

[preacher4truth]

I'll willingly correct something. It's feinting,not fainting.

...think he meant feigning, not feinting, nor fainting. All are descriptive enough for me. :thumbsup:

 

[Amy.G]

Right.

I actually like Skandelon. Of all the "non-cals" on bb I think he is the most consistent and sound.

Awww....I thought you liked me the best. :laugh::laugh:

 

[Skandelon]

But one of his problems is a too ready willingness to correct others while fainting that he himself occupies the high ground of generosity and amiableness.

We both correct what we believe to be the error of others, Luke. It is a debate board after all. And could it be what you refer to as "fainting" generosity and "amiableness" is my genuine attempt to be more loving and kind with those I debate even though I know full well it is not my nature? Could it be that the forum of the written words lends itself to misinterpretation of intent and when we don't TRY to assume the best about another we tend to assume the worse?

As God is my witness, I TRY to stay on topic, stay cordial, patient and kind in my responses, but if that comes across as fake to those who disagree with me, how can I help that? I'd love to speak to you on the phone one day because if you could here my tone and sincerity I think you would know my heart even if you continued to disagree with my doctrine.

I don't dislike you. I am a lot like you which probably makes me all the more patient with you in our discussions. I genuinely want you to see things my way, as I'm sure you do of me.

Just stick to the issues and leave off ALL comments that address the person.

I'd love nothing more and I think if you read back over all our discussions you will see I'm much more consistent at this than you have been. Maybe I'm bias, but I'd be willing to subject that theory to an objective test any day.

He literally said of Aaron, not of his COMMENTS, but of Aaron himSELF, "You are incorrigible, Aaron."

Which only meant that he was not willing to receive correction for misrepresenting my views. You are welcome to call me the same thing if you believe I'm continually misrepresenting you and will not receive your correction. I don't find that personally insulting. It's not as if I was accusing him of being an incorrigible heathen or criminal or sinner...I was only referring to his incorrigibility regarding misrepresenting my view.

But don't walk around baptistboard like you are Mr. Clean when you roll in the mud every chance you get.

Is the "blatantly false" and the "incorrigible" quotes the only specific charges you guys can produce? If so, I'm doing better than I thought! :smilewinkgrin:

 

[DHK]

They can't if being "born again" means what you think it means.

You think it IS salvation- it is the whole of it. You base this on a viewpoint that is very new so far as church history is concerned but old enough for you to have been raised hearing it. So you cannot see being "born again" as anything other than the WHOLE of salvation.

I believe if I dig far enough (historically), that I will find that your theology is relatively new--new in the respect that salvation is not a process (not the act of salvation). I am not speaking of hearing of the Word of God, the conviction of the Holy Spirit. I am speaking of the event, when a person trusts the Lord as their Savior--that event which took place on the Day of Pentecost, or with the Ethiopian Eunuch, or the Philippian jailor, or perhaps even better, the thief on the cross.
With the thief on the cross, how long did the Holy Spirit have to work in his heart; had the Father been drawing him: was he regenerated before he was saved; etc. How long? Or did it all take place in a moment, in that very moment when he looked at Jesus and said (prayed): "Remember me when you enter into your kingdom."

Part of the trouble is that you fail to see the other side because of your environment, background, teaching, etc. I am accused of the same thing. You say things that can't possibly be true. If they were true I wouldn't be saved. That is one way I know they are false.

How long did I have to hear the Word of God before I was saved?
How long did the Holy Spirit have to work in my heart before I was saved?
How was I supposed to know that the Holy Spirit was working in my heart?
What if I didn't have a great sense of guilt or sin when I was saved?
What if my life didn't radically change right after I was saved?
What if I didn't feel any different after I was saved?

I was saved as an adult at the age of 20, with a Catholic background. I had never heard the gospel previous to the time that I was saved. The "Mass" that I went to was said in Latin. I got saved the first time I heard the gospel, because it made sense. It appealed to my intellect. I was a sinner in need of a savior, and Christ could meet that need, personally. When it could be shown out of the Bible, I had no argument. It was Christ that saves, not the Church. I prayed and trusted Christ as my Savior.
--I never sat under the preaching of the Word of God previous to that time.
I never felt the convicting power of the Holy Spirit.
I didn't feel any great sense of conviction; there were no tears, etc.
And there was no big change in my life after my salvation, at least not immediately.

I didn't doubt my salvation because it was firmly grounded in the Word of God. I didn't know any of the Word of God, but those that led me to Christ discipled me--at least three days out of the week. They made me memorize Scripture, attend Bible Studies, fellowship with other believers. I had an entirely new group of friends (trustworthy friends) that I never had before. The more I spent in the Word after I got saved (and in fellowship with others) the more my life began to change. That is a result of both discipleship and a process of sanctification.

I can give you the exact date--right to the hour--of my salvation. There is no reason for me to assume there was any process going on before that time, for there wasn't. I wasn't raised in a Christian family.

The event of salvation includes regeneration, justification, adoption, sealing of the Holy Spirit, initial sanctification, forgiveness of sins, redemption, and so much more. God gives us all these things at once.

He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? (Romans 8:32)

 

[Winman]

DHK, my story is similar to yours. I had heard of God and Jesus when my parents went to church on occasion as a boy. I believed in God and Jesus, and believed the Bible was God's word. But I did not understand the gospel (not sure if I really heard it) and thought you had to be good to go to heaven.

But when I was around ten or eleven I was invited to church and heard a real fire and brimestone message. Believeing God's word I was convinced I was in danger of hell. I went down at the invitation and was showed again from scripture I was a sinner in danger of hell, but also that Jesus died for my sins, rose again, and that I could call on him for salvation. I did pray and ask Jesus to save me and was saved that day. It was also the first time I heard the gospel in detail and understood it that I recall.

So, no long process for me either.