Liberal Christianity vs. Seeker Friendly Christanity

[Van]

Spurgeon/Edwards/Hodgh/berkhof/Grudem/owens/Calvin been called many things over the yeras, doubt ANY were because they were "fast and losse' with the scriptures!

There is no actual support for four of the five points of the TULIP in scripture. So all the Calvinists and Enablers can do is question my character and qualifications.

Total Spiritual Inability of some men, but not all men, is supported in scripture. Calvinism teaches all men, adding to scripture to support a liberal interpretation, i.e. no one seeks God with the Calvinist add on "at any time."

Unconditional Election simply nullifies the scripture that says we are chosen through faith in the truth, again ignoring the syntax of the inspired message.

Limited Atonement asserts Christ did not lay down His life for all, but only for the elect, however they ignore that the false teacher was bought by the Master.

Irresistible grace claims once a person is able to seek God, then 100% of them are given to Christ, denying that the men who were entering heaven were blocked by false teachers.

To support these mistaken doctrines, Calvinism uses loose, approximate, errant and liberal interpretations of scripture.

 

[Van]

Probably not. But he does not represent all non cals. His characterization is only meant to tear the opposing view down. It has nothing to do with debate. He just wants to be right and have everyone capitulate to him.

Yet another personal attack, devoid of content. Me thinks he doth protest too much.

 

[Mexdeaf]

Yet another personal attack, devoid of content. Me thinks he doth protest too much.

And your response just proof of the content you said it was lacking.:laugh:

 

[Van]

Hi Mexdeaf, I provided content in post #141

Here is something just for you (stolen from the net): If you rearrange the letters of Predestination you can get the future for the elect, i.e. ripened to saint, and for the non-elect, i.e. sent to dire pain.

 

[Van]

Calvinism as codified in the TULIP provides a fixed position which I oppose as based on a liberal and errant interpretation of scripture. But if you interact with Calvinists, and ignore the stream of ad hominems tossed your way, you find some pretty much disagree with every point, so they are really "post Calvin Evangelicals." They see themselves as more liberal than classic Westminster Confession Calvinists, but more conservative than Seeker Friendly Churchgoers.

They accept every part of us is tainted by the fall, i.e. total depravity, but deny there is no capacity for good, i.e. to seek God, because we are still made in God's image, marred as it may be.

They reject limited atonement, because of the clear scripture that God desires everyone to be saved.

What we can draw from this is that mushy bottom or foundation of Calvinism resting on liberal interpretations, has spawned even more interpretations than you can shake a stick at.