• 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!

Man's nature

Robert Snow

New Member
No Marcia, it's people like you who are not only 'mean', but downright deceptive in your persistent insidious implications that all monergists are really just followers of Calvin.

One needs only to do a very brief scan of Winman's posts to realize his whole intent on this site is to bash the monergists and label them all as Calvinists, which really I take pride in the label, but for those newbies outside looking in, they could easily get the wrong impression towards us. Yeah, it is a shameful, deceitful tactic that you believers in 'Man's Sovereign Will' use quite often.

You, Marcia, should be ashamed.

Did the Pot just call the Kettle black?

You accuse Marcia of being deceitful for calling all monergists Calvinists, yet you then impugn those who disagree with you by making the statement, "you believers in 'Man's Sovereign Will."

You know we don't believe in man's sovereign will, we just believe God allows man the choice in His sovereign will.
 

Allan

Active Member
Your question is distorted and biased toward making it appear as if I would approve of God haters and evil doers being included among the elect.
No, my question speaks directly to the heart of the matter.
If a person is not of faith in Christ then by default they are evil doers as scripture declares all that is not of faith (meaning faith in CHrist) is sin. As such they are God haters and blasphemous against Him in whom they have not believed.

I do not speak for other Primitive Baptists when I make this statement, I speak only for myself:
I appreciate that clarification.

Just as God had a multitude that belonged to Him outside of the Mosaic economy, I cannot doubt that He would have a multitude that belongs to Him outside of the visible church today.
Here is the answer to my question, though you still haven't 'actually' stated yes or no to it.

I will ask for one bit of clarification though.
What do you mean by "outside the visible church"?

If you mean these people are not specifically in or apart of a local church yet they are actaully believers and professers of/in Jesus the Christ, then we have something to work with.

However if not, it becomes apparent you believe there are some people who are not of faith, and as such in other religions, beliefs, which includes atheists and yes even the blasphemers and haters of God - are saved.

Again, if the later, your statment that He has a multitude the belongs to Him outside the church confirms the very doctrine I stated all the PB'ers I have met and debated with profess.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

kyredneck

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Allan, if you feel yourself as being qualified to dictate from God's word what God can or cannot lawfully do with His own, then have at it brother.

I'm done with this dialog.
 

Robert Snow

New Member
Allan, if you feel yourself as being qualified to dictate from God's word what God can or cannot lawfully do with His own, then have at it brother.

I'm done with this dialog.

Your former posting was a little unusual. I wish you would at least explain it.
 

webdog

Active Member
Site Supporter
Allan, if you feel yourself as being qualified to dictate from God's word what God can or cannot lawfully do with His own, then have at it brother.

I'm done with this dialog.
How is that any different than what you have done?
 

kyredneck

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Your former posting was a little unusual. I wish you would at least explain it.

Clarify Robert; what is it that you wish for me to explain?

Bear in mind, this is really a topic that I'm more likely to discuss in detail with my fellows who accept the right of the potter over the clay.
 

webdog

Active Member
Site Supporter
Ref post #60:



That is my stance, and always will be my stance. I fail to see the substance to your [typical] quip.
...then why do you reject it when Scripture states plainly HOW and WHY Christ deals with man?
 

Winman

Active Member
So, Winman, the God-honoring doctrines which give Him ALL the glory are false, and are damning folks, and it is your Christian duty to oppose and stamp out those doctrines every chance you get. Do I have it right?

But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who was made unto us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption: that, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord. I Cor 1:30,31

I don't believe a doctrine that says God damns the vast majority of mankind before they are even born honors God. In the scriptures God says he loves all men, and yet allows most men to perish when it is within his power to save them.

How this doctrine honors God I fail to see.
 

kyredneck

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
...How this doctrine honors God I fail to see.

What you deniers of the potter's right over the clay fail to see is that those vessels of wrath don't belong to God. They belong to the devil. Search the parable of the wheat and the tares. Where is the edict to persuade the tares to become wheat? Where is ANY concern shown for the tares? There is none. The concern is only for the wheat. IMO, if you put a child of the devil in heaven he would be absolutely miserable there. He would be out of place. He doesn't belong there.
 

Winman

Active Member
What you deniers of the potter's right over the clay fail to see is that those vessels of wrath don't belong to God. They belong to the devil. Search the parable of the wheat and the tares. Where is the edict to persuade the tares to become wheat? Where is ANY concern shown for the tares? There is none. The concern is only for the wheat. IMO, if you put a child of the devil in heaven he would be absolutely miserable there. He would be out of place. He doesn't belong there.

That God punishes evil does not dishonor God, that is just. But that God would choose before a man is even born to damn him to eternal torment in hell without any means to be saved is monstrous. We non-Cals do not believe this. We believe God gives every man the opportunity to repent and believe on his Son for salvation. If a man rejects this free salvation offered to him and chooses evil, then God is just in punishing him.

You wrote a few days back about your son calling for help. And being a good and loving father you ran to assist him. This makes you better than God if your doctrine is true. By your doctrine God callously and without mercy damns man to everlasting torture in fire for his pleasure, and will not give these unelect any possible way to escape this damnation.

And you call that honoring God?

If you threw your young son in a fire for your pleasure, would that be an honorable act?
 

kyredneck

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
That God punishes evil does not dishonor God, that is just. But that God would choose before a man is even born to damn him to eternal torment in hell without any means to be saved is monstrous. We non-Cals do not believe this. We believe God gives every man the opportunity to repent and believe on his Son for salvation. If a man rejects this free salvation offered to him and chooses evil, then God is just in punishing him.

You wrote a few days back about your son calling for help. And being a good and loving father you ran to assist him. This makes you better than God if your doctrine is true. By your doctrine God callously and without mercy damns man to everlasting torture in fire for his pleasure, and will not give these unelect any possible way to escape this damnation.

And you call that honoring God?

If you threw your young son in a fire for your pleasure, would that be an honorable act?


Winman ,don't you see that Paul here is speaking directly to you and others like you?:

Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he still find fault? For who withstandeth his will? Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why didst thou make me thus? Or hath not the potter a right over the clay, from the same lump to make one part a vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor? Ro 9:19-21

Don't you see that through your objections you are replying back to God and denying the potter the right over the clay?

You free willers are anxious about things you have no control over.
 

Winman

Active Member
Winman ,don't you see that Paul here is speaking directly to you and others like you?:



Don't you see that through your objections you are replying back to God and denying the potter the right over the clay?

You free willers are anxious about things you have no control over.

That is what Paul is saying, but Paul is not saying God destroys men for his pleasure. Paul is saying that God has chosen to save men through faith and not works. That is the topic of the whole chapter.

God does have a right to choose his means of salvation, and if a man rebels against that and rejects his Son Jesus Christ, then God is just in punishing that man.

The scriptures say God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked.

Eze 33:11 Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?

God says he has no pleasure whatsoever in the death of the wicked. Calvinism teaches the opposite. God wills that man turn from his wickedness, and shows this is the man's responsibility.

Eze 33:14 Again, when I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; if he turn from his sin, and do that which is lawful and right;
15 If the wicked restore the pledge, give again that he had robbed, walk in the statutes of life, without committing iniquity; he shall surely live, he shall not die.
16 None of his sins that he hath committed shall be mentioned unto him: he hath done that which is lawful and right; he shall surely live.


Calvinism cannot explain why God allows the vast majority of mankind to perish. If they did, the system will collapse. But the scriptures are quite clear that man perishes because of his own wickedness, but that God offers forgiveness and mercy to those who turn from evil.

Ezekiel 33:14-16 proves Calvinism false. God has not determined that man be damned, the wicked can turn from evil and trust in Christ, and if they do so they can be forgiven.

Now to me, that is a good and honorable God. He offers his love and forgiveness to all that will hear him and turn from evil and trust on him. But if a man willingly refuses to turn and trusts in evil, then God is just in punishing him.

Going back to Romans 9, the whole chapter is contrasting those saved by faith as opposed to those who believed they were saved simply by being descendents of Abraham, and those who believed they were saved by keeping the law. That is clearly shown.

Rom 9:7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.


Here Paul explains that the saved are those who hold the faith of Abraham, not those descended from his flesh.

When he contrasts Moses and Pharaoh it is the same. Moses was a man of great faith, he is mentioned in Hebrews chapter 11.

Heb 11:24 By faith Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter;
25 Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season;
26 Esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt: for he had respect unto the recompence of the reward.
27 By faith he forsook Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king: for he endured, as seeing him who is invisible.


Moses forsook Egypt. He could have stayed in Pharaoh's house and been a ruler and enjoyed all the privilages and power it offered. But he chose to follow the true God. Pharaoh on the other hand was exceedingly rebellious and obstinate, even though God showed him many miracles, he refused to repent and hardened his heart. He loved his wealth, fame, and power and refused to give it up.

Then, at the end of Romans 9, Paul sums up the whole chapter. This is where he clearly explains he is contrasting faith versus works.

Rom 9:30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith.
31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.
32 Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;
33 As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.


Calvinists take verses out of context in Romans 9 to say that God simply chooses some to show mercy, and others to show wrath for his pleasure. That is total error, it is not for God's pleasure, it is because some come by faith, while others attempt to be saved through their own righteousness.

This passage in Romans has been misrepresented by Calvinism.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Allan

Active Member
Allan, if you feel yourself as being qualified to dictate from God's word what God can or cannot lawfully do with His own, then have at it brother.

I'm done with this dialog.

Then it IS your (as well other PB'ers) position that not all of God's elect are people of faith in Christ but in fact some of them are people of other faiths and no faith as well.

I don't see why, since this is the view both yourself and other PB's hold to, that you will not own to it?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top