Another fake objection.
Accusing Particular Baptists of being Hyper Calvinist Double Predestinationists. How sad.
-
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!
Review of Free Will 2
- Thread starter TCassidy
- Start date
- Status
Accusing Particular Baptists of being Hyper Calvinist Double Predestinationists. How sad.
I have been sick. I have never been dead. I think they are probably two very different things!
Rockson
Active Member
I have been sick. I have never been dead. I think they are probably two very different things!
So you would go up to Jesus and say, "Lord stop using that analogy where you're the great physician who heals the sick!" Mk 2:16-17 (in regard to sinners coming to repentance) Bottom line is sinners still have consciousness, they can reason, hear and think. The rich man in hell demonstrates that and I hardly think you would argue that he wasn't spiritually dead. (Luke 16)
The argument presented by Martin Luther is wrong. Free Will is not evident by action to fulfill a desire. It has having the desire without coercion.
It is not the ability to choice correctly not the ability to understand all choices and consequences.
Nicodemus is not about Free Will at all. He did not understand Jesus statements.
According to Luther a paraplegic does not have Free Will because , although might want to walk, there is no evidence of him wanting to walk.
Secondly, one freely sins and freely does not sin, but is influenced.
We sin in free will, as Adam and Satan and the others. Otherwise God made them sin.
The same free will we exercise faith in Christ is the same as we selfishly sin. God does not make us sin or accept Him.
Jhn 7:37
In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink.
not , I have a drink for only some of you
You said we believe election is "random." None of us believe that, and you know none of us believe that. God's election is not "random" but according to the good pleasure of His Will.
Adam acted as the representative for all his posterity. When he sinned and fell, we sinned being in Adam. Dads are not representatives for their children. You’re comparing apples to guacamole.
Romans 5:12-19 is a beautiful picture of the federal headship of both Adam’s.
Another fake objection.
Accusing Particular Baptists of being Hyper Calvinist Double Predestinationists. How sad.
Doc is right on this point. The Second London Confession of the Particulars specifically rejected — although subtly — double predestination by rewriting both Savoy and Westminster in favor of preterition, or passing over, as opposed to specific ordination of reprobation. Basically Augustinian single predestination vs. Calvinistic double predestination.
That said, in my mind the logical differences are distinct the practical differences are virtually indistinguishable, so I would not spill many electrons attempting to justify either position.
you missed with his verse, It is how one man has set up a system of sin and another has set up (constituted) a system or method to be saved,, Are all saved through Jesus, or can one participate in salvation? just as one can participate in this system of sin.
Adam has no federal headship, He was just the sinner were sin and the curse entered the physical world
Please humor me by allowing me to expand on your answer just a bit. Paul's word in Ephesians 1 are nothing short of beautiful and lovely:
Ephesians 1:3-6 3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, 4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love 5 He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will, 6 to the praise of the glory of His grace, which He freely bestowed on us in the Beloved.
The Apostle Paul blessed the Lord who has so generously blessed us, by granting us every spiritual blessing in His Son, Jesus. In the same manner, He chose us in Christ before the physical universe ever existed. Not only did He chose us from all eternity, He did so with a purpose in mind, that we should be in His presence as separate and righteous people. This He has done in His smiling providence. For this, He deserves all the glory.
When we dwell upon the great doctrine of election and predestination it allows us to see God in His proper place and mankind its place. God does not seek the counsel of His creation. Indeed, how can the sinful race of men offer the Lord God Almighty anything of value? Job rightly said:
Job 42:1-6 1 Then Job answered the LORD and said, 2 “I know that You can do all things, And that no purpose of Yours can be thwarted. 3 ‘Who is this that hides counsel without knowledge?’ Therefore I have declared that which I did not understand, Things too wonderful for me, which I did not know.” 4 ‘Hear, now, and I will speak;I will ask You, and You instruct me.’ 5 “I have heard of You by the hearing of the ear; But now my eye sees You; 6 Therefore I retract, And I repent in dust and ashes.”
We are no better than Job. The Synergist view of election elevates man as a cooperator with God. They deny this vigorously, but their theology makes that accusation unavoidable. How can we, a people whose righteousness is of no more value than a dirty menstrual cloth (c.f. Isa. 64:6), claim to partner with God in our own salvation? Not only is it not biblical, but it also strains credulity.
37818
Well-Known Member
". . . Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. But not as the offence, so also [is] the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, [which is] by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. And not as [it was] by one that sinned, [so is] the gift: for the judgment [was] by one to condemnation, but the free gift [is] of many offences unto justification. For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.) Therefore as by the offence of one [judgment came] upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one [the free gift came] upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. . . ."
Yes, but that does not tell me how you understand this.
The human race inherited the divine knowledge of good and evil on account of Adam's disobedience. It is this divine knowledge of evil (Genesis 3:22) which we have from Adam which is the cause of our sinful nature being we are only finite beings, not infinitely good. And the divine knowledge of good causes us to be self condemned (1 John 3:20-21)..
Rockson
Active Member
And just what does God not needing the counsel of his creation have anything to do with defending your case against Non-Calvinists? Nothing whatsoever!
Depending on how you define "cooperator with God" but I believe this about the subject of election and nope I won't back down regardless of how many bullies want to smear me as not being honorable to God. God has revealed to us the gospel and we cooperate with him. Cooperate is not a dirty word.
You strain credulity when you claim a sinner can't say a yes or no to God. It's everything the gospel is to share the message and have them accept or reject.
You really are full of yourself, are you not? You make no biblical case, just pronouncements. Who are you, the theological Captain Jean Luc Picard? "Make it so!" My point about God not needing the counsel of His creation is to refute the Synergist error of cooperation with God in salvation.
Now you play the martyr. Monergists are bullies trying to get you to submit to their evil theology, and by-golly they will smear you if you do not! How horrible it must be to be you. Get over yourself and stop being a theological snowflake. Make your point from scripture. Develop a better argument. If you do not have one, go study and see what the Word has to say. But whatever you do, do not pull out the "I'm being bullied card." It makes you look like a petulant, whining child who needs a box of crayons and a safe place. I am sure some of your Synergist compagni are just as turned off by your tone as I am. If you ever take the time to search my past posts you will see that I have repeatedly put forth an exegetical argument against Synergism and why it is unbiblical. I cannot be accused of not making a thorough case. That does not mean you have to agree with it, but if you are going to refute my argument, make a similar case. Just because you say something that does not make it convincing.
To quote my favorite president, "There you go again."
Lastly, I am not going to go back-and-forth with you until/unless you can defend your arguments. This board is full of diverse opinions, which I believe is a good thing. We all have the right to challenge each other. That is how we find out if our own argument stands against scripture. If all you are going to do is share your unsupported opinions, then you will have to do that with other posters.
I don't know how you can consistently miss the point so spectacularly.
Whoever comes to Christ may drink. '....The one who comes to Me I will by no means drive out.' (John 6:37). The problem is that people will not come to Christ of their own accord, not because God prevents them, but because of their own wicked, unbelieving hearts. 'But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life' (John 5:40). It is only when God puts forth His power and irresistibly draws men and women to Himself that they come. 'Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power' (Psalms 110:3; c.f. John 6:44).
Rockson
Active Member
Sorry R no offense but I'd kindly suggest you review my posts. I think you'll find I've many such "Biblical cases" all of which you go strangely silent to respond to. As in Jesus did use the analogy of the sinner as being sick in response to your saying the sinner is either spiritual dead or sick...which is it? (see below)
Contradict yourself much? You believe the sinner is spiritually dead and then refute your own statement by saying the sinner is sick? Which one is it, dead or sick? (Reformed # 72)
To which I responded in # 81 Why are you questioning me on this? I didn't make up this analogy. Jesus did. He knew people were spiritually dead and yet he said what he said in Lk 5:32
But you never addressed the scripture where it clearly shows Jesus used the analogy. All you did was get on the defensive (perhaps like a snowflake you accused me of being) but you get on the defensive and don't even address the verse. If you bypassed it because you're afraid to answer and try to pretend that a good point hadn't been made then fine...the readers can be the judge as to how credible you are....but you come back and go on a rant in regard to it by saying in your post #83,
Because your understanding of scripture is wrong. And get off of your moral high horse, as though no one can question you. This is what debate is all about. We question, we disagree, we present our arguments and counter-arguments. (Reformed #83)
But you never responded to the scriptural argument! All you did my friend was become condescending. No counter-argument of the Luke 5:32 verse which shows JESUS used the analogy just you telling me to get off my high horse. That's your definition of friendly, intelligent discussion and debate? Or rather seeking to steam roll your way through and not answering an argument from scripture.
Look get this straight....I couldn't care less if you or any other Calvinist or Reformed respond to any of my posts! You do whatever YOU WANT and I guess I take that position for I believe in free will. As for your encouragement to go back and review your posts I just did that and I suggest you've been found wanting....telling one to do one thing and yet what do you do? Something different?
I have not missed, I was pointing out the invitation is open to all, God is not choosing some.
He has not and will not violate free will.
If so, there would not be sin in the first place.
What you don't seem to understand is that all Calvinists believe that the invitation is open to all. There has never been more than a tiny minority of Hyper-calvinists who have not believed in the universal proclamation of the Gospel. Read the sermons of Whitfield or Spurgeon, both 5-point Calvinists.
The problem is that, if that were the end of the story, no one would ever be saved because people exercise their 'free will' by freely and voluntarily not coming to Christ, because,
'There is none righteous, no, not one;
There is none who understands;
There is none who seeks after God.
They have all turned aside;
They have together become unprofitable;
There is none who does good, not, not one.........
There is no fear of God before their eyes' (Romans 3:10-12, 18).
"And this is the condemnation, that the Light has come into the world and men preferred darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil" (John 3:19).
But, praise God, that is not the end of the story. God, in His mercy, has chosen a vast crowd of people, of all people, races and tongues, and given them to the Son to redeem (John 6:39) at infinite cost, and to the Spirit to seal for the day of Redemption (Ephesians 1:13-14). And what do these people sing, as they stand before the throne of God? "Salvation belongs to our God who sits upon the throne, and to the Lamb!" They know, as will you on that last day, that salvation does not belong to you, not even a tiny bit of it. For, 'It is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy' (Romans 9:16). Praise His name!
Limited atonement and election are not open to all. There is no free will in the doctrine. How can you say that. It is completly opposite of Calvinism [personal attack edited].
Last edited by a moderator:
Yet, in your theology salvation has been settled from since "before the foundation of the world", so obviously it is impossible for it to be open to all.
Rockson
Active Member
I'm sorry but I have to believe this is extremely disingenuous for you to say this and the only reason you do it IMO is to deceive the misinformed. You DO NOT believe a genuine invitation was given to ALL! There's nothing genuine about saying ALL are invited to salvation and turning them away at the door. Well you would say they just wouldn't come to the door but you're saying the others came because God put in them to come to the point of making them...(irresistible grace)
Well if that's what it took to cause anyone to come to the door then for it to be a genuine invitation the draw TO ALL would have to be included or why bother sending out the invitations? This is what's so absolutely disturbing about Calvinistic thinking. They think God would play games with people granting invitations and not sincerely wanting them there.
Sad thing is Calvinists in the REAL WORLD would never go for something like that and call it reasonable conduct for a person to do let alone for God. Can you Calvinists honestly tell me if you heard one gave out invitations and sent ones responding away that you wouldn't find such actions disgusting? I'm sorry but I suspect I'll hear crickets on this OR have one of them tell me I need to come down from my high horse...anything but answer a good solid question.
Failure to understand the distinction between the Gospel Call and the Effectual Call.
And once again failing to discern the difference between Monergism, which believes, as clearly stated in Dort, the Universal Gospel Call, and the Hyper-Calvinism of Hoeksema, Gill, and others of their ilk.
It always makes me laugh when those who believe some sort of Syncretism cry foul when Monergists accuse them of not understanding Monergism, then post the absolute proof that they don't understand it! LOL!
- Status