preacher4truth
Active Member
I see the same things you see, it's quite apparent.
-
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!
Smashing the "T" out of TULIP
- Thread starter steaver
- Start date
I see the same things you see, it's quite apparent.
As you can see, the only one's having a problem with what I have shown God is doing in the passage are Calvinist.
You see? This is error, and this is why I say that you wrestle with scripture. Of course in your mind you do not, you believe you have it down pat, but it is my opinion that you wrestle with scripture to make it fit into TULIP. I guess in your mind you don't wrestle with it, that's fine, but in my opinion you have settled on error.
And millions have 'made a choice' and there is huge change in their lives and they do mighty and wonderful things with the power of Christ in their lives.
I'm sure as you see it you don't wrest the scriptures on TULIP anymore, you have embraced the doctrine. In my opinion you do not rightly divide the word of truth concerning the Sovereinty of God and the freewill of man to choose Christ. I guess we will find out which doctrine is correct at the JSoC. Then it will all be behind us and we can enjoy eternal life together with Christ and each other never to debate the doctrine again.
Can you reconcile for me how Jesus was fully man and fully God at the same time while here on earth?
savedbymercy
New Member
The None Elect are born damned, however their guiltiness increases as they continue to hear the True Gospel or read it, and reject it. They are calling God a Liar every time 1 Jn 5:9-10
9If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son.
10He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.
The record here is the Gospel testimony !
Now, when a True believer gives witness to a person of the Gospel, and that person continually rejects it, debates it, opposes it, then he is to consider that one in a damned state. Thats why Jesus said to His disciples who preached the True Gospel, this is how you will know my elect; Those who believe, they shall be saved, in a saved state, but those who believe not, they shall be damned, in a damned state, so their damnation becomes evident to the elect Mk 16:15-16
15And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
16He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned
A Damned person cannot believe the Gospel, the good news of the their salvation, simply because Christ did not die for them !
evangelist-7
New Member
Yes, of course they are ... and so are the elect!
That's what original sin, and man's inherited sin nature, are all about.
But, the elect lose their damnation destiny the instant they're born-again.
Agreed, I'm being technical here.
IF somehow they failed to get born-again, they'd remain damned.
But, that would mean God failed to get His elect born-again.
(Friend) Master, come quickly! A man has fallen in a well just like I did that day you found me. He needs your help!
(Master) Yes, he will surely die if I do not get him up out of there. I'm tossing you down a rope, grab hold of it and I will save you!
(One in well) I cannot grab hold of it, both of my arms are broken!
(Friend) Master, heal his arms for him so he can grab hold! Just like you healed mine when the same thing happened to me when you found me dying in a well.
(Master) I cannot do that, for this man in the well is not one of my elect.
(Friend) I do not understand, why did you toss him a rope if you knew he could not grab hold without you healing his arms?
(Master) I tossed him a rope so I could increase his damnation for not obeying my command to grab hold and be saved.
(Friend) But Master, he was already damned to death without you offering a rope of salvation.
(Master) Yes, but I want his damnation to be increased, because he rejected my offer of salvation through the rope.
(Friend) I don't understand, why did you command the man to grab hold knowing that he could not unless you healed his arms?
(Master) Are you so dull of hearing? I will one day send the world a great man of wisdom, he will understand perfectly and he will gather to himself a following of true believers, ones who can clearly understand why I must offer slavation to those who cannot possibly lay hold of it.
(Master) Yes, he will surely die if I do not get him up out of there. I'm tossing you down a rope, grab hold of it and I will save you!
(One in well) I cannot grab hold of it, both of my arms are broken!
(Friend) Master, heal his arms for him so he can grab hold! Just like you healed mine when the same thing happened to me when you found me dying in a well.
(Master) I cannot do that, for this man in the well is not one of my elect.
(Friend) I do not understand, why did you toss him a rope if you knew he could not grab hold without you healing his arms?
(Master) I tossed him a rope so I could increase his damnation for not obeying my command to grab hold and be saved.
(Friend) But Master, he was already damned to death without you offering a rope of salvation.
(Master) Yes, but I want his damnation to be increased, because he rejected my offer of salvation through the rope.
(Friend) I don't understand, why did you command the man to grab hold knowing that he could not unless you healed his arms?
(Master) Are you so dull of hearing? I will one day send the world a great man of wisdom, he will understand perfectly and he will gather to himself a following of true believers, ones who can clearly understand why I must offer slavation to those who cannot possibly lay hold of it.
preacher4truth
Active Member
Baseless drivel here. The one who clearly has a problem with, as you say, God double damning people is you son. Some of us have pointed this out to you on several occasions, in fact it's the objective of your OP. In addition, you accuse Calvinists of interpreting the passage to say what YOU are interpreting it as, with no proof whatsoever. Bottom line is you're interpretation and accusations of Calvinists are both erroneous.
As a matter of fact you bring up the question yoursef with "why does God need to damn those already damned?" (very similar to what you ask) clearly showing it is you who has this problem.
For the record, I have no problem with God sending strong delusion to this already damned. In your world, you show your serious problem with this and have attempted to clean up your mess throughout this thread, even resorting to false accusations of others.
But hey, more strawman arguments and baloney from you. At least you're consistently wrong. Congrats!!! :thumbs:
More of your drivel. Show me my wresting of Scripture specifically, OK, and lose your false dishonest accusations. You have nothing to base this on other than accusations.
Many THINK they chose, when the Scriptures which I gave you show it is God who chooses us. Look at you, wresting Scripture yet again. :thumbs:
Show me where I've wrested the Scriptures with exact quotes and the exact passage where I have interpreted and wrested Scripture. OK? You're fully aware that your interpretation is fallacious aren't you? Perhaps you should listen to others and admit you're way off track. The OP begins on a false premise and stays there. I'm sure you thought you had yourself a 'gotcha' moment, but again your false teaching in the passage falls flat on its face.
Put your money where your mouth is and put and end to your strawman false accusations.
As many have pointed out, you've falsely interpreted a passage, there is nothing in the passage smashing total depravity, and now and yet still you resort to baseless accusations and name calling.
As I assumed you're not big enough to apologize for your false accusations, let alone that you cannot prove them.
Time for you to man up son. Own up and prove it or keep your fabrications to yourself.
You are entitled to your opinions my brother. I have nothing to appologize for nor anything to prove. If I missed somewhere where I called you a name, which I doubt, point it out and I will clear it up or appologize.
preacher4truth
Active Member
'Brother?' I'll pass on that since you've falsely accused me and await your owning up to that and acting like a believer. This stance I'm taking? Biblical.
Don't ever accuse me falsely then call me 'brother'. No true brother of mine charges me with fabricated accusations.
It's time you apologize or prove your false accusations, but you can't.
Graciously I ask again, prove your 'wresting of Scripture' charge, showing the exact passage and my interpretation, or, better yet, simply apologize like a true believer would after making false charges.
Keep in mind, I as an alleged 'Calvinist' have never claimed nor coined the phrase 'double damnation' in the passage you've used. Double damned has always been and always will be YOUR interpretation and statement used in and of the passage at hand, and only something YOU have come up with.
Not one Calvinist has used this terminology, nor does your fallacious and basless OP employ any proof that Calvinists interpret this passage in this way. No need to wonder why because sinply you can't.
The facts remain: 1) You've accused Calvinists of interpreting a passage in a manner in which only you have interpreted, and, you provide no proof of your accusation; 2) Only YOU have come up with the term 'double damned' while at the same time attempting to lay it on me specifically as if (and in your pretend world other 'Calvinists') stated this; 3) Your interpretation falls short of smashing the 'T' in 'Tulip' due to the fact that your interpretation has not a thing to do with total depravity, but instead centers upon free will (a fallacious term when Jesus says we are all enslaved and not free - John 8)
In other words your entire OP is pointless and baseless and totally fails to represent what a true Cavinist brother believes, and as time transpires you resort to name calling and false accusations. This is how you roll, and is descriptive of you as a person. You make things up, then when proven wrong you resort to accusations that aren't true. This is who you are and how you appear.
Now son, get to reading the passages I've given you, that show God chooses, not you nor others, something you run from with a tucked tail and have failed to address. After this, put your money where your mouth is, and prove your false accusations against me, and since you can't do that, own up between you and God that you've misrepresented me and made things up that aren't true, as well as against other Calvinists brother.
Thanks.
From your quote above, it appears that you agreed with me. If you misspoke, don't blame more for it, but rather appologize.
Your interpretation verses mine. This is why this is a debate forum. I say that your interpretation is fallacious. So what's your problem??
I provided your quote, if you misspoke then own up and say so, you shouldn't be falsely accusing me of something I did not do.
I'm not so sure you understand what graciously means per your last few postings towards me. As far as you wresting the scriptures, I believe that all Calvinist wrest the scriptures which have them to believe in TULIP. THis is my observation and opinion as I am sure you would say that all anti-TULIP believers wrest the scriptures. So again, what is the problem? This is a debate forum, do you think we all should agree with you?
Ok, but it appeared to me that you agreed as per the quote of yours above. So you do not see double damnation, wonderful! I cannot make you see it.
Actually, I don't believe I ever said that Calvinist do. I believe what I said was this.....
If you read through my post, I believe you will not find anywhere where I said a Calvinist brother believes in double damnation. What I have been saying is that the "T" in TULIP would have to conclude that these needed double damnation.
Now, I'm not sure what you are reffering to as to "name calling". Do you mean implying you are a Calvinist? I didn't know that was a dirty word, but if you believe it is I most certainly appologize for assuming that you were a Calvinist and will be careful not to call you one in the future.
As for any false accusations, I don't see any from me, maybe you could give me a quote and I will certainly clear it up or appologize.
Again, bring forward the post that have upset you and I will do what I can to reconcile. I believe this is a misunderstanding, I hope.
Last edited by a moderator:
I was listening to a cd titled "Answering the Key Questions About the Doctrine of Election" featuring an interview setting with John MacArthur. After listening to John trying to explain why he believes the way he does on this topic I am convinced even more that this doctrine as presented by the Calvinist simply does not fit with the full counsel of God's Word. Sovereign Election and free will choice goes hand and hand throughout the Scriptures. Both are true and find harmony in the Scriptures. One should not embrace either one and deny the other.
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
Good point.
Another issue with total depravity is that the wicked can choose to "harden their heart" which should not be possible if the heart is already hardened or the person is so dead that they are incapable of doing anything. (The way Calvinists sometimes bend the idea of "dead in sin" to an extreme).
In John 1 "he came to His own and His own received Him not" is another knock against total depravity because here the sovereign act of God is to reach out to them with the Gospel - and yet they refuse it. But according to Calvinists (some of them) you simply "wake up one morning to find out you are a born again Christian" and then after that - you choose to accept eternal life.
IF God's first sovereign act in reaching out to you individually is to cause the new birth - and then to lead you to accept him - then those in John 1 were saved saints - that "received him not".
In the Bible model the Holy Spirit "convicts the WORLD of sin and righteousness and judgment" John 16 and as Christ "I will draw ALL unto Me" John 12:32 not "just the saved saint".
Thus the lost are supernaturally "enabled" while still in the lost state - to choose life because Christ supernaturally "Draws ALL" and the Holy Spirit convicts "the World" -- not just saved saints.
in Christ,
Bob
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
John says that in the context of his own record that says that God "draws ALL" of mankind not just the saved in John 12:32.
And John is the one that says that the Drawing of God enables the lost to come to Christ in John 6.
And John says that the Holly Spirit convicts all mankind of sin and righteousness and judgment.
Thus in 1John 5:2-9 John points to the contrast between the saved and the lost - in their choices - and in God arbitrarily ignoring one group.
Paul says that with the heart man believes and with the mouth man confesses "resulting in salvation" in Romans 10.
Paul never says that God ignores someone - and so they never have the chance to choose eternal life - because the required mechanism for that choice never exists for them. Which is the heart and soul of the Calvinist POV.
in Christ,
Bob
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
Since 2 Thess 2 is being used to show the contrast between the saved and the lost -and the fact that the lost are enabled to choose eternal life - and be saved - but choose not to do so... (Rather than God arbitrarily "forgetting" to enable then to choose eternal life).
5 point and 4 pt Calvinist Future Scenario:
“Showing” the requirement of 4 and 5 point Calvinism to have the “luxury” of a cold disregard for the non-elect “When the non-Elect are finally Known”. (In the perfect Calvinist Utopian future). This scenario simply removes that “luxury” (for a moment) in order to emphasize the point 4-5 Pt Calvinism makes about God Himself – vs the view that “God so Loved the World that He Gave…Really” (something that both Arminians and 3-pt Calvinists seem to Agree on).
=======================================================
When the 4 OR 5-point-Calvinist finds himself in heaven enjoying the perfect love, unity and selfless concern for others that is not possible here on this sinful earth - and then peeking over the ramparts of heaven - observes his OWN precious sweet daughter who passed the age of accountability as the MANY of Matt 7 -- now writhing in the agony of eternal roasting in hell - he may well run to his sovereign lord with the cry
"Oh My Lord, my great God and Savior! Couldn't you have done Something for my precious child?? - In this realm of love for others -- I cannot bear the sorrow of their loss"
And of course the much expected answer will come back that Calvinism so often predicts – "Why of course I COULD - IF I had Cared to"!
"Hallelujah!" cries out the Calvinist - that IS the Gospel I was proclaiming!! Ahh that blissful eternity with calvinism's God that unfairly saved you but had not a single care for your precious daughter - and you will be praising through all eternity that YOU were spared though she was not. (For it IS all about the lucky - arbitrarily selected saved/elect in the end)
We see Calvinists blessing the fact that He chose You – AND that it was "unfair" as you say - but it was graciously unfair IN YOUR favor - just not your precious yet insignificant not-to-be-concerned-about daughter's.
[FONT="]======================================================[/FONT][FONT="]
<You see the problem when the Calvinist model is not “allowed the luxury" of disregarding the fate of the lost - as in the case above?>
Here we see Calvinism’s view of God who (arbitrarily from the POV of human eyes) selects out the FEW of Matt 7 and loves THEM alone - and then represents that to Calvinists as "So Loving the World". Oh the pure joy of that thought inside the model of Calvinism..
[/FONT]
5 point and 4 pt Calvinist Future Scenario:
“Showing” the requirement of 4 and 5 point Calvinism to have the “luxury” of a cold disregard for the non-elect “When the non-Elect are finally Known”. (In the perfect Calvinist Utopian future). This scenario simply removes that “luxury” (for a moment) in order to emphasize the point 4-5 Pt Calvinism makes about God Himself – vs the view that “God so Loved the World that He Gave…Really” (something that both Arminians and 3-pt Calvinists seem to Agree on).
=======================================================
When the 4 OR 5-point-Calvinist finds himself in heaven enjoying the perfect love, unity and selfless concern for others that is not possible here on this sinful earth - and then peeking over the ramparts of heaven - observes his OWN precious sweet daughter who passed the age of accountability as the MANY of Matt 7 -- now writhing in the agony of eternal roasting in hell - he may well run to his sovereign lord with the cry
"Oh My Lord, my great God and Savior! Couldn't you have done Something for my precious child?? - In this realm of love for others -- I cannot bear the sorrow of their loss"
And of course the much expected answer will come back that Calvinism so often predicts – "Why of course I COULD - IF I had Cared to"!
"Hallelujah!" cries out the Calvinist - that IS the Gospel I was proclaiming!! Ahh that blissful eternity with calvinism's God that unfairly saved you but had not a single care for your precious daughter - and you will be praising through all eternity that YOU were spared though she was not. (For it IS all about the lucky - arbitrarily selected saved/elect in the end)
We see Calvinists blessing the fact that He chose You – AND that it was "unfair" as you say - but it was graciously unfair IN YOUR favor - just not your precious yet insignificant not-to-be-concerned-about daughter's.
[FONT="]======================================================[/FONT][FONT="]
<You see the problem when the Calvinist model is not “allowed the luxury" of disregarding the fate of the lost - as in the case above?>
Here we see Calvinism’s view of God who (arbitrarily from the POV of human eyes) selects out the FEW of Matt 7 and loves THEM alone - and then represents that to Calvinists as "So Loving the World". Oh the pure joy of that thought inside the model of Calvinism..
[/FONT]
Last edited by a moderator:
Good thoughts! We need to see the unavoidable application of our held doctrines to real life scenarios, then we can see if it measures up to a Holy, Just and Loving God.
evangelist-7
New Member
2 Thes 2:13
God hath from the beginning chosen you (i.e. the elect) to salvation
through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth
I will wager that the underlined in the Greek are in the continual tense ... to be continued until death!
IMO, the elect are described in Romans 8:28-30.
These elect are the only ones going to heaven (and the demands on them are great).
They were elected before the foundation of the world (Eph 1:4, etc.).
[Paul was writing to the saints in Ephesus who actually were "faithful"].
God foresaw WHO would carry that precious ball of grace-faith-salvation across the goal-line into heaven.
Yes, He actually saw these elect co-operating with God's Spirit to be fully sanctified unto holiness.
Romans 6
slaves of God >>> slaves of obedience >>> slaves of righteousness >>> holiness >>> eternal life
.
evangelist-7
New Member
Romans 6
slaves of God + slaves of obedience + slaves of righteousness --->>> holiness --->>> eternal life
Re: understanding Romans 6 ...
As usual, Paul is speaking out of both sides of his mouth (edifications & warnings/commands),
for example:
“you became slaves of righteousness” (Rom 6:18) … i.e. they were given the ability to be (through God's Spirit)
“so now present your members as slaves of righteousness for holiness” (Rom 6:19)
.
Last edited by a moderator:
In John MacArthur's interview he is asked the question, "If God arbitrarily chooses whom to be saved, does he not then by default choose whom he will leave for hell's fire?"
John's answer was "of course God is choosing who goes off into hell".
The follow up question is "why?"
John says "it is for God's glory that most people will be tormented forever and ever in hell".
I think BobRyan had a good scenario story about a father and daughter, the father getting the lucky call of salvation and the daughter sent to burn in hell. I can see the father pleading with God, why God? Why does my daughter have to suffer eternally in hell? And God answers, because her torment brings me great glory! Sorry, I just do not see such a God in the scriptures I read.
John's answer was "of course God is choosing who goes off into hell".
The follow up question is "why?"
John says "it is for God's glory that most people will be tormented forever and ever in hell".
I think BobRyan had a good scenario story about a father and daughter, the father getting the lucky call of salvation and the daughter sent to burn in hell. I can see the father pleading with God, why God? Why does my daughter have to suffer eternally in hell? And God answers, because her torment brings me great glory! Sorry, I just do not see such a God in the scriptures I read.
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
Indeed - it paints a very different picture of God - from "God so love the World -- yes really! the World! not just the arbitrarily select FEW of Matt 7".
The problem with the lost is not that "God does not love them" or that "God loves them - but forgot to do the necessary to make salvation available to them". The problem for the lost is that they choose darkness rather than light - no matter that the Holy Spirit "Convicts the WORLD of sin and righteousness and judgment" and no matter that "Christ is the light that coming into the world enlightens EVERY man".
in Christ,
Bob
The problem with the lost is not that "God does not love them" or that "God loves them - but forgot to do the necessary to make salvation available to them". The problem for the lost is that they choose darkness rather than light - no matter that the Holy Spirit "Convicts the WORLD of sin and righteousness and judgment" and no matter that "Christ is the light that coming into the world enlightens EVERY man".
in Christ,
Bob
Last edited by a moderator:
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
A neighbor of mine once claimed to be a Calvinist to the max. And I asked him about that Calvinist future scenario regarding one of his children. His heartless response was that "Well at least I will be saved" and the firmly held hope that God would make him not love his child once he got to heaven. That he would be as uncaring about his child as God.
So fine that is how it went down in a discussion - in a debate. But when his child later turned to Calvinism and claimed he did not need to study at College or worry about anything because God would simply make whatever HE wanted to happen - happen and nothing man decided or did would make any change to that plan. Well then my neighbor suddenly developed a conscience about how Calvinism does not work. And how that teaching was destroying his child.
in Christ,
Bob