Sovereign choice of God part deux

[MennoSota]

@Calv1: Like a good reformer you take the long route to get to your point. [emoji41]
I too was raised in Arminian theology. Then I started reading the Bible objectively via an inductive Bible Study. As you said, the Sovereign work of God shouts from every page of the Scriptures.

 

[TCassidy]

To "accept" the truth would be a choice.

All people, including "Calvinists" make choices every day. So your point is moot.

Sounds like another choice was made.

All people, including "Calvinists" make choices every day. So this point is moot also.

You might believe in Calvinism and put your faith in Calvinism

Nobody I know who self-identifies as a "Calvinist" puts their faith in Calvin or Calvinism. Our faith is in the Lord Jesus Christ.

To imply that one must believe in, or obey, Calvinism to be saved

I know of no person who self-identifies as a "Calvinist" who says that a person much believe in or obey "Calvinism."

 

[2Dennings]

All people, including "Calvinists" make choices every day. So your point is moot.

Seriously? Obviously people make choices everyday but he was not talking about everyday choices. I have read pages of debate on here how we do not "choose" to believe and how we can't "understand" unless we are born again and how faith is given to us and then he contradicts every one of these.

I know of no person who self-identifies as a "Calvinist" who says that a person much believe in or obey "Calvinism."

Let me introduce you to Calv1. Since we know we must believe the gospel, and he says Calvinism is the gospel, that would mean you must believe Calvinism.

I only responded to what he said. Commenting on what I say while ignoring what he said makes no sense at all.

 

[TCassidy]

Since we know we must believe the gospel, and he says Calvinism is the gospel, that would mean you must believe Calvinism.

He was quoting Charles Spurgeon, the famous English Baptist pastor. If you read the context in which Spurgeon said those words you would see how little you understand what was said.

I only responded to what he said. Commenting on what I say while ignoring what he said makes no sense at all.

I didn't ignore what he said. I am just well read enough to know he was quoting Spurgeon, and I am well read enough to know what Spurgeon meant by that.

Here, let me save you the trouble.

"I have my own opinion that there is no such thing as preaching Christ and Him crucified, unless we preach what nowadays is called Calvinism. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else. I do not believe we can preach the gospel if we do not preach justification by faith without works; nor unless we preach the sovereignty of God in His dispensation of grace; nor unless we exalt the electing unchangeable eternal, immutable, conquering love of Jehovah; nor do I think we can preach the gospel unless we base it upon the special and particular redemption of His elect and chosen people which Christ wrought out upon the cross." (Charles Spurgeon, The New Park Street Pulpit, Vol. 1, 1856).

 

[2Dennings]

He was quoting Charles Spurgeon, the famous English Baptist pastor.

I know who Charles Spurgeon was. If he was quoting Spurgeon he left off the quotation marks and the fact that he was quoting Spurgeon. Besides that, the comments you said you were not ignoring were not Spurgeon quotes. Personally I don't care who he was quoting, Calvinism still is not the gospel. Are there aspects of Calvinism that are found in the gospel? I'm sure there are. Do I believe some things Calvin said? I'm sure I do. Does that make Calvinism the gospel? Absolutely not. Do I care how "well read" you are? Absolutely not. Does the gospel have to be believed to be saved? Yes. Does Calvinism have to be believed to be saved? No. Therefore Calvinism is not the gospel. I'm not even arguing the points of Calvinism, just the idea of saying that Calvinism is the gospel. The gospel is the gospel, it does not need Calvin to support it or explain it and it should not have his or any other name tied to it. Have a good night.

 

[TCassidy]

So you don't believe justification by faith without works, the sovereignty of God in His dispensation of grace, the unchangeable eternal, immutable, conquering love of Jehovah is the gospel? Fine. But why are you on a Baptist discussion forum?

 

[2Dennings]

So you don't believe justification by faith without works, the sovereignty of God in His dispensation of grace, the unchangeable eternal, immutable, conquering love of Jehovah is the gospel? Fine. But why are you on a Baptist discussion forum?

LOL, how you come up with that is beyond me. My argument really has nothing to do with the beliefs of Calvin or what the gospel is. My argument is against saying "Calvinism is the gospel". You are saying that if a person disagrees with Calvin on any point they are disagreeing with the gospel. Disagreeing with Calvin, or not believing Calvin, is equated to disagreeing with God, or not believing God. If you are comfortable with that then go right ahead. I am not, and I will cringe every time I hear it.

 

[TCassidy]

LOL, how you come up with that is beyond me.

It is in the full explanation of the quote from Spurgeon. It is what he was talking about when he said "Calvinism is the gospel."

My argument is against saying "Calvinism is the gospel".

Then your argument is with Spurgeon (and the gospel).

You are saying that if a person disagrees with Calvin on any point they are disagreeing with the gospel.

I didn't mention Calvin.

Disagreeing with Calvin, or not believing Calvin, is equated to disagreeing with God, or not believing God.

I didn't mention Calvin.

If you are comfortable with that then go right ahead.

Am I comfortable with your claiming I believe something I don't believe, and your claiming I said something I didn't say? No. I am never comfortable with that sort of thing.

I am not, and I will cringe every time I hear it.

If you are not comfortable claiming I said things I didn't say perhaps you should quit saying so.

 

[Yeshua1]

LOL, how you come up with that is beyond me. My argument really has nothing to do with the beliefs of Calvin or what the gospel is. My argument is against saying "Calvinism is the gospel". You are saying that if a person disagrees with Calvin on any point they are disagreeing with the gospel. Disagreeing with Calvin, or not believing Calvin, is equated to disagreeing with God, or not believing God. If you are comfortable with that then go right ahead. I am not, and I will cringe every time I hear it.

Calvinism is NOT the Gospel, but it is the BEST way to understanding what the message and meaning of the Gospel is!

 

[Calv1]

Hi Friend, yeah it's amazing huh? I never even knew there was a argument! Then yeah just as you say, if we step out in FAITH "I don't understand this, but God doesn't ask me to understand it, but ACCEPT IT", when we do that, at least with me He's been gracious enough TO explain it to me, but if we "Lean on our own understanding", as the bible warns, we're in trouble. Nice to meet you!

@Calv1: Like a good reformer you take the long route to get to your point. [emoji41]
I too was raised in Arminian theology. Then I started reading the Bible objectively via an inductive Bible Study. As you said, the Sovereign work of God shouts from every page of the Scriptures.

 

[Calv1]

The must frustrating thing with dealing with Non-Reformed folks is that hideous misunderstanding of what the bible and we believe, who says we don't make choices? We make choices every day, we have volition, we have a will, it's just that God's will is free and more powerful than ours, this is why He ACCOMPLISHES ALL HIS WILL AMONG MEN, what I don't understand is how a so called "Christian" can hear God describe how He is in plain language, and then reject it. I know ego, we like to take credit and rob God of the glory due Him, it's fallen human nature, but yeah have to admit very frustrating the misunderstanding, how about someone actually STUDY, DEEPLY what the bible and we believe, THEN comment so we can have an intelligent debate?

Yeah that's right, we put our faith in Calvin, you in Jesus, sorry but how weak is that??? CALVIN WAS ONE OF MANY REFORMERS, THE AVERAGE MAN ONLY KNEW CHURCH OF ROME THEOLOGY, we should thank him, Luther and everyone else except a few heretics for doing the hard work, but we don't settle on his or any mans work, we STUDY. Let's be honest, Americans are biblically illiterate and lazy, when was the last time you all read the Institutes? How about even something simple like "Knowing God" by JI Packer? How about the full Synod of Dort that shows the debate with Scholars who, in order to go to graduate school didn't have to know Greek, they had to DEBATE IN GREEK, we are clowns next to these men who over the decades laid down their lives, suffered loss of everything on our behalf.

Calvinism, or Reformed Theology, was the Protestant Religion from Luther to the late 1800's when German Higher Criticism crept in, we got all kinds of cults in that century, Mormons, JW, Christian Science, then we got Pentecostalism, and liberalism. Spurgeon called it the great "Downgrade", as Baptist Churches in England were falsely being taught that scripture was corrupted, they became liberal, so no more taking the bible word for word, this is probably why modern liberals like the fellow below is ignorant of what we believe, and makes such outrageous and ridiculous statements, Spurgeon was INFURIATED, you should hear his sermons, well you should hear them anyways, learn something, and his writings of the period, the Devil won, twisted German Higher critics got to the Church, the Church of our Fathers, all of them reading Geneva bibles as they thought KJV was too liberal, after all was translated by Catholics, the KJV is a great version, the point is ALL CHRISTIONDOM was Reformed, as it's the GOSPEL, it's not even a debate.

All people, including "Calvinists" make choices every day. So your point is moot.

All people, including "Calvinists" make choices every day. So this point is moot also.

Nobody I know who self-identifies as a "Calvinist" puts their faith in Calvin or Calvinism. Our faith is in the Lord Jesus Christ.

I know of no person who self-identifies as a "Calvinist" who says that a person much believe in or obey "Calvinism."

 

[Calv1]

You need to study Reformed Theology before debating it, sorry but you're embarrassing yourself and not even knowing it.

I am not much of a debater which is why I don't say much on here but I'll point out a couple things in your response to me.



You say this but then you say



Which sounds like a contradiction to what Calvinists believe. We don't "accept" the truth, the truth is given to us. To "accept" the truth would be a choice.

And then you say



Once again you say something that contradicts Calvinism. They can't understand without the Spirit. Sounds like another choice was made.

and,



This sounds like something I would say. Calvinist say faith is given to us where stepping out in faith implies a choice.

Not all Calvinists believe what they say, or maybe I should say "practice what they preach". This is not limited to Arminians or JW's or Mormons or Baptists or anyone else.

You might believe in Calvinism and put your faith in Calvinism but sorry, Calvinism is not the gospel!!! The gospel is what must be believed, or as Paul says, "obeyed" in order to be saved and it is not Calvinism. To imply that one must believe in, or obey, Calvinism to be saved would be preaching another gospel and you know what Paul says about that. I do know some Calvinists that would strongly disagree with you on this. This would apply to anyone who believes Arminianism or any other "ism" is the gospel. There is one gospel and there is no other name attached to it.

 

[Yeshua1]

Berkhof would be the best place to start!

 

[2Dennings]

You need to study Reformed Theology before debating it, sorry but you're embarrassing yourself and not even knowing it.

At this point I don't think it really matters to me. I didn't say Calvinists don't make choices, I didn't say you put your faith in Calvin and us in Jesus. I also didn't say I was attempting to debate Reformed Theology. It is pointless to say anything because you are going to hear what you want. You are obviously right and I'm not, you are obviously smart and I'm not. I have made no claim to be a scholar but I do not have a "hideous" misunderstanding of the Bible, nor am I ignorant of what Reformed Theology teaches. There sure may be some confusion on my part of what a Calvinist believes because they do not all say the same thing. You know nothing about me but have judged me as inferior in intelligence, ignorant, and accused me of making outrageous and ridiculous statements that I did not make. You come across as being very condescending and arrogant. I did make some very specific comments about things you said to me that I felt contradicted what others here have been debating. All you had to do was clarify what you meant and maybe the confusion would have cleared up. Instead you don't address what I say but answer something I didn't say in order to make what I'm questioning pointless (Mr. Cassidy took care of some of that for you). I have seen it happen on here over and over. If you question anything a Calvinist says they go into attack mode, with usually 2 or 3 ganging up on the one that questions them. Then they all high-five each other liking and agreeing with each others comments. As far as learning all about Reformed Theology or reading Calvin's Institutes, It's not a priority. Becoming a scholar is not a requirement for being a Christian and it does not make you better than others. I'm finished, you can continue on to the others you were attacking.

 

[Calv1]

I'm very sorry if you feel that way, trust me I don't mean to. I've just debating Arminians for so long, hear the same misrepresentations, but no once one thinks they are wise, they become a fool No offence, and please be a friend.

This is just what I do, debate, and have for some time, at first it was AGAINST Calvs, then the truth of God's word won me over. So I apologize if I hurt your feelings in any way.

At this point I don't think it really matters to me. I didn't say Calvinists don't make choices, I didn't say you put your faith in Calvin and us in Jesus. I also didn't say I was attempting to debate Reformed Theology. It is pointless to say anything because you are going to hear what you want. You are obviously right and I'm not, you are obviously smart and I'm not. I have made no claim to be a scholar but I do not have a "hideous" misunderstanding of the Bible, nor am I ignorant of what Reformed Theology teaches. There sure may be some confusion on my part of what a Calvinist believes because they do not all say the same thing. You know nothing about me but have judged me as inferior in intelligence, ignorant, and accused me of making outrageous and ridiculous statements that I did not make. You come across as being very condescending and arrogant. I did make some very specific comments about things you said to me that I felt contradicted what others here have been debating. All you had to do was clarify what you meant and maybe the confusion would have cleared up. Instead you don't address what I say but answer something I didn't say in order to make what I'm questioning pointless (Mr. Cassidy took care of some of that for you). I have seen it happen on here over and over. If you question anything a Calvinist says they go into attack mode, with usually 2 or 3 ganging up on the one that questions them. Then they all high-five each other liking and agreeing with each others comments. As far as learning all about Reformed Theology or reading Calvin's Institutes, It's not a priority. Becoming a scholar is not a requirement for being a Christian and it does not make you better than others. I'm finished, you can continue on to the others you were attacking.

 

[Yeshua1]

I'm very sorry if you feel that way, trust me I don't mean to. I've just debating Arminians for so long, hear the same misrepresentations, but no once one thinks they are wise, they become a fool No offence, and please be a friend.

This is just what I do, debate, and have for some time, at first it was AGAINST Calvs, then the truth of God's word won me over. So I apologize if I hurt your feelings in any way.

I find that reformed theologians, even though still dispy in some regards, are usually much more through in their writings on the scriptures, more meaty!

 

[Revmitchell]

I find that reformed theologians, even though still dispy in some regards, are usually much more through in their writings on the scriptures, more meaty!

yea that is what they like to tout about themselves.

 

[Yeshua1]

yea that is what they like to tout about themselves.

I do not mean that they are infallible or always right, but are really pressing in on deeper things of the faith than traditional name aot claim it stuff!

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Six Hour Warning

This thread will be closed sometime after 11:30 PM Pacific.

 

[Calv1]

Berkhof would be the best place to start!

Going to get a big head winning all of these award things, kind of cool, thanks whoever is doing that.

Berkhof is great, tell you what, I REALLY liked Grudem (I know he has some critics), Berkhof is the best, but just wears you out, Grudem is a easier read, maybe Grudem, then Berkhof