The hidden dangers of Calvinism

[MB]

It is foolishness to those who are perishing (the wise and the learn) who try to find away around the truth that God wants all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth.

They have the key to knowledge and they themselves did not enter and they are hindering those from entering

1 Corinthians 1:18For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19For it is written:
"I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate."[Isaiah 29:14 ]

What is amazing to me How ppl lean on their own understanding than just trusting in the Lord and His word.

I absolutely agree. If man is ever going to have truth then it will always be God who gives the explanation of the truth. Amen
MB

 

[Pastor Larry]

I absolutely agree. If man is ever going to have truth then it will always be God who gives the explanation of the truth. Amen

This is exactly what Calvinism teaches. It is, in fact, part of the foundation of Calvnism, that apart from God man will never understand.

 

[Jim1999]

I am not saying that God's absolute truth must come from man's intelligence, but neither does it come from man's ignorance.

God created us with a brain to think and think we must. Surely this will not cause anyone to turn away from truth. We are taught to have a reason for the faith that is in us. We may never, in this lifetime, fully understand this, but we must make the effort.

All Calvinists are saying is that it is God who works in this dead carcass and brings it back to life in Christ through the Holy Spirit. This is as biblical as I am breathing.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[Salamander]

There's believe then there's a belief based on faith. Two different entities. Satan and the demons believe in God but do not have a belief that their faith in Him will save them.



That's the difference between belief IN and believing ON. I can believe that there is a Jesus but until I believe ON Him for my salvation, it's not worth anything.



Huh? It is not in man's ability to find Christ. The Father must make him able to find Christ.

And God did just that through the Incarnation and preaching of the Gospel.

Scripture tells us that men will hear through preaching. God tells us to preach. Calvinism is far from exalting man above the throne of God - in fact it humbles man so much that there is no way for him to reach the throne of God at all.



No it's not.



Have you read Romans 9? God is absolutely exalted by His sovereign choice. Scripture says so.



And how has man's sinful will able to find Christ without first being drawn? Of course all of those who become a child of God glorifies the Father - but it's not that man's will is more sovereign than God's.



And man's will IS brought under submission to the Lord when He's saved.

:laugh: And man chooses to ask for salvation and forgiveness of sins after conviction. He must submit first after conviction, not hear and submit later.

I don't think you fully understand the doctrine of grace.

Of course you don't. But try me, I think I understand a weebit more than you might think.

 

[Salamander]

What am I stuck with? Ultimately, the reason for disobedience is irrelevant.

Not quite, friend, Adam disobeyed God and cast the whole race into sin.

No, I am taking it as a general statement of truth. Your distinction is absurd, and has no biblical basis whatsoever.

Goes to show you have no idea what you are talking about. Everyone has faith. Some have saving faith and others do not.

Dice and slice and julian fried faith?:laugh: You add something to faith that isn't even being talked about. The ONLY faith we've discussed is faith in Christ, of which no man could have had until AFTER hearing the Gospel.

Yes, indeed.

No, I am not. You aren't reading closely.

Nope, I think "pricking" is way too understated for what the Bible says.

A blatant attack on the very word of God!

I agree until your last phrase, which seems to be missing something. The reason for missions is to preach the word so that man will see his need.

Yep, the ONLY way anyone can be saved and God remains just to see that no man has an excuse.

Yes, excellently said.

Again, well said.

Yes, indeed.

As a side note, I am always humored by things like this when people pretend they are refuting Calvinism but state exactly what Calvinism espouses. Kind of goes to show what I have long said, that most people have no idea what they are talking about because 1) they do not know the Bible, and 2) they do not understand Calvinism.

Ok, so you admit many calvisinist are confused and make rash statements. I understand Bible, but calvinism is a braod spectrum when considered.

BTW, please explain how anyone is ever holy and without blame before they were ever in Christ?

 

[Pastor Larry]

Not quite, friend, Adam disobeyed God and cast the whole race into sin.

This is true, and is also irrelevant to the point which was being discussed.

You add something to faith that isn't even being talked about.

And what is that?

The ONLY faith we've discussed is faith in Christ, of which no man could have had until AFTER hearing the Gospel.

True, but who disagreed with that? I didn't.

A blatant attack on the very word of God!

Show how. (I am guessing you can't.)

Yep, the ONLY way anyone can be saved and God remains just to see that no man has an excuse.

Yes indeed, Calvinism at its core.

Ok, so you admit many calvisinist are confused and make rash statements.

I didn't admit that, though I don't dispute it. If you read what I said, you will see that I said nothing of the sort.

I understand Bible

That has not been demonstrated yet.

BTW, please explain how anyone is ever holy and without blame before they were ever in Christ?

Why? Who believes this?

 

[gb93433]

I absolutely agree. If man is ever going to have truth then it will always be God who gives the explanation of the truth. Amen
MB

So forget the preacher who studies and explains the Bible well?
And forget one of the qualifications of a pastor that he teach well?

 

[Salamander]

This is exactly what Calvinism teaches. It is, in fact, part of the foundation of Calvnism, that apart from God man will never understand.

Hmmmm? I wonder how that statement would go over in the BV&T forum about modern versions?:laugh:

God has the formula to espouse truth and man has to respond in faith to that preached word.

Man has cognitive ability to accept or reject Scripture and that Scripture is never apart from God except out of context.

"Limited atonement" denies "who so ever will". All can be saved if they will respond to the Gospel call. God would have every man to be saved, but every man will not choose to accept Christ.

Teaching that only the elect can be saved takes away from whosoever will and says God predetermines who WILL be saved vs who/ that's anyone, so/ that chooses to believe, ever/ at any time when conviction begins, will/ those who act upon their faith.

Man's feeble attempt to limit God's grace is futility in the deepest example of apostacy.

 

[gb93433]

It is, in fact, part of the foundation of Calvinism, that apart from God man will never understand.

That is true because apart from God man would not be living and his heart would not beat. So it would be impossible for him to understand anything.

 

[MB]

So forget the preacher who studies and explains the Bible well?
And forget one of the qualifications of a pastor that he teach well?

I didn' say that you did. The preacher is supposed to be used by God to present the message. However the congregation can for the most part read and understand scripture too. We are suppose to be like the Bereans seaching the scripture daily to make sure what the preacher says is really what scripture says.
The Bible says;
Act 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

If the Bereans did this don't you think it wise to make sure what we hear from the preacher is what scripture really says?
MB

 

[ray Marshall]

One red flag is when they begin "correcting" scriptures that don't fit into their "grand theory".

Spurgeon, warning about those Calvinists who undermine the inspiration of scripture by "reexplaining" verses to mean the opposite of what God said:

[I Tim. 2:4 "Who will have all men to be saved"]:
"What then? Shall we try to put another meaning into the text than that which it fairly bears? I trow not. You must, most of you, be acquainted with the general method in which our older Calvinistic friends deal with this text. "All men," say they, —"that is, some men": as if the Holy Ghost could not have said "some men" if he had meant some men. "All men," say they; "that is, some of all sorts of men": as if the Lord could not have said "all sorts of men" if he had meant that. The Holy Ghost by the apostle has written "all men," and unquestionably he means all men. I know how to get rid of the force of the "alls" according to that critical method which some time ago was very current, but I do not see how it can be applied here with due regard to truth. I was reading just now the exposition of a very able doctor who explains the text so as to explain it away; he applies grammatical gunpowder to it, and explodes it by way of expounding it. I thought when I read his exposition that it would have been a very capital comment upon the text if it had read, "Who will not have all men to be saved, nor come to a knowledge of the truth." Had such been the inspired language every remark of the learned doctor would have been exactly in keeping, but as it happens to say, "Who will have all men to be saved," his observations are more than a little out of place. My love of consistency with my own doctrinal views is not great enough to allow me knowingly to alter a single text of Scripture. I have great respect for orthodoxy, but my reverence for inspiration is far greater. I would sooner a hundred times over appear to be inconsistent with myself than be inconsistent with the word of God. I never thought it to be any very great crime to seem to be inconsistent with myself, for who am I that I should everlastingly be consistent? But I do think it a great crime to be so inconsistent with the word of God that I should want to lop away a bough or even a twig from so much as a single tree of the forest of Scripture. God forbid that I should cut or shape, even in the least degree, any divine expression. So runs the text, and so we must read it, "God our Saviour; who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.""

I have a question: If a man never hears the Gospel like in the darkest days of Africa or where ever, What is his position regarding, Hell or Heaven? Will he be say through ignorance or will he split Hell wide open?

 

[Pastor Larry]

Hmmmm? I wonder how that statement would go over in the BV&T forum about modern versions?

No need to wonder. It would go over just fine.

God has the formula to espouse truth and man has to respond in faith to that preached word.

Yes, this is Calvinism.

Man has cognitive ability to accept or reject Scripture and that Scripture is never apart from God except out of context.

Yes, this is part of Calvinism. However, the natural man does not have the spiritual ability to accept or reject Scripture.

"Limited atonement" denies "who so ever will".

No it doesn't. This is simply flat out wrong.

All can be saved if they will respond to the Gospel call.

This is Calvinism.

God would have every man to be saved, but every man will not choose to accept Christ.

This is Calvinism as well.

Teaching that only the elect can be saved takes away from whosoever will

No it doesn't. This is simply flat out wrong.

and says God predetermines who WILL be saved vs who/ that's anyone, so/ that chooses to believe, ever/ at any time when conviction begins, will/ those who act upon their faith.

Apart from being virtually incoherent, the Bible teaches that whosoever will may come, and those who come do so because they have been chosen by God. The rest don't come. They "will not."

Man's feeble attempt to limit God's grace is futility in the deepest example of apostacy.

Well put. To limit God's grace by the foolishness of man's unbelief is indeed wrong. You limit God's grace by saying that it can only work when man allows it to. God's grace is much bigger than that.

However, I think it is against the forum rules to call your opponents view apostasy. Not to mention that it is simply incorrect. What you call apostasy is what the church has held as the gospel for two millenia. The good news is that God saves people in spite of their misunderstanding of the gospel.

If you were not elect, you would never have believed.

 

[Pastor Larry]

That is true because apart from God man would not be living and his heart would not beat. So it would be impossible for him to understand anything.

Yes, indeed. It is also true in the spiritual realm. Man is blinded by sin, hardened in his heart, ignorant, and calloused (Eph 4:17-19). Until God opens his eyes to see, he will not see the gospel and will not respond (2 Cor 4:1-6).

 

[webdog]

I have a question: If a man never hears the Gospel like in the darkest days of Africa or where ever, What is his position regarding, Hell or Heaven? Will he be say through ignorance or will he split Hell wide open?

You will find the answer to that in Romans 1.

 

[ray Marshall]

You will find the answer to that in Romans 1.

I'm not talking about those kind of people. I'm talking about "Those that have never heard of the Gospel now and earlier times."

 

[ray Marshall]

You will find the answer to that in Romans 1.

I'm not talking in any way about those kind of people.
Read my question again.

 

[annsni]

I have a question: If a man never hears the Gospel like in the darkest days of Africa or where ever, What is his position regarding, Hell or Heaven? Will he be say through ignorance or will he split Hell wide open?

Yes - Romans 1 shows that man is given evidence of God and has no excuse.

I do trust the the Lord God is sovereign and just and will make the correct decision on this.

It's not mine to say if he gets to heaven or hell.

But it IS up to me to spread the Gospel. If someone dies without knowing about Christ, and I had the ability to get the Gospel to them, it's my own fault.

But again, God is sovereign and will make the right decision. Period.

 

[webdog]

I'm not talking about those kind of people. I'm talking about "Those that have never heard of the Gospel now and earlier times."

That doesn't make sense according to Romans 1. You are implying there are "other people" that don't have the Truth presented to them, which is false. EVERYONE has the chance to accept or reject that which is True. It has been presented to them! There is no such thing as a group of people that exist who have never heard about God, know nothing of Him, and haven't had the Truth presented to them. John 3:18 states these people "believed not". The opportunity to believe is real.

 

[Salamander]

That is true because apart from God man would not be living and his heart would not beat. So it would be impossible for him to understand anything.

Uh-oh, apply that to Isaiah 59 where iniquities and sins separate us from God?

Separation is the state of being apart from God due to sin which kills.

The fact remains that the dead in tresspasses and sins can hear the voice of God and become regenerate, which being regenerate IS a state of being alive unto God!

Now, if ANY calvinist can explain how someone who is DEAD can be in a living state, APART from natural life and spiritually exclusive, I will make concession.

The dead can respond ONLY to the voice of God.

Calvinism goes beyond the doctrinal proof of this fact and is therefore extra-biblical.

 

[Pastor Larry]

The fact remains that the dead in tresspasses and sins can hear the voice of God and become regenerate, which being regenerate IS a state of being alive unto God!

Or become regenerate and hear the voice of God.

Now, if ANY calvinist can explain how someone who is DEAD can be in a living state, APART from natural life and spiritually exclusive, I will make concession.

If you use "dead" and "living" the way the Bible uses them, this is an easy explanation that you have already given.

Calvinism goes beyond the doctrinal proof of this fact and is therefore extra-biblical.

This seems a welcome change on your part, from heresy and apostasy to now being only "extra-biblical." If you continue down this path, you will soon come to the Bible's position on the matter.