The route to Calvinism

[Pastor Larry]

That could well be, Amity. If so, then I misread. My apologies. If not so, then my comments stand.

 

[Allan]

So are the elect not christians, or are christian not elect? No matter your defination of elect, God's people, christians, are elect.

There are some on here who believe there are a few Buddists, Hindos, Satan worshippers, ext, ext... are elect even though till death they reject everything about God. WHy? Because it was Gods sovereign will to save them even if they never believed in Him.

 

[amity]

There are some on here who believe there are a few Buddists, Hindos, Satan worshippers, ext, ext... are elect even though till death they reject everything about God. WHy? Because it was Gods sovereign will to save them even if they never believed in Him.

... and who might that be, Allan?

 

[Allan]

... and who might that be, Allan?

I wasn't making a statement towards you. I was explaining to Donna there are a few people on this board who hold to such.

I was not trying to put it in a demeaning way toward anyone but stating a fact that some DO hold to that concept. (unbiblical though it may be IMO). I don't think (or at least didn't think) you held such a contrary veiw.

 

[amity]

I wasn't making a statement towards you. I was explaining to Donna there are a few people on this board who hold to such.

I was not trying to put it in a demeaning way toward anyone but stating a fact that some DO hold to that concept. (unbiblical though it may be IMO). I don't think (or at least didn't think) you held such a contrary veiw.

As a matter of fact... I DO! :thumbs:

 

[Allan]

I made the statement:

There are some on here who believe there are a few Buddists, Hindos, Satan worshippers, ext, ext... are elect even though till death they reject everything about God. WHy? Because it was Gods sovereign will to save them even if they never believed in Him.
...snip...
I don't think (or at least didn't think) you held such a contrary veiw.

and you stated:

As a matter of fact... I DO!

So, you are contending the above statement I made is correct??


I personally do not wish to side track this thread, but that is absolute nonsense.
In that it is an unscriptural and non-biblical view, if you agree with my comment above.
You would have to pretend half of scripture is there only as filler and basically meaningless (only those who believe HAVE eternal life) to hold THAT view.

The redeemed are those who have believed and those who HAVE NOT believed are still in their condemnation. Reread John 1-3. Heck, reread the NT for that matter.

 

[Jarthur001]

Hello webdog,

I have asked this before, but I would like to ask again. Where many Calvinist admit they have pulled from other great men of God of the past, as they study the Word, most of which were Baptist in there views, I would like to know your list of great men that you like to quote that lived before 1900 and was not a Calvinist, but were Baptistic.

Are there any other then the SDA and Methodist that you have quoted before? What is your best source to quote from a "Baptist World View", that believes in OSAS but does not believe in election as Calvinist do that lived before 1900.

My guess is that you will have little to none. Why before 1900? Some of todays Baptist have left their roots and followed the teachings of SDA and Methodist of the past.

***********

Please share with us your proof that jumps off the pages of Romans 9.
Please do not waste our time with Romans 9 speaks of electing of PEOPLES as in NATIONS and not men. For as been show before, this would only make matters of election stronger.

11(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth

12It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.

13As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

If This speaks only of nations, then God is saying, is this still not election? Is that not the point? God choose a people to love.

also thess verses from romans 9..

17For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

18Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.

Is this talking about Pharaoh a man, or the whole nation was raised-up to not show mercy to, but to harden?

Also...

21Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

22What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:

Is this vessel of wrath fitted for destruction a group of people as in nation, or does it apply to each man?
The clay in verse 21, do you feel this is speaks of each man God makes, or again are we going with a nation?


But I would be glad to see your proof....unless its the same old "its the nation...its the nation" cry, as if they changed anything



Please share with us the proof of Eph 1 that jumps off the pages. If you running with the "in Christ" ....dont waste your time trying to pull that one. That again comes from the Methodist, and has been shown to be wrong many times on this board alone.

Yet I would like to see the other jumping out proof you have. Maybe you can change a few Calvinist. We are all ears. You know how much we Calvinist love to study the WORD.

Lets hear your proof.

 

[Andy T.]

Nope, sorry, I do not have to reconcile certain passages with others. I can walk with God, seek the power of the Holy Spirit and to be used by God, do my best to be a blessing to those around me, grow in grace and the knowledge of the Lord and do all else that I need to do as a Christian completely without completely understanding the sovereignity of God.

Your comparison of the CvA argument with the arguments about baptismal regeneration are spurious. Both sides should end up doing evangelism in the same way, while the Campellite view of salvation is a heresy that sends people to Hell.

Those who believe we have to understand the sovereignity of God or we can't be good Christians end up arguing endlessly about the subject as an intellectual exercise. That is not profitable to believers, IMO. :type:

Just so I am not misunderstood, I did not say that one has to understand the sovereignty of God in order to be a good Christian. Otherwise, none of us would be good Christians (cf. Romans 11:33-36). But at some point, we all reconcile certain passages in order to teach correct doctrine. But I also said that we each determine our own level of understanding and at what point we stop reconciling passages. You might stop at point A and I might stop at point B, with each point representing our level of understanding. And with that, I should not look down on you, nor should you set yourself up as more pious and humble than me.

Bless you on your way, John. Like I said some time ago, you being a missionary makes you one of my heros in the faith.

 

[webdog]

Hello webdog,

I have asked this before, but I would like to ask again. Where many Calvinist admit they have pulled from other great men of God of the past, as they study the Word, most of which were Baptist in there views, I would like to know your list of great men that you like to quote that lived before 1900 and was not a Calvinist, but were Baptistic.

Are there any other then the SDA and Methodist that you have quoted before? What is your best source to quote from a "Baptist World View", that believes in OSAS but does not believe in election as Calvinist do that lived before 1900.

My guess is that you will have little to none. Why before 1900? Some of todays Baptist have left their roots and followed the teachings of SDA and Methodist of the past.

***********

Please share with us your proof that jumps off the pages of Romans 9.
Please do not waste our time with Romans 9 speaks of electing of PEOPLES as in NATIONS and not men. For as been show before, this would only make matters of election stronger.


If This speaks only of nations, then God is saying, is this still not election? Is that not the point? God choose a people to love.

also thess verses from romans 9..


Is this talking about Pharaoh a man, or the whole nation was raised-up to not show mercy to, but to harden?

Also...


Is this vessel of wrath fitted for destruction a group of people as in nation, or does it apply to each man?
The clay in verse 21, do you feel this is speaks of each man God makes, or again are we going with a nation?


But I would be glad to see your proof....unless its the same old "its the nation...its the nation" cry, as if they changed anything



Please share with us the proof of Eph 1 that jumps off the pages. If you running with the "in Christ" ....dont waste your time trying to pull that one. That again comes from the Methodist, and has been shown to be wrong many times on this board alone.

Yet I would like to see the other jumping out proof you have. Maybe you can change a few Calvinist. We are all ears. You know how much we Calvinist love to study the WORD.

Lets hear your proof.

I'm not going to derail this thread to suit your propaganda. You are the only one I know here who would try to debate a personal testimony
I've played your game before. Your ego wins out all the time regardless what is presented to you, including Romans 9 and Ephesians 1.

I really do not see why it's important what theologians believed either before or after 1900. You seem to be obsessed by this fact.

 

[webdog]

This is the name of this thread and the intent of the op. Not to debate calvinism, but tell how YOU becasme a calvinist. If your posting on this thread, about how YOU becasme a calvinist, we can only assume your a calvinist, so, tell us how YOU became a calvinist. Otherwise, your off topic. Can we not consentrate on one thing, or must our minds constantly wander.

Are you going to be unbiased and reprimand your fellow calvi's for doing the same thing here?

 

[donnA]

I wasn't making a statement towards you. I was explaining to Donna there are a few people on this board who hold to such.

I was not trying to put it in a demeaning way toward anyone but stating a fact that some DO hold to that concept. (unbiblical though it may be IMO). I don't think (or at least didn't think) you held such a contrary veiw.

I haven't heard, or rather read, of anyone here beleiving non christians go to heaven. Please give a link so we can read that and know who said that.

 

[skypair]

Can you point me to a passage that teaches that God's sovereignty excludes man's choices?
Is this one?
Proverbs 16:9
In his heart a man plans his course,
but the LORD determines his steps.

Maybe this one?
Proverbs 19:21
Many are the plans in a man's heart,
but is it the LORD's purposes that prevails.

This one?
Daniel 4: 35
All the peoples of the earth are regarded as nothing.
He does as he pleases with the powers of heaven
and the peoples of the earth.
No one can hold back his hand or say to him:
"What have you done?"

Or this?
Lamentations 3: 37
Who can speak and have it happen if the LORD has not decreed it?

Or is it here?
Acts 17: 26
From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live.

As a Calvinist, I find my Bible makes more sense when I give God the glory He alone deserves as the Sovereign Lord over His creation.

isaiah -- these all show man making a decision and God overriding if man's decision is not according to God's plan. Still, man makes the decision -- not God for man. Man's plans -- God prevails," just like I said. Perhaps are seeing free will in a new light, eh?

skypair

 

[donnA]

Are you going to be unbiased and reprimand your fellow calvi's for doing the same thing here?

it seems non calvinst on this thread only want to take it so far off topic you can not recognize it's original topic.

 

[webdog]

I haven't heard, or rather read, of anyone here beleiving non christians go to heaven. Please give a link so we can read that and know who said that.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=976506&postcount=125

It seems like calvinism keeps on branching off even further. Let's see...faith before regeneration, regeneration before faith, God is not the author of sin, God is the author of sin, all calvinists are elect, those who hate God their entire lives are elect...

No wonder us non cal's are always being accused of not knowing "what calvinism teaches". Calvinists have a hard enough time knowing "what calvinism teaches"...

 

[webdog]

it seems non calvinst on this thread only want to take it so far off topic you can not recognize it's original topic.

So I take it you are biased then, as there are plenty of calvinists who have also done so here, including you.

 

[skypair]

no, not calvinists, christians.

I used christian sources for the defination of elect.

So let me get this straight -- Christianity is like Israel? All Christians are "chosen" by God? Chosen for what -- salvation or purpose?

skypair

 

[John of Japan]

Just so I am not misunderstood, I did not say that one has to understand the sovereignty of God in order to be a good Christian. Otherwise, none of us would be good Christians (cf. Romans 11:33-36). But at some point, we all reconcile certain passages in order to teach correct doctrine. But I also said that we each determine our own level of understanding and at what point we stop reconciling passages. You might stop at point A and I might stop at point B, with each point representing our level of understanding. And with that, I should not look down on you, nor should you set yourself up as more pious and humble than me.

Bless you on your way, John. Like I said some time ago, you being a missionary makes you one of my heros in the faith.

Then we will agree to disagree on the subject.

Thanks for the kind words. I certainly don't consider myself a hero! Just doing my best for Jesus, amen?:jesus:

 

[amity]

I made the statement:


and you stated:

So, you are contending the above statement I made is correct??


I personally do not wish to side track this thread, but that is absolute nonsense.
In that it is an unscriptural and non-biblical view, if you agree with my comment above.
You would have to pretend half of scripture is there only as filler and basically meaningless (only those who believe HAVE eternal life) to hold THAT view.

The redeemed are those who have believed and those who HAVE NOT believed are still in their condemnation. Reread John 1-3. Heck, reread the NT for that matter.

Off topic. Start a new thread.

 

[skypair]

John of Japan,

Nice threads, man!

I would ask this since you are "in the business" -- have you tried to reconcile some of these issues? The reason I ask is...

my next post.

skypair

 

[skypair]

Guys,

Last night I was reading Phil 1:14-18 -- "So that my bonds in Christ are manifest in all the palace, and in all other places; 14 And many of the brethren in the Lord, waxing confident by my bonds, are much more bold to speak the word without fear. 15 Some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife; and some also of good will: 16 The one preach Christ of contention, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my bonds: 17 But the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defence of the gospel. 18 What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice..."

First notice -- Paul rejoices upon the preaching of both sides!

Second, notice that Paul contrasts 2 teachings -- one of contention, envy, strife -- the other of goodwill, love.

Let's face it, Calvinism 1) does NOT teach the love of God for everyone and 2) is iconoclastic, rigid, immutable as it's image of God is and 3) has a lot of missing parts (most of Revelation, a pre-Christ gospel and salvation model, etc.)

So guys, "bark on!" I've just never found that Calvinism gives a good image of God's love, His wisdom, His ways.

skypair