The Unbeliever

[Mark Osgatharp]

According to God's Holy Bible, every unbeliever:

1. Has God's wrath abiding on him - John 3:36.

2. Will not see life - John 3:36.

3. Is not one of God's sheep - John 10:26.

4. Cannot go where Jesus is - John 8:24.

5. Is a child of Satan - John 8:44-45.

6. Is destitute of purity - Titus 1:25.

7. Is not chosen - I Peter 1:6-9.

8. Is ordained to condemnation - Jude 4.

9. Shall be damned - Mark 16:16.

In light of these plain facts, the Calvinites tell us there is a class of unbelievers who stand in no danger whatsoever of eternal damnaation because they are elect but just don't know it yet.

Who will you believe? The Calvinites or the Lord?

Mark Osgatharp

 

[Watchman]

Mark, you said, "According to God's Holy Bible, every unbeliever:" Then your nine points. By what I believe, everyone who still has the breath of life has a chance to become a believer; only after death is that chance gone. It is my understanding that those that adhere to Calvinism say that only the elect will be saved and the non-elect WILL be lost.
This person is saved because God chooses him to be, this person is lost because God chooses him to be lost, and there is nothing those people can do to change their state. That is what I must totally reject. The sovereign Lord has shown again and again throuhgout His Word that he leaves to man a choice on this matter.
Most disturbing is the contention of Calvanites that we who reject Calvinism regard God as less than sovereign, and man is in charge. That is nonsense. Man cannot save himself, only faith in the finished work of the Lord Jesus can do that.
God has put before us a choice, of life and death, receive His Son or reject Him, to "Choose this day whom ye will serve."
God made man a living soul, one with freewill, He did not make puppets.

 

[whetstone]

Originally posted by Mark Osgatharp:
In light of these plain facts, the Calvinites tell us there is a class of unbelievers who stand in no danger whatsoever of eternal damnaation because they are elect but just don't know it yet.

Who will you believe? The Calvinites or the Lord?

They coincide. Those were some excellent proof texts for Total Inability Mark and I appreciate you sharing them with us! Please read those verses you posted (especially John 3:36) a little more closely. Notice that the believers are not condemned and the unbelievers are. That's the summation of Calvinism: Elect (believers) and non-elect (unbelievers). Simple.

God bless.

Daniel Allen
www.spurgeon.us

 

[2BHizown]

AMEN, DAN, That is the simple truth!!Dont ever stop telling it!!

 

[Ray Berrian]

whetstone,

Yes, my friend keep perpetuating the lie. The Devil and Christ are busy taking the non-elect one on each each arm--escorting them to the gates of Hell at the hour of death. It sure is intriguing how they apparently work together against those unfortunate predestined non-elect ones.

Well, to be fair with Calvinism the Devil may be a little more busy because it is his intent to place all of us sinners in the Lake of Fire but he found out that we Arminians have a volition--a free will. Because of Jesus imparted righteousness he has no power over us [Romans 8:1].

And all the time the Calvinists are singing "Great Is Thy Faithfulness" oh God my Father, even in the face of their God who is uncaring toward the non chosen ones. I was taught in school that the word 'faithfulness' and 'uncaring' were poles apart.

This post is in honor of Mark Osgatharp. It's sure nice to hear men of God like you telling the truth to the church and not this flagrant error and "B" word.

Are these ideas offensive to the true God of love, or what? I guess the serious minded John Calvin never got enlightenment from the Holy Spirit about the deep love of the Lord God for all lost sinners; because he used the words 'the love of God' very infrequently.

 

[2BHizown]

Rev Dr Berrian, Have you ever read The Sovereignty of God by AW Pink? Did you read it and verify each statement by the scripture reference? To speak of our most Holy God as you state in error that we believe is so very farfetched it is ludicrous! No one on earth upholds God's sovereignty with great reverence than those who believe the doctrines of grace! Please read this and confirm it in great earnest prayer to our Lord that He will bring you into all truth! Lay your pride at the cross and humbly submit to Him. He loves you and so do we!

 

[Mark Osgatharp]

Originally posted by whetstone:
That's the summation of Calvinism: Elect (believers) and non-elect (unbelievers). Simple.

But that is in fact NOT the summation of Calvinism. Calvinism teaches that the elect are elect before they believe. That is why Calvinism is in flat contradiction to the Scriptures I posted.

For example, Jesus said that those who did not believe Him were not his sheep (John chapter 10). Calvinism says that some of those who don't believe on Him are His sheep, but just don't know it yet.

Now who should I believe? Jesus or Calvinism?

Mark Osgatharp

 

[KenH]

The basic tenets of Calvinism are in line with the teachings of God. Therefore, there is no reason to choose between them.

 

[2BHizown]

Originally posted by KenH:
The basic tenets of Calvinism are in line with the teachings of God. Therefore, there is no reason to choose between them.

I definitely agree with that and know it is true! What is it that makes the doctrines of grace such hated doctrines? It seems when the topic comes up that all nerves suddenly are charged with negative vibes!! Why is this so? Do we all hunger for truth and seek His face? Are we sealed against new insight that He brings to us? I learned of these doctrines late in life but was horrified at the response of my family and friends! Why object to something so totally wonderful, a sovereign God that owns and runs the world and all that live therin?
Blessings!

 

[whetstone]

Mark and Ray-

The more I read from you, the more I realize that your problems with Calvinism arise in your ignorance to what it actually believes. When I said 'belief (the elect) and unbelief (the non-elect) are what Calvinism is all about' you say, 'no it's not' as if you know better than me or any of the other Calvinists here.

Do you realize how foolish it would be to go into a forum owned by some other religious group (we'll use Catholics for example since you like to frequently compare us to them) and tell THEM what what THEY believe without listening to them?

That's what it really comes down to folks- an inability to listen. All I hear from you Ray is- 'well this is what I heard in school, etc.' News flash- you're in the real world- not school. Why not listen to what we say rather than tell us what we believe according to your school.

And Mark- your basic misunderstanding comes in thinking that all unbelievers today must automatically be non-elect according to Calvinism. This is a misunderstanding, so I'll set the record straight. To God- only a portion of the unbelievers are non-elect and a portion are elect. To US they ALL appear lost. We don't know! You're so desperate to either know who they are or reject the whole system completely. To paraphrase Spurgeon- if the elect had a yellow stripe down their backs I'd be lifting shirts all day- but since they don't I preach 'whosoever will may come.'

Please stop generalizing- and please take a moment to read what we're saying and absorb before shooting at the hip. At the very least it's the respectable thing to do- and at the best it's a better debate tactic.

God bless.

Daniel Allen
www.spurgeon.us

 

[TCassidy]

Originally posted by 2BHizown:
What is it that makes the doctrines of grace such hated doctrines?

In my opinion, two things. 1. Ignorance. 2. Pride.

Ignorance of what the doctrines of grace really teach, and when shown what they really teach, pride that prevents the anti-doctrines of grace believer from admitting his ignorance.

Case in point. A couple days ago I told Bob that Limited Atonement does not mean that the scope of the Atonement was insufficient for every person who ever lived, but that only the application of the atonement was limited. I quoted the old adage "Sufficient for all, efficient only for those who believe." To that Bob replied, "I wish that was what Calvinists really believe." Or words to that effect. I then posted, verbatim, from the Canons of the Synod of Dordt the very words that old adage is taken from, "it is of infinite value and worth, more than sufficient to atone for the sins of the whole world." How did Bob reply? He ignored it, and will, in the future, say the exact same thing again even though he knows he is wrong and has been informed as to what the Doctrines of Grace really teach. Why. The first was caused by ignorance. The second by pride.

It seems when the topic comes up that all nerves suddenly are charged with negative vibes!! Why is this so?

Same answer. Ignorance and pride.

Do we all hunger for truth and seek His face?

Unfortunately, no. All too often the criteria is not "truth" but "I am right." Some fail to adjust their truth to what the bible says, but rather try to adjust their bible to what they believe.

Are we sealed against new insight that He brings to us?

In some cases, yes, unfortunately. The greatest hindrance to learning is the idea "I already know."

I learned of these doctrines late in life but was horrified at the response of my family and friends!

I know how you feel. Although I have always believed as I do now, and don't identify myself as a Calvinist (in my opinion, Calvin was not only a heretic but also a terrible legalist in the Pharisaical sense) but as an Historic Particular Baptist. I firmly believe in Particular Redemption. However, I am constantly amazed by my Baptist brethren who don't know what that means. They have no concept of Baptist history and the roots of the Particular and General Baptists. And when confronted with the historic beliefs, they object vehemently to their very heritage they formerly embraced.

Why object to something so totally wonderful, a sovereign God that owns and runs the world and all that live therin?

Because, to embrace the sovereignty of God one must reject the sovereignty of self.

 

[whetstone]

Originally posted by TCassidy:
To embrace the sovereignty of God one must reject the sovereignty of self.

Wow. very true. very good insights Thomas.

 

[Mark Osgatharp]

Originally posted by TCassidy:
"it is of infinite value and worth, more than sufficient to atone for the sins of the whole world."

TCassidy,

I'm sure there are different slants on the atonement even among Calvinites. I've read that Calvin himself taught that Christ's sacrifice was sufficient for all.

That notwithstanding, I have both heard and read men professing to be Calvinites who teach unabashedly that Christ's death was sufficient only for the sins of the pre-selected. These sort do all sorts of philological and exegetical stunts to avoid the plain meaning of words such as,

"tasted death for every man."

On top of that, if Christ's death was sufficient to save all men, it wouldn't make one bit of difference if the Lord was holding it back, as Calvinism teaches.

Mark Osgatharp

 

[Ray Berrian]

KenH,

Someone said, 'The basic tenets of Calvinism are in line with the teachings of God. Therefore, there is no reason to choose between them.'

In college you learn that this is a presupposition; a presupposition of a man who apparently smiles a lot. Again, this would be my presupposition.

RayB

 

[Mark Osgatharp]

Originally posted by whetstone:
And Mark- your basic misunderstanding comes in thinking that all unbelievers today must automatically be non-elect according to Calvinism. This is a misunderstanding, so I'll set the record straight.

I didn't misunderstand a thing. You didn't even understand what I said. I didn't say that all unbelievers are non-elect according to Calvinism. To the contrary, I said,

the Calvinites tell us there is a class of unbelievers who stand in no danger whatsoever of eternal damnaation because they are elect but just don't know it yet.

That is no misrepresentation or misunderstanding of Calvinism at all. That is exactly what Calvinism teaches.

What I did say is that all unbelievers are non-elect according to the Bible. That is the whole crux of my argument. Jesus said all unbelievers are not His sheep.

Now who should I believer?

Mark Osgatharp

 

[whatever]

Originally posted by Mark Osgatharp:
the Calvinites tell us there is a class of unbelievers who stand in no danger whatsoever of eternal damnaation because they are elect but just don't know it yet.

Then where did Jonathan Edwards get off preaching about "Sinners In The Hands Of An Angry God", and calling those sinners to repent? I guess he wasn't as smart as people make him out to be. It's really too bad that he didn't know what Calvinites really believe.

Originally posted by Mark Osgatharp:
Now who should I believer?

Believe whom you will, but you really ought to get more understanding before you write.

 

[Mark Osgatharp]

Originally posted by whatever:
Then where did Jonathan Edwards get off preaching about "Sinners In The Hands Of An Angry God", and calling those sinners to repent? I guess he wasn't as smart as people make him out to be. It's really too bad that you weren't around to inform him what Calvinites really believe.

Whatever,

All that proves is that Calvinites are bad about preaching things that are inconsistent with their philosophy. You can say I have misrepresented the case till you are blue in the face, the fact still remains that Calvinism teaches certain individuals were predestinated to be saved before the foundation of the world and therefore are elect before they believe and therefore never for a moment stood in any danger whatsoever of eternal damnation. Whetstone put it thus earlier in this thread:

To God- only a portion of the unbelievers are non-elect and a portion are elect. To US they ALL appear lost. We don't know! You're so desperate to either know who they are or reject the whole system completely. To paraphrase Spurgeon- if the elect had a yellow stripe down their backs I'd be lifting shirts all day- but since they don't I preach 'whosoever will may come.'

Now don't tell me that doesn't mean that some unbelievers are elect and therefore not lost and therefore not in danger of eternal damnation.

Mark Osgatharp

[ October 31, 2005, 08:34 PM: Message edited by: Mark Osgatharp ]

 

[whatever]

Jonathan Edwards was inconsistent with his theology. That's a good one.

All unbelievers stand in danger of eternal damnation until God calls them. After He calls they respond, and then they are no longer in danger. The fact that God will infallibly rescue them tomorrow does not lessen the danger that they are in today.

You and I were chosen for salvation before the foundation of the world; and yet we were lost, dead in our sins, etc., until we believed. I don't know why that is so difficult to understand.

 

[Mark Osgatharp]

Originally posted by whatever:
The fact that God will infallibly rescue them tomorrow does not lessen the danger that they are in today.

The only way such a statement might possibly make sense is if we were already in hell.

But we are not already in hell and if God is going to infallibly rescue this mythical group of pre-selected people so as to prevent them from ever going to hell, then they are not now nor ever will be in any danger of going to hell.

If that is not the case, then the words "infallibly rescue" and "danger" have no meaning.

Mark Osgatharp

 

[whatever]

Originally posted by Mark Osgatharp:
But we are not already in hell and if God is going to infallibly rescue this mythical group of pre-selected people so as to prevent them from ever going to hell, then they are not now nor ever will be in any danger of going to hell.

If that is not the case, then the words "infallibly rescue" and "danger" have no meaning.

That's nonsense. What does He infallibly rescue us from, if not danger? If we are not lost then how could we be saved?