-
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!
To Cals/Arms here on BB.. What is hardest Point to refute of each position held?
- Thread starter DaChaser1
- Start date
The hardest thing for a non-cal to refute is when the Calvinist has been backed into a corner and their argument is being boxed up and they pull out "it's a mystery, and some day we will know the answer" as the answer to questions they can't defend. It's the ultimate cop out.
glfredrick
New Member
The hardest thing for the non-cals to refute is that Calvinists see God as GOD with the power to do as He wishes, when He wishes, to whom He wishes, for any reason He wishes. The "mystery" aspect of all of this has nothing at all to do, really, with this view of God other than we cannot readily grasp how God can both be sovereign and allow us free moral agency at the same time. THAT He does is a given and virtually all those who call themselves Calvinists will conceed this point (virtually all have, save those who are in fact "hyper-Calvinist" and who carry out this concept to fatalistic determination, something the Bible never states nor do most believe).
I would say the hardest thing to refute on the other side in the non-cal position is their fluidity in their use of the Scriptures to proof-text their arguments. When a particular verse is exegeted that refutes the position held, the fluidity arises and that verse is discounted because of this or that. Happens constantly. Difficult to persuade people who cannot be persuaded even by the Word of God because it goes against their concept of "choice."
I would say the hardest thing to refute on the other side in the non-cal position is their fluidity in their use of the Scriptures to proof-text their arguments. When a particular verse is exegeted that refutes the position held, the fluidity arises and that verse is discounted because of this or that. Happens constantly. Difficult to persuade people who cannot be persuaded even by the Word of God because it goes against their concept of "choice."
So there are no mysteries in the Bible that we just don't understand yet?
convicted1
Guest
Lemme get this straight, when we use texts to properly refute Calvinism, it's called "proof texting? And when someone refutes our side, it's sound teaching,eh?
of course!
I only call out proof texting when it's just a long list of verses and no context has been considered. There's nothing wrong with having proof texts, but we have to consider the context.
convicted1
Guest
Then why accept 1st Cor 2:14 as proof that the natural man doesn't understand. Why not find the context in which Paul was speaking by reading on into chapter 3. When I first started comming here Calvinist told me the Natural man could not see or hear. Now they tell us the natural man can't understand and calvinist have one verse from which to base this on which is taken out of context.of course!
I only call out proof texting when it's just a long list of verses and no context has been considered. There's nothing wrong with having proof texts, but we have to consider the context.
MB
1 Corinthians 2:11-16 ESV
Verses 11-13 deal with the Spirit is the one that understand the things of God. It's not our natural spirit, nor the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God. In verse 14, Paul says that the natural man cannot accept the things of the Spirit of God. It is foolish and he cannot understand. This is contrasted with the person who has the Spirit. He can understand because he has the Spirit.
1 Corinthians 3:1-4 ESV
Paul is speaking to believers. He calls them "brothers." He says he could not address them as spiritual people because they were acting like people of the flesh or "infants in Christ." These are immature believers.
When we are saved, we receive the Spirit and are able to understand spiritual things. This doesn't mean that we are now perfect as clearly noted in chapter 3.
Have never seen that happen before.It could be that your lack of understanding the answers you were given leads you to perceive it that way.:thumbsup:
:applause::applause:Good post Willis!:laugh: You got it...
glfredrick
New Member
No, WHEN it is proof-texting it is almost impossible to refute. Not that it is ALWAYS proof-texting. We're not in a *** match here. The question was, what is the most difficult point to refute.
The hardest thing to refute is ignorant arguments, or christo-science fiction replies. See this all of the time concerning Augustinianism. You can show a straight forward verse like James 1:15 when and how someone dies spiritually, and they will counter with a figurative Psalm not to be taken literally as literal...or they will give you the argument that a child in the womb is given faith, an infant can exhibit saving faith, or they are saved in some way that Scripture doesn't touch on.
And it is statements like this that create such hostility.
This is not what the scriptures actually says. This is what some person thinks it says and of course that persons slant, is on it. Such as it is with dynamic translations.
This below is more word for word;
1Co 2:10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
1Co 2:11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.
1Co 2:12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
1Co 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
1Co 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
1Co 2:15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
1Co 2:16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.
1Co 3:1 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.
1Co 3:2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.
So actually we have men here who are believers in Christ yet they still do not understand the deep things of God. They can only grasp the milk of the word. The gospel is the milk of the word and anyone can understand it. The Spirit can't indwell a sinner there fore the man must be saved first. There is no room for the Spirit in the lost
MB
What I quoted was not a dynamic translation. It is a word for word. There is difference in meaning.
First, there was absolutely no difference in the meaning on the translations. The KJV does fine here, but the ESV does just as well. Both are word for word.
In chapter 3 yes. But not in verse 14. The natural people as I showed in verse 14 are not believers. In verse 14 he is contrasting the natural man without the spirit and the spirit man.
BTW, you didn't refute anything that I said. Go back and look at the points that I made.
glfredrick
New Member
Why? Is that not the primary Calvinist statement that is the most difficult to refute?
You seem to be asking me to supply for you a Calvinist statement that is easy to refute...
Sorry dude... :smilewinkgrin:
What good would that do?
So tell me..who disagrees with that?
preacher4truth
Active Member
That's one HUGE strawman. I've haven't witnnessed one Calvinist on here use that lame excuse that you accuse them of.
Not one proof, example, nada. It's like you trying to prove you had a freewill, and of the same deficient error of those who say they loved God and pursued Him while lost, which there is no Biblical evidence of whatsoever.
Yes, you've now moved into first place in the Non-cal/Arminian Fallacy Olympics surpassing all others in the strawman marathon! Congrats!!! :thumbsup:
That's one HUGE strawman. I've haven't witnnessed one Calvinist on here use that lame excuse that you accuse them of.
Not one proof, example, nada. It's like you trying to prove you had a freewill, and of the same deficient error of those who say they loved God and pursued Him while lost, which there is no Biblical evidence of whatsoever.
If this board had a more robust search engine I could find it. I've seen it several times--I've been here about 16 months--and even commented that it was lame way to back out of an argument.