To Calvinists, What is 'Irresistible Grace'?

And it would also be blasphemy if you were wrong. But consider -- just because God COULD do something doesn't mean that He WILL do it. I have no doubt that if God held an inquisition right today that He could "irresistibly" get everyone to believe on Him or on anything He wanted them to beleive, don't you?

And lest you forget -- He DOES get "every knee to bow and every tongue to confess that Jesus Christ is Lord!" Only thing is, most will do it only at the GWT!

skypair

 

But you've admitted you don't know anything about historical Baptist Calvinism so how can you decide "without knowledge" that the practice hurts????????:BangHead:

 

Do you disagree that the whole Sermon of Stephen is an indictment against Israel?

 

But not mine, eh?

Is sin nature so hard to get your mind around? Or is it soul vs. spirit that you can't handle (you realize that Calvinism can't account for them separately but the Bible can, don't you?)? Maybe it's the errant "total depravity" issue that has you bound and gagged? :laugh:

skypair

 

Well, I haven't studied Baptist history but I know enough about Calvinism to half believe it is a cult of Calvin followers. Some aspects are rather like Greek worship of their gods -- "all is fate!"

skypair

 

==I believe Baptists do need to return to the past (so to speak). We need men like Spurgeon, Boyce, Fuller in today's church. I would say that we need to return to the Second London Confession. We could also learn a thing or two from Whitefield, Edwards, and Newton. All of these men, and more, were Calvinists. Yet their Calvinism did nothing to kill their belief in evangelism. I know Dr. Rogers preached a sermon against Calvinism as has Vines, Caner, Falwell, and others. I also know that these men believe/ed that Calvinism kills evangelism. History proves them dangerously wrong. Sure there are Calvinists who don't do evangelism, but there are also Arminians who don't do evangelism. A person who does not believe in evangelism is a person who is not obeying Christ. Regardless of their theological bend. We should evangelize because Jesus commanded us to do so. Not because we know who the elect are (because we don't) and not because everyone can be elect (because everyone is not) but because Jesus commanded it. It is really that simple.

 

==Of course that last part is totally untrue (unless you equate the Biblical God with blind fate). As for the first part, well that is a totally ridiculus statement. The doctrines we know as Calvinism were around long before John Calvin. Martin Luther was a Calvinist! Don't believe me? Read his "Bondage of the Will". Moving past Calvin we can also look to men like John Newton. That hymn you sing in your church called "Amazing Grace" was written by a "Calvinist". If Calvinism is a cult then you better stop singing that hymn in your church. If Calvinism is a cult then you better not listen to/support Joni Eareckson Tada, you better leave the SBC (since it was founded by many Calvinists like Boyce). History tells us that Baptists have generally split into two camps: General Baptists and Particular Baptists. Like it or not that split continues to do this day (as the debates on this board prove). The fact that the Particular group grew in the past, and is still growing today, is why some General Baptist lash out at Particular Baptists (IMHO).

 

I fail to see how you've made a case for your soul vs spirit theory. Maybe in some of your other posts elsewhere but nothing I've read on this thread.

 

And don't leave out Sky P...'s own pastor, Bro. Steve Gaines. He hardly had his feet on the ground in Memphis when he launched a broadside against Calvinism.

 

Surely You, the one who stresses knowledge time after time, would be more concerned about making statements like this based on "half beliefs" or "half truths" than this.

Be consistent, Man. Admit your lack of knowledge on the subject and study it or stop making false accusations.

I don't know any Southern Baptist Calvinists who follow Calvin. We don't baptize Babies and we don't believe in a state church and those are just two out of many of Calvin's errors.

 

Pardon me, but Rogers was not an Arminian either, sir!

Well pardon me again but I believe that God means to actually SAVE sinners through evangelism. I know that hurts but read a little scripture and you will realize that what I am saying is true.

skypair

 

Martin, I don't want you to get angry at me. Evey notice that when you get angry, you get irrational -- "to the nth degree?" You are not thinking about what I am saying anymore. You are lashing out. "Fighting against the prricks."

Baptists are FREE WILL, dude. Don't be a history buff and fall like so many Catholics have! One thing history proves -- men are fallible and there's good and bad in history. Believe God. Middle verse in all of scripture -- Psa 118:8 "It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in men."

Evangel on, dude!

skypair

 

Fair enough -- make your case. Divide soul and spirit with the Word and see what you get.

I know most see soul and spirit the reverse of how I describe them so maybe this is your opportunity to teach me. I can't see that. But there is a difference -- and it is significant.

skypair

 

Hallelujiah That is one GOOD thing that can be said for him!! :saint:

skypair

 

Thank you for acknowledging Calvin's errors. Care to go on? I doubt that Calvin could have got his Masters at a good SBC seminary today. A man who can't distinguish soul and spirit -- who can't logically describe "sin nature" -- who thinks the church is a secular government -- who baptizes infants for "original sin" -- who claims that salvation is "fate" with which we have NOTHING to do... Oi Vey! It is I who could go on and on!

Look, hs. Start from scratch. Pretend you never heard the name John Calvin. Burn that "wood, hay, and stubble" before it scorches you!

BTW, that wasn't you in that "back pew" at Bellevue last week was it? :laugh:

skypair

 

I can say amen to this. I hope this is not taken wrong, but Calvin has become more of a hindrance to the doctrine of predestination than a help. (Not that he was wrong in his application of it) But, most of the time the debate turns to attacks on Calvin's actions rather than Scripture. Very few of these debates end with Scripture. They usually end with Calvin or Arminius. Which throws the argument off course.

 

BTW, who are you?

 

Skypair --- don't you remember? :laugh:

No one of consequence in this world, TC. But I did sleep at a Holiday Inn Express one night!

Blessings,
skypair

 

You really do need to read that history book ....

You may learn a few things....and you would stop saying things crazy things as you do and maybe even know what your talking about.

 

Actually, as it happens I am reading Eusebius History of the Christian Church right now. Funny I find nothing in 3 centuries about the veneration of Mary but I do find that James was considered brother to Jesus and son of Joseph (neither of these being in the "rich" tradition of Catholicism).

Is that the kind of truth you wish me to "ferret out?" Things that I already know from studying my Bible?

BTW, I probably should have said "Baptists are FREE WILL today, dude." That would have been more in keeping with what I was trying to drive home.

skypair