To the Calvinists here: what part of Non cal theology Bothers you the Most?

[Iconoclast]

DrJamesAch

i could only offer a short reply before, but i can answer the rest now....

If you can logically address the post point by point, I'll respond.

*********************
Now this verse only says what you say it doesn't say if you read a presuppostional stance into the text. But what does 2 Peter 3:9 actually say?

"The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

Now does this verse only mean that God is not willing that ONLY THE ELECT should not perish?

yes...that is exactly what it does mean.....which is clearly seen by any who read the context....

That would be impossible because in the very next clause it says "but that all should come to repentance". So the end of the verse is about those who have not came to repentance which means that the subject of this verse are those who are not saved.

it is not impossible, but in fact demanded by the letter....

A simple contrast of the believers[red] and the scoffing unbelievers[green] shows this quite nicely as well as who is being addressed in vs9


3 This, now, beloved, a second letter to you I write, in both which I stir up your pure mind in reminding [you],

2 to be mindful of the sayings said before by the holy prophets, and of the command of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour,

3 this first knowing, that there shall come in the latter end of the days scoffers, according to their own desires going on,

4 and saying, `Where is the promise of his presence? for since the fathers did fall asleep, all things so remain from the beginning of the creation;'

5 for this is unobserved by them willingly, that the heavens were of old, and the earth out of water and through water standing together by the word of God,

6 through which the then world, by water having been deluged, was destroyed;

7 and the present heavens and the earth, by the same word are treasured, for fire being kept to a day of judgment and destruction of the impious men.

8 And this one thing let not be unobserved by you, beloved, that one day with the Lord [is] as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day;

9 the Lord is not slow in regard to the promise, as certain count slowness, but is long-suffering to us, not counselling any to be lost but all to pass on to reformation,

10 and it will come -- the day of the Lord -- as a thief in the night, in which the heavens with a rushing noise will pass away, and the elements with burning heat be dissolved, and earth and the works in it shall be burnt up.

11 All these, then, being dissolved, what kind of persons doth it behove you to be in holy behaviours and pious acts?

12 waiting for and hasting to the presence of the day of God, by which the heavens, being on fire, shall be dissolved, and the elements with burning heat shall melt;

13 and for new heavens and a new earth according to His promise we do wait, in which righteousness doth dwell;

14 wherefore, beloved, these things waiting for, be diligent, spotless and unblameable, by Him to be found in peace,

15 and the long-suffering of our Lord count ye salvation, according as also our beloved brother Paul -- according to the wisdom given to him -- did write to you,

16 as also in all the epistles, speaking in them concerning these things, among which things are certain hard to be understood, which the untaught and unstable do wrest, as also the other Writings, unto their own destruction.

If you read the whole passage your whole objection evaporates.:thumbs:

And what then does it say about those who have not come to repentance? That the Lord is NOT WILLING (by determination or plan) that ANY should perish"

To suggest this ...is foolish.God is very willing that many perish.Mt7...

Allspoken of in 2 pet will NOT PERISH....All will come to repentance.

Now what does Ezekiel 33:11 say?

" Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?"

It does not say what you post...it says God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked.....that does not mean that they will not perish...they surely will...that is why Jesus wept of Jerusalem...:type:

Furthermore,

Furthermore?????...you have posted so many errors that YOU believe to be true...to continue on down this path is fruitless because you false premises hinge one upon another....so there is no furthermore here, or in your other lenghty posts...the same patter is seen.

if God eternally decreed the damnation of sinners to hell, THEN WHY WAS HELL ONLY ORIGINALLY CREATED FOR THE DEVIL AND HIS ANGELS??

"Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels" Matt 25:41

The fact that is described this way does not mean it was ONLY for them.The indication is the order of the Fall of satan,and other angels.....after gen 1:31

Notice that in Isaiah 5:14 Hell hath ENLARGED itself. Hell did not previously have the capacity for lost sinners because that's not who it was made for.

You push this verse beyond it's meaning as you are doing with many others,

Hell had to be enlarged to include judgment on sinners. If hell was for sinners "According to plan", then the Bible would have made it clear that hell was prepared for the devil, his angels, and sinners.

It is not for you to dictate to God how and why he has designed hell,and in what order, or to speculate and reduce God who is All knowing in Holiness,and Wisdom....to reduce Him to a ...god who changes plans,and corrects mistakes.....this is to blaspheme.

The Calvinist will claim that God made an eternal decree that sinners will be damned, and site verses like "God knows how to deliver the ungodly and reserve the unjust for punishment" but keep in mind that an "eternal decree" is not eternal IF IT WAS MADE IN TIME. The judgment of sinners in hell is not only devoid of any mention in the Bible of being "decreed" but the evidence shows that the door that opened to reserve even Satan in hell was made AFTER CREATION, WITHIN THE CONCEPT OF TIME, and therefore can not possibly be an "eternal" decree.

Another blasphemy...read here about the biblical God-
18 Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.

"For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, saith the LORD, thoughts of peace, and not of evil, to give you an expected end". Was God talking to ONLY the elect? Of course not, ALL ISRAEL was called God's elect (Isaiah 45:4) and they rejected Him:

"Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth: for the Lord hath spoken, I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against me." Isaiah 1:2

"He came unto his own and his own RECEIVED HIM NOT" John 1:11.

6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:

7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.

8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.


This is what GT was trying to tell you, before you kept insulting him...your dispensational errors build one upon another...

Since you just summarily wrote off my explanation of Romans 8, I won't comment further on it because the explanation is valid.

It was sad and completely avoided the obvious truth contained in the passage....every cal writer speaks of it as the golden chain of romans 8 which is easily found on a google search....and you did not even begin to answer to it...because YOU CANNOT...not because we "wrote it off"

The plain reading of the Bible proves that God never desired nor intended ANYONE to perish. If perish is used in contrast to those who repent, then perish means hell.

Proving GT's point about you and how you view scripture.....Jesus would not be the lamb slain before the foundation of the world...is no one needed to be saved from sin and eternal destruction.You continue to speak of the biblical God ...as if he was a feeble old man ...wishing and hoping someone somewhere might listen to him.

 

[DrJamesAch]

Yes. We're getting more than just a glimpse of what the 'Dr.' is made of right here and now.

He should be ashamed but somehow I don't think he can be.

A real man would openly apologize for attempting to deceive others. Pride won't allow it.

I was determined before the foundation of the world to copy that post. I had no choice.

I just can't get over that you think Jesus was a winebibber, and then defended liquor. You know good and well the difference between wine in the NT, and that liquor you and your buddy were bragging about. Do I need to show you your own post again??? Did you forget already?

 

[Yeshua1]

Funny thing is you had to Google it first which means you weren't sure whether it was my position, or another's. It's a catch 22 argument. Every thing I site about Calvinism is ALWAYS restated from another Calvinistic website except for the conclusions. That is how I know for 100% certainty that I have never misrepresented CalvinISM, you simply don't like the conclusions that I and others come to about Calvinism because it is based solely on a philosophical system, and when you tear down the philosophy, you tear down the walls of Calvinism.

Seems like it would be hard to tear down, for its a system bult upon the inspired reachings of the Bible!

 

[preacher4truth]

I was determined before the foundation of the world to copy that post. I had no choice.

Now you move over to borderline blasphemy and blame it on the LORD in a mocking fashion? Nothing short of taking His Name in vain.

 

[Iconoclast]

OK I will give you your chances to pick me apart. I will write out what I believe TULIP to mean, and you all can tell me how straw man I am. If I am wrong, then I will concede that I do not understand Calvinism and go on my merry way. I will explain this from a Calvinist position, and then if you can not pick apart my description of Calvinism, then you agree that there has been no misrepresentation of Calvinism on my part, but that you simply don't like my conclusions.

Total Deprativty

Sin has affected all parts of man. The heart, emotions, will, mind, and body are all affected by sin. We are completely sinful. We are not as sinful as we could be, but we are completely affected by sin.

The doctrine of Total Depravity is derived from scriptures that reveal human character: Man’s heart is evil (Mark 7:21-23) and sick Jer. 17:9). Man is a slave of sin (Rom. 6:20). He does not seek for God (Rom. 3:10-12). He cannot understand spiritual things (1 Cor. 2:14). He is at enmity with God (Eph. 2:15). And, is by nature a child of wrath (Eph. 2:3). The Calvinist asks the question, "In light of the scriptures that declare man’s true nature as being utterly lost and incapable, how is it possible for anyone to choose or desire God?" The answer is, "He cannot. Therefore God must predestine."

Calvinism also maintains that because of our fallen nature we are born again not by our own will but God’s will (John 1:12-13); God grants that we believe (Phil. 1:29); faith is the work of God (John 6:28-29); God appoints people to believe (Acts 13:48); and God predestines (Eph. 1:1-11; Rom. 8:29; 9:9-23).

Unconditional Election:
God does not base His election on anything He sees in the individual. He chooses the elect according to the kind intention of His will (Eph. 1:4-8; Rom. 9:11) without any consideration of merit within the individual. Nor does God look into the future to see who would pick Him. Also, as some are elected into salvation, others are not (Rom. 9:15, 21).

Limited Atonement:
Jesus died only for the elect. Though Jesus’ sacrifice was sufficient for all, it was not efficacious for all. Jesus only bore the sins of the elect. Support for this position is drawn from such scriptures as Matt. 26:28 where Jesus died for ‘many'; John 10:11, 15 which say that Jesus died for the sheep (not the goats, per Matt. 25:32-33); John 17:9 where Jesus in prayer interceded for the ones given Him, not those of the entire world; Acts 20:28 and Eph. 5:25-27 which state that the Church was purchased by Christ, not all people; and Isaiah 53:12 which is a prophecy of Jesus’ crucifixion where he would bore the sins of many (not all).

Irresistible Grace:
When God calls his elect into salvation, they cannot resist. God offers to all people the gospel message. This is called the external call. But to the elect, God extends an internal call and it cannot be resisted. This call is by the Holy Spirit who works in the hearts and minds of the elect to bring them to repentance and regeneration whereby they willingly and freely come to God. Some of the verses used in support of this teaching are Romans 9:16 where it says that "it is not of him who wills nor of him who runs, but of God who has mercy"; Philippians 2:12-13 where God is said to be the one working salvation in the individual; John 6:28-29 where faith is declared to be the work of God; Acts 13:48 where God appoints people to believe; and John 1:12-13 where being born again is not by man’s will, but by God’s.
“All that the Father gives Me shall come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out," (John 6:37)

Perseverance of the Saints:
You cannot lose your salvation. Because the Father has elected, the Son has redeemed, and the Holy Spirit has applied salvation, those thus saved are eternally secure. They are eternally secure in Christ. Some of the verses for this position are John 10:27-28 where Jesus said His sheep will never perish; John 6:47 where salvation is described as everlasting life; Romans 8:1 where it is said we have passed out of judgment; 1 Corinthians 10:13 where God promises to never let us be tempted beyond what we can handle; and Phil. 1:6 where God is the one being faithful to perfect us until the day of Jesus’ return.

ACH,

Now no one is going to pick at this as it is more in line with what is believed by cals'. Where you get "picked on" is your posts that give no indications of any of these truths you presented here...In other words....what you have stated cal's believe in other posts....could be answered by your own post here as source material.....:thumbsup:

 

[Yeshua1]

Now you move over to borderline blasphemy and blame it on the LORD in a mocking fashion? Nothing short of taking His Name in vain.

Matthew 7:6 maybe?

 

[Herald]

preacher4truth, I stand shoulder to shoulder with you in opposing DJA's deceit and blasphemy. If his tripe is not rebuked by those who share his doctrinal distinctives, then they are giving him at least tacit approval. Time will tell.

 

[agedman]

Because this is a "General forum" I figured the discussion of Peter and Ezekiel might be better served in the other debate room.

I opened a thread that some may desire to pursue the matter, there.

 

[Iconoclast]

Now you move over to borderline blasphemy and blame it on the LORD in a mocking fashion? Nothing short of taking His Name in vain.

P4T,

You have posted many times to him and used restraint in the light of his shameful and degrading posts to you and all the cals here.
that he casually blasphemes God is shocking, but I believe he is in over his head right now, and cannot find his way out, unless he repents and starts over. many have asked him to do so...but he has dug in his heels.
His bad theology is being publically manifest in these threads.
He may have studied as he claims...but grace seems to be absent from the posts almost totally.
I would not despise good scholarship or a person earning a degree of DR.
But calling GT a drunk, others morons,and other degrading words and condescending remarks nonstop...shows a dis-connect that is too wide to bridge the gap.....

At this point...if he is a "DR'.....I guess I can say I an a ROAD Scholar :thumbsup::laugh::smilewinkgrin:

 

[jonathanD]

I think that's the gist of it. Being a Molinist, you're familiar with middle-knowledge. For those who may not be, it's the concept that God not only knows all things as they are, he also knows all things as they would be if conditions were different or changed. One biblical example is in Matthew 11:20-24. God is not bluffing or exaggerating or guessing when he informs Chorazin that Tyre and Sidon would've repented if they had seen the signs that Chrorazin saw. He is speaking the truth because he knows perfectly what would've happened.

This affects creation in that He knows exactly what each creature will do perfectly. Additionally, He knows exactly what those creatures would do in other circumstances. In light of these facts, it seems that, at least at some level, creation is causation.

I don't want this to get lost!

 

[preacher4truth]

preacher4truth, I stand shoulder to shoulder with you in opposing DJA's deceit and blasphemy. If his tripe is not rebuked by those who share his doctrinal distinctives, then they are giving him at least tacit approval. Time will tell.

Agreed and thank you brother. This whole thing is truly saddening.

- Blessings

 

[preacher4truth]

P4T,

You have posted many times to him and used restraint in the light of his shameful and degrading posts to you and all the cals here.
that he casually blasphemes God is shocking, but I believe he is in over his head right now, and cannot find his way out, unless he repents and starts over. many have asked him to do so...but he has dug in his heels.
His bad theology is being publically manifest in these threads.
He may have studied as he claims...but grace seems to be absent from the posts almost totally.
I would not despise good scholarship or a person earning a degree of DR.
But calling GT a drunk, others morons,and other degrading words and condescending remarks nonstop...shows a dis-connect that is too wide to bridge the gap.....

At this point...if he is a "DR'.....I guess I can say I an a ROAD Scholar :thumbsup::laugh::smilewinkgrin:

I hope God can shame him in his heart and he repents. I'd be fearful to go unchastised over this.

You're correct, he did casually blaspheme. I attempted to be kind, and called it borderline, but it in fact is blasphemy.

- Blessings

 

[DrJamesAch]

ACH,

Now no one is going to pick at this as it is more in line with what is believed by cals'. Where you get "picked on" is your posts that give no indications of any of these truths you presented here...In other words....what you have stated cal's believe in other posts....could be answered by your own post here as source material.....:thumbsup:

Let me give you an example of what I mean when I say you disagree with my conclusion.

PREMISE
I will state that Calvinism asserts that man is dead in sin, and because he is dead in sin, he can not hear the voice of God or respond to it. He must be GIVEN repentance and only then can he hear the gospel. This is a correct short simple statement of Total Depravity.

CONCLUSION
I will then rebut this argument, that death in Ephesians 2:2 does not mean annihilation but separation. Being spiritually dead does not mean that you can not hear what God is say. As an example, I would use Adam in Genesis 3:9 where he not only heard the voice of God, but also responded to him.

The typical Calvinist response is "that's just stupid, you have no understanding, you need to study the Bible, that argument is fallacious, and you are erecting a straw man argument and are misrepresenting what Calvinists teach".

Sound about right so far!

What you all have done, is taken the conclusion and then asserted that we believe OUR CONCLUSION is YOUR PREMISE. You, P4T and others have consistently amalgamated what we believe are the RESULTS of what Calvinism teaches with the premise of what we are refuting. So it is the Calvinists on here that have repeatedly misunderstood our arguments, not the other way around.

 

[preacher4truth]

Let me give you an example of what I mean when I say you disagree with my conclusion.

PREMISE
I will state that Calvinism asserts that man is dead in sin, and because he is dead in sin, he can not hear the voice of God or respond to it. He must be GIVEN repentance and only then can he hear the gospel. This is a correct short simple statement of Total Depravity.

CONCLUSION
I will then rebut this argument, that death in Ephesians 2:2 does not mean annihilation but separation. Being spiritually dead does not mean that you can not hear what God is say. As an example, I would use Adam in Genesis 3:9 where he not only heard the voice of God, but also responded to him.

The typical Calvinist response is "that's just stupid, you have no understanding, you need to study the Bible, that argument is fallacious, and you are erecting a straw man argument and are misrepresenting what Calvinists teach".

Sound about right so far!

What you all have done, is taken the conclusion and then asserted that we believe OUR CONCLUSION is YOUR PREMISE. You, P4T and others have consistently amalgamated what we believe are the RESULTS of what Calvinism teaches with the premise of what we are refuting. So it is the Calvinists on here that have repeatedly misunderstood our arguments, not the other way around.

You probably need to just stop talking and go do some soul-searching.

You have no credibility to be addressing anyone on here about the Word when you blaspheme, slander and deceitfully make pretense to have written out your own beliefs on Calvinism when in fact you plagiarized it.

Respect is earned and you're a long way from earning it due to your character.

 

[DrJamesAch]

I hope God can shame him in his heart and he repents. I'd be fearful to go unchastised over this.

You're correct, he did casually blaspheme. I attempted to be kind, and called it borderline, but it in fact is blasphemy.

- Blessings

It was a parody of your ridiculous belief that God predetermines EVERYTHING. Your view makes God the author of sin, evil, and heresy, so according to Calvinism, if what you thought I said was heresy, it was predetermined by God to be so according to YOUR belief system.

Yet, God determines all things except when it makes you face the reality of having to admit there are things that sound preposterous. That's where Calvinists demonstrate such enormous dishonesty because they refuse to concede what the conclusions of their beliefs imply. The only Calvinist I know that had the guts to admit it was A.W. Pink.

 

[DrJamesAch]

You probably need to just stop talking and go do some soul-searching.

You have no credibility to be addressing anyone on here about the Word when you blaspheme, slander and deceitfully make pretense to have written out your own beliefs on Calvinism when in fact you plagiarized it.

Respect is earned and you're a long way from earning it due to your character.

What a farse. YOu can't make up your mind how you want to spin this. One hand, I misrepresent Calvinist beliefs, but when I post the beliefs directly from a Calvinist source where you have the opportunity to hold me to explaining myself compared to a Calvinist document that's right there, now it's plagiarism LOL So either way I go, it would not matter. If I don't cut and paste something, it's not acceptable because I am misrepresenting Calvinism ,cut and paste is OK for Calvinists, but not for Non Calvinists. Yet if I do cut and paste something, now it's pretentious. You are a real joke fella and your fake piety is beyond contemptuous.

 

[Iconoclast]

Actually it's more along the lines of a ventriloquist and his dummy . HOS is a bonafide troll and anyone he begins to be 'chummy' with should become automatically suspect also.

I do not think it is correct to speak about Hos as being a "troll". I think that is not at all accurate.
Hos has spoken up for Ach because Hos has been doing much of the heavy lifting for the non cal p.o.v..he thought he saw in ACH an ally to help him against us evil cals.
Hos is well read, perhaps more than most here.I think he is sincere...most times...although he can post things that are borderline sociopathic.
I am not being a HOS cheerleader here,having been occasionally attacked by him .I think him working among prison inmates sometimes it takes him awhile to switch gears back to normal society.
Hos often has good imput,and some solid questions. I believe God will in time grant a change in his understandings that have been clouded by some of his reading of Molina,and others he submits himself to.
The fact that quite a few times he has at least been honest and objective enough to correct other non-cals who have gone off the rails ...is the kind of thing that when the Spirit opens up a verse or two will change him around.
Do not link him with ACH who is digging himself deeper on each post.

 

[Herald]

DJA, you may not care, but I will not be able to engage you on any other topic until you publicly repent, retract, and apologize for your dishonesty. I pray God grants you a tender heart and that you recognize your sin.

 

[DrJamesAch]

And speaking of plagiarism, what's that at the bottom of your signature:

Whether God has decreed all things that ever come to pass or not, all that own the being of a God, own that He knows all things beforehand. Now, it is self-evident that if He knows all things beforehand, He either doth approve of them or doth not approve of them; that is, He either is willing they should be, or He is not willing they should be. But to will that they should be is to decree them. - Jonathan Edwards.

Is that your statement, is it a Bible verse....Nah, it's the typical man worship concept where the mantras of men are more important than the word of God.
Do you know how many creeds, synods, Westminster Confessions, Belgium Confessions, etc an independent fundamental Baptist church has? ZERO. I nor any one in my church have to have a synod to figure out what the truth is. I don't need an acrostic to live by. If I had to live by acrostics, it would be BIBLE not TULIP. Man made man worshipping doctrines of MEN that never separated from the Whore of Babylon.

 

[Iconoclast]

Ach

Let me give you an example of what I mean when I say you disagree with my conclusion.

PREMISE
I will state that Calvinism asserts that man is dead in sin, and because he is dead in sin, he can not hear the voice of God or respond to it. He must be GIVEN repentance and only then can he hear the gospel. This is a correct short simple statement of Total Depravity.

CONCLUSION
I will then rebut this argument, that death in Ephesians 2:2 does not mean annihilation but separation. Being spiritually dead does not mean that you can not hear what God is say. As an example, I would use Adam in Genesis 3:9 where he not only heard the voice of God, but also responded to him.

The typical Calvinist response is "that's just stupid, you have no understanding, you need to study the Bible, that argument is fallacious, and you are erecting a straw man argument and are misrepresenting what Calvinists teach".

Sound about right so far!

No....the cal believes that a depraved man.....can be religious, speak about God,the bible......however not savingly....because of sins effects on his mind, heart, emotions