To Those Who Hate Calvinism: What is Your BIG problem With it?

[Thousand Hills]

Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel unto all the elect even though they are going to be saved whether you preach to them or not.

How a Calvinist honestly fulfills the commission to win souls is a mystery which is probably why you never see any of them emphasize it and often even preach against it. The Calvinist waits for God to bring the elect to them which doesn't make sense when the Bible says "GO".

One of the biggest issues that Rome had with the Baptists is that they were aggressive soul winners. What a great way for John Calvin to help out his baby sprinkling mother church by creating a doctrine that discourages the spread of the gospel.

But hey, at least for the Calvinists that use the NIV that says to preach the gospel to all "creation", we know that the trees will be saved! Al Gore will be happy.

Dr. J, welcome to BB!:wavey: I post this not to convince you as I'm sure your mind is already made up, but for the benefit of those who might be on the fence like I once was.

http://www.reformedreader.org/e&c.htm

Calvinism and Evangelism do not have to be reconciled, they are already best of friends. If they seem to be at odds with one another, the problem is not with their relationship but our perception. When we see them in conflict it is because we have confused the nature of one or both with something else.

One of the greatest evangelists to ever set foot on American soil was George Whitefield. Read carefully the following quote and note his pleading with sinners.

"I offer you salvation this day; the door of mercy is not yet shut, there does yetremain a sacrifice for sin, for all that will accept of the Lord Jesus Christ. He will embrace you in the arms of his love. O turn to him, turn in a sense of your own unworthiness; tell him how polluted you are, how vile, and be not faithless, but believing. Why fear ye that the Lord Jesus Christ will not accept of you? Your sim will be no hindrance, your unworthiness no hindrance; if your own corrupt hearts do not keep you back nothing will hinder Christ from receiving of you. He loves to see poor sinners coming to him, he is pleased to see them lie at his feet pleading his promises; and if you thus come to Christ, he will not send you away without his Spirit; no, but will receive and bless you. O do not put a slight on infinite love - he only wants you to believe on him, that you might be saved. This, this is all the dear Saviour desires, to make you happy, that you may leave your sim, to sit down eternally with him at the marriage supper of the Lamb. Let me beseech you to come to Jesus Christ; I invite you all to come to him, and receive him as your Lord and Saviour; he is ready to receive you. I invite you to come to him, that you may find rest for your souls. He will rejoice and be glad. He calls you by his ministers; O come unto him - he is labouring to bring you back from sin and from Satan, unto himself: open the door of your hearts, and the King of glory shall enter in. My heart is full, it is quite full, and I must speak, or I shall burst. What, do you think your souls of no value? Do you esteem them as not worth saving? Are your pleasures worth more than your souls? Had you rather regard the diversions of this life, than the salvation of your souls? If so, you will never be partakers with him in glory; but if you come unto him, he will supply you with his grace here, and bring you to glory hereafter; and there you may sing praises and hallelujahs to the Lamb for ever. And may this be the happy end of all who hear me!"George Whitefield was a staunch Calvinist. There is one thing certain -Whitefield's Calvinism did not in any way dampen his holy zeal for the souls of men

.

Charles Haddon Spurgeon, that great soul-winner, once said, "We only use the term 'Calvinism' for shortness. That doctrine which is called 'Calvinism; did not spring from Calvin; we believe that it sprang from the great founder of all truth. Perhaps Calvin himself derived it mainly from the writings of Augustine. Augustine obtained his views, without doubt, through the Holy Spirit of God, from diligent study of the writings of Paul, and Paul received them from the Holy Ghost and from Jesus Christ, the great founder of the Christian Church. We use the term then, not because we impute an extraordinary importance to Calvin's having taught these doctrines. We would be just as willing to call them by any other name, if we could find one which would be better understood, and which on the whole would be as consistent with the fact." Spurgeon went on to say, "The old truths that Calvin preached, that Augustine preached, is the truth that I preach today, or else I would be false to my conscience and my God. I cannot shape truth; I know of no such thing as paring off the rough edges of a doctrine. John Knox's gospel is my gospel. And that gospel which thundered through Scotland must thunder through England again."

 

[Tom Butler]

Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel unto all the elect even though they are going to be saved whether you preach to them or not.

How a Calvinist honestly fulfills the commission to win souls is a mystery which is probably why you never see any of them emphasize it and often even preach against it. The Calvinist waits for God to bring the elect to them which doesn't make sense when the Bible says "GO".

One of the biggest issues that Rome had with the Baptists is that they were aggressive soul winners. What a great way for John Calvin to help out his baby sprinkling mother church by creating a doctrine that discourages the spread of the gospel.

But hey, at least for the Calvinists that use the NIV that says to preach the gospel to all "creation", we know that the trees will be saved! Al Gore will be happy.

Dr. James, it will be helpful in the discussion to accurately define that which you're attacking, and avoid straw men.

First, you misrepresent Calvinism by equating it with hyper-Calvinism. It is hyper-Calvinists (Primitive Baptists or Hardshells) who hold that people can be saved independently of the gospel.

Every Calvinist I know holds to the truth of I Corinthians 1:21

For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.

To repeat, God says people by sending them the gospel. The foolishness of preaching.

Then you mis-characterize Calvinists by making a general statement that we all wait for God to bring the elect to them. I don't know of a single Calvinist who believes that. They take Jesus' commission seriously. Calvinists are perfectly willing to preach the gospel around the world, to exhort men and women to repent and trust Christ, and leave the results to the Lord.

If every Calvinist were as you described them, I'd be opposed to Calvinism as well.

 

[Mexdeaf]

Dr. James, it will be helpful in the discussion to accurately define that which you're attacking, and avoid straw men.

First, you misrepresent Calvinism by equating it with hyper-Calvinism. It is hyper-Calvinists (Primitive Baptists or Hardshells) who hold that people can be saved independently of the gospel.

Every Calvinist I know holds to the truth of I Corinthians 1:21


To repeat, God says people by sending them the gospel. The foolishness of preaching.

Then you mis-characterize Calvinists by making a general statement that we all wait for God to bring the elect to them. I don't know of a single Calvinist who believes that. They take Jesus' commission seriously. Calvinists are perfectly willing to preach the gospel around the world, to exhort men and women to repent and trust Christ, and leave the results to the Lord.

If every Calvinist were as you described them, I'd be opposed to Calvinism as well.

As would I. Most non-Calvinists do not understand the difference between Calvinism and hyper-Calvinism and that is why they are against it. The most ardent Calvinists are generally the most evangelical and mission-minded.

 

[Revmitchell]

Limited Atonement is hyper-Calvinism


http://www.challies.com/guest-blogg...essage-on-limited-atonement-by-dr-david-allen

 

[DrJamesAch]

Dr. James, it will be helpful in the discussion to accurately define that which you're attacking, and avoid straw men.

First, you misrepresent Calvinism by equating it with hyper-Calvinism. It is hyper-Calvinists (Primitive Baptists or Hardshells) who hold that people can be saved independently of the gospel.

Every Calvinist I know holds to the truth of I Corinthians 1:21


To repeat, God says people by sending them the gospel. The foolishness of preaching.

Then you mis-characterize Calvinists by making a general statement that we all wait for God to bring the elect to them. I don't know of a single Calvinist who believes that. They take Jesus' commission seriously. Calvinists are perfectly willing to preach the gospel around the world, to exhort men and women to repent and trust Christ, and leave the results to the Lord.

If every Calvinist were as you described them, I'd be opposed to Calvinism as well.

A Calvinist being willing to preach the gospel around the world and doing it are 2 different things. When was the last time a Calvinist knocked on a door or passed out a tract? If they preach the gospel, where is it done? IN THEIR CHURCH which means that they are waiting for people to come to church and hear it, instead of going to gather people (soul winning).

And just what does a Calvinist preach? Do they tell the sinner to repent? The Calvinist tells you that God will GRANT you repentance IF you are one of the elect, then you will repent. Repentance is never preached as an option to the sinner; of course not, because the person has no free will and repentance is a willful change of mind and turning to Christ.

I never said that a Calvinist doesn't believe in preaching. The "Great Commission" is not just preaching in your church, it includes the word GO, and I don't know of any Calvinistic group, hyper or not, that takes on confrontational, personal soul winning. Why would they? There's no way to determine who is elect and who isn't and according to admissions by Calvinists in this forum "Who God elects is up to God". Thus if it's up to God, then that admits that who the elect are (including yourself) can not be knowable, and that is an enormous discouragement to soul winning.

If a Calvinists truly believed in soul winning, then I would expect to see testimonies written by Calvinists of their experiences. How many times have you heard of a Calvinist that spoke about the gospel to someone that rejected it? Never, because that would be an embarrassment to Calvinism since grace is supposed to be irresistible, and why would God send someone to give the gospel to a person who was predestinated to reject it?

The issue of evangelism DOES provide a problem to Calvinists whether they admit it or not. Paul preached to many that rejected his preaching, but if God knew they were not elect, why lead him to preach in areas that he knew there would be rejection?

Furthermore, what of the third world communities that have not heard the gospel? Where does their predestination and election fit in? A Calvinist would be forced to conclude that God just did not love them and therefore there was no need to send any missionaries to them, but then why send missionaries to preach to people that God knew would reject the gospel as was the case with Paul?

Calvinism simply takes the rhetoric of a Catholic heretic (Augustine) and accepts them at face value without thinking through the biblical and logical fallacies one will find when boiling all 5 points to their lowest common denominators:

Total Depravity: man is dead in sin and must have God wake him up to even hear the voice of God, yet when Adam was dead in his sin he not only heard God but responded to him.

Unconditional Election: based on eternal decrees that not one Calvinist can point to that was created outside of eternity so they add "decrees" to the Bible where they are not found. Moreover, Calvinism ignores the dispensations of the Bible and confuses the elect of Israel with the elect of the church and the elect during the tribulation. A Calvinist can never have true assurance of salvation because whom God elects is totally up to him and therefore unknowable to any believer which forces the believer to rely on works to prove his election (Arminianism).

Limited Atonement: When John writes that God so loved the world, the Calvinist manages to write volumes over that simple statement to mean that God only meant the elect. Calvinists butcher passages like Romans 5:18-19 and claim that while the many in one half means only the elect are saved, that many in the SAME VERSE AND CONTEXT means that ALL means ALL when it comes to the description of sinners. Thus Calvinism does not consistently adhere to basic hermeneutic principles when attempting to prove that atonement is limited. If terms such as all only mean some, then that would also mean that not ALL are sinners forcing the Calvinist to butcher the Bible to fit their dogma.

Irresistible Grace: Covered this somewhat in my opening paragraphs, but again the Calvinist must do gymnastics to explain Jesus comments in Matthew 23 where Jesus plainly says that Israel rejected Christ because they WOULD NOT: a clear and unambiguous statement to the will of man to accept or reject the gospel. If it was irresistible, then Jesus wouldn't have wasted His time preaching to them, and Judas would have never chosen to leave. Calvinist logic says that John 6:37 proves that all that was given to Christ SHALL come to him, but ignore what Jesus says in John 17:12 where that same statement is used for the 12, and one of them was lost (Judas) which means that the Calvinist interpretation of who is chosen based on John 6:37 is erroneous.

Perseverance of the Saints: Although a believer that is saved can never lose their salvation, the Calvinist interpretation is that if one ever backslides then they were never saved in the first place (which emphasizes comments above about assurance under unconditional election). The only way that a Calvinist can determine they are elect is if they remain faithful because works are the only test to prove the validity of their election which demonstrates that Calvinism ultimately leads to Arminianism.

There is no confusion about the roots of Calvinism. Any cursory perusal of the Synod of Dort and Westminster Confession reveals that those who oppose Calvinism have rightly stated the Calvinist positions and correctly rejected it. The Calvinists simply reject the conclusions that have been reached by those who have honestly thought the system through, and therefore the Calvinist complains that the conclusions are wrong merely because that's not what they said in all the synods and confessions written about it. For example, the Calvinist argues "We never said that God doesn't love everyone", and those of us that oppose Calvinism never accused them of saying that: ITS THE LOGICAL CONCLUSION OF THE BELIEF SYSTEM, and it doesn't need to be specifically said in order for the honest reader to come to that conclusion.

And regarding "general statements" it's a forum where there often short comments. Sometimes general statements can be acceptable, and then sometimes a general comment is directed to a specific audience (even if that audience is one person who gets the generalization because the 2 of you are on the same page).

Even in this response, it is still somewhat of a general response, so I hope you don't hold it against that I failed to write a 100 page volume of my objections.

 

[Iconoclast]

DrJamesAch

Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel unto all the elect even though they are going to be saved whether you preach to them or not.

How a Calvinist honestly fulfills the commission to win souls is a mystery which is probably why you never see any of them emphasize it and often even preach against it. The Calvinist waits for God to bring the elect to them which doesn't make sense when the Bible says "GO".

Before you try and speak about the great commission,How about trying to respond to your mis-understanding of romans 5....which along with this foolish post,shows you do not have any understanding of the topic.

You posted and were answered...then you disappeared now offer this???

 

[Thousand Hills]

If a Calvinists truly believed in soul winning, then I would expect to see testimonies written by Calvinists of their experiences. How many times have you heard of a Calvinist that spoke about the gospel to someone that rejected it? Never, because that would be an embarrassment to Calvinism since grace is supposed to be irresistible, and why would God send someone to give the gospel to a person who was predestinated to reject it?

The issue of evangelism DOES provide a problem to Calvinists whether they admit it or not. Paul preached to many that rejected his preaching, but if God knew they were not elect, why lead him to preach in areas that he knew there would be rejection?

Furthermore, what of the third world communities that have not heard the gospel? Where does their predestination and election fit in? A Calvinist would be forced to conclude that God just did not love them and therefore there was no need to send any missionaries to them, but then why send missionaries to preach to people that God knew would reject the gospel as was the case with Paul?

As Tom said earlier, the "foolishness" of preaching will accomplish God's purpose.

Isaiah 55:8-11
8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord. 9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.10 For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

Isaiah 46:9-10
9 Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me,10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:

I doubt you looked at the link I posted earlier, if so you would of read this about that lazy bum, no zeal Calvinist Whitfield.

DID YOU KNOW?


Little-known or remarkable facts about George Whitefield (1714-1770)

Though little known today, GeorgeWhitefield was America's first celebrity. About 80 percent of all American colonists heard him preach at least once. Other than royalty, he was perhaps the only living person whose name would have been recognized by any colonial American.

America's Great Awakening was sparkedlargely by Whitefield's preaching tour 1739- 40. Though only 25 years old, the evangelist took America by storm. Whitefield's farewell sermon on Boston Common drew 23,000 people - more than Boston's entire population. It was probably the largest crowd that had ever gathered in America.

Whitefield preached at both Harvard and New Haven College(Yale). At Harvard it was reported that "The College is entirely changed. The students are full of God." Yet Harvard's leading professors later wrote a pamphlet denouncing Whitefield.

Brutal mobs sometimes attacked Whitefield and his followers, maiming people and stripping women naked. Whitefield received three letters with death threats, and once he was stoned until nearly dead.

Whitefield usually awoke at 4 A.M. before beginning to preach at 5 ~ 6 A.M. In one week he often preached a dozen times or more and spent 40 or 50 hours in the pulpit.

Whitefield pushed himself so hard and preached with such intensity that often afterward he had "a vast discharge from the stomach, usually with a considerable quantity of blood."

Whitefield became close friends with Benjamin Franklin. Franklin once estimated that Whitefield, without any amplification, could be heard by more than 30,000 people.

George Whitefield traveled seven times to America, more than a dozen times to Scotland, and to Ireland, Bermuda, Holland.

In his lifetime, Whitefield preached at least 18,000 times. He addressed perhaps 10,000,000 hearers.

Once at Moorfields, London in 1742, a trumpeter and drummer tried to drown out Whitefield's preaching. At the same time, a man tried to whip Whitefield, who said, "I was honoured with having a few stones, dirt, rotten eggs, and pieces of dead cats thrown at me. Yet he kept on preaching for 3 hours, and 350 people were "awakened".

 

[DrJamesAch]

DrJamesAch




Before you try and speak about the great commission,How about trying to respond to your mis-understanding of romans 5....which along with this foolish post,shows you do not have any understanding of the topic.

You posted and were answered...then you disappeared now offer this???

I clearly stated my position about Romans 5 in this thread, and elsewhere. I typically ignore people that offer pejorative responses that serve to attack a person's character and demean them simply because they do not agree with another person. Thus when I write something, and then you respond with comments like "all your foolish posts" "you don't know the Bible" "you are a liar" "you must have mis understood the Bible because *I* did not come to that conclusion and I am obviously far more superior in my knowledge of the Bible than you are": for future reference, those responses get ignored.

Now back to Romans 5:18

"Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life."

Now here is the obvious interpretation which Calvinism rejects: ALL MEN are sinners because of the offense of one, Adam. However, the free gift came by one man and is offered to ALL MEN.

The Calvinist argues that salvation is not offered to ALL MEN, but only to some, and those some are the elect. But if "ALL MEN" means only SOME MEN are offered the free gift, then it logically and grammatically follows that only SOME MEN were made sinners. The grammatical structure in English and Greek are the same for both halves of the verse, and it is grammatical and hermeneutic suicide to interpret the plain meaning of that verse any way other than the plain meaning of that verse.

 

[plain_n_simple]

I clearly stated my position about Romans 5 in this thread, and elsewhere. I typically ignore people that offer pejorative responses that serve to attack a person's character and demean them simply because they do not agree with another person. Thus when I write something, and then you respond with comments like "all your foolish posts" "you don't know the Bible" "you are a liar" "you must have mis understood the Bible because *I* did not come to that conclusion and I am obviously far more superior in my knowledge of the Bible than you are": for future reference, those responses get ignored.

Now back to Romans 5:18

"Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life."

Now here is the obvious interpretation which Calvinism rejects: ALL MEN are sinners because of the offense of one, Adam. However, the free gift came by one man and is offered to ALL MEN.

The Calvinist argues that salvation is not offered to ALL MEN, but only to some, and those some are the elect. But if "ALL MEN" means only SOME MEN are offered the free gift, then it logically and grammatically follows that only SOME MEN were made sinners. The grammatical structure in English and Greek are the same for both halves of the verse, and it is grammatical and hermeneutic suicide to interpret the plain meaning of that verse any way other than the plain meaning of that verse.

SMACK DOWN!:tongue3::laugh:

 

[Iconoclast]

Limited Atonement is hyper-Calvinism


http://www.challies.com/guest-blogg...essage-on-limited-atonement-by-dr-david-allen

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QGJsGw36Hk&list=PLA6856749491A71CA

 

[DrJamesAch]

As Tom said earlier, the "foolishness" of preaching will accomplish God's purpose.

Isaiah 55:8-11
8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord. 9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.10 For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

Isaiah 46:9-10
9 Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me,10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:

I doubt you looked at the link I posted earlier, if so you would of read this about that lazy bum, no zeal Calvinist Whitfield.

If I spent all my time reading every link someone sent to me or posted I would lose 50 pounds because I would not even have time to eat. I have spent several years reading about various doctrines and have studied Calvin, Whitefield extensively (I have several books containing Whitefields sermons, and Calvin's "Institutes").

I have also read George Whitefield's letter to John Calvin and Whitefield and Calvin were not on the same page when it came to Calvin's doctrines. Furthermore, the Reformation was still a fresh movement and not many-even popular preachers-had fully developed their doctrines as to whether or not they were consistent in repeating Calvin's theories.

It is to me erroneous to rely on preachers that were evangelistic hundreds of years ago, whom did not wholly agree with Calvin, and use them as examples of Calvinists today. Those Calvinists who have in the past had any modicum of evangelism (like D. James Kennedy) were totally inconsistent in their beliefs regarding Calvinism.

Those who are completely immersed in all 5 points of Calvinism, whether "Low" "Neo" "Hyper" "Reformed" "Moderate (Norman Geisler's invention) are not evangelistic in practice when they are consistent in their Calvinism.

Now regarding your quote of Isaiah, God's word not "returning void" does not mean that when it goes forth, everyone that hears it will be saved which is what that interpretation would imply (Universalism). When God speaks in the context of prophecy, it is going to be accomplished as He said it. When He says those who receive Christ as Saviour are saved, then He saves them and keeps His promise to keep them saved. When He says those who reject Him will spend an eternity in the lake of fire, then His word is true when a sinner rejects Christ. Isaiah 55 nor ch 46 have anything to do with an evangelist preaching the gospel and then the message either saving or condemning the listener.

 

[DrJamesAch]

Iconoclast



And one other thing to add, when you did respond, you cherry picked only certain points to rebut, left half of my arguments unanswered, and promised they would be included in "Part 2" and instead of there being a complete answer in a Part 2, was made sporadically over about 10 different comments and still did not address some of the primary arguments I made, not to mention that someone closed the thread.

 

[Iconoclast]

DrJamesAch

I clearly stated my position about Romans 5 in this thread, and elsewhere.

I typically ignore people that offer pejorative responses that serve to attack a person's character and demean them simply because they do not agree with another person. Thus when I write something, and then you respond with comments like "all your foolish posts" "you don't know the Bible" "you are a liar" "you must have mis understood the Bible because *I* did not come to that conclusion and I am obviously far more superior in my knowledge of the Bible than you are": for future reference, those responses get ignored.

Nice try, trying to avoid the answer...but you did not respond to this:

When Romans 5:18-19 is argued in the Calvinistic sense that only SOME were made righteous (the elect) then that means only SOME were under condemnation and judgment only came upon SOME unto that condemnation. You can't cherry pick the verse and say that many means all were sinners in the first half of the verse, and then say that many means only the elect in the last half of the verse

If you understand it biblically that is exactly what it says.....

ALL mankind was in Adam by physical birth

All in Christ started dead in Adam by physical birth....but By new birth, or rather being born from above they are In Christ..

Not all mankind are described as ......ALL In Christ

ALL In ADAM...does not equal ALL In Christ.......

if you deny this ...you are denying the basis of the gospel.

22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive

Now back to Romans 5:18

"Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life."

Now here is the obvious interpretation which Calvinism rejects: ALL MEN are sinners because of the offense of one, Adam. However, the free gift came by one man and is offered to ALL MEN.

The Calvinist argues that salvation is not offered to ALL MEN, but only to some, and those some are the elect. But if "ALL MEN" means only SOME MEN are offered the free gift, then it logically and grammatically follows that only SOME MEN were made sinners. The grammatical structure in English and Greek are the same for both halves of the verse, and it is grammatical and hermeneutic suicide to interpret the plain meaning of that verse any way other than the plain meaning of that verse.

No Calvinist says this.....The gospel is preached to all men everywhere.

Your failure to answer this is clear

 

[Iconoclast]

Iconoclast



And one other thing to add, when you did respond, you cherry picked only certain points to rebut, left half of my arguments unanswered, and promised they would be included in "Part 2" and instead of there being a complete answer in a Part 2, was made sporadically over about 10 different comments and still did not address some of the primary arguments I made, not to mention that someone closed the thread.

I answered your post with one lenghty post that because of a bad connection did not post....which post do you want responded to...which point do you think is valid.....to be honest..your last three posts here are horrible...do you really want to stand by what you just posted???

 

[DrJamesAch]

DrJamesAch

I clearly stated my position about Romans 5 in this thread, and elsewhere.


Nice try, trying to avoid the answer...but you did not respond to this:



If you understand it biblically that is exactly what it says.....

ALL mankind was in Adam by physical birth

All in Christ started dead in Adam by physical birth....but By new birth, or rather being born from above they are In Christ..

Not all mankind are described as ......ALL In Christ

ALL In ADAM...does not equal ALL In Christ.......

if you deny this ...you are denying the basis of the gospel.

22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive




No Calvinist says this.....The gospel is preached to all men everywhere.

Your failure to answer this is clear

It is odd how you can accuse me on not answering your question when I just did. Just because you don't like or agree with the answer does not mean it was not answered.

Your premise is that I did not "understand it Biblically". I wasn't aware that I was quoting from some other source than the Bible for my response, so if there's some other means of responding "Biblically" please enlighten me. But NO, that is NOT "exactly what it says" and I just spelled it out.

I never said that "all in Adam" EQUALS "all in Christ". I believe that the explanation I just gave above is clear and concise and accurate. Romans 5:18 says that ALL MEN were under condemnation, and then it says that the free gift came upon (came upon doesn't mean it saved them it means it was offered to them, "came upon" does not mean forced) ALL MEN.

You are fish tailing your argument by claiming that "Calvinist PREACH to ALL MEN", and again, that wasn't the argument. My contention about Romans 5 has nothing to do with whether Calvinists preach to all men, but rather their interpretation of all men being only applicable to the elect. And therefore if the usage by Calvinism in Romans 5:18 that makes ALL MEN into only the elect, then that same line of logic has to apply to the first half of the verse that says ALL MEN were sinners to mean that only SOME are sinners.

And again, any other way of interpreting that verse is simply adding something that is not there.

 

[Iconoclast]

18 So, then, as through one offence to all men [it is] to condemnation, so also through one declaration of `Righteous' [it is] to all men to justification of life;

19 for as through the disobedience of the one man, the many were constituted sinners: so also through the obedience of the one, shall the many be constituted righteous.

It does not say...offered...they are made, or constituted righteous...only the elect are...

I will give a more detailed answer tomorrow on your more lengthy post....but your response is ignoring the reality of Union with Christ...that is why I say it is not really a response.

And therefore if the usage by Calvinism in Romans 5:18 that makes ALL MEN into only the elect, then that same line of logic has to apply to the first half of the verse that says ALL MEN were sinners to mean that only SOME are sinners.

Logic has nothing to do with it.....

all men are physical descendants of dead Adam

not all men are spiritually alive In Christ. That is why it is only the elect...there is no other possibility.

I must sleep now...must work in a few hours....

 

[HeirofSalvation]

ALL mankind was in Adam by physical birth
All in Christ started dead in Adam by physical birth....but By new birth, or rather being born from above they are In Christ..
Not all mankind are described as ......ALL In Christ
ALL In ADAM...does not equal ALL In Christ.......
if you deny this ...you are denying the basis of the gospel.
22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive

You are misusing 1 Cor. 15:22. You are essentially using it to reinterpret what is being said in Romans 5:18. It is NOT talking about the same thing as Romans 5:18. You are equivocating between them. ALL of 1 Cor 15 is about physical resurrection. And it does indeed refer to ALL humans beings. All, everyone....sum toto.

Everyone experiences a physical resurrection: The question is whether you will experience the resurrection unto life or unto damnation.
Jhn 5:29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

What you are trying to do is imply that the All in Romans 5 is not Universal by equivocating it to the All of I Cor 15. That dog don't hunt. Because the "all" in 1 Cor 15 does indeed include everyone saved and damned. Possibly, if you were exegeting 1 Cor 15 instead of eisegeting Calvinism into it. That would have been plain as day to you.

Romans 5: All (sinned)-Universal
The (gift) of salvation-Universal
ICor 15: All (die) physically: Universal
All will be (ressurected): Universal again

 

[Iconoclast]

HeirofSalvation

You are misusing 1 Cor. 15:22. You are essentially using it to reinterpret what is being said in Romans 5:18. It is NOT talking about the same thing as Romans 5:18. You are equivocating between them. ALL of 1 Cor 15 is about physical resurrection. And it does indeed refer to ALL humans beings. All, everyone....sum toto.

Let's take a look....

You are essentially using it to reinterpret what is being said in Romans 5:18.

Paul wrote both passages by the Spirit,true.....so let's take a closer look-

]ALL[/B] of 1 Cor 15 is about physical resurrection. And it does indeed refer to ALL humans beings. All, everyone....sum toto.

The larger context is about the resurrection of Christ and it is extremely important which we would agree on. that is not what is at issue as it relates to Romans 5 however.....

Everyone experiences a physical resurrection: The question is whether you will experience the resurrection unto life or unto damnation.
Jhn 5:29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Okay.....agreed:thumbsup:

What you are trying to do is imply that the All in Romans 5 is not Universal by equivocating it to the All of I Cor 15. That dog don't hunt. Because the "all" in 1 Cor 15 does indeed include everyone saved and damned. Possibly, if you were exegeting 1 Cor 15 instead of eisegeting Calvinism into it. That would have been plain as day to you.

:laugh: here your anti-cal agenda causes you to have a temporary mental disconnect:laugh:

Hint and explanation:

While speaking of the truth are reality of the resurrection Paul himself{the great Calvinist that he was} see's how the truth of saving Union with Christ,and the Image Bearer doctrine.. Gen1:26-27
.teach federal headship!
If you read a bit further.....

The first man [Adam}was of the earth....earthy
The last Adam..Jesus was heavenly

As we have born the IMAGE of the earthly...we shall bear the image of the Heavenly....

So even in discussing the vital topic of the resurrection......the truth of romans 8:29-30 comes into play....

You are not going to try and make a case that universal salvation is in view for every human son of Adam......ARE YOU??????:laugh:

Every son of Adam......is not going to bear the Image of the heavenly...that is why there is an eternal separation at the White throne judgement.....

Romans 5: All (sinned)-Universal
The (gift) of salvation-Universal
ICor 15: All (die) physically: Universal
All will be (ressurected): Universal again

[/QUOTE]
you say:
1] All (sinned)-Universal.......yes all men ever born,all men around the world...yes

2]The (gift) of salvation-Universal

Wrong.....universal in that it goes worldwide......but not universal to everyman who ever lived...ALL men universally as in all men are saved is not the teaching of scripture.....

Even now we are told to preach the gospel to all men.....many men have lived and died without ever hearing the gospel.

3]All (die) physically: Universal......
all men die physically....and spiritually In Adam...The passage is speaking of Physical resurrection true......but for those who remain in Adam....they remain in the realm of death.That is why they go into what is called the SECOND DEATH.

4]All will be (ressurected): Universal again

Yes all men will be raised up, however you cannot ignore that the federal headship and image bearer doctrine that is taught here and Romans 5 is what determines the destiny of those raised up.

I cor 15:22 stands....

 

[Iconoclast]

..............

 

[Iconoclast]

Iconoclast



And one other thing to add, when you did respond, you cherry picked only certain points to rebut, left half of my arguments unanswered, and promised they would be included in "Part 2" and instead of there being a complete answer in a Part 2, was made sporadically over about 10 different comments and still did not address some of the primary arguments I made, not to mention that someone closed the thread.

You are not reading my responses evidently.I kept them separate to focus on each point.When a post gets too long many will not read it. I will list my responses in one place for you:

Quote:
yet if we were preordained to salvation that can not be resisted, does it make sense that God would preordain our belief systems as well?
Just step back for a second and it is obvious that this is the only thing that makes sense.God has an eternal plan and purpose that he has revealed and made known to the church both in His Son,and in the church through the word being revealed.
9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

10 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,

11 According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord:

12 In whom we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him.

Quote:
If assurance is synonymous with salvation, then that means that not only is salvation irresistible, but so is the assurance of salvation.
You are making major mistakes here.
Salvation is 100% objective and certain
Assurance while commanded... is subjective and conditional based on obeying lawful commands and performance of the things commanded. That is what God has linked together as far as overall sanctification.... however justification stands alone as it is based on Christs work, not yours and not mine.
You desire to remove the tension of these two truths and seek to make it a "works based " argument which you can defeat...because you cannot defeat post 39....
Quote:
But if assurance of salvation is irresistible
,

Once you have stated a false premise,and seek to take the discussion from a biblical one...to carnal reasoning and philosophy....you show that you cannot truthfully deal with what has already been offered. {assurance of salvation is not irresistible}


Quote:
then why would scripture tell us to "make your calling and election sure"? And what would be the point of examing oneselves whether ye be in the faith or not?
Again..quite simple...Justification is certain for all the elect.Those who profess to be elect are told to "give diligence to get the title deed of their salvation"....that is what peter means by listing those things that all are part of who real Christians are,and the fruit of the Spirit...he listed those things....again;
4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

5 And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge;

6 And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness;

7 And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity.

8 For if these things be in you, and abound,

All of these listed come in one after another in the life of Christians....as the Spirit works in a christian.....

Some of these can be counterfeited in the flesh for awhile, but scripture speaks of many times how these false works are manifest as of the flesh.

they do not work for it...they work showing that they have it....God working in them to will and to do of His good pleasure;
12 Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.

13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.

DrJa,
here is a main root error in your view as predicted...

Quote:
And if God is not electing based on His foreknowledge of who freely chooses to receive Christ, but because election demands salvation even against the will, then that means that not everyone are sinners, only some are sinners. When Romans 5:18-19 is argued in the Calvinistic sense that only SOME were made righteous (the elect) then that means only SOME were under condemnation and judgment only came upon SOME unto that condemnation. You can't cherry pick the verse and say that many means all were sinners in the first half of the verse, and then say that many means only the elect in the last half of the verse. Thus according to Calvinism, if terms like "many" and "all" really only mean some (the elect) then that means that "ALL have sinned" can only mean that some sinned, and I'd have to guess that the some that sinned would be only the non-elect, which makes the Calvinist non sinners.

You don't get saved and then believe, you get saved BY believing. Salvation comes after the belief, but Calvinism puts the cart before the horse.

If you do not get this correct you will never come to truth;
Quote:
When Romans 5:18-19 is argued in the Calvinistic sense that only SOME were made righteous (the elect) then that means only SOME were under condemnation and judgment only came upon SOME unto that condemnation. You can't cherry pick the verse and say that many means all were sinners in the first half of the verse, and then say that many means only the elect in the last half of the verse
If you understand it biblically that is exactly what it says.....

ALL mankind was in Adam by physical birth

All in Christ started dead in Adam by physical birth....but By new birth, or rather being born from above they are In Christ..

Not all mankind are described as ......ALL In Christ

ALL In ADAM...does not equal ALL In Christ.......

if you deny this ...you are denying the basis of the gospel.

Quote:
First to this argument, if total depravity implies that the sinner is so dead in trespasses that God has to wake him up just to hear Him, then explain how Adam was still able to not only hear God, but also respond to Him after eating the fruit. Genesis 3:9-10.

Romans 5 makes it clear that Adam was dead the moment he ate of the fruit, yet in his dead state, he could still hear God as well as respond to Him.

Furthermore, in Romans 1:19, Paul clearly shows that those dead in sin can still understand and perceive the nature of God and the truth of God.
Clearly this is another falsehood.Scripture describes spiritually dead persons as quite religious, but never in God's way.they make religion and idols that they like.

2 Wherefore should the heathen say, Where is now their God?
3 But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased.
4 Their idols are silver and gold, the work of men's hands.
5 They have mouths, but they speak not: eyes have they, but they see not:
6 They have ears, but they hear not: noses have they, but they smell not:
7 They have hands, but they handle not: feet have they, but they walk not: neither speak they through their throat.
8 They that make them are like unto them; so is every one that trusteth in them.

Actually, every major error begins with a misunderstanding about the nature of God.

Nope..it is a wrong view of sin and the fall, and then a wrong view of scripture itself....man has lost the capacity to rightly understand divine revelation ...correctly..it must be God given.

And you say "Jesus taught men are bound not free"? First of all, scripture and verse please.

Sure...right here:
You are attempting to argue as the jews in Jn 8 did..jesus told them what was what>>>.
31 Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;
32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
33 They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?
34 Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.
35 And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever.
36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

Secondly, Jesus said the opposite in Matthew 17:26 and John 8:32.

no...you look right at it and miss it???

Furthermore, in Matthew 23:37, Jesus made it clear that Jerusalem had rejected Christ of their own free will:

The text no where mentions "free will" at all scripture does not mention the false idea of a will that is "free'....your will is bound by your nature....romans 618-18 i posted before.
Men have a will that is bound and a slave to sin....they are servants....willing bondslaves to sin...they have self will which is sinful.
inMT 23 :37 IT DECLARES THEIR CONDITION....You WILL NOT.....come to me....no man comes to God unless drawn by the Father....that is why He wept over them ....he was willing, they were responsible but...would not come.
"how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!"