top 5 against calvinism?

Interesting. That's the first time I have heard a non-Calvinist claim forthrightly according to a salvation by free will interpretation that God didn't really mean it when He had written down that He desires for everyone to be saved. That's a new twist to me.

 

But you don't really interpret that to mean "all" as in every person. Otherwise you must either be a universalist or else you believe that God fails. I know you are not a universalist, therefore, you believe that God fails to save everyone that it is His desire to have mercy on. You believe that the Creator is checkmated by His own creature.

 

But you don't really interpret that to mean "all" as in every person. Otherwise you must either be a universalist or else you believe that God fails. I know you are not a universalist, therefore, you believe that God fails to save everyone that it is His desire to have mercy on. You believe that the Creator is checkmated by His own creature. </font>[/QUOTE]Wrong Ken, it says that he "may" have mercy on them. It doesn't say that he will as the universalists would like.

There is one condition; they must be righteous. God is a just God and he demand's righteousness from his creation. Am I propogating a salvation by works? NO. It's not a righteousness that comes by the works of the law but a righteousness that is attained through faith.

He has mercy on all who have faith.

 

I really think if you do an indepth study on the Hardening of Israel that you will see the obvious errors of the Calvinistic teaching of Total Depravity.

 

My arminian friends,

Why can't they hear his words?

Who are his sheep?

Who are those people?


Thanks
Steve

 

timothy 1969,

IMO, Arminianism and Calvinism are both false. From my observation, the problem lies in the premise that there are only "two sides to the coin". You're either one or the other. Many Calvinists especially adhere to this and seem to think any other view other than theirs is to be "Arminian". This simply isn't true.

Unfortunately, one extreme pushes the other further into its own extremity. So it's easy to get "stuck" into a certain way of thinking.

Just my 2 cents...

 

God does not have to save a certain number of sinners to fill His limited quota in Heaven, as some say His elect. Let me say quickly that He does know the exact number and names of His elect. He in His absolute sovereignty and omniscience knows everything.

The Archangel,

The question is has He operated within His perfection in securing salvation for every person? He has paid the atonement for every soul. [I John 2:2] His perfection requires reaching all who will trust in Him, [John 3:16] those who believe in Him by their own, human and personal faith. [I Peter 1:9] 'Receiving the end of YOU faith, even the salvation of your souls.'

We do not intrude or violate Christ's sovereignty when we say that He has limited Himself to only saving those who believe and trust in Him. [John 5:24] He cannot save every human being because His Divine plan has defined certain limitations and parameters. Human response and free will has been more than generously lavished on all of humankind. His love has called all prodigals back to His arms of grace. [John 3:16]

As far as Dr. Sproul is concerned I never met him but if I did we might well become fishing buddies. There is nothing personal against this man and I am sure much of his theology is orthodox, but His five points of Calvinism are a bandage and 'band-aid' theology.

 

1 Tim. 2:3 This is good, and it pleases God our Savior, 4 who wants everyone to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

I could stop there but I will go on:

I Peter 3:9: The Lord does not delay His promise, as some understand delay, but is patient with you, not wanting any to perish, but all to come to repentance.


First of all let me say I answered Tim in the way I did because if he is really searching I have faith in the Spirit of God to show him through a study of the word of God that he will be founded upon that truth and not ever can the adversary come against him and accuse him of believing a system that I or some other man has taught him. My faith is in God, Tim having been regenerated and been made a partaker of that heavenly calling possesses that Spirit, this is enough leadership for me, I am quite alright with letting God complete the work He has begun in Tim whereby he may be led into Scriptural truth.

Next, let me say the passages you cite above are speaking specifically to or about saved persons. Thus God is not slack and would have none of us to perish.

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

 

Thanks Brother Bill.


Steve

 

Dallas, I notice you didn't deal with the text in Matthew 23:37. Why?

Second, look at 1 Tim. 2 again:

First of all, then, I urge that petitions, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for everyone, 2 for kings and all those who are in authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity. 3 This is good, and it pleases God our Savior, 4 who wants everyone to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

So, you actually interpret this passage to mean that God want's everyone of you (the elect) to be saved. That is completely bogus and I think it is quite clear by this context why it is bogus. He begins by instructing the saints to pray for everyone and then he specifically points out that they should pray for kings and authority figures (many of whom we know were not believers). THEN he tells us why the saints should be praying for everyone. Because it is good and God our Savior wants everyone to be saved.

In other words, this passage tells the saints to pray for everyone, especially those in authority for God wants everyone to be saved. Yet, somehow you pull from this text that Paul is saying that God only wants a select few to be saved. ABSOLUTELY FREAKING AMAZING!

(by the way, I don't think most scholarly Calvinist even take this view, you may want to reconsider)

 

That's a rather wild interpretation you have there, Brother Bill. Actually, Brother Dallas' comments are spot on. I think it would help your understanding of how Calvinists have arrived at solid Biblical interpretation by reading a book by Dr. James White entitled, The Potter's Freedom. It is the best recent publication that deals with the faith once for all delivered to the saints of God. If it is God's will you could be quite blessed by reading it.

 

Ray,

Thank you for your response.

I'd like to deal with a few things if I might.

You Say: Let me say quickly that He does know the exact number and names of His elect. He in His absolute sovereignty and omniscience knows everything.

This is very encouraging!

You Say: He has paid the atonement for every soul.

This, of course, is dealing with particular and general redemption. And, I beleive that this is the very crux of the issue and all things Calvinistic.

If this is the case, that He has paid the atonement for every soul, then why is anyone sent to hell?

You Say: He cannot save every human being because His Divine plan has defined certain limitations and parameters.

This appears troubling to me. Where do we see God limiting Himself? And, why is it NOT a work for someone to beleive in God?

You Say: His love has called all prodigals back to His arms of grace.

Are we not all prodigals? Why then are not all saved? (again this may relate best to the atonement issue)

Again, I'm not being adversarial in a mean way. I am asking honest questions as they relate to your view of Scripture.

The most important thing is this: IF God paid atonement for all, then why are not all saved? Better still, IF God paid the atonement for all, how is it then that God requires a payment from the non-believers for their sin? In short, how does this NOT lead to universalism?

Blessings,

Archangel

 

Matt. 23:37
"O Jerusalem! Jerusalem that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, yet you were not willing!

This is dealing with the covenant people of God this people is Israel, Jerusalem is their capital and the city of the Temple, the center of worship. This people had rejected an offer from God of the covenant of Grace and had embarked upon the covenant of works, in this covenant, they reject the gathering of God, because as the Apostle Paul says of them in Rom. 10 they had set about to establish their own righteousness and not the righteousness of God.

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

 

Brother Dallas,

You offered a great summary of Matthew 23:37. Very good.

What you might have unwittingly neglected is the fact that the Lord wanted to spiritually save His people as noted in this verse and others, [John 1:11] but in His words, ' . . . ye would not!'
The Greek word for 'and ye WOULD NOT.' is {ethelsate} which is in the (aorist active indicative tense) expressing the idea that not only once did they reject Him, there was also and active and continued rebellion against His deep and all inclusive love for His now people, the Israelites. Also, the word 'would not' means from the Greek to 'wish not,' to 'not delight' or to 'not desire.'

While Calvinists persist in their dogma, God is still expressing the fact that He desired to save them all, but the depraved will and heart of the Israelites remained in tact. The Lord would not 'desire' their spiritual transformation if it would have been humanly impossible for them to respond to Him. This verse as explained by Calvinists is one of many more that casts an evil shadow against the very words coming from our Savior's lips.

Augustinian Calvinism portrays God as having no real feeling of concern for not only the residents of Jerusalem in Biblical days, but also toward all sinners except, of course, His elect.

 

You added "us" to Peter's text, and I think that is in error, unless your use of 'us' means "all mankind vs divine beings".

2 Peter 3 verse 9 from nine versions of the bible

 

You added "us" to Peter's text, and I think that is in error, unless your use of 'us' means "all mankind vs divine beings".

2 Peter 3 verse 9 from nine versions of the bible

</font>[/QUOTE]You have disproved yourself and defended my position here. It is the texts you provided after the KJV that changed the "us" not me. You fail to recognize Peter is talking to people who are in the church, "supposedly" regenerated people. It is to these people the "us-ward" is speaking, none other.

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

 

Paraphrase: "God is not slow regarding his promise, as some define slow, but is patiently waiting for his works to have their desired effect on all mankind that no one is lost, but that all can be saved." Peter is not speaking of "an elect", and yes he is speaking to Christians (not Calvinists nor Armenians) to inform them that the reason they have not yet seen the promise is that God's plan is still being carried out so that all mankind has the opportunity to be saved.

 

So then, Peter doesn't count himself as one of the Christians?

Read the scripture again. It is spoken to Christians, the context of the 'us-ward' is taken of Christians. It does not speak to any such weakness of God that His divine plan is being withheld in hopes that those yet unsaved might join in.

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas