I can find you a few million of them. Walk into a catholic church any Sunday (or Saturday). </font>[/QUOTE]Most of them are striving for religion. Some of them (only God knows) may be elect and are striving for grace. If they are elect, they will infallibly find it by God's providence.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Where do you line up?
- Thread starter Calvibaptist
- Start date
Webdog, I won't quote that long post to save space, but man that's a lot of posting in a short time. Anyway, I agree with every word of scripture you quoted, although I don't particularly like the version that was used.
Those that seek the Lord will find Him. I believe that. Now believe this:
John 10:26 "...But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep,"
John 12:38 "...who hath believed our report?..."
John 12:39 Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again, 40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with [their] eyes, nor understand with [their] heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.
J.D.
God's Unloving Robot/Puppet (as called by posters on this forum)
Those that seek the Lord will find Him. I believe that. Now believe this:
John 10:26 "...But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep,"
John 12:38 "...who hath believed our report?..."
John 12:39 Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again, 40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with [their] eyes, nor understand with [their] heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.
J.D.
God's Unloving Robot/Puppet (as called by posters on this forum)
This is mixing quotes in order to build a straw man.
God uses different ways to illustrate man's condition.
Does this mean that we're just spiritually sick, and not spiritually dead in our sins? No. Ephesians makes it clear we're DEAD in our sins. It's just that the illustration Jesus is trying to make wouldn't make sense any other way.
Jesus is making the point that, just as you wouldn't go to a doctor unless you realize you're sick, you won't know you need Jesus unless you realize you are dead in your sins. He can't make that point by saying, "It is not the living who need a doctor, but the dead." That wouldn't make sense. HOWEVER, when the death analogy fits the lesson, He does use it.
Have your fun, but you're just revealing your ignorance of how the Bible teaches lessons using different analogies.
Calvibaptist
New Member
Does anyone find it interesting that the modern Baptist church is more in line with the Roman Catholic theology of Erasmus than they are with the historic Protestant theology of Luther?
I, since moving towards Calvinism, was shocked when I discovered that I used to believe just as Roman Catholics do. Do you think this is just another attempt to "blur the lines" between Evangelicalism and Catholicism?
I, since moving towards Calvinism, was shocked when I discovered that I used to believe just as Roman Catholics do. Do you think this is just another attempt to "blur the lines" between Evangelicalism and Catholicism?
This is mixing quotes in order to build a straw man.
God uses different ways to illustrate man's condition.
Does this mean that we're just spiritually sick, and not spiritually dead in our sins? No. Ephesians makes it clear we're DEAD in our sins. It's just that the illustration Jesus is trying to make wouldn't make sense any other way.
Jesus is making the point that, just as you wouldn't go to a doctor unless you realize you're sick, you won't know you need Jesus unless you realize you are dead in your sins. He can't make that point by saying, "It is not the living who need a doctor, but the dead." That wouldn't make sense. HOWEVER, when the death analogy fits the lesson, He does use it.
Have your fun, but you're just revealing your ignorance of how the Bible teaches lessons using different analogies. </font>[/QUOTE]"mixing quotes to build a strawman?!? If they are "mixed", you did the mixing. Why? Maybe to build your OWN strawman? This is what you posted:
Calvibaptist
New Member
I also find it interesting that the modern idea that a command from God assumes the ability in the one commanded to obey it is straight from the mouth of Pelagius. He, in his argument against Augustine, said, "If I ought, I can."
I find it very interesting, but not surprising. Left unchecked, I think all "religion" eventually works its way back to a man-centered philosophy. That's why we needed the reformation in the first place.
I find it especially amusing when some free willers try to cast Calvinism as a return to Roman Catholicism because Calvin agreed with some of Augustine's beliefs. This is an INCREDIBLE stretch, I know, since Augustine isn't the same thing as the Catholic Church -- but that's the connection they make.
That's terribly ironic, isn't it, considering their views are much more aligned with Catholicism than the views of the original protestants?
Bingo again. I didn't realize that Pelagius actually said it that clearly until recently, but I've known for a while that he believed it. That's why I call the so-called Arminians here "free willers" instead of Arminians. They are actually much closer to being Pelagians than Arminians. I'd use the term semi-Pelagians, but a lot of folks don't know what that means.
</font>[/QUOTE]I don't recall posting that, but that isn't mixing quotes. It's quoting scripture.
Here's an example of mixing quotes out of context in order to make the text look silly:
"Ye believe not because you are not my sheep, who I have blinded and hardened, you sick people who are dead in your sins."
For better examples of mixing up quotes to make something sound silly, look at your own posts.
One problem, Me4, none of the verses you quoted with no exegesis state that man strives for GRACE. They all show man working to earn heaven. I would be interested in knowing exactly what you like about this paragraph. And if you are going to throw verses around, it helps if you detail what you think they actually mean.Originally posted by Calvibaptist:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Me4Him:
You can start the conversation by admitting you were wrong.
Andy, I agree with Erasmus' last statement as well (that's the only part). </font>[/QUOTE]If I can use a quote from another post.
One sin makes you a sinner/condemned, but does that mean you lose the ability to know good/evil, absolutely not.
there is none good, literally means there is none without sin, save God, Calvin's doctrine of total depravity is totally wrong when it claims we lose the ability to chose good/evil as sinners.
The wages of sin is "death", Faith won't pay those wages, only death, so calvins claim that having faith is a works of man that shares in the "Glory" of salvation, only shows an ignorance of the requirements for salvation, "DEATH".
"While we were yet sinners", puts all of us the same category, Jesus die for all sins, so what makes the difference in saved/lost???
"BELIEF/UNBELIEF", of the person is the deciding factor of whom God will/won't save.
Joh 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
We all begin as sinners/condemned, and "FAITH" in Jesus is the only way out of condemnation,
how many sins did Jesus die for, "Whole world", might be saved???
And why are those condemned, because Jesus didn't die for their sin, NO, he died for all sins, they're condemned for rejecting Jesus/salvation and remaining sinners in spite of Jesus dying for their sins,
Jesus. being "God in the flesh", it's actually "GOD" they reject, and are condemned, but in order to reject, the option of accepting the "FREE GIFT" must also be offered.
As I've said, calvanist look at it "backwards", Sinner are not comdemned for being sinners but remaining sinners in spite of God/Jesus's effort to save the whole world,
Calvin's god looks for blood, the God of the scriptures looks for "LOVE".
</font>[/QUOTE]I don't recall posting that, but that isn't mixing quotes. It's quoting scripture.
Here's an example of mixing quotes out of context in order to make the text look silly:
"Ye believe not because you are not my sheep, who I have blinded and hardened, you sick people who are dead in your sins."
For better examples of mixing up quotes to make something sound silly, look at your own posts. </font>[/QUOTE]My apologies, it was J.D.'s quote.
If we intrepret scripture as calvin, then we have to believe that Jesus really didn't offer to take Israel under his wings, or invite them the "marriage supper".
Mt 22:3 And sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding:
and they would not come.
4 Again, he sent forth other servants, saying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready:
come unto the marriage.
5 But they made light of it, and went their ways, one to his farm, another to his merchandise:
Joh 1:11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
What does the scripture say was the reason they were "hardened"???
"their will"
"God's will"??
He didn't invite them to the marriage supper. That's called a "parable". </font>[/QUOTE]Lu 8:10 And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.
If you don't understand the parables, you don't understand the bible.
which I already knew.
With all the respect and kindness I can muster, I must ask this question: Do you even know the God of the bible or His son, Jesus Christ? You are so filled with hate and anger I wonder if you know the peace of God. </font>[/QUOTE]Did you ever run into a "bully" growing up, know why they were a bully, low self esteem, so they wanted the "GLORY" of everyone knowing how big/bad/important they were,
Calvinist say God's Glory is manifested by those he predestined to hell, and "WE" get to stand there and watch him cast them into hell, and God is somehow glorified by it,
there's not much difference in a bully forcing us to watch him beat up a helpless person, then glorifying the bully for doing it,
Like the bully, Calvin's god need to hurt/condemn people to have his glory,
But the GOD of the scriptures seeks to heal/saves to have his glory.
"ALL" doesn't mean "ALL" and "WORLD" doesn't mean "WHOLE WORLD",
Calvins's god doesn't "LOVE".."ALL",.."WHOLE WORLD",..or seeks to save "ALL".
the God of the scriptures "LOVES",.."ALL",.."whole world",..seeks to save "ALL".
That's the difference between the god described in calvin's doctrine and the God described in the scripture.
Let me give you a little clue about doctrines,
Satan gets his glory from the destruction of souls,
God get his glory from the salvation (saving) of souls,
To whomever get the glory from the doctrine, is who's doctrine it belongs.
Calvibaptist
New Member
Come on people, show a little civility. It is ridiculous that we can't stay away from ad hominem attacks and name calling from both sides of the tulip tree.
The idea behind this thread was fairly simple. A quote supporting free-will was posted and you were asked if you agree with it. A follow-up question was asked - "What, specifically, do you agree/disagree with." This quote was made before Calvin (or Arminius) was even born, so it should have nothing to do with Calvinism-Arminianism. There should be no attacks against "calvins god" or anything else for that matter.
It is more a question of whether your view of what the Bible teaches is more in line with Erasmus and the Roman Catholic Church or Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation. Deal with the quote or things directly related to it.
Take the quote line by line and determine whether you agree with it or not. If you wish to list verses in support of your view, please do the scholarly thing and exegete them to show specifically how they support your view. Simply listing 15 verses after you make a statement does no one any good.
But, please, stop calling each other heretics and satanists. It really is quite ridiculous.
The idea behind this thread was fairly simple. A quote supporting free-will was posted and you were asked if you agree with it. A follow-up question was asked - "What, specifically, do you agree/disagree with." This quote was made before Calvin (or Arminius) was even born, so it should have nothing to do with Calvinism-Arminianism. There should be no attacks against "calvins god" or anything else for that matter.
It is more a question of whether your view of what the Bible teaches is more in line with Erasmus and the Roman Catholic Church or Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation. Deal with the quote or things directly related to it.
Take the quote line by line and determine whether you agree with it or not. If you wish to list verses in support of your view, please do the scholarly thing and exegete them to show specifically how they support your view. Simply listing 15 verses after you make a statement does no one any good.
But, please, stop calling each other heretics and satanists. It really is quite ridiculous.