1. 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!

Why bring up hardening?

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by William C, May 5, 2003.

  1. Yelsew

    Yelsew Guest

    This very much reminds me of Deism, the idea that God set everything in motion but now He is hands off, that's it now up to man to make the best of his situation in the crapshoot of life that he is dealt.

    How sad that anyone who claims to be a Christian would have such a view of Almighty God. [​IMG]

    It is truly sad when a person who claims to be a Christian promotes an obviously man-centered religion. [​IMG]
    </font>[/QUOTE]Explain to me please why God would need religion!
    How about the animals, birds, and fish?

    If not for Man, there would be no religion! Man is what religion is all about.

    You obviously are of the opinion that religion is not about man, but about God. Human history says otherwise. The written word of God is about man and his understanding of God, and God's redemption plan for man.

    God does not need religion, man does. Because God is not visible to man religion is man's attempts to understand and make sense of God whom he cannot see. Our vision is no better today than it has been since Adam, hence religion flourishes.

    It is for that reason that God manifested Himself as human for a time so that man could come to understand and to believe unto redemption and salvation.

    Religion is about man. God is the object of man's religion.
     
  2. Hardsheller

    Hardsheller Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    3,817
    Likes Received:
    2
    Religion is Man's reaching out toward a (any)god.
    Christianity is God's reaching out to Man.

    Religion seeks to define god.
    Christianity defines Man.

    Religion seeks to find god.
    Christianity finds Man.
     
  3. rufus

    rufus New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2003
    Messages:
    730
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  4. Yelsew

    Yelsew Guest

    Thanks Hardsheller, Your explanation shows that religion is all about man, which KenH does not seem to understand.
     
  5. William C

    William C New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2003
    Messages:
    1,562
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ken we have these little Graemlins for a reason. Didn't you notice my little smiling face that waved ( [​IMG] ) That was to show that my tone was meant to be heard as up, not down. I was just trying to raze you about your off topic oneliners. If that's your style, fine, but its my style to call you on it if my argument goes unanswered. :D
     
  6. William C

    William C New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2003
    Messages:
    1,562
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, God's sovereign will is always accomplished. His permissive will may or may not be.
     
  7. TheTravelingMinstrel

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2002
    Messages:
    119
    Likes Received:
    0
    You are infering from the fact that man's turn to Christ causes salvation that man's rejection of Christ causes his damnation.

    Not true, man's condemnation is based upon his sinfullness. We know that man is sinful from birth, so we can conclude that man is condemnded from birth and is not condemned with he rejects Christ. So whether a man rejects Christ or never hears about him make no different, because he has already been condemned.
     
  8. TheTravelingMinstrel

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2002
    Messages:
    119
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, God's sovereign will is always accomplished. His permissive will may or may not be. [/QB][/QUOTE]

    I have heard this argument made before, yet have seen no real support for this.
    You may through words like 'permissive will' around all you wish, but if you have no scriptural backing, then these words are ultimatly worthless.
     
  9. William C

    William C New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2003
    Messages:
    1,562
    Likes Received:
    0
    Read John Piper's article that Archangel posted earlier. The majority of Calvinists (Piper, Packer, Sproul, MacArthur etc) including Pastor Larry on this board, believe in the two wills of God.

    Think about it.

    Example of permissive will
    God desires that men choose not to lie, right? Do men lie? Yes. Is this God's decree that men don't lie? Of course not, otherwise they couldn't lie. This is an expression of God pleasure or desire (called "permissive will" by many theologians).

    Example of sovereign will
    God desired that man not be alone so he created woman. God's desire was acted upon by a sovereign decree which met that desire. The sovereign will is that which God does regardless of anyone elses intervention or response.

    His permissive will is what God desires to see but allows his creation to intervene and respond by their own volition which determines the outcome. This in no way lessons God's sovereignity because it was his choice to allow his creation to respond, that was apart of His Sovereign plan.
     
  10. William C

    William C New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2003
    Messages:
    1,562
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hey Calvinists!

    The major objection that I introduced in this thread has still gone uncontested scripturally.

    I'm still waiting for one of you to actually address the arguements of my first post. There is one major reaction that most every person has when they hear Calvinistic dogma for the first time and you guys don't have any biblical response to that objection?


    Hmmmm. Revealing. ;)
     
  11. KenH

    KenH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    43,035
    Likes Received:
    1,641
    Faith:
    Baptist
    From John Gill's commentary:

    Romans 9:19

    Ver. 19. Thou wilt say then unto me,.... That is, thou wilt object to me; for this is another objection of the adversary, against the doctrine the apostle was advancing: and it is an objection of a mere natural man, of one given up to a reprobate mind, of an insolent hardened sinner; it discovers the enmity of the carnal mind to God; if is one of the high things that exalts itself against the knowledge of him; it is with a witness a stretching out of the hand against God, and strengthening a man's self against the Almighty; it is a running upon him, even upon the thick bosses of his bucklers; it carries in it the marks of ill nature, surliness, and rudeness, to the last degree:

    why doth he yet find fault? The objector does not think fit to name the name of "God", or "the Lord", but calls him "he"; and a considerable emphasis lies upon the word "yet": what as if he should say, is he not content with the injustice he has already exercised, in passing by some, when he chose others; in leaving them to themselves, and hardening their hearts against him, and to go on in their own ways, which must unavoidably end in destruction; but after all this, is angry with them, finds fault with them, blames, accuses, and condemns them, for that which they cannot help; nay, for that which he himself wills? this is downright cruelty and tyranny. The objector seems to have a particular regard to the case of Pharaoh, the apostle had instanced in, when after God had declared that he had raised him up for this very purpose, to make known his power, and show forth his glory in all the world, still finds fault with him and says, "as yet exaltest thou thyself against my people, that thou wilt not let them go?" Ex 9:17; and yet he himself had hardened his heart, and continued to harden his heart, that he might not let them go as yet; and when he had let them go, hardened his heart again to pursue after them, when he drowned him and his host in the Red sea; all which in this objection, is represented as unparalleled cruelty and unmercifulness; though it is not restrained to this particular case, but is designed to be applied to all other hardened persons; and to expose the unreasonableness of the divine proceedings, in hardening men at his pleasure; and then blaming them for acting as hardened ones, when he himself has made them so, and wills they should act in this manner:

    for who hath resisted his will? This is said in support of the former, and means not God's will of command, which is always resisted more or less, by wicked men and devils; but his will of purpose, his counsels and decrees, which stand firm and sure, and can never be resisted, so as to be frustrated and made void. This the objector takes up, and improves against God; that since he hardens whom he will, and there is no resisting his will, the fault then can never lie in them who are hardened, and who act as such, but in God; and therefore it must be unreasonable in him to be angry with, blame, accuse, and condemn persons for being and doing that, which he himself wills them to be and do. Let the disputers of this world, the reasoners of the present age, come and see their own faces, and read the whole strength of their objections, in this wicked man's; and from whence we may be assured, that since the objections are the same, the doctrine must be the same that is objected to: and this we gain however by it, that the doctrines of particular and personal election and reprobation, were the doctrines of the apostle; since against no other, with any face, or under any pretence, could such an objection be formed: next follows the apostle's answer.


    Romans 9:20

    Ver. 20. Nay, but O man, who art thou that repliest against God?.... Or "answerest again to God": some have been so weak and wicked as to suggest, that the apostle met with an objection he could not answer, or give a fair solution of, and therefore takes the method he does: but when the several things returned in answer by the apostle are considered, it will appear that he has taken the wisest method to silence such an audacious objector, and that he abundantly clears God from the charge of cruelty and unmercifulness. And he answers "first", by putting the insolent creature in mind of what he was; "nay, but O man, who art thou?" &c. Thou art man, and not God; a creature, and not the Creator; and must not expect that he, thy Creator, will give an account of his matters to thee, or a reason why he does, this or the other thing. Thou art but a man, who in his best estate was vanity, being mutable; thou art a fallen sinful creature, and obnoxious to the wrath and displeasure of God for thy sins, and darest thou to open thy mouth against him? thou art a poor, foolish, and ignorant man, born like a wild ass's colt, without understanding, and wilt thou take upon thee to confront, direct, or counsel the Most High, or tell him what is fitting to be done, or not done? "next" the apostle answers, by pointing out his folly and madness, in replying to God. To speak to God in behalf of a man's self at the throne of grace, in the most submissive manner, for any mercy or favour wanted, is an high privilege, and it is a wonderful condescension in God to admit of; and when a man, a good man takes upon him to plead with God on the behalf of others, of a wicked people, a sinful nation, he ought to set before him the example and conduct of Abraham, who in a like case acknowledged himself to be but dust and ashes, and more than once entreated, that the Lord would not be angry at his importunity; but for a man to answer again to God, which a servant ought not to do to his master, to litigate a point with God, to dispute a matter with him, is the highest instance of arrogance and impudence: "woe unto him that striveth with his Maker, let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth", Isa 45:9: with their equals, with men like themselves, but let no man dare to "contend with God"; if he should, "he cannot answer him one of a thousand", Job 9:3; for "he is wise in heart", in forming all his counsels, purposes, and decrees; "and mighty in strength", to execute them; "who hath hardened himself against him and hath prospered?" Job 9:4. Another way the apostle takes in answering the objection is, by showing the absurdity of a creature's wrangling with God about his make, and the circumstances in which he is made:

    shall the thing formed, say unto him that formed it, why hast thou made me thus? reference is had to Isa 45:9; Now as it would be a most absurd thing for the clay, was it capable of speaking, to say to the fashioner of it, why dost thou put me into such or such a shape and form? or for any piece of workmanship to say to the maker of it, he has no hands, no head, no judgment and skill; or for a child to say to its parents, what begettest thou, or what hast thou brought forth? so absurd and unreasonable is it, for any to say to God, why hast thou appointed me to such and such ends and purposes, and has brought me into being in such a manner, and under such circumstances? There is a story in the Talmud {n}, which may be pertinently produced here;

    "it happened to R. Eleazar ben Simeon, of Migdal Gedur, that he went from his master's house, and he was riding on an ass, and travelling by the sea side, and as he rejoiced exceedingly, and his heart was lifted up because he had learnt much of the law, there was joined to him a certain man that was very much deformed, and says to him, peace be upon thee Rabbi; but he did not return the salutation to him, but says to him "Raca", how deformed is that man! perhaps all thy townsmen are as deformed as thee; he replied to him, I do not know, but go and say, ynavev
    Nmwal, "to the workman that made me", how ugly is this vessel thou hast made, when he knew in himself that he has sinned; upon this the Rabbi dismounted his ass, and fell down before him, and said unto him, I entreat of thee forgive me; he said unto him, I cannot forgive thee, till thou goest "to the workman that made me", and say, how ugly is this vessel which thou hast made.''

    {n} T. Bab. Taanith, fol. 20. 2. Massechet Derech Eretz, c. 4. fol. 18. 1.


    Romans 9:21

    Ver. 21. Hath not the potter power over the clay,.... By the power the potter has over the clay, to shape it in what form he pleases, and out of it to make what vessels he pleases, and for what purposes he thinks fit, which will be most to his own advantage, the apostle expresses the sovereign and unlimited powder which God has over his creatures; the passages referred to, are Isa 64:8, in which God is represented as the potter, and men as clay in his hands; now if the potter has such power over the clay which he did not make, only has made a purchase of, or has it in his possession, much more has God a power, who has created the clay, to appoint out of it persons to different uses and purposes, for his own glory, as he sees fit; even

    of the same lump, to make one vessel to honour, and another to dishonour. The apostle seems to design hereby, to point out to us the object of predestination to be man, as yet not made, but as lying in the mere mass of creatureship, signified by the unformed clay, before put into any shape; and is an allusion to the first creation of man, out of the clay, or dust of the earth, Ge 2:7; for such a consideration of man best agrees with the clay, lump, or mass, not yet formed, than as already made, and much less as fallen and corrupted: for if men, in predestination, were considered in the corrupt mass, or as fallen creatures, they could not be so well said to be made out of it, both to honour and dishonour; but rather since they were all dishonourable, that some were left in that dishonour, and others removed from it unto honour: besides, if this is not the case, God must create man without an end, which is contrary to the principle of reason and wisdom; the end is the cause, for which a thing is what it is; and it is a known rule, that what is first in intention, is last in execution, and "vice versa": the end is first fixed, and then the means; for God to create man, and then to fix the end of his creation, is to do what no wise potter would do, first make his pots, and then think of the end of making them, and the use they are to be put unto. To make one vessel to honour, and another to dishonour, is for God to appoint creatures, which are to be made out of the same mass and lump, for his own glory; which end, his own glory, he determines to bring about by different means, as these following: with respect to the vessels of honour, whom he appoints for his glory, he determines to create them; to suffer them to fall into sin, whereby they become polluted and guilty; to raise and recover them, by the obedience, sufferings, and death of his Son; to regenerate, renew, and sanctify them, by his Spirit and grace, and to bring them to eternal happiness; and hereby compass the aforesaid end, his own glory, the glorifying of his grace and mercy, in a way consistent with justice and holiness: with respect to the vessels of dishonour, whom he also appoints for the glorifying of himself, he determines to create them out of the same lump; to suffer them to fall into sin; to leave them in their sins, in the pollution and guilt of them, and to condemn them for them; and hereby gain his ultimate end, his own glory, glorifying the perfections of his power, justice, and holiness, without the least blemish to his goodness and mercy: now if a potter has power, for his own advantage and secular interest, to make out of the same clay what vessels he pleases; much more has God a power, out of the same mass and lump of creatureship, to appoint creatures he determines to make to his own glory; which he brings about by different methods, consistent with the perfections of his nature.


    Romans 9:22

    Ver. 22. What if God, willing to show his wrath,.... The apostle proceeds to clear God from any charge of cruelty and unmercifulness, by observing his conduct in time, both towards those he passes by, and towards those he chooses; for in this and the following verse, nothing is said relating to any act of God before time, everything of that kind being considered already. In this verse, the apostle considers the conduct of God towards the vessels of dishonour; and let it be observed, that these are called

    vessels of wrath fitted for destruction; they are said to be vessels, and so no longer considered in the clay, in the mass and heap of creatureship, but as creatures formed and made, and brought into being; and so to be used as instruments in God's hands, to subserve his ends and purposes, and therefore called "vessels"; and not only so, but "vessels of wrath", fallen sinful creatures, and so deserving of the wrath of God, and objects of his vindictive justice, in whom he may righteously display his wrath and vengeance: hence they may be so called, being as vessels filled with his wrath; as such who are the instruments and executioners of his wrath are called, in Isa 13:5, wmez ylk, "vessels of his wrath"; and in
    Jer 50:25; where the Septuagint use the same phrase as here: and they are moreover said to be "fitted for destruction", as Haman is said to be by the Jews {o}; whom they affirm to be the same with Memucan, and ask why is his name called Memucan? and answer,
    twnerwpl Nkwmv, "because he was fitted for punishment": so these are said to be "fitted for destruction", that is, eternal damnation; not by God, for this does not respect God's act of ordination to punishment; but by Satan, the god of this world, that blinds them, who works effectually in them, and leads them captive at his will; and by themselves, by their own wickedness, hardness of heart, and impenitence, do they treasure up to themselves wrath, against the day of wrath, so that their destruction is of themselves: a phrase somewhat like this is used in Ps 31:12, where the Psalmist, under some dismal apprehensions of himself, says, that he was like dba ylk, "a perishing vessel", or "a vessel of perdition"; the Septuagint render it, skeuov apolwlov, "a lost vessel". Now what is the method of the divine conduct towards such persons? he

    endures [them] with much longsuffering; as he did the old world, before he destroyed it; and as he did Pharaoh, before he cut him off: God not only supports such persons in their beings, amidst all their impieties and iniquities, but follows and fills them with his providential goodness, insomuch that many of them have more than heart can wish; nay, to many he affords the outward means of grace, which they slight and despise; externally calls them, but they refuse, loving darkness rather than light, and therefore are inexcusable: now if after all this patience, indulgence, and forbearance, when he could in justice have sent them to hell long ago, he is "willing to show his wrath"; his displicency at sin and sinners, his vindictive justice, his righteous vengeance:

    and to make his power known; what it is he can do, by the utter destruction and damnation of such persons; what man in his senses can ever find fault with such a procedure, or charge it with tyranny, cruelty, and unmercifulness?

    {o} T. Bab. Megilia, fol. 12. 2.


    Romans 9:23

    Ver. 23. And that he might make known the riches of his glory,.... That is, his glorious riches, the perfections of his nature, his love, grace, and mercy, his wisdom, power, faithfulness, justice, and holiness; all which are most evidently displayed in the salvation of his people, here called

    vessels of mercy, which he hath afore prepared unto glory. They are said to be vessels, and so considered as creatures, made and brought into being; "vessels of mercy", and so fallen creatures, and by sin become miserable, for only such are objects of mercy: they are not called so, because deserving of mercy more than others, they are in no wise better than others, and are by nature children of wrath, even as others; but because God of his infinite goodness fills them with his mercy, displays it in them, in the redemption of them by his Son, in the regeneration of them by his Spirit, and in their eternal salvation: and these are by him "afore prepared unto glory"; to everlasting happiness, which he has chosen them to before time, and calls them to in time; to this glory he does not take them, until he has prepared them for it; which act of preparation does not regard the eternal predestination of them to eternal life, but an act of his grace towards them in time; and which lies in putting upon them the righteousness of his Son, and in putting his grace in them; or in other words, in justifying them by the imputation and application of the righteousness of his Son unto them, and by the regeneration, renovation, and sanctification of their hearts, by his Spirit. Now what if God willing to make known his glorious perfections, by displaying his mercy to such sinners, and by preparing them for heaven in a way consistent with his holiness and justice, what can any man that has the exercise of his reason object to this? The whole of his conduct is free from blame and censure; the vessels of wrath he shows his wrath upon, are such as fit themselves for destruction, and whom he endures with much longsuffering and patience, and therefore he cannot be chargeable with cruelty; the vessels of mercy he brings to glory, none of them are taken thither, until they are prepared for it, in a way of righteousness and holiness, and therefore he cannot be charged with acting contrary to the perfections of his nature.


    Romans 9:24

    Ver. 24. Even us whom he hath called,.... From election the apostle proceeds to calling, the fruit and evidence of it, taking the same method he did in Ro 8:30, with a view to treat of the call of the Gentiles, of which he afterwards gives proof from prophecy; whence it appears to be according to divine predestination, upon which prophecy is founded; for God foretells that such a thing will be, because he has foreordained it shall be. These words are explanative of the former, and show who the vessels of mercy are; they are such whom God calls by his grace. Election may be known by calling, as the cause by its effect, and that without an extraordinary revelation. This may as well be known, as man's adoption, justification, and the forgiveness of his sins; for as all the chosen are, and shall be called in time, so all that are truly called by the grace of God, are manifestly, and to a demonstration, the chosen vessels of salvation: if a man is satisfied of his calling, he ought to be equally so of his election, the one being demonstrable by the other; and for such an one to doubt of it, is his sin and crime. Moreover, the above phrase, "afore prepared for glory", is here further explained; to be afore prepared for glory, is no other than to be called, sanctified, and justified, in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God; for this is the saints' preparation for glory, before they come to it; and hereby the means are expressed, even sanctification of the Spirit, and belief of the truth, through which God appoints his people unto salvation: now this calling is to be understood, not of a call to any office, as of Aaron to the priesthood, of Saul to the kingdom, of the disciples of Christ to apostleship, or of ministers to the work of the ministry; for persons may be called to the highest office in church and state, as Judas to: apostleship, and Pharaoh to the throne of Egypt, and yet have no share in electing grace: nor of a call by the external ministry of the word, which is often slighted, despised, and of none effect; in this sense many are called, who are not chosen: but of a call that is by the powerful, efficacious, and irresistible grace of God; a call that is internal, that reaches the heart, and not the ear only: a special one that is peculiar to God's elect, is by special grace, and is to special blessings, as both grace and glory; it is an high, heavenly, and holy calling, and is without repentance; between which and glorification, as between it and eternal election, there is a close and an inseparable connection. The objects of this grace follow,

    not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles; not all the Jews, nor all the Gentiles, but some of each; as all are not chosen, all are not redeemed, only some out of every kindred, tongue, nation, and people; so not all, but some only are called by grace: and this is not peculiar to the Jews, it reaches to the Gentiles also; and under the present dispensation, to the far greater number of them.
     
  12. Frogman

    Frogman <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2001
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    S2307--θέλημα
    thelēma
    thel'-ay-mah
    From the prolonged form of G2309; a determination (properly the thing), that is, (actively) choice (specifically purpose, decree; abstractly volition) or (passively) inclination: - desire, pleasure, will.


    S2309--θέλω, ἐθέλω
    thelō ethelō
    thel'-o, eth-el'-o
    Either the first or the second form may be used. In certain tenses θελέω theleō thel-eh'-o (and ἐθέλέω etheleō eth-el-eh'-o) are used, which are otherwise obsolete; apparently strengthened from the alternate form of G138; to determine (as an active voice option from subjective impulse; whereas G1014 properly denotes rather a passive voice acquiescence in objective considerations), that is, choose or prefer (literally or figuratively); by implication to wish, that is, be inclined to (sometimes adverbially gladly); impersonally for the future tense, to be about to; by Hebraism to delight in: - desire, be disposed (forward), intend, list, love, mean, please, have rather, (be) will (have, -ling, -ling [ly]).

    The first "thelema" is said of God's will; the second "thelo" is said of man's will.

    See the difference? In this difference I believe lays the hardening. Does man incline toward God's will? At times yes he would, is he able to do that which is God's will, no, man does not have the strength to sustain the fulfillment of the law apart from the Grace that is in Christ Jesus. Does this mean that man will not at times have in certain areas a love for the law of God, no, not all men are adulterous, not all are drunkards, not all hate, etc. But to not be adulterous while being a drunkard is this yet the ability of man to deliver himself, what has the chaste man gained? To not be a drunkard but to be adulterous, then what has the sober man gained. Is it the will of God that man obey his law? Yes.

    Col. 1.9: For this cause we also, since the day we heard it, do not cease to pray for you, and to desire that ye might be filled with the knowledge of his will (S2307) in all wisdom and spiritual understanding;

    Here the 'will' of God is the same as that given of the will of God in John 7.17 above, 'thelo' what is said in connection with this? '...that ye might be filled with the knowledge of his will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding.'
    The lost has no knowledge but the knowledge of this world, no wisdom but the wisdom of the world of and of spiritual understanding if so limited only to that which is his own spirit concerning his goals, and pursuit of acheivement in this world.

    God Bless.

    Bro. Dallas [​IMG]
     
  13. KenH

    KenH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    43,035
    Likes Received:
    1,641
    Faith:
    Baptist
    At least one thing has now been accomplished in this thread - you can't say that anymore, Bill. [​IMG]
     
  14. rufus

    rufus New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2003
    Messages:
    730
    Likes Received:
    0
    First, argumentum ad numeram: appeal to numbers, is an irrelevant factor in this discussion. You said that "almost every believer" has an objection againist Calvinism. Please provide empirical support for that statement, good sir.

    Second, petitio principii: begging the question and concealing evidence pertinent to the issue is logically fallacious. God gave the first pair the ability to respond to Him. They choose against God and sin entered the world. Man became a holistically depraved being in rebellion against God. Total depravity ought not to be objected to merely because it is
    distasteful to the minds of a few theologians, for many others down through the centuries have certainly found inductively the doctrine in the Bible.

    Third, presenting a straw man of Calvinism does not help your case, friend. Indeed, in himself, depraved man does not have the ability to choose God for salvation; but, the drawing and illuminating power of the Holy Spirit working through the gospel message empowers men to decide for Christ. If I'm not mistaken, Arminians believe that, too.

    I've already addressed Romans 9-11 and stressed how Arminianism falls apart in light of Paul's type of meaning in the whole letter of Romans.

    rufus [​IMG]
     
  15. William C

    William C New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2003
    Messages:
    1,562
    Likes Received:
    0
    At least one thing has now been accomplished in this thread - you can't say that anymore, Bill. [​IMG] </font>[/QUOTE]Ken you still haven't said anything. You just cut and paste really long quotes from Calvinistic authors. Anyone can cut and paste to sand bag the discussion. Can you pick out the paragraph or phrase that actually addresses my argument and expound on that for us. Or if you'd rather I'll go copy a few hundred words from one of my commentators and paste it here for you. Shoot, we don't even need to discuss this ourselves lets just use big long quotes from others to speak for us.
    :D
     
  16. William C

    William C New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2003
    Messages:
    1,562
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, its not irrelivant to this discussion. If unbelievers didn't like a doctrine of scripture that is understandable and even expected. But for believers to abhore a doctrine at least should bring that doctrine in the light of scrutinty, especially when most believers find it offensive. Even Calvinist's that I have read and those that I know speak of being "dragged into believing these doctrines" and "fighting against them". Its common knowledge that most evangelical Christians are not Calvinistic and I thought it was fairly common knowledge that even most Calvinists abhore these teaching when first approached with them. Do you deny that?

    I hid nothing. I simply am calling you all out on the carpet for using Romans 9 as a proof text to answer objections to Total Depravity when it is clear that Paul is addessing hardening, which by Calvinists own admission are two very different things. You all have yet to deal with this.

    A few? Read your history sir.

    Yes, we do. But notice that you said, "through the gospel message." The power is in the word. Who gave the inspired gospel message to the apostles? The Holy Spirit. Who enters and guides and even compels the preacher to preach? The Holy Spirit. The power is in the message, not in some additional, secret, inward, irresistable calling that Calvinists make up. The gospel is the call! And its made by the Holy Spirit through men. There is not another secret one. If there were the first one would be meaningless and void of power, but the gospel is the power of God unto salvation, not the irresistable inward calling as Calvinists presume.

    Ha! Not so. You said nothing with any substance that even related to our discussion. In fact, if I remeber correctly everything you said about the book we agreed with. You never showed how those things you brought up proved that Paul wasn't addressing the issue of Hardening nor did you show how Total depravity related. You had no substance.

    Keep trying.
    [​IMG]
     
  17. KenH

    KenH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    43,035
    Likes Received:
    1,641
    Faith:
    Baptist
    You just don't won't to admit, Bill, that you have no answer to refute the Biblical truth that the authors I quote present. [​IMG]

    I guess you must consider yourself the equal of the best and brightest on your side, Bill. That's says a lot about where your side stands. [​IMG]
     
  18. romanbear

    romanbear New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2002
    Messages:
    530
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi Ken ;
    Changed your name again I see. All of Calvinism has been completely refuted but you seem to blind to see the truth.
    Romanbear
     
  19. KenH

    KenH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    43,035
    Likes Received:
    1,641
    Faith:
    Baptist
    1)Yes, about a week ago. Although Ken is still my name. Brother Bill told me I shouldn't be calling myself a Spurgeonite because of some point that I don't now recall. So I was simply following his order, so blame him for the name change. [​IMG]

    2) [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] Have you thought about taking your comedy routine on the road, romanbear? [​IMG]

    3)Fortunately, God is my judge and not you, romanbear. :D
     
  20. William C

    William C New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2003
    Messages:
    1,562
    Likes Received:
    0
    You just don't won't to admit, Bill, that you have no answer to refute the Biblical truth that the authors I quote present. [​IMG]
    </font>[/QUOTE]Actually, I didn't take the time to read it all. I scanned it looking for the part that was addressing my argument. I never found it, so I asked you to point it out to me which you have not done.

    Revealing.
    ;)
     
Loading...