Why is it worth fighting over?

[Rippon]

I believe God loves everyone and desires to save everyone.

Your view is that of a god who has unfulfilled desires. That's not the Almighty God of the Bible.

You believe God passes by billions of persons he could save and lets them perish

He has His reasons which He has not imparted to you. God is under no obligation to anyone. Everything He does is righteous. For anyone to question such a basic premise is foolhardy.

because it pleases him and brings him glory!

He derives no pleasure in the death of the wicked.

You are confusing reprobation with the Lord's sovereign,discriminating, elective grace.

 

[Winman]

Your view is that of a god who has unfulfilled desires. That's not the Almighty God of the Bible.

You mean like Matthew 23:37?

Mat 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

Yes, that is my God.

He has His reasons which He has not imparted to you. God is under no obligation to anyone. Everything He does is righteous. For anyone to question such a basic premise is foolhardy.

Oh, the ol' Romans 9:20 cop out!

Rom 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?

Very convenient line of scripture no doubt. :thumbsup:

He derives no pleasure in the death of the wicked.

You are confusing reprobation with the Lord's sovereign,discriminating, elective grace.

According to the Westminster Confession of Faith God passes by persons and lets them perish because it pleased him.

VII. The rest of mankind God was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of His own will, whereby He extends or withholds mercy, as He pleases, for the glory of His sovereign power over His creatures, to pass by; and to ordain them to dishonor and wrath for their sin, to the praise of His glorious justice.[17]

Oh, yes, it also glorifies him to ordain these unfortunate souls to dishonor and wrath.

Nice guy.

 

[Reformed]

I am quite new to this board and not very familiar with the ins and outs, but my initial observation is that much of the "discussion" on here contains much more venom than brotherly love.

You are correct. It is shame that vitriol has become part of the vernacular. Thankfully I have taken measures to reduce being exposed to it. Still, there are some very thoughtful people on both sides of the debate that make participating worthwhile.

 

[Yeshua1]

You mean like Matthew 23:37?

Mat 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

Yes, that is my God.




Oh, the ol' Romans 9:20 cop out!

Rom 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?

Very convenient line of scripture no doubt. :thumbsup:


According to the Westminster Confession of Faith God passes by persons and lets them perish because it pleased him.



Oh, yes, it also glorifies him to ordain these unfortunate souls to dishonor and wrath.

Nice guy.

IF the Lord decides to bypass sinners on the whole, and to provide salvation unto those whom he desires to save, who are you to querstions his motives/ways?

God has every right to just allow ALL sinners go off to eternal hell, correct?

 

[Winman]

IF the Lord decides to bypass sinners on the whole, and to provide salvation unto those whom he desires to save, who are you to querstions his motives/ways?

God has every right to just allow ALL sinners go off to eternal hell, correct?

No he doesn't. Not if he has obligated himself to save persons who believe. God MUST keep his promises.

Nowhere does the Bible teach that God passes by people and lets them go to hell. The Bible teaches that God is not willing that any man should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

2 Pet 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

2 Peter 3:9 doesn't even make sense if Calvinism and Irresistible Grace are true. Why would God have to be longsuffering toward the elect? If Calvinism is true, God can regenerate any elect person any time he chooses, there is no need to be patient and longsuffering with anyone.

This alone makes it clear Calvinism is error. It is nonsensical when compared to scripture.

 

[The Archangel]

No he doesn't. Not if he has obligated himself to save persons who believe. God MUST keep his promises.

Nowhere does the Bible teach that God passes by people and lets them go to hell. The Bible teaches that God is not willing that any man should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

2 Pet 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

2 Peter 3:9 doesn't even make sense if Calvinism and Irresistible Grace are true. Why would God have to be longsuffering toward the elect? If Calvinism is true, God can regenerate any elect person any time he chooses, there is no need to be patient and longsuffering with anyone.

This alone makes it clear Calvinism is error. It is nonsensical when compared to scripture.

In 2 Peter 3:9, to whom do the following words refer: "Any" and "All?"

The Archangel

 

[Iconoclast]

:thumbs:

The Bible teaches that God is not willing that any man should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

never says that at all,,,,,,

2 Peter 3:9 doesn't even make sense if Calvinism and Irresistible Grace are true. Why would God have to be longsuffering toward the elect? If Calvinism is true, God can regenerate any elect person any time he chooses, there is no need to be patient and longsuffering with anyone.

some of the elect are not born yet

This alone makes it clear Calvinism is error. It is nonsensical when compared to scripture.

the only nonsense here is your out of context posts:thumbs:

 

[steaver]

Dr. D. James Kennedy was a Reformed Presbyterian preacher. His church subscribed to the Westminster Confession of Faith. From the Bible, he preached on the theological truths of TULIP many times to his congregation, and it was from Dr. Kennedy that the evangelism program Evangelism Explosion was launched.

I watched his TV telecast for years, I never heard anything about TULIP's Election. I didn't know he was a Calvinist, obviously because I never heard him say anything Calvinistic. Which gives me another example of a Calvinist who preaches (preached) like an Non-Cal.

 

[steaver]

I dont fully agree. The true Calvinist believes that the non-elect can not have a desire to be saved. Anyone who wants to can accept Christ because only the "elect" can "want to."

That's a sticking point.

The Non-Cal believes the Spirit must draw the sinner to belief in Christ, without this working of the Holy Spirit none could be saved. The Truth convicts ALL, but not ALL will deny themselves and submit to God's path to eternal life.

The Cal believes the Spirit must regenerate first, forcing the person to belief in Christ.

Jesus' lamenting over Jerusalem supports the Non-Cal position and clearly shows the Cal position to be in error. God has no reason to lament over the lost if God is the One preventing them from having a choice.

 

[Winman]

I watched his TV telecast for years, I never heard anything about TULIP's Election. I didn't know he was a Calvinist, obviously because I never heard him say anything Calvinistic. Which gives me another example of a Calvinist who preaches (preached) like an Non-Cal.

The thing is, Dr. D. James Kennedy got saved when he heard the gospel on the radio. He heard the gospel from Donald Barnhouse, a Presbyterian preacher who had a radio show, but he heard an Arminan or non-Cal gospel message.

Well, he had my attention then. I got up and sat on the edge of the bed and with my chin hanging open I listened and I heard the Good News...that Salvation was not earned or merited or deserved, but it was a free gift. That it was purchased by the excruciating agony of Christ who paid an atoning death on the cross, suffered for our sins and purchased Eternal Life. And all of those that would repent of their sins and trust in Him would be freely forgiven and given a place in Heaven.

http://janaeusa.angelfire.com/Kennedy.html

You see, this Presbyterian preacher preached like an Arminian that day, he told his listeners, Jesus paid for OUR sins. No Calvinist that believes in Limited Atonement can honestly make this statement, because he believes Jesus only died for SOME sinners, and he has no idea who those sinners are. He cannot even know for a certainty that Jesus died for his sins if Limited Atonement is true.

So, Dr. Kennedy was saved when he heard an Arminian or non-Cal gospel message.

 

[steaver]

Just a note,

When reading these debates one needs to understand that there are many Non-Cals debating which are not Arminian.

The Arminian places "you" into the equation, and essentially it is "you" who must save yourself through a constant faith in Jesus Christ. There is no OSAS. They have no understanding of "born-again" or "regeneration".

The Calvinist misunderstands regeneration also, believing that God regenerates prior to any prayer from the person asking for the Holy Spirit's regeneration. Regeneration is clearly taught in scripture to be God's work AFTER the person accepts God's offer to be saved.

I am a Non-Cal who believes in OSAS through regeneration. Once God performs this miracle upon you there is no returning to an unregenerated state, and no one would desire to, for their heart has been changed permanently, a new creation.

 

[The Archangel]

I dont fully agree. The true Calvinist believes that the non-elect can not have a desire to be saved. Anyone who wants to can accept Christ because only the "elect" can "want to."

I don't think this is entirely accurate. It is possible, I think, to have a non-elect person desire to be saved. I think we see this in the Rich Young Ruler. But, the question is better asked: Do the non-elect want to be saved in their rebellion against God or do they want to be delivered from their rebellion against God?

I think many want to be saved even in their active rebellion against God. But, the elect will wish to be delivered from their rebellion against God. This is why the discussion of "conversion" is so important to a proper understanding of responding to Christ in repentance and faith.

I think this is, at least, implied in what Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 6:

[9] Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, [10] nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. [11] And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. (1 Corinthians 6:9-11 ESV)​

That's a sticking point.

The Non-Cal believes the Spirit must draw the sinner to belief in Christ, without this working of the Holy Spirit none could be saved. The Truth convicts ALL, but not ALL will deny themselves and submit to God's path to eternal life.

The Cal believes the Spirit must regenerate first, forcing the person to belief in Christ.

Jesus' lamenting over Jerusalem supports the Non-Cal position and clearly shows the Cal position to be in error. God has no reason to lament over the lost if God is the One preventing them from having a choice.

The word "force" is misplaced here. The Calvinist conception of salvation deals with God making the unwilling willing, not force.

Jesus' lament over Jerusalem cannot be seen outside the context of God's revelation in the Old Testament. As Paul said, they had the oracles of God. Israel had God's special revelation for quite a bit of time, yet, even though they knew about Him, they did not receive Christ because they did not know God.

Jesus' lament over Jerusalem is a reminder to all that we can know about God and still not want to know Him intimately.

Again, from the Old Testament, we must remember that those who sinned by creating and worshiping the Golden Calf are the very same people who had walked through the dry ground of the Red Sea.

Neither proves or disproves Calvinism in and of itself. What it does show, however, is that knowledge about God--even in the preaching of the Gospel--doesn't equate to salvation. For salvation to happen, there must be a super-natural application of knowledge (or fact) to a heart made willing to believe.

The Archangel

 

[Winman]

Not only was Dr. D. James Kennedy saved hearing an Arminian or non-Cal style gospel message, he also preached the same way. From that same article;

COOKSEY: Dr. Kennedy, I know there's someone special listening in one of the many parts of America that this interview is playing. And they've heard that testimony of how God met you at your point of need. Just like you put yourself in the position of the young man Dr. Barnhouse was addressing on his program, would you please share that same message that touched your heart? And would you just lead our listeners in an invitation prayer? Because with your own salvation story, you've already set it up. I know there are people out there who are saying, "That's me he's talking about." Yet, it's your own testimony. Would you just take a moment and lead someone into the Kingdom?

KENNEDY: I would be more than delighted to do so. And I do pray that the Spirit of God will be drawing from all over the area that hear your broadcast right now. So, Dear Friend, whoever you are...wherever you are. Whether you're in a nursing home...in a prison or a jail...and maybe you're home drunk. Maybe you're out of a job. Maybe your family has broken up. Maybe you're sick. Maybe you're dying...whatever your situation. Maybe you're like I was on top of the world with everything going your way...and no real problems. And then realize that "What shall it profit a man if he gain the whole world and lose his own soul?" And I would just ask you to ponder that question that was asked of me. "What right do you have to enter into God's Heaven?" Why should He let you in? You'll see there are only two answers to that. Either everyone in the world is trusting in himself...in the big "I". I do this. I do that. I do the other. Or else, you're trusting in the Cross...in the Atoning Death of Jesus Christ. If you've been trusting in yourself, you don't know what's going to happen to you when you die. You can't know. Because you'll never know that you're good enough for the simple reason that you're not. For all have sinned and come short of His Glory. But, God loves us not because of what we are, but in spite of what we are. Not because of what we've done, but in spite of what we've done. And because of what He's done for us upon that Cross. If you'd like to invite Him into your life to accept Him as Savior and Lord, I would urge you to bow your heart, your head and even your knee. And pray this prayer right now. "Lord Jesus, I realize now that what You endured upon that Cross was done for me. All of that pain...all of that agony...all of that anguish You experienced to pay for my sins...the sins that I deserved to pay for. Right now I ask You to come into my life. Wash me with Your Precious Blood and make me whiter than snow. I acknowledge my sin and my guilt and my unworthiness to stand before you. I repent of those sins. And I invite You to be my Savior and Lord. From this day forward, oh, Christ, I will trust in Your Cross and in that alone. I thank You for the Promised Gift of Eternal Life. And that Your Promise also is that I will never perish. For that I give You my praise now and will do so forever more. Amen."

So, Dr. Kennedy tells people that Jesus died "for us". This is good, this is the actual gospel that Paul preached in 1 Cor 15:3;

1 Cor 15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;

Dr. Kennedy preached a gospel message consistent with 1 Cor 15:3, but he did not preach a gospel message consistent with Calvinism. Calvinism cannot preach that Jesus died "for us" because Calvinism teaches that Jesus only died for some sinners, and no Calvinist knows who those sinners are. No Calvinist can look another person in the eye and tell them that Jesus died for them personally if they believe in Limited Atonement.

So, Dr. Kennedy got saved hearing an Arminian gospel, and he also preached an Arminian gospel.

He even preached the sinner's prayer. What a shock.

http://janaeusa.angelfire.com/Kennedy.html

 

[Winman]

Just a note,

When reading these debates one needs to understand that there are many Non-Cals debating which are not Arminian.

The Arminian places "you" into the equation, and essentially it is "you" who must save yourself through a constant faith in Jesus Christ. There is no OSAS. They have no understanding of "born-again" or "regeneration".

The Calvinist misunderstands regeneration also, believing that God regenerates prior to any prayer from the person asking for the Holy Spirit's regeneration. Regeneration is clearly taught in scripture to be God's work AFTER the person accepts God's offer to be saved.

I am a Non-Cal who believes in OSAS through regeneration. Once God performs this miracle upon you there is no returning to an unregenerated state, and no one would desire to, for their heart has been changed permanently, a new creation.

Correct, both Calvinists and Arminians must "persevere" to be saved. This is nothing but works salvation.

Non-Cals believe that the moment they trust Jesus they are born again and indwelt forever by the Holy Spirit. It is impossible that they can fall away in unbelief as their "seed" (the Holy Spirit) remains in them, and they cannot sin. (1 John 3:9)

 

[Revmitchell]

Correct, both Calvinists and Arminians must "persevere" to be saved. This is nothing but works salvation.

First, that is as evil a mischaracterization as is some of the cals work. It is only intended to be inflammatory and demeaning of a position other than your own.

Second, I hold to that position and I am not an arminian. You have no idea what in the world you are talking about on both counts. Let's try a little intellectual honesty here.

 

[convicted1]

I tell people all the time that Christ died for our sins.

The "our" is plural, and that refers to the sheep....

 

[Winman]

I tell people all the time that Christ died for our sins.

The "our" is plural, and that refers to the sheep....

Isn't that being a little deceptive Willis? Aren't you giving them an impression you know might not be true? Wouldn't that give the impression that Jesus died for them personally?

To be accurate, a Calvinist should tell people Jesus died for "some" people's sins.

To be accurate, a Calvinist should tell people Jesus died for his sheep. Then the person can ask you how they can know if they are one of God's fortunate sheep.

And then you can tell them you do not have a clue who is a sheep and who is not.

That should inspire tremendous faith, don't you think?

 

[steaver]

Isn't that being a little deceptive Willis? Aren't you giving them an impression you know might not be true? Wouldn't that give the impression that Jesus died for them personally?

To be accurate, a Calvinist should tell people Jesus died for "some" people's sins.

To be accurate, a Calvinist should tell people Jesus died for his sheep. Then the person can ask you how they can know if they are one of God's fortunate sheep.

And then you can tell them you do not have a clue who is a sheep and who is not.

That should inspire tremendous faith, don't you think?

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs: Come, let us reason together!

 

[convicted1]

Isn't that being a little deceptive Willis? Aren't you giving them an impression you know might not be true? Wouldn't that give the impression that Jesus died for them personally?

To be accurate, a Calvinist should tell people Jesus died for "some" people's sins.

To be accurate, a Calvinist should tell people Jesus died for his sheep. Then the person can ask you how they can know if they are one of God's fortunate sheep.

And then you can tell them you do not have a clue who is a sheep and who is not.

That should inspire tremendous faith, don't you think?

I tell it to'em like this...."If you want Jesus, you can have Him. But this 'want to' has to come from God". My pastor actually quotes that quite a bit, and he is most certainly NOT a calvinist.

We are to proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ to every creature, not that every creature will be saved, mind you, but rather, the sheep will hear that wonderful message and come....

 

[kyredneck]

I don't think this is entirely accurate. It is possible, I think, to have a non-elect person desire to be saved. I think we
see this in the Rich Young Ruler.....

So AA, did you have to sell all that you had and give it to the poor in order to get 'saved'?