Why do people blame calvinists ?

BNR32FAN said:

How does Romans 7 :7-8 refute Iranaeus?

Click to expand...

Oops! It doesn't.

That's Romans 8:7-8. However, I quoted the correct verse.

Thanks.

Since God, therefore, gave [to man] such mental power (magnanimitatem) man knew both the good of obedience and the evil of disobedience, that the eye of the mind, receiving experience of both, may with judgment make choice of the better things; and that he may never become indolent or neglectful of God's command; and learning by experience that it is an evil thing which deprives him of life,

Click to expand...

Clare73 said:

"No one can come to me unless the Father has enabled him." (John 6:65) -- all are not granted grace to come
"All that the Father gives me will come to me. (John 6:37) -- those granted grace do come, therefore those who do not come did not receive grace
"I give them eternal life and they shall not perish." (John 10:28) -- those granted grace to come cannot ever peris

Click to expand...

BNR32FAN said:

Not a single one of these verses says that God does not grant grace to all men.

Click to expand...

Nor does a single verse says, "God is sovereign."

But as the sovereignty of God is the necessary conclusion of many Scriptures, so
that "God does not grant grace to all men" is the necessary conclusion of John 6:37. . .think it through.

Dave L said:

Only after the new birth.

Click to expand...

Are we able to choose to be sinless after the new birth? (1 John 1:8-10)

RickReads said:

open minded could be considered fallacious I find true open mindedness hard to achieve.

Click to expand...

Is God open-minded?

I open my mind like I open my mouth, to close it on something solid.

Butch5 said:

I didn't say you weren't teachable. But, if you're believing the ism's it shows you haven't set aside all of you preconceptions. Someone who is teachable and open minded can be taught things that are wrong. Likewise they can draw incorrect conclusions.

That there is this constant back and forth between Calvinists and Arminians shows that both sides are wrong. Both sides have passages they think support their beliefs. However, both sides have passages they can't reconcile with their beliefs. So, it winds up being a matter of numbers. Which side can find the most passages that they believe support their side. That's not how to rightly divided the word. You know you're correct when "ALL" of the passages fit with what you believe.

Click to expand...

Nice general assumption which is not necessarily true.

Butch5 said:

That's the Holy Spirit. Scriptures says He's seated at the right hand of God. But, even apart from that people can't walk up to Jesus. He's not on earth. It's this kind of thing that leads people to these ism's. People talk about coming to Christ and what they mean is they became a believer. That's not what Jesus meant when He said no one could come to Him. People start reading the Bible like this and that's how we come to the ism's.

Click to expand...

Wrong.

So you don't believe in a spiritual fellowship with Christ in this life?

That's sad.

Butch5 said:

Really? Can you reconcile these passages?
The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool? (Matt. 22:44 KJV)
Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. (Matt. 26:64 KJV)
So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God. (Mk. 16:19 KJV)

Click to expand...

And the part that says I am seated with him in the heavenlies? (Ephesians 2:6)?

But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,

56 And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God. (Acts 7:55-56 KJV)

Please, reconcile these passages with the ones you posted. You see, you're proving my point. People just take passages they want and ignore the rest. If you're open minded you'll seek to reconcile them, if not you won't.

If you can't reconcile them all, you have something wrong.

Click to expand...

Okay, be my guest. . let's see what you call "reconciliation". . .I'm here. . .and I'm also there.

chad kincham said:

Imagine a man dangling from a cliff, who's going to fall to his death.
Just before he loses his grip, a man comes along and sees his plight, and reaches out a hand to save him.
The one in danger has to accept the offer of help.
He could turn it down. Maybe the rescuer is black, and the one ready to fall is racist and refuses the offered hand, or maybe he was committing suicide and wants to die - so he could refuse the saving hand.

Click to expand...

To claim that the man about to fall to his death decides to accept the offer from the saving hand, grasps that hand, and is saved from death, means that the man in peril saved himself, is ludicrous.
He obviously couldn’t save himself - nor would anyone in that situation claim that he saved himself -
nor would any observer of the rescue claim that the act of accepting the saving hand meant that he was his own savior.
That typical Calvinist claim, is pretty ludicrous..

Click to expand...

No wonder. . .wrong analogy.

The correct analogy is the man is in his coffin on the way to the graveyard, when a wealthy oligarch stops the vehicle, opens the coffin, commands the dead man to come back to life, and when the man does so, the oligarch makes the man an inheritor of his estate.

RickReads said:

The vision of Steven is significant. When Steven saw Jesus He was standing up. This idea that Jesus has spent the last 2000 years sitting in a chair is something I have never understood.

Click to expand...

Cannot he do both intermittently?

chad kincham said:

You can argue all day long about the state of fallen man before salvation, but the undeniable fact is that faith comes by hearing the word of God - not by first being zapped with irresistible grace, and regenerated, but by hearing the gospel.

This means that the Holy Spirit that is the one that draws men unto Jesus and convicts them of their sin, sufficiently enlightens the unconverted enough when they hear the word of God, to believe and have faith.

Click to expand...

And why would that exclude the new birth by the Holy Spirit, giving one a heart disposed to receive the gospel, so that when one hears the gospel one willingly receives it?

Then they have freewill to either receive Jesus, per John 1:12, or to reject Jesus, as the elect nation of Israel, who Jesus came for, did in John 1:11.

Click to expand...

It's not about free will, it's about the disposition--preferences and likes which govern the will. Apart from the Holy Spirit changing his disposition, fallen man does not find the gospel compelling, he finds it foolish and undesirable (1 Corinthians 2:14).

Stephen told the Jews, the very people who rejected Jesus and crucified Him, (though they were His own, whom He came for John 1:11) that the reason they killed the prophets sent to them, and rejected and killed Jesus, is because they RESISTED THE HOLY SPIRIT.

Click to expand...

They resisted the Holy Spirit in their disobedience and in their not listening to/believing Moses in the Scriptures (Deuteronomy 19:18-19),
therefore, the Holy Spirit did no work in their hearts which made the gospel desirable and compelling to them.

No man can say Jesus is Lord, without the Holy Spirit drawing them - yet the Holy Spirit can be resisted.

Click to expand...

Yes, disobedience is resistance to the Holy Spirit, causing him to withdraw his special influences.

It’s a freewill choice to accept the drawing of the Holy Spirit or to resist Him.
After He sufficiently enlightens those who hear the word of God enough to have faith, they can accept or reject Jesus.

Click to expand...

It's not about free will--the will is not diminished, the issue is the disposition--preferences and likes, which governs the will.
We choose according to our preferences and likes.
The Holy Spirit works in the disposition changing its preferences and likes from the things of man to the things of God.

"Free will" is just a rabbit trail having nothing to do with fallen man's rejection of the gospel, and a rabbit trail going nowhere.

Butch5 said:

Yes, you said that. I asked you support it with Scripture. You said Jesus is a divine spirit. Jesus said,

Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. (Lk. 24:39 KJV)

According to Jesus, He wasn't a spirit.

Click to expand...

The man Jesus has a human spirit, the God Jesus is a divine spirit.

Jesus was not just a spirit (ghost) in Luke 24:39, he was human--body and spirit.

FredVB said:

God will not work salvation for any that do not respond with repentance.

Click to expand...

Of course. Did I say otherwise?

chad kincham said:

You seem to deny the spiritual.

We do come to Jesus. We as believers sit in heaven with Jesus. Ephesians 2:6

That’s because the new covenant is a marriage, and as the bride of Christ, we become as one with Jesus in marriage, and it’s a spiritual union. Romans 7:4

This is how we become the body of Christ - the two cleave together and become as one in marriage.

So we do come to Jesus while He is bodily in heaven at the Father’s right hand - spiritually- our spirit and His.

You mentioned a celestial body, that’s a Mormon term, isn’t it?

Click to expand...

Butch5 said:

Of course Jesus has a spirit or breath in Him. Every man does. It is the breath or spirit of life. Saying Jesus has a spirit in Him is different than saying Jesus is a spirit. But again, the Holy Spirit is not Jesus.

Click to expand...

Paul disagrees (2 Corinthians 3:17).
The Spirit, the Spirit of God, the Spirit of Christ and Christ are used interchangeably in Romans 8:9-10.

Your conversation with chad has gotten so far off the point because you misunderstand Jesus' meaning in Luke 24:39, saying Jesus is not a spirit. The word pneuma is both spirit and ghost. The meaning in Luke 24:39 is that the resurrected Jesus was not just a ghost, but was a physical person (flesh and bones). And so you've gone down rabbit trail after rabbit trail from your misunderstanding of "spirit;" i.e., Jesus said he is not a spirit.

And that misunderstanding of "spirit" in Luke 24:39 has caused misunderstanding of several other verses in your approach to Scripture.

The spirit of Christ is the spirit from Christ which is the Holy Spirit. What did He say to the apostles?

26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me: (Jn. 15:26 KJV) After He sufficiently enlightens those who hear the word of God enough to have faith, they can accept or reject Jesus.

Jesus told the apostles that He would send the Spirit to them. Paul goes on to say that God gives the spirit to all believers.

Click to expand...

The Holy Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son, and is the Spirit of both the Father and the Son.

Clare73 said:

Oops! It doesn't.

That's Romans 8:7-8.

Thanks.

Click to expand...

Ok pay close attention please.

“For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so,”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭8:6-7‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Paul says that the mind set on the flesh is hostile towards God.

Iranaeus said that God has gave to man the mental power to both good and evil. These do not contradict one another. The person who sets his mind on the flesh cannot please God.

“For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭8:5‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Those who set their mind on the flesh are of the flesh. Iranaeus is saying that God has given man the ability to set his mind on the Spirit. He’s not saying that man can set his mind on the Spirit by his own doing.

Clare73 said:

Nor does a single verse says, "God is sovereign."

But as the sovereignty of God is the necessary conclusion of many Scriptures, so
that "God does not grant grace to all men" is the necessary conclusion of John 6:37. . .think it through.

Click to expand...

But Jesus warned about people not abiding in Him and warmed that The Father cuts off every branch in Christ that doesn’t bear fruit. So if you think that verse means that they cannot fall away then your not understanding it correctly. The Greek word translated to “comes” or “cometh” is only used in the present and imperfect tense. So those who continue to come to Him will not be cast out not those who came to Him at some point.

BNR32FAN said:

Ok pay close attention please.

“For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so,”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭8:6-7‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Paul says that the mind set on the flesh is hostile towards God.

Click to expand...

And that is all mankind before the new birth and indwelling Holy Spirit (Romans 3:9-10, Romans 5:18).

Iranaeus said that God has gave to man the mental power to both good and evil. These do not contradict one another. The person who sets his mind on the flesh cannot please God.

“For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit.”‭‭Romans‬ ‭8:5‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Click to expand...

And the former are the regenerate, while the latter are the unregenerate, the not born again, those without the indwelling Holy Spirit enabling them to do otherwise.

Those who set their mind on the flesh are of the flesh. Iranaeus is saying that God has given man the ability to set his mind on the Spirit. He’s not saying that man can set his mind on the Spirit by his own doing.

Click to expand...

Are you able to do something that you yourself cannot do?

The statement that man is given the ability means man is able by his own power.
You are either misunderstanding Irenaeus, or he is using wrong terminology.

According to your understanding of Irenaeus, correct terminology would be that man has the capacity, competence for setting his mind on the Spirit, but that does not mean he has the power to do so.
My vacuum cleaner has the capacity, competence to move dust and dirt, but it doesn't have the power to do so apart from an electrical source.

With this terminology in mind, is Irenaneous saying what you say he is saying, that man has the capacity, but not the power?
If so, then I think that puts him in agreement with Calvin, right? . . .as well as the NT.

No wonder we cannot come to agreement, if wrong terminology is involved.

BNR32FAN said:

But Jesus warned about people not abiding in Him and warmed that The Father cuts off every branch in Christ that doesn’t bear fruit. So if you think that verse means that they cannot fall away then your not understanding it correctly.

Click to expand...

The Father takes away every branch. . .cuts off also means judgment.

Scripture often speaks of professors (who are not possessors) of faith as being in the kingdom, but not of the kingdom. See Matthew 13, John 8:30-31, John 8:44; Galatians 5:4; Hebrews 6:4-6, Hebrews 10:29; 2 Peter 1:9; Luke 8:13; 2 Peter 2:20-22.

The Greek word translated to “comes” or “cometh” is only used in the present and imperfect tense. So those who continue to come to Him will not be cast out not those who came to Him at some point.

Click to expand...

"Those" being mankind which continues coming until the end of time, not one individual. When you truly come to Jesus, he is with you evermore, you don't have to keep "coming," you are already there.

Clare73 said:

And that is all mankind before the new birth and indwelling Holy Spirit (Romans 3:9-10, Romans 5:18).

Click to expand...

Are you saying that people must be born again and receive the Holy Spirit before they can come to Christ? I think you have that backwards.

Clare73 said:

The statement that man is given the ability means man is able by his own power.
You are either misunderstanding Irenaeus, or he is using wrong terminology.

Click to expand...

Here’s a direct quote, again.

Man has received the knowledge of good and evil. It is good to obey God, and to believe in Him, and to keep His commandment, and this is the life of man; as not to obey God is evil, and this is his death. Since God, therefore, gave [to man] such mental power (magnanimitatem) man knew both the good of obedience and the evil of disobedience, that the eye of the mind, receiving experience of both, may with judgment make choice of the better things; and that he may never become indolent or neglectful of God's command

If man has been given the ability from God then it means that ability came from God and not by man’s own power.

Clare73 said:

According to your understanding of Irenaeus, correct terminology would be that man has the capacity, competence for setting his mind on the Spirit, but that does not mean he has the power to do so.
My vacuum cleaner has the capacity, competence to move dust and dirt, but it doesn't have the power to do so apart from an electrical source.

Click to expand...

Who said anything about man accepting Christ apart from God’s grace? I specifically showed you that Iranaeus said that God has given man the knowledge and capability to do both good and bad.