Calvinism Refuted

[nobdysfool]

LOL! The mad lyricist strikes again!

 

[drstevej]

LOL! The mad lyricist strikes again!

I pulled the lyrics just to be on the safe side.

 

[Hammster]

Even when I was debating you guys I understood that Calvinism fell within the pale of orthodoxy. I disagreed with it, but never once tried to make you out as less than Christian.

Well, where there was Van and Ben Johnson, now we have Mr. Pate and JDS.

 

[cygnusx1]

Even when I was debating you guys I understood that Calvinism fell within the pale of orthodoxy. I disagreed with it, but never once tried to make you out as less than Christian.

Well, where there was Van and Ben Johnson, now we have Mr. Pate and JDS.

usually trouble/opposition comes in pairs , Dathan and Abiram ; Jannes and Jambres ; Hymenaeus and Philetus ; Hymenaeus and Alexander , etc

 

[Hammster]

usually trouble/opposition comes in pairs , Dathan and Abiram ; Jannes and Jambres ; Hymenaeus and Philetus ; Hymenaeus and Alexander , etc

lol

 

[cygnusx1]

I wonder why, if Calvinism has become so marginalized, so many are on here trying to disprove it?

(I bet I will get an answer)

because they know it's true and cannot permit it . To agree is to have such a radical awakening and submission to the Will of God over all things.

 

[Hammster]

because they know it's true and cannot permit it . To agree is to have such a radical awakening and submission to the Will of God over all things.

I don't even think they have to agree. And I am not saying that I don't welcome the debate. It is just some of the anger that is poured out, especially when you point out their error, is beyond belief.

And if they think that we are lost, then they are surely not doing anything to win us to Christ.

But check, I'm having fun, so let them come.

 

[DD2008]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cynmCdtDy2E

 

[Benefactor]

So what you had to do is make assumptions as to what the writer meant by 'Word', 'light' etc. to make your point. It also says that he came into His own and His own knew Him not., or did not receive Him. Is not John a Jew? Did John not receive Him?

No assumptions - John the Baptist is one that is counted with those "but as many as received Him God gave to them the right to be children of God.

 

[JDS]

No assumptions - John the Baptist is one that is counted with those "but as many as received Him God gave to them the right to be children of God.

Benefactor,

Do you believe that many, if not most people on earth at any given time are predistined by God to go to the Lake of Fire, a real place without water, to endure unimaginable pain, suffering, loneliness, darkness that can be felt and be separated from God for all eternity, is Good News or glad tidings?

If you say yes, in what sense is the shed blood of Jesus Christ and the message of the preacher to them that Jesus Christ died, according to the scripture, and that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day, according to the scriptures, 1 Cor 15:1-4, the scriptural definition of the gospel, in what sense is it good news? Why would God want this preached to every creature on the earth and call it good news to them if they were created by God for the express purpose of being sent to hell?

I am only wanting to know how this is good news/glad tidings.

Limited atonement is the "L" in TULIP. How can the events of the cross and the person of Jesus Christ and his shed blood and his resurrection be good news to those who are not atoned for.

I think this is a legitimate question and I am asking you because I have asked this before and no one has given a very good answer. I know this is not your position but I think you probably believe we are all teaching the orthodox Christian faith with slight disagreements on non essential points. If I get a good answer I will believe it. I am here to learn.

Forgive me in advance if I am wrong about this.

 

[archierieus]

It's actually a feature of truth. It is right here in scripture.

1 Corinthians 2:14 ESV
The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.

So then, are you suggesting that a non-Calvinist believer in Jesus, such as an Arminian or otherwise, is the 'natural man' described in this verse?

 

[archierieus]

Actually Calvinism is growing and flourishing

So is Islam. Different religions have their own appeals. And without a doubt, Calvinism has an appeal--the belief in assurance of salvation for those who are the 'elect,' for example. Islam also has an appeal, as do others.

Of course, none of that makes a particular religion 'true' when measured against the Bible. I think the earlier comment about the demise of Calvinism was within the context of an examination of the beliefs in the light of Scripture as it reads. This thread is 'Calvinism Refuted,' and that has been in process in the course of this thread. As happened quite recently on another discussion thread, initially it was asserted that Calvinism is based on Scripture, 'Sola Scriptura.' When that was shown not to be the case, various rationales and philosophical positions were put forward in support of the doctrine. When those were successfully challenged, resort was had to the 'secret knowledge' idea, which only initiates could possess, the rest of us blokes not being able to comprehend it.

But the standard here is Sola Scriptura, and by that standard the belief system hasn't fared well so far. Nevertheless, the appeal of the belief is so powerful that its adherents will cling to it in the face of evidence, continuing to come up with explanations and exceptions more and more fanciful. The work of the faithful student of Scripture is to confront and expose such fanciful ideas and point people to the pure Word of God instead.

 

[archierieus]

It really isn't that important.

I see. Okay, if that's your position, then so be it.

 

[archierieus]

Pride, an inflated sense of self-importance, a refusal to accept reality, a willful suspension of disbelief, a misguided crusade, take your pick.....

Or, in the case of this student, a desire to be faithful to God's Word and follow the truth as taught in Scripture.

 

[archierieus]

Instead of taking the scriptures and combining them as a whole he seperates them into segments without adding them together for the whole picture and conclusion of the full counsel of the written scriptures..

A religious doctrine is composed of building blocks or components. Those building blocks can include Scriptures, beliefs and understandings. Accuracy in erecting the doctrinal edifice is critically important. If the building blocks are faulty, then the entire edifice is faulty. In fact, if a doctrine is based upon even one significant error, the entire doctrine is compromised. Thus the importance of accuracy. It starts with a correct understanding of Scripture, which in turn necessitates an accurate understanding of the words of Scripture. Context cannot violate the text. Doctrine cannot violate Scripture.

 

[archierieus]

Okay, let's say that you are right and a word always means what it appears to mean, ie. world means world. Are you prepared to stick with that idea, or is it possible that an author, or speaker, could have something else in mind when he speaks things?

The science of exegesis necessarily includes recording the occurrences of a word within a document and identifying the range of meanings for the word. One begins with the verse and chapter where the word in question appears, then works outward to the rest of the book, to other books by the same author, and so forth. The goal is to minimize speculation and opinion, and stick as close to the data as possible.

 

[archierieus]

the lengnths some will go in order to defend a mistake , either all can believe or they cannot , “For this cause they could not believe, for that Isaiah said again, He hath blinded their eyes, and He hardened their heart; Lest they ... John 12 : 1-50

The lengths to which an advocate for a belief system will go to defend an erroneous position statement are truly amazing. Unimpeachable evidence has been presented about the accurate meaning of the words 'could not believe,' which is a middle imperfect, 'they' causing and participating in the action. Unimpeachable evidence has been quoted from the Septuagint, the Isaiah passage quoted by John, that the people stopped their ears and closed their eyes against the light from heaven. God gave the light, the people closed their eyes and hardened their hearts. To recap from that post:

Reference is to Isaiah, ch. 6:9, 10. Note the Septuagint:

6:9 και ειπεν πορευθητι και ειπον τω λαω τουτω ακοη ακουσετε και ου μη συνητε και βλεποντες βλεψετε και ου μη ιδητε

6:10 επαχυνθη γαρ η καρδια του λαου τουτου και τοις ωσιν αυτων βαρεως ηκουσαν και τους οφθαλμους αυτων εκαμμυσαν μηποτε ιδωσιν τοις οφθαλμοις και τοις ωσιν ακουσωσιν και τη καρδια συνωσιν και επιστρεψωσιν και ιασομαι αυτους
​

English translation:

9 Ye shall hear indeed, but ye shall not understand; and ye shall see indeed, but ye shall not perceive. 10 For the heart of this people has become gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.
​

Now compare the John cite of Isaiah 6:9, 10:

διὰ τοῦτο οὐκ ἠδύναντο πιστεύειν, ὅτι πάλιν εἶπεν Ἠσαΐας, Τετύφλωκεν αὐτῶν τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς καὶ ἐπώρωσεν αὐτῶν τὴν καρδίαν, ἵνα μὴ ἴδωσιν τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς καὶ νοήσωσιν τῇ καρδίᾳ καὶ στραφῶσιν, καὶ ἰάσομαι αὐτούς.

Note the verb in v. 39, which is imperfect middle. I.e., it comes from within themselves, they initiate the action and participate in the results(middle voice) That is very consistent with the Septuagint reading as noted above. God sent light, they hated the light, and the more light sent to them, the more they rejected it. This was demonstrated in Christ's ministry. John records how Jesus worked miracle after miracle, made appeal after appeal, culminating in the evidence of Lazarus' resurrection. But they refused to believe, as Jesus said in Jn. 9, they said they see but refused to accept the evidence, so their blindness remains
​

This grammatical and textual evidence has not been refuted. The correct meaning of the words has been presented, relying on the original Greek, but instead of accepting that evidence, you continue to repeat the translated words, without evidence as to the meaning of those words, and instead apparently giving them your own meaning. That certainly is not accurate, nor is it sound study technique.

In addition to this grammatical and Scriptural evidence is the weight of evidence of the rest of Scripture, which is in harmony with this grammatical and textual evidence.
​

 

[DD2008]

..

So then, are you suggesting that a non-Calvinist believer in Jesus, such as an Arminian or otherwise, is the 'natural man' described in this verse?

One can be a part of the visible Church but not be a part of the true invisible Church that is only composed of the elect.

Also one can be an athiest bible scholar with no idea what scripture means. Many of those are the ones responsible for the historical critical method and the bringing into question if the New Testament is Apostolic or not. They always treat the bible like it is just another historic ancient text.

...

So is Islam. Different religions have their own appeals. And without a doubt, Calvinism has an appeal--the belief in assurance of salvation for those who are the 'elect,' for example. Islam also has an appeal, as do others.

Actually Islam's big apppeal in most of the world is that by adhearing to it in public one can keep his head on his shoulders. What those people do in private is another matter. The entire middle east is a den of vice and corruption behind closed doors.

But the standard here is Sola Scriptura, and by that standard the belief system hasn't fared well so far. Nevertheless, the appeal of the belief is so powerful that its adherents will cling to it in the face of evidence, continuing to come up with explanations and exceptions more and more fanciful. The work of the faithful student of Scripture is to confront and expose such fanciful ideas and point people to the pure Word of God instead.

Actually,

Soli Deo Gloria, Solo Christo, Sola Scriptura, Sola Gratia, Sola Fide,

Are the five sola's of the Protestant Reformation.

Here is a link to www.fivesolas.com It is a Reformed site.

 

[archierieus]

usually trouble/opposition comes in pairs , Dathan and Abiram ; Jannes and Jambres ; Hymenaeus and Philetus ; Hymenaeus and Alexander , etc

As in Peter and John, Luther and Melancthon. Opposition to doctrines which are false according to Scripture, such as limited atonement, is often best accomplished by a team of Scripture students using Scripture to trouble and oppose those who falsify the truth of God's Word.

 

[archierieus]

The urgent need to affirm free will........

​

The urgent need to present Bible truth in opposition to such false doctrines as limited atonement.