• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Calvinism VS. Arminianism: A Futile Argument

Osage Bluestem

Galatians 5:1
Dec 27, 2010
2,488
253
Texas
Visit site
✟26,711.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
His_disciple3 said:
I never said I spoke in tongues I said I prayed in tongues. however 1 Cor. 13 does say that tongues will cease, then two verses down it tells when they will cease, when the perfect one comes, this is when Jesus Christ comes in the fullness on the notable day of the Lord, it does not mean the Holy scriptures came about as the Baptist preach, for look careful it also says that knowledge will vanish away, knowledge did not vanish, with the Bible, but was manifested with the printing of the Holy Scriptues. it can not mean when He came as a Babe, for then "ALL" scriptures stating prophecy and tongues in the new testament after He came would be against scriptures, it can not mean when He came as the resurrected, for the same thing "ALL" scriptures referring to tongues and/or prophecy in scriptures after His resurrection would be against scriptures. And my friend saying that I am more pentacosta than baptist is not saying that I am pentacosta, just closer to them in my understanding of scriptures, concerning the Holy Spirit. most everyone in the baptist Church that I attend has been baptized by the Holy Spirit, everybody saved has been baptized with the Holy Spirit, we are all baptized with the Same Spirit, your understanding of scriptures just won't let God The Holy Spirit work in your life like He should. listen I would be very careful and really Know what scriptures says concerning the Holy Spirit, for If there is a thin chance That pentacostal people are of God , then the say what you said about it being a evil spirit , this my friend could very well be blaspheme/speaking eveil of the Holy Spirit!

1 Corinthians 13:8-10
8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.
9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
KJV

You fit in better in a pentacostal church. They believe like you do. Baptists don't. Pentacostals are all Arminians as well. So, it is pretty well dead certain their actions are false in my view as that system isnt biblical. I don't believe God would bless a false doctrine with those kinds of things.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,188
2,677
63
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟115,334.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
To continue from my previous post, Arthur W. Pink further writes:

When we say that man is totally depraved, we mean that the entrance of sin into the human constitution has affected every part and faculty of man’s being. Total depravity means that man is, in spirit and soul and body, the slave of sin and the captive of the Devil—walking "according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience" (Eph. 2 :2).This statement ought not to need arguing: it is a common fact of human experience. Man is unable to realize his own aspirations and materialize his own ideals. He cannot do the things that he would. There is a moral inability which paralyzes him. This is proof positive that he is no free man, but instead, the slave of sin and Satan. "Ye are of your father the Devil, and the lusts (desires) of your father ye will do" (John 8:44). Sin is more than an act or a series of acts; it is a state or condition: it is that which lies behind and produces the acts. Sin has penetrated and permeated the whole of man’s make-up. It has blinded the understanding, corrupted the heart, and alienated the mind from God. And the will has not escaped. The will is under the dominion of sin and Satan. Therefore, the will is not free. In short, the affections love as they do and the will chooses as it does because of the state of the heart, and because the heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked "There is none that seeketh after God" (Rom. 3:11).

We repeat our question; Does it lie within the power of the sinner’s will to yield himself up to God? Let us attempt an answer by asking several others: Can water (of itself) rise above its own level? Can a clean thing come out of an unclean? Can the will reverse the whole tendency and strain of human nature? Can that which is under the dominion of sin originate that which is pure and holy? Manifestly not. If ever the will of a fallen and depraved creature is to move Godwards, a Divine power must be brought to bear upon it which will overcome the influences of sin that pull in a counter direction. This is only another way of saying, "No man can come to Me, except the Father which hath sent Me, draw him"(John 6:44). In other words, God’s people must be made willing in the day of His power (Ps. 110:3). As said Mr. Darby, "If Christ came to save that which is lost, free will has no place. Not that God prevents men from receiving Christ—far from it. But even when God uses all possible inducements, all that is capable of exerting influence in the heart of man, it only serves to show that man will have none of it, that so corrupt is his heart, and so decided his will not to submit to God (however much it may be the devil who encourages him to sin) that nothing can induce him to receive the Lord, and to give up sin. If by the words, ‘freedom of man,’ they mean that no one forces him to reject the Lord, this liberty fully exists. But if it is said that, on account of the dominion of sin, of which he is the slave, and that voluntarily, he cannot escape from his condition, and make choice of the good—even while acknowledging it to be good, and approving of it—then he has no liberty whatever (italics ours). He is not subject to the law, neither indeed can be; hence, they that are in the flesh cannot please God." The will is not sovereign; it is a servant, because influenced and controlled by the other faculties of man’s being. The sinner is not a free agent because he is a slave of sin—this was clearly implied in our Lord’s words, "If the Son shall therefore make you free, ye shall be free indeed" (John 8:36). Man is a rational being and as such responsible and accountable to God, but to affirm that he is a free moral agent is to deny that he is totally depraved—i.e., depraved in will as in everything else. Because man’s will is governed by his mind and heart, and because these have been vitiated and corrupted by sin, then it follows that if ever man is to turn or move in a Godward direction, God Himself must work in him "both to will and to do of His good pleasure" (Phil. 2:13). Man’s boasted freedom is in truth "the bondage of corruption"; he "serves divers lusts and pleasures." Said a deeply taught servant of God, "Man is impotent as to his will. He has no will favorable to God. I believe in free will; but then it is a will only free to act according to nature (italics ours). A dove has no will to eat carrion; a raven no will to eat the clean food of the dove. Put the nature of the dove into the raven and it will eat the food of the dove. Satan could have no will for holiness. We speak it with reverence, God could have no will for evil. The sinner in his sinful nature could never have a will according to God. For this he must be born again" (J. Denham Smith). This is just what we have contended for throughout this chapter—the will is regulated by the nature.

In order for any sinner to be saved three things were indispensable: God the Father had to purpose his salvation, God the Son had to purchase it, God the Spirit has to apply it. God does more than "propose" to us: were He only to "invite", every last one of us would be lost. This is strikingly illustrated in the Old Testament. In Ezra 1:1-3 we read, "Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, that the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah might be fulfilled, the Lord stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, that he made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and put it also in writing saying, Thus saith Cyrus king of Persia, the Lord God of heaven hath given me all the kingdoms of the earth, and He hath charged me to build Him an house at Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Who is there among you of all His people? his God be with him, and let him go up to Jerusalem which is in Judah, and build the house of the Lord God of Israel." Here was an "offer"made, made to a people in captivity, affording them opportunity to leave and return to Jerusalem—God’s dwelling-place. Did all Israel eagerly respond to this offer? No indeed. The vast majority were content to remain in the enemy’s land. Only an insignificant "remnant" availed themselves of this overture of mercy! And why did they? Hear the answer of Scripture: "Then rose up the chief of the fathers of Judah and Benjamin, and the priests, and the Levites, with all whose spirit God had stirred up, to go up to build the house of the Lord which is in Jerusalem" (Ezra I :5) ! In like manner, God "stirs up" the spirits of His elect when the effectual call comes to them, and not till then do they have any willingness to respond to the Divine proclamation.

The superficial work of many of the professional evangelists of the last fifty years is largely responsible for the erroneous views now current upon the bondage of the natural man, encouraged by the laziness of those in the pew in their failure to "prove all things" (1 Thess. 5:21). The average evangelical pulpit conveys the impression that it lies wholly in the power of the sinner whether or not he shall be saved. It is said that "God has done His part, now man must do his." Alas, what can a lifeless man do, and man by nature is "dead in trespasses and sins" (Eph. 2:1)! If this were really believed, there would be more dependence upon the Holy Spirit to come in with His miracle-working power, and less confidence in our attempts to "win men for Christ."

When addressing the unsaved, preachers often draw an analogy between God’s sending of the Gospel to the sinner, and a sick man in bed, with some healing medicine on a table by his side: all he needs to do is reach forth his hand and take it. But in order for this illustration to be in any wise true to the picture which Scripture gives us of the fallen and depraved sinner, the sick man in bed must be described as one who is blind (Eph. 4:18) so that he cannot see the medicine, his hand paralyzed (Rom. 5:6) so that he is unable to reach forth for it, and his heart not only devoid of all confidence in the medicine but filled with hatred against the physician himself (John 15:18). O what superficial views of man’s desperate plight are now entertained! Christ came here not to help those who were willing to help themselves, but to do for His people what they were incapable of doing for themselves: "To open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house" (Isa. 42:7).

Now in conclusion let us anticipate and dispose of the usual and inevitable objection—Why preach the Gospel if man is powerless to respond? Why bid the sinner come to Christ if sin has so enslaved him that he has no power in himself to come? Reply:—We do not preach the Gospel because we believe that men are free moral agents, and therefore capable of receiving Christ, but we preach it because we are commanded to do so (Mark 16:15); and though to them that perish it is foolishness, yet, "unto us which are saved it is the power of God"(1 Cor. 1:18). "The foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men" (1 Cor. 1:25). The sinner is dead in trespasses and sins (Eph. 2:1), and a dead man is utterly incapable of willing anything, hence it is that "they that are in the flesh (the unregenerate) cannot please God" (Rom. 8:8).

Arthur W. Pink, The Sovereignty of God, Chapter 7, God's Sovereignty and Numan Will, Section 3, The Impotency of the Will

As far as I am concerned, that says it all.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,188
2,677
63
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟115,334.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
You fit in better in a pentacostal church. They believe like you do. Baptists don't. Pentacostals are all Arminians as well. So, it is pretty well dead certain their actions are false in my view as that system isnt biblical. I don't believe God would bless a false doctrine with those kinds of things.

Brother, such harsh words.

It is a fact that some Baptist churches do not believe in speaking in tongues, and it is true that some do. The Southern Baptist Convention takes no stance either way:

8. What is the SBC’s official view of "speaking in tongues" and other "charismatic" gifts?

There is no official SBC view or stance on the issue. If you polled SBC churches across the nation on the topic of "charismatic" practices you would likely find a variety of perspectives. Probably most believe that the "gift of tongues" as described in the Bible ceased upon the completion of the Bible. Some may view speaking in tongues as a spiritual gift given to some Christians enabling them to communicate the Gospel to foreign cultures in a language the speaker had not known previously. A very small minority might accept what is commonly practiced today in charismatic churches as valid.

About Us - Basic Beliefs

In fact, in 1742, it was written:

God alone is Lord of the conscience, and hath justify it free from the doctrines and commandments of men which are in any thing contrary to His Word, or not contained in it. So that to believe such doctrines, or obey such commands out of conscience, it to betray true liberty of conscience; and the requiring of an implicit faith, and absolute and blind obedience, is to destroy liberty of conscience and reason also.

The Philadelphia Confession of Faith of 1742, Chapter 21, Of Christian Liberty and Liberty of Conscience

While you believe the gift was cut off, I respect that and aplaude your stance in your convictions.

But true Baptists beliefs dictate we not condemn another Baptist who in their own convictions practice it.

I take the stand that I see no reason as to believe they (spiritual gifts) as being cut off.

I respect your convictions, stand firm in what you believe to be true.

And I shall do the same.

But remember that Baptists believed in Christian liberty and liberty of conscience so much, we put in writting befoer this country declared itself "independant".

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0

Osage Bluestem

Galatians 5:1
Dec 27, 2010
2,488
253
Texas
Visit site
✟26,711.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
DeaconDean said:
Brother, such harsh words.

It is a fact that some Baptist churches do not believe in speaking in tongues, and it is true that some do. The Southern Baptist Convention takes no stance either way:

About Us - Basic Beliefs

In fact, in 1742, it was written:

The Philadelphia Confession of Faith of 1742, Chapter 21, Of Christian Liberty and Liberty of Conscience

While you believe the gift was cut off, I respect that and aplaude your stance in your convictions.

But true Baptists beliefs dictate we not condemn another Baptist who in their own convictions practice it.

I take the stand that I see no reason as to believe they (spiritual gifts) as being cut off.

I respect your convictions, stand firm in what you believe to be true.

And I shall do the same.

But remember that Baptists believed in Christian liberty and liberty of conscience so much, we put in writting befoer this country declared itself "independant".

God Bless

Till all are one.

Well, thats a shame. The charismatic movement is pagan and arminianism is a heresy.
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,188
2,677
63
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟115,334.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The charismatic movement is pagan

I'm truly sorry to hear that from you.

Although I disagree with the way Catholicism uses the ECF's, a lot can be learned from them.

The belief and practice of speaking in tongues can be traced back to the early church as far back as the 2nd century AD.

References to speaking in tongues by the Church fathers are rare. Except for Irenaeus' 2nd-century reference to many in the church speaking all kinds of languages 'through the Spirit', and Tertullian's reference in 207 AD to the spiritual gift of interpretation of tongues being encountered in his day, there are no other known first-hand accounts of glossolalia, and very few second-hand accounts among their writings.

Glossolalia

In fact, the same article shows:

For the prophetical gifts remain with us, even to this present time.

Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 82.

Now, it is possible to see amongst us women and men who possess gifts of the Spirit of God.

Ibid, Chapter 88

Augustine believed in them also saying:

In the earliest times, "the Holy Ghost fell upon them that believed: and they spake with tongues", which they had not learned, "as the Spirit gave them utterance". These were signs adapted to the time. For there behooved to be that betokening of the Holy Spirit in all tongues, to shew that the Gospel of God was to run through all tongues over the whole earth. That thing was done for a betokening, and it passed away. In the laying on of hands now, that persons may receive the Holy Ghost, do we look that they should speak with tongues? Or when he laid the hand on infants, did each one of you look to see whether they would speak with tongues, and, when he saw that they did not speak with tongues, was any of you so strong-minded as to say, These have not received the Holy Ghost; for, had they received, they would speak with tongues as was the case in those times? If then the witness of the presence of the Holy Ghost be not given through these miracles, by what is it given, by what does one get to know that he has received the Holy Ghost? Let him question his own heart. If he love his brother, the Spirit of God dwelleth in him. (Augustine of Hippo, 354-430)

Augustine, Homilies on the Gospel of John 6:10, in The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers [7:497-98]

I tell you, I'd be afraid to call speaking in tongues "pagan".

but since I'm in the minority here, and speaking in tongues is not part of the debate, I'll just wish you well in your beliefs.

Too bad nobody will do the same to me.

I guess I'll be counted with the "pagans" as in Acts 2:4:

"And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance."

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

DesertScroll

Member
Jul 19, 2007
240
1
53
✟22,896.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
1st, a type of rapist can not create the universe, God can, creation has nothing to do with the way we see the love of God. both parties say that God created all things. God creating people does not make Him a type of rapist, But If one of His creations, don't like life and decides to end their life here, then according to calvinist God made them commit suicide. so is it suicide? If I dislike someone and kill them, them according to calvinist God made me kill them, so who is the murderer? to say that all the murderers, raptist and child abusers are doing the work of God, is simply blaspheming God, who said choose good over evil,

I think you are arguing with someone else.
My point was your claim about God forcing Himself on someone can be used in the exact same way in regards to creation.

Evil cannot come from God.
Once evil is there God controls it (sovereign). Like hardening a heart, God doesn't take a good heart and harden it, but He hardens a heart that is already hard. God uses sin for His purposes, sin does not originate with Him. Just like desires of the world and anything of the fallen world does not come from God, but from the world (1 John 2:16).

Now as far as something happening in the world, God does want it that way (His plan) but it doesn't mean it originated with Him. Some people don't recognize this difference (and I assume it is a past argument you are referencing).

Genesis 4:7
7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.
KJV

No my misunderstood friend God does no evil, nor will He force anyone else to. He allows things to happen but does not cause them. that "Choice" is God given, does the one that was made say to the one that made Him why hast thou made me this way, I can't question God on why He made all with the sin nature, But can praise Him for the faith that He gave so that I might escape that sin nature, and choose to do good over evil.

Once again your off in left field arguing with someone else.

God does force evil to drink a full swig from their own cup... making a hard heart even more hard. Like pharaoh in relation to Moses and Israel.

And once again, the desires are from the world, not God (1 John 2:16).

If you are given the Spirit, then only spirit will come from Him. Just like only sin will come from the flesh. Like produces like.
Nor is their some neutral mind as everything is good or evil in relation to God. It is either from Him or not from Him. It is either Spirit or flesh. And once you have the tree, the fruit is automatic.
the message of the potter and the lump of clay, one vessel of honour one of dishonour, is very much misintrepreted. It is the same lump not two individuals but one lump/individual, flesh made of dishonour, the Spirit made of Honour. the flesh was made for destruction, the spirit to live in Glory.
I never brought in the potter and the clay. But your interpretation cannot be correct as it is about clay (v.21) which both lumps come from. Spirit is separate from the flesh (John 3:6) and are in fact in opposition (Gal 5:17) so cannot come from the same lump.

If this is your response to mercy not being in relation to anything of man but based upon God alone (Rom 9:11,12,16) you didn't even touch upon the topic.

as far as Eph 2:8,9 when we take parts of verse and try to make them say something by theirselves that is how false doctrine are started, for By grace are we saved, THROUGH FAITH, again I say If God forces you to believe in Him , that is not Faith. if God forces you to serve Him that is not obedience. as far as romans 9, I have always said that yes the Bible teaches predestination and yes the Bible teaches free-will, to say that one is not taught is just denying scriptures, but our understanding of those scriptures is where the split comes. for the two are not contradicted but should be made to come together as both are the Word of God.
The reason why once one accepts "By grace you have been saved" the argument is over is because "through faith" is also in reference to "you have been saved".
Its not a matter of only focusing in on one portion of a sentence to come up with a doctrine. It just that once "saved" is by grace, then by necessity, by the language the Bible used for this passage, anything that is associated with "saved" must also be by grace.


How are we saved? By grace.
How was being saved accomplished? Through grace.
And in verse 9, what is the gift? Being saved (not just an offer (gift) to be accepted or rejected).

For the verse to say what you want it would have to say either:

...by grace one has a chance to be saved.

...Or, through faith one qualifies to be saved.

But it doesn't.

That is why once one accepts by grace we have been saved... it is over.

Let me write it out like this:

(Saved by grace)

(Saved through faith)

Saved is both by grace and through faith. They both apply to being saved. So once it is by grace, by necessity so to must faith.

(Saved by grace through faith)

What is in parenthesis is all through faith. Which by necessity means faith is also by grace.

Faith is the means by which grace is actualized.
 
Upvote 0

Osage Bluestem

Galatians 5:1
Dec 27, 2010
2,488
253
Texas
Visit site
✟26,711.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
DeaconDean said:
I'm truly sorry to hear that from you.

Although I disagree with the way Catholicism uses the ECF's, a lot can be learned from them.

The belief and practice of speaking in tongues can be traced back to the early church as far back as the 2nd century AD.

Glossolalia

In fact, the same article shows:

Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 82.

Ibid, Chapter 88

Augustine believed in them also saying:

Augustine, Homilies on the Gospel of John 6:10, in The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers [7:497-98]

I tell you, I'd be afraid to call speaking in tongues "pagan".

but since I'm in the minority here, and speaking in tongues is not part of the debate, I'll just wish you well in your beliefs.

Too bad nobody will do the same to me.

I guess I'll be counted with the "pagans" as in Acts 2:4:

"And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance."

God Bless

Till all are one.

The real speaking in tongues referenced in the bible was when a person spoke in a language he didnt know to people who did know that language. It had a use and purpose. It wasnt incoherent babble. It was used to kickstart the church and evangelize.

That is the Christian gift of tongues.

Babbling in incoherent ways has been a part many pagan practices but God always has a purpose and a use for his gifts. He doesnt have people babble. He said tongues are useless without an interpreter. In other words, if a guy starts speaking Russian to the only Russian in the room then someone will be given the gift to interpret Russian to everyone else. It wont be babbling no one can understand if it is from God.
 
Upvote 0

His_disciple3

Newbie
Nov 22, 2010
1,680
33
as close to Jesus as I can be
✟24,575.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
You fit in better in a pentacostal church. They believe like you do. Baptists don't. Pentacostals are all Arminians as well. So, it is pretty well dead certain their actions are false in my view as that system isnt biblical. I don't believe God would bless a false doctrine with those kinds of things.
and obviously you don't read other's posts too well, I am more welcomed in the pentacostal churches that I preach in, than the Baptist, Pentacostal people understand more That if we believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God then we are "ALL" of the same Body, pentacostals don't make fun or tear down other denominations like baptist do, But most don't believe in once saved always saved so salvational doctrine are the ground floor we build on then I am not pentacostal, But I belong to a whole Baptist Church that is Spirit filled. BUt I will not derail this post any longer, for the Bible said if you want to be ignorant than to let you be ignorant, and you are preaching against scripture for sure, for it also says :

1 Corinthians 14:38-39
38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.
39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.
KJV
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,188
2,677
63
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟115,334.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The real speaking in tongues referenced in the bible was when a person spoke in a language he didnt know to people who did know that language. It had a use and purpose. It wasnt incoherent babble. It was used to kickstart the church and evangelize.

That is the Christian gift of tongues.

Maybe, maybe not.

You cannot prove than difinatively from the scriptures.

That's only one possible explanation.

Does the Holy Spirit also give the gift of "understanding" a foreign" language as well?

He who would learn to fly one day must first learn to stand and walk and run and climb and dance; one cannot fly into flying.

Friedrich Nietzsche

While you may be able to pick up and speak Russian, somebody there has to tell what is said first.

Babbling in incoherent ways has been a part many pagan practices but God always has a purpose and a use for his gifts. He doesnt have people babble. He said tongues are useless without an interpreter. In other words, if a guy starts speaking Russian to the only Russian in the room then someone will be given the gift to interpret Russian to everyone else. It wont be babbling no one can understand if it is from God.

You really hate our Pentecostal/Charasmatic brethren don't you.

Babbling? Really?

Seems to me I remember reading in the OT:

"Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech...Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the Lord did there confound the language of all the earth:" Gen. 11:7,9 (KJV)

I'm sure that when God "confounded" the common language of the people, those who spoke Greek, and those who spoke chinese must have sure sounded like "babbling" to them.

Oh well, everybody has their opinion.

I guess the "babbling" at the Tower of Bable is pagan as well.

I'm wrong.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0

Osage Bluestem

Galatians 5:1
Dec 27, 2010
2,488
253
Texas
Visit site
✟26,711.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
and obviously you don't read other's posts too well, I am more welcomed in the pentacostal churches that I preach in, than the Baptist, Pentacostal people understand more That if we believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God then we are "ALL" of the same Body, pentacostals don't make fun or tear down other denominations like baptist do, But most don't believe in once saved always saved so salvational doctrine are the ground floor we build on then I am not pentacostal, But I belong to a whole Baptist Church that is Spirit filled. BUt I will not derail this post any longer, for the Bible said if you want to be ignorant than to let you be ignorant, and you are preaching against scripture for sure, for it also says :

1 Corinthians 14:38-39
38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.
39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.
KJV

Those things have to be taken in context, historically and gramatically. Tongues have ceased.

Watch this:

John MacArthur on the charismatic movement - YouTube
 
Upvote 0

GQ Chris

ooey gooey is for brownies, not Bible teachers
Jan 17, 2005
21,009
1,888
Golden State
✟53,342.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
People love babbling even to this day. You go to almost any Charismatic/Pentecostal church and it is a bizarre display of emotionalism and personality elevation and self made mysticism.
 
Upvote 0

Osage Bluestem

Galatians 5:1
Dec 27, 2010
2,488
253
Texas
Visit site
✟26,711.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
You really hate our Pentecostal/Charasmatic brethren don't you.

Babbling? Really?

I don't hate them. I just don't believe their charismatic experience is real.

Anyway, what I really have against them is their arminian theology, which is what the thread is about.
 
Upvote 0

His_disciple3

Newbie
Nov 22, 2010
1,680
33
as close to Jesus as I can be
✟24,575.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I think you are arguing with someone else.
My point was your claim about God forcing Himself on someone can be used in the exact same way in regards to creation.

Evil cannot come from God.
Once evil is there God controls it (sovereign). Like hardening a heart, God doesn't take a good heart and harden it, but He hardens a heart that is already hard. God uses sin for His purposes, sin does not originate with Him. Just like desires of the world and anything of the fallen world does not come from God, but from the world (1 John 2:16).

Now as far as something happening in the world, God does want it that way (His plan) but it doesn't mean it originated with Him. Some people don't recognize this difference (and I assume it is a past argument you are referencing).



Once again your off in left field arguing with someone else.

God does force evil to drink a full swig from their own cup... making a hard heart even more hard. Like pharaoh in relation to Moses and Israel.

And once again, the desires are from the world, not God (1 John 2:16).

If you are given the Spirit, then only spirit will come from Him. Just like only sin will come from the flesh. Like produces like.
Nor is their some neutral mind as everything is good or evil in relation to God. It is either from Him or not from Him. It is either Spirit or flesh. And once you have the tree, the fruit is automatic.

I never brought in the potter and the clay. But your interpretation cannot be correct as it is about clay (v.21) which both lumps come from. Spirit is separate from the flesh (John 3:6) and are in fact in opposition (Gal 5:17) so cannot come from the same lump.

If this is your response to mercy not being in relation to anything of man but based upon God alone (Rom 9:11,12,16) you didn't even touch upon the topic.


The reason why once one accepts "By grace you have been saved" the argument is over is because "through faith" is also in reference to "you have been saved".
Its not a matter of only focusing in on one portion of a sentence to come up with a doctrine. It just that once "saved" is by grace, then by necessity, by the language the Bible used for this passage, anything that is associated with "saved" must also be by grace.


How are we saved? By grace.
How was being saved accomplished? Through grace.
And in verse 9, what is the gift? Being saved (not just an offer (gift) to be accepted or rejected).

For the verse to say what you want it would have to say either:

...by grace one has a chance to be saved.

...Or, through faith one qualifies to be saved.

But it doesn't.

That is why once one accepts by grace we have been saved... it is over.

Let me write it out like this:

(Saved by grace)

(Saved through faith)

Saved is both by grace and through faith. They both apply to being saved. So once it is by grace, by necessity so to must faith.

(Saved by grace through faith)

What is in parenthesis is all through faith. Which by necessity means faith is also by grace.

Faith is the means by which grace is actualized.
God uses sin for His Purpose,

that's about "ALL" of your doctrine that I can stomach
 
Upvote 0

His_disciple3

Newbie
Nov 22, 2010
1,680
33
as close to Jesus as I can be
✟24,575.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The real speaking in tongues referenced in the bible was when a person spoke in a language he didnt know to people who did know that language. It had a use and purpose. It wasnt incoherent babble. It was used to kickstart the church and evangelize.

That is the Christian gift of tongues.

Babbling in incoherent ways has been a part many pagan practices but God always has a purpose and a use for his gifts. He doesnt have people babble. He said tongues are useless without an interpreter. In other words, if a guy starts speaking Russian to the only Russian in the room then someone will be given the gift to interpret Russian to everyone else. It wont be babbling no one can understand if it is from God.

let me give you this, sure people can fake speaking in tongues, are you saying the Baptist never fakes anything spiritual, are you saying that the baptist won't pat a pentacosta on the back and tell people that this is my pentacosta buddy, then once the pentacosta is gone, make fun of him for his beliefs in the Holy Spirit? but as far as tongues just being a foreign language, if it is an unknown tongue and someone can speak that language or understand it then it is not an unknown tongues, and second do you know anyone that knows the tongues of angels?
 
Upvote 0

Osage Bluestem

Galatians 5:1
Dec 27, 2010
2,488
253
Texas
Visit site
✟26,711.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
let me give you this, sure people can fake speaking in tongues, are you saying the Baptist never fakes anything spiritual, are you saying that the baptist won't pat a pentacosta on the back and tell people that this is my pentacosta buddy, then once the pentacosta is gone, make fun of him for his beliefs in the Holy Spirit? but as far as tongues just being a foreign language, if it is an unknown tongue and someone can speak that language or understand it then it is not an unknown tongues, and second do you know anyone that knows the tongues of angels?

All denominations are flawed and marked by the sin of their members. Only the Bible is 100% correct. Regenerate men, even though we are saved by the grace of God and indwelt by the Holy Spirit are still effected by the corruption of the flesh until we are raised from the dead and glorified. So, we will all sin and fail to understand scripture and grieve the Spirit, but we try to do right and walk in the truth of God's Word and mold our lives and practice in accordance with it and not it in accordance with our lives and practice.

I believe that speaking in the tongues of angels was an illustration made by Paul to make a point, and I believe that no matter what kind of charismatic tongue thing is in question it has ceased if it ever was and no new tongues from God have started again or started for the first time recently. I think the whole charismatic movement is false. It is no wonder that such error erupts from the arminians because arminian theology is false as well. Lies all stem from the same tradition.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Skala

I'm a Saint. Not because of me, but because of Him
Mar 15, 2011
8,964
478
✟35,369.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
If I recall correctly, some Charismatics believe that an "experience" is evidence of being born again/truly saved. Thus they say, if a person never has such an experience, they aren't truly saved.

Lets say for the sake of an argument that these "experiences" are real, and really happen.

The Bible says that God gives Christians different amounts of faith, because he has plans for some that he doesn't have for others. (Rom 12:1-8)

Rom 12:1-8
(1) I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship.
(2) Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.
(3) For by the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned.
(4) For as in one body we have many members, and the members do not all have the same function,
(5) so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another.
(6) Having gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, let us use them: if prophecy, in proportion to our faith;
(7) if service, in our serving; the one who teaches, in his teaching;
(8) the one who exhorts, in his exhortation; the one who contributes, in generosity; the one who leads, with zeal; the one who does acts of mercy, with cheerfulness.

Therefore, doesn't it stand to reason that their doctrine that one must have one of these experiences or he/she is not truly saved, doesn't line up with the Biblical testimony that each Christian is different, based on what God gives them?
 
Upvote 0

His_disciple3

Newbie
Nov 22, 2010
1,680
33
as close to Jesus as I can be
✟24,575.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
If I recall correctly, some Charismatics believe that an "experience" is evidence of being born again/truly saved. Thus they say, if a person never has such an experience, they aren't truly saved.

Lets say for the sake of an argument that these "experiences" are real, and really happen.

The Bible says that God gives Christians different amounts of faith, because he has plans for some that he doesn't have for others. (Rom 12:1-8)



Therefore, doesn't it stand to reason that their doctrine that one must have one of these experiences or he/she is not truly saved, doesn't line up with the Biblical testimony that each Christian is different, based on what God gives them?

some Baptist believes in calvinism does that make "ALL" baptist calvinist, No, neither does some pentacosta believing that speaking in tongues, is the evidence of being saved, make all pentacosta wrong, saying that "ALL" charismatic are wrong because a few misunderstand scriptures is like saying "All" baptist commit adultery because some baptist preachers run off with the piano players. You are judging "ALL" when you don't know the heart of any, and that my friend is just as wrong as misusing the Spiritual gifts
 
Upvote 0

His_disciple3

Newbie
Nov 22, 2010
1,680
33
as close to Jesus as I can be
✟24,575.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
All denominations are flawed and marked by the sin of their members. Only the Bible is 100% correct. Regenerate men, even though we are saved by the grace of God and indwelt by the Holy Spirit are still effected by the corruption of the flesh until we are raised from the dead and glorified. So, we will all sin and fail to understand scripture and grieve the Spirit, but we try to do right and walk in the truth of God's Word and mold our lives and practice in accordance with it and not it in accordance with our lives and practice.

I believe that speaking in the tongues of angels was an illustration made by Paul to make a point, and I believe that no matter what kind of charismatic tongue thing is in question it has ceased if it ever was and no new tongues from God have started again or started for the first time recently. I think the whole charismatic movement is false. It is no wonder that such error erupts from the arminians because arminian theology is false as well. Lies all stem from the same tradition.


well If you believe "all" are flawed then shouldn't you be focusing on getting the beam out of the Baptist eye before you start working on getting the splinter out of the pentacosta eyes.

if you would truely study the prophecy of Joel ( chapter 2) the very same prophecy that Peter repeated at Penacost, I do mean study it with a clear heart, you would see that God pouring out His Spirit on "all" flesh began at pentacost but clearly says that it will end with the sun darkening and the moon turning to blood, and on that great and notable day that the Lord comes, we are still in the last days of Joel's prophecy and will be until He comes in His fullness, and this is when knowledge, that we know partly, will vanish For we will be part with the True Word. we won't need any more prophecy for it will "ALL be fulfilled, we won't need tongues, we will "All' be as one even with our language. but this has nothing to do with your salvation, but I would be just a little less judgemental on those that don't see it your way, but still believe that Jesus was the Son of God !
 
Upvote 0

DesertScroll

Member
Jul 19, 2007
240
1
53
✟22,896.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
that's about "ALL" of your doctrine that I can stomach

Just like Assyria (Evil) was the rod of His anger against Israel. And after His purpose through them was finished, He punished Assyria as well. Isa 10:5-12

Guess I'll keep posting these as you don't seem to have an answer:

-Being saved is by grace. (Eph 2:8,9)
-Mercy does not depend upon man's actions or will, but God alone. (Rom 9:11,12,16)



-----
My head banging against scripture started with this:

"For many are called, but few are chosen". Matt 22:14

My question was chosen on the basis of what? I knew it could not be a works, even the parable showed that. I also knew the righteousness was not of ourselves, but of God (Php 3:9). So I struggled, and struggled, and wrestled... and came up with the greatest idea. We don't do anything, Christians were the ones who don't reject God's gift... its passive. A passive acceptance of God's gift.

Then I read:

"So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy." Rom 9:16

It doesn't rely on man at all, active or passive.

The only question left was why?

God desires all to be saved (1 Tim 2:4).

Isaiah said in 1:9 unless God had left survivors, no one would be left. Paul uses this as Isaiah foretelling about our day "And just as Isaiah foretold[...]" (Rom 9:29). So God desires all to be saved, but because He must act, it must be in line with who He is.

Paul relates through Isaiah again, that although Israel is great in number only a remnant will be saved (Rom 9:27) and the reason is given in the next verse:

"For the Lord will execute His word on the earth, thoroughly and quickly." Rom 9:28

Because no one would come to Jesus, God must act. And His actions comply completely with who He is, His nature. And His nature has always shown, with the OT giving many examples.... it is always only a remnant.

So the answer for why only a few will chosen? Is because that is what God desires, that is what His nature requires. A remnant that must be saved is the best outcome.


progress.gif
 
Upvote 0