Examining Calvinistic "Proof Texts"

[Samson Reaper]

First, I would the whole reference from which you quote Spurgeon.

Discussed at length in this thread (parallel universe).

No problem. Do a bit of googling....

Secondly, since we are on the topic of Calvinism, why would you use a secondary source to define Calvinism? Spurgeon, although I enjoy much of his works, is not Calvin.

You real want me to quote Calvin!!! Have you not heard of Calvin's terrible decree?

Moreover, Spurgeon and Calvin both are not infallible, and I am not aware that either of them ever claimed to be. I have heard something of this claim before (perhaps from Dave Hunt or Norm Geisler)

Forgive me but I doubt either of these made any such claim.

...it is removing Spurgeon's complete context, changing the meaning of what Spurgeon wrote. Y

I quoted most of it. However see the link in point 1 above.

In regards to 1 Timothy 2:3-4, the context is referring to all kinds of men (1 Timothy 2:1-2), not every single human being that has ever existed,

No. Spurgeon is abundantly clear on what he said.

and not universal salvation. Salvation is for all kinds of men, but not all men will be saved because of the sovereignty of God and His decree.

Yep Spurgeon dealt with this as well. See preceding posts in

="Samson Reaper, post: 70703972, member: 393613"]

but since it happens to say, “Who will have all men to be saved,” his observations are more than a little out of place. My love for consistency with my own doctrinal views is not great enough to allow me knowingly to alter a single text of Scripture.

I have great respect for orthodoxy, but my reverence for inspiration is far greater. I would sooner a hundred times over appear to be inconsistent with myself than be inconsistent with the word of God. I never thought it to be any very great crime to seem to be inconsistent with myself; for who am I that I should everlastingly be consistent?

But I do think it is a great crime to be so inconsistent with the word of God that I should want to lop away a bough or even a twig from so much as a single tree of the forest of Scripture.

God forbid that I should cut or shape, even in the least degree, any divine expression.

So runs the text, and so we must read it, “God our Saviour; who will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth.”

 

[Samson Reaper]

First, I would the whole reference from which...

Just for info, what version of Calvinism do you hold to e.g Single/double predestination. Infra/Supra lapsarianism etc.

Thanks

 

[EmSw]

In regards to 1 Timothy 2:3-4, the context is referring to all kinds of men (1 Timothy 2:1-2), not every single human being that has ever existed, and not universal salvation. Salvation is for all kinds of men, but not all men will be saved because of the sovereignty of God and His decree.

Joe, you said the following: "I follow Jesus Christ and His inerrant word of the Bible."

Then you turn right around and state 1 Timothy 2:3-4 refers to all KINDS of men. You have added to what the verse actually says. I see you do follow His inerrant word as long as you can add what you desire.

 

[JoeP222w]

You don't understand Calvinism either.

You don't know what I know and what I don't know so do not make such claims.

 

[JoeP222w]

Joe, you said the following: "I follow Jesus Christ and His inerrant word of the Bible."

Then you turn right around and state 1 Timothy 2:3-4 refers to all KINDS of men. You have added to what the verse actually says. I see you do follow His inerrant word as long as you can add what you desire.

1 Timothy 2:1-4 First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, (2) for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. (3) This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, (4) who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.


I have not added anything. Your traditions appear to be overpowering your ability to read the text exegetically.

 

[JoeP222w]

Just for info, what version of Calvinism do you hold to e.g Single/double predestination. Infra/Supra lapsarianism etc.

Thanks

First and foremost, the Bible defines what I believe. As I have said in other places, I find Calvinism to be consistent with what scripture teaches. I do not categorize myself as some subset of Calvinism as my identity. Christ is my identity. I don't believe that Calvin was infallible, nor do I believe that he claimed himself to be.

 

[JoeP222w]

Have you not heard of Calvin's terrible decree?

Calvin was not God. Just a sinful man saved by the grace of God.

Spurgeon is abundantly clear on what he said.

In the end it does not matter what Spurgeon said. It matters what God has spoken.

 

[EmSw]

You don't know what I know and what I don't know so do not make such claims.

Why the chip on your shoulder?

 

[EmSw]

1 Timothy 2:1-4 First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, (2) for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. (3) This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, (4) who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.


I have not added anything. Your traditions appear to be overpowering your ability to read the text exegetically.

If exegesis of Biblical text is adding words for one's delights, then no, exegesis is not for me.

Now you deny that you added anything to the text. The above passages do not give you the liberty to add anything to texts.

All 'kinds' of people, huh? Add away, my friend.

 

[Marvin Knox]

The groups you list, for the most part, do not believe God's predestines what men believe; they allow man's free will to choose as they desire.

Duh!

That's why they were called "non-Calvinists" by me in my post.

You don't seem to get my point. I believe that's because you simply want to argue.

Let me ask you this Marvin. Since you do believe man has free will (a rarity among Calvinists), does man's free will overrule God's predestination and sovereignty?

No - rather than overrule it (or God's sovereignty overrule their free will) - the free choices of men are the means which God uses to bring to past what He has predestined to occur.

Rather than "overrule" what God has predestined to occur - they establish what God has predestined to occur.

(The crucifixion of Christ is a prime example).

But you've been told these thing a thousand times now.

You just want to argue and continue in your misconceptions about what Calvinists believe. You will not be corrected on anything.

Or perhaps you are unable to follow simple logical concepts when they are explained to you. After that first sentence in your post - I believe that to be the case.

Over time I have vacillated in my opinion of you between believing that you are just not the sharpest tool in the shed and believing that your silly statements are just because you get so wrapped up in wanting to argue for it's own sake that you end up appearing to be a bit dense.

At any rate - and for now.

 

[EmSw]

Duh!

That's why they were called "non-Calvinists" by me in my post.

You don't seem to get my point. I believe that's because you simply want to argue.

That is not your point. I gave multiple Calvinistic groups, showing they all have complete and unhindered free will to choose what they believe. This has nothing to do with predestination, as God would not have some of His 'elect' believe one thing while predestining others to believe another. In this case, God is predestining His elect to believe lies.

No - rather than overrule it (or God's sovereignty overrule their free will) - the free choices of men are the means which God uses to bring to past what He has predestined to occur.

Rather than "overrule" what God has predestined to occur - they establish what God has predestined to occur.

(The crucifixion of Christ is a prime example).

'Establish' is just a Reformed buzz word they think settles their beliefs. Wrong Marvin! That is just like if someone shows up in church, it establishes them as a Christian.

You haven't and can't possibly prove anyone has free will with your doctrine of predestination, no matter how you put your twist on it. It CANNOT be free will if it's already 'established' by God from the beginning.

But you are one who can systematically 'establish' white is black by your wild reasonings. Those who use the reasoning given by God, will see the fallacy of your arguments. Only those who confirm themselves in these 'mysterious' arguments will agree with your views.

But you've been told these thing a thousand times now.

You just want to argue and continue in your misconceptions about what Calvinists believe. You will not be corrected on anything.

Or perhaps you are unable to follow simple logical concepts when they are explained to you. After that first sentence in your post - I believe that to be the case.

Just because you state your argument a million times does not make it truth. I will not and can not be corrected with fallacy, no matter how hard you try. You can degrade me all you want, my friend; that does not prove you are right and I am wrong.

Over time I have vacillated in my opinion of you between believing that you are just not the sharpest tool in the shed and believing that your silly statements are just because you get so wrapped up in wanting to argue for it's own sake that you end up appearing to be a bit dense.

At any rate - and for now.

I am not here to get anyone's opinion of me. If you think you know my heart and judge me thus, you are the one who is fooled. The hammer is not the sharpest tool in the shed, but it does its work just fine. And, appearances can be deceiving.

 

[Jack Terrence]

So Boxer, are you on this forum by instinct, programming, or free will? If not by your own free will, then you are spamming this thread.

You mock science, eh?

 

[EmSw]

You mock science, eh?

What is it? Are you on this forum by instinct, programming, or free will?

 

[Jack Terrence]

What is it? Are you on this forum by instinct, programming, or free will?

Don't be a wise guy. If science has proven that free will is only an illusion, then Christianity must accept it if it is going to have any credibility in the world. And you must adjust your interpretation of scripture accordingly. The scripture no where affirms free will.

 

[EmSw]

Don't be a wise guy. If science has proven that free will is only an illusion, then Christianity must accept it if it is going to have any credibility in the world. And you must adjust your interpretation of scripture accordingly. The scripture no where affirms free will.

Science also says we came from apes, that an explosion started all things, and life started in mucky water. I guess you believe them also when they say free will is an illusion.

 

[Geralt]

ridiculous unbelief, when christ was already there stating the answers. you dont need calvinism to answer your questions.

Predestination and calvinism

If Calvinism's idea of predestination is right per the above link, then in John 8:41 the Jews said they were of God, that God was their Father. Then according to the Calvinistic proof text of John 10:26, those of God, Christ's sheep, will automatically believe in Christ and be saved, yet these Jews were rejecting Christ. So why were these Jews who said God was their Father rejecting Christ?


======


Mt 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!"


1) If these Jews were predestined by God to be saved, then why were they rejecting Christ, killing the prophets of God sent unto them?

2) If these Jews were predestined by God to be lost, then why was Christ wanting them to be saved? Why did Christ love them and not 'hate' them as God 'hated' Esau?

 

[Jack Terrence]

Science also says we came from apes, that an explosion started all things, and life started in mucky water. I guess you believe them also when they say free will is an illusion.

Free Will Is an Illusion, so What?

 

[Jack Terrence]

So, if that is the case, we are not responsible for our actions. Thus justice and judgement are an illusion also.
If I have no real choice over what I do how can a just God find me faulty?

Free Will Is an Illusion, so What?

 

[EmSw]

Free Will Is an Illusion, so What?

So, you believe in the big bang theory and evolution also, just because science says so? How sad.

 

[Widlast]

Free Will Is an Illusion, so What?

If you are going to make a reply put in the effort to make it an intelligent one, and not just a reference to somebody else's drivel.