For Your Information - Hunt Exposes Calvinism

heymikey80 · May 8, 2009

YouTube - Debating Calvinism (James White vs. Dave Hunt on John 6:37-44)

To someone on a drifting vessel, solid ground seems to be moving.

But it's not.

nobdysfool · May 8, 2009

Benefactor said:
Your answer is why RT / Calvinism are situational theology. You are demonstrating that with your approach to Scripture to avoid the clear meaning of the text you find a situation whereby you can argue against its clear Biblical truth.

You are what you are a Calvinist.

You can't refute the theology, so you try to marginalize the Calvinist. The non- and anti-Calvinists here have been soundly refuted, and there's nothing you can do about it. Deal with the theology, and leave the personalities out of it.

I am a Calvinist by the Grace of God.

Benefactor · May 10, 2009

Have you ever tried talking to a dead person?

nobdysfool · May 10, 2009

Benefactor said:
Have you ever tried talking to a dead person?

And what is that supposed to mean?

Benefactor · May 10, 2009

What does it mean? It means what it is asking. The next time you are at a funeral home or where a dead person is talk to that person and see if they respond to you.

A dead person will not talk back, it can't think, will, or express emotions etc. No in all reality the body that is before you is nothing more than a combination of elements that will soon return to the earth and the soul is departed.

I ask you should the dead person act any different?

nobdysfool · May 10, 2009

Benefactor said:
What does it mean? It means what is asking. The next time you are at a funeral home or where a dead person is talk to that person and see if they respond to you.

A dead person will not talk back, it can't think, will, or express emotions etc. No in all reality the body that is before you is nothing more than a combination of elements that will soon return to the earth and the soul is departed.

I ask you should the dead person act any different?

You're obviously going someplace with this, so just cut to it. I have no time for games.

Benefactor · May 10, 2009

nobdysfool said:
You're obviously going someplace with this, so just cut to it. I have no time for games.

Aren't we all going somewhere with our questions? Yes

Just answer the question.

Charis kai Dunamis · May 11, 2009

Benefactor said:
What does it mean? It means what is asking. The next time you are at a funeral home or where a dead person is talk to that person and see if they respond to you.

A dead person will not talk back, it can't think, will, or express emotions etc. No in all reality the body that is before you is nothing more than a combination of elements that will soon return to the earth and the soul is departed.

I ask you should the dead person act any different?

Eph 2:1 And you were dead in your trespasses and sins...

nobdysfool · May 11, 2009

Benefactor said:
Aren't we all going somewhere with our questions? Yes

Just answer the question.

Then you should have no problem answering mine. After you.....

Benefactor · May 11, 2009

To be informed with respect to the debate between Calvinism and non Calvinist take time to view the U-tube series by David Hunt by clicking the address below.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7364936/#post51587616

heymikey80 · May 11, 2009

Benefactor said:
To be informed with respect to the debate between Calvinism and non Calvinist take time to view the U-tube series by David Hunt by clicking the address below.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7364936/#post51587616

The one who states his case first seems right,
until the other comes and examines him.
http://www.christianforums.com/t7364936/#post51588689

nobdysfool · May 11, 2009

Benefactor said:
To be informed with respect to the debate between Calvinism and non Calvinist take time to view the U-tube series by David Hunt by clicking the address below.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7364936/#post51587616

I'm quite sure that the reason so much credence is given by some to Dave Hunt's so-called "debate" is because he's saying what they want to believe about Calvinism. It's easier than actually taking the time to find out what Calvinism is really all about, and to separate the fact from the fiction.

It seems that there can be no serious debate, because the non-Calvinists insist on repeating canards and falsehoods about Calvinism, which if left unanswered and uncorrected, cause the debate to collapse, because the discussion is not about real issues, but false ones. We cannot have a debate about false issues, and arrive at true conclusions.

The non-Calvinists don't seem to understand how insulting and annoying those falsehoods and canards are to the Calvinists. They make these statements, and then wonder why we are sometimes a little prickly about answering. If they were insulted and lied about constantly, they might begin to understand how it feels. If their only motive is to somehow "defeat" Calvinism, they don't seem to realize that we can see that one a mile off, and we react accordingly. When there is no respect, they should not be surprised if they do not receive any.

Benefactor · May 11, 2009

Dr. Hunt is a godly man and I hope that Calvinist are not suggesting He is not.

nobdysfool · May 11, 2009

Benefactor said:
Dr. Hunt is a godly man and I hope that Calvinist are not suggesting He is not.

I am making no judgment as to his spiritual condition, and you know it. However, he can be godly, and seriously wrong, which you obviously aren't willing to consider. Godliness does not confer correctness.

Benefactor · May 11, 2009

nobdysfool said:
I am making no judgment as to his spiritual condition, and you know it. However, he can be godly, and seriously wrong, which you obviously aren't willing to consider. Godliness does not confer correctness.

Godliness does not confer correctness - I can accept that. However, Godliness trumps all men's errors in doctrine or perceived errors by others. I would be heart broken if Dr. Hunt or any person I look up to were to display actions unbecoming of a believer, as do some I am not permitted to refer.

For example: Two people call themselves Christian

Christian one believes something that is clearly not biblical
Christian two believes something that is clearly not biblical

Christian one however, does exemplify godly living
Christian two however, does not exemplify godly living

Which would you follow? Which would your be bless to associate with?

I have a 100 percent convection that there are no Believers ever that have been one hundred percent correct in all areas but while that, in my minds eye, is a solid conviction of mine any such person within the 100 percent who is not living a godly life looses their credibility.

nobdysfool · May 11, 2009

Benefactor said:
Godliness does not confer correctness - I can accept that. However, Godliness trumps all men's errors in doctrine or perceived errors by others. I would be heart broken if Dr. Hunt or any person I look up to were to display actions unbecoming of a believer, as do some I am not permitted to refer.

For example: Two people call themselves Christian

Christian one believes something that is clearly not biblical
Christian two believes something that is clearly not biblical

Christian one however, does exemplify godly living
Christian two however, does not exemplify godly living

Which would you follow? Which would your be bless to associate with?

I have a 100 percent convection that there are no Believers ever that have been one hundred percent correct in all areas but while that, in my minds eye, is a solid conviction of mine any such person within the 100 percent who is not living a godly life looses their credibility.

The flaw in that theory is that Truth is not dependent on the teacher, or the messenger. That is not to say that an ungodly messenger makes it harder to see the Truth, but Truth is Truth, no matter who states it. Also, ungodly can be a subjective judgment, unless one is very careful.

We are to live a godly life before men, no question. We are commanded to. But, as you have correctly pointed out, no one achieves 100% correctness in all areas. Therefore, we must not judge the Truth by the speaker's imperfections, and conclude that because they are not perfect, what they say must be wrong. That is a logical fallacy. There's been far too much of that on this forum. And I say again that it is because it's easier to jump to that conclusion than it is to do the due diligence to separate the message from the messenger.

I have no doubt that you truly believe what you say, but in the spirit of christian love, I must ask you to leave behind the cliches and canards about Calvinism, and deal with the truth of the theology of Calvinism, and address that. Nothing is accomplished by inaccurate and outright wrong polemics. It becomes a defense mechanism to deflect from the examination of what you believe. Certainly you wish to be correct in your beliefs. Why then, all the attempts to avoid examination of those beliefs?

MamaZ · May 12, 2009

Benefactor said:
Have you ever tried talking to a dead person?

This is what scripture tells us all the time that those dead in their tresspasses cannot hear Gospel for they are dead men. LOL.. This is why dead men cannot choose to respond to a living God. God has to cause them to be born again.. Wow I think He finally is getting it..

Benefactor · May 12, 2009

MamaZ said:
This is what scripture tells us all the time that those dead in their tresspasses cannot hear Gospel for they are dead men. LOL.. This is why dead men cannot choose to respond to a living God. God has to cause them to be born again..

Now let’s take it to its logical conclusion.

The person next door to you let us assume is not saved, therefore he is dead, yet he lives, he makes decisions, he feels, wills, thinks, etc. what then is dead and is dead really dead? Are you actually willing to stand firm on the view that mans soul is dead and that the body is walking around with a lifeless dead non functioning soul? What exactly is dead about the person, be very specific.

Is the soul dead and are the soul and spirit the same or is the spirit dead the soul alive or is the man simply living and has on functioning soul / spirit either or. It is your belief so let’s find out exactly how you really and completely define dead in sins and trespasses.

the particular baptist · May 12, 2009

Benefactor said:
in my minds eye, is a solid conviction of mine any such person within the 100 percent who is not living a godly life looses their credibility.

*deleted*

nobdysfool · May 12, 2009

Benefactor said:
Now let’s take it to its logical conclusion.

The person next door to you let us assume is not saved, therefore he is dead, yet he lives, he makes decisions, he feels, wills, thinks, etc. what then is dead and is dead really dead? Are you actually willing to stand firm on the view that mans soul is dead and that the body is walking around with a lifeless dead non functioning soul? What exactly is dead about the person, be very specific.

Is the soul dead and are the soul and spirit the same or is the spirit dead the soul alive or is the man simply living and has on functioning soul / spirit either or. It is your belief so let’s find out exactly how you really and completely define dead in sins and trespasses.

Here's the situation: Man is under sentence of death for sin. He may be alive in the sense that he is breathing, and moving about, but as far as God is concerned, he is a dead man walking. And due to sin, the man is cut off from God, and not in connection to God, but as the Word says, the Wrath of God abides on him. That effectively prevents him from approaching God, even if he wants to, which he doesn't (Romans 1). In order for man to be able to receive spiritual information, he must be changed, something which he cannot do for himself, or by himself. God calls it giving him a new heart of flesh, to replace the heart of stone he currently possesses. This equates to the new birth, and what man can cause his own birth, either physically or spiritually? Birth is something that happens to a man, not something he does.

This whole idea of decisional regeneration is based on the idea that man is not really dead to God, only misinformed, and given the right information, he can choose to repent and believe. However, the Word says the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, because they are foolish to him, and he cannot know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 1 Corinthians 1 and 2 establish that the Gospel is one of those spiritual things, and therefore cannot be understood or received by the natural, carnal man. The Gospel is, to those who are being saved, the wisdom of God and the power of God. Those who are being saved are those whom the Spirit has regenerated. they are not doing it themselves, they are having it done to them, which is why Paul said it that way.

Those who are being saved denotes a person whom God has regenerated so that he can hear and understand the Gospel, in order that he will repent and believe.

For Your Information - Hunt Exposes Calvinism

Quidquid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur

The original! Accept no substitutes!

Benefactor

Guest

The original! Accept no substitutes!

Benefactor

Guest

The original! Accept no substitutes!

Benefactor

Guest

χάρις καὶ δύναμις

The original! Accept no substitutes!

Benefactor

Guest

Quidquid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur

The original! Accept no substitutes!

Benefactor

Guest

The original! Accept no substitutes!

Benefactor

Guest

The original! Accept no substitutes!

MamaZ

Guest

Benefactor

Guest

pactum serva

The original! Accept no substitutes!

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency