How, then, is the Calvinist refuted? (2)

[Ben johnson]

Therefore, it is impossible to believe WHILE dead. Yet, you insist that you do in fact believe WHEN you are dead....

Of course it is (possible). Indeed, 1Cor1:21 says "God is well pleased, THROUGH the foolishness of the Gospel preached, to save those WHO believe".

Believe-through-foolishness, Woody; there it is. Calvinism would have it say "sovereign-regeneration CHANGES the Gospel from 'foolish' to 'power', so that he THEN believes".

Not what it says...

But WHILE (or "when") we were dead, we were made alive through faith. ~ Ben Johnson.
The sad part is that you can't even see the glaring contradiction.

No contradiction at all; faith receives grace, and makes us alive.

You would have it say "made-alive, and THEN faith". Not what it says.

Funny, I thought that God made us alive.

Yup --- He does, through our faith.

So, faith is not of grace as you insist and faith makes us alive so your being made alive has nothing to do with God. Like I said....

Has everything to do with God. Faith receives grace.

Read again John1:12-13; grace is nothing of men, and all of God; but RECEIVING grace is by believing and receiving Jesus. (Using "receiving" interchangeably with "begottenness".)

It is almost like you just needed God to die and get out of your way.

Ben, O expert of the Greek, the tense is explicit. At any moment of belief, including the first moment, the act of being born of God is already a finished act not needing to be repeated. This is the meaning of the Greek verb tense.

And it does not conflict "was born WHEN believed". Have you studied the context of chapters 4-5?

Well, it may no longer be in the Ben Johnson private translation of Scripture, but it is still in my Bible....

Romans 4:16
Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,

What do verse 3, and 5 say? What about 20-24?

Your problem, Ben, apart from the fact that you insist that the logical contradiction of belief and dead be true is the fact that you don't even know what the Bible says much less what it really means.

Seems that I just showed I do.

 

[Ben johnson]

A known future choice is no choice -- for he cannot choose ELSE.

Right?

Of course he can choose "else". He can choose anything he wants. Simply KNOWING the future doesn't mean the knower CAUSES it. That's why I brought up Start Trek and BTTF...

Ben, don't you think it is plainly obvious to the ENTIRE world that you simply rewrite any verse of Scripture which doesn't agree with you.

John 10:26
But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.

OK, let's take it one point at a time.

Do you agree that Jesus is saying, "You don't believe that I'm the Messiah...."

???

 

[Ben johnson]

This doesn't refute my point at all. I never said God only chooses a few. How on earth would I know whether its a few or many?

By looking around the World. There are more "non-Christians".

It's not for me to know - and I probably never will know.

Will you not "know them by their fruits"?

The point of Matt 11:27 is that God chooses.

Not in context with 21-24.

Who, when, and how many I can't answer - no one can. You are putting words in my mouth Ben - you've done it since the LBMB days.

Those were good days, weren't they? Jerry Jenkins once tried to argue theology, about Rapture timing; he failed miserably.

They never kicked me off of there, because I always posted with love and kindness; and plainly said things like, "Even though the books are fundamentally wrong, I know well how many people have come to know God through them; I cannot condemn that which does good, and I am confident that the Spirit can mature those who seek Him."

Remember the great war? People being banned left-and-right? In the midst, was a young lady truly asking about salvation; many accused her of being a "sock". But she was sincere, and she received an honest and caring answer to her question.

Fact is God is the one doing the revealing - not man finding.

Which part of "those who seek" in Heb11:6, is not true?

Actually Jesus did mention it - sort of - in 11:27. This doesn't refute any of my points. I don't deny Jesus admonishes - I'm just pointing out that these people aren't going to be able to do so until God enables them.

Verse 27 does not deny the free choice established by the rebuke of 21-24.

Again - putting words in my mouth. I never said God chose both to unbelief. I just said that they, we, he, she, everyone is in unbelief until God makes them able. Check out Matthew 11:27.

Isn't it God's choice? In choosing the ELECT, He IGNORES the rest --- so both end as He chooses. Can you deny this?

Predestination would be ruined if vs 27 was NOT there. But it is - so it remains firmly in tact. I have no idea what an "I'm AUTHORIZED" verse is - nor do I want to know if its coming from you.

"I'm authorized", is clear in Jesus' response in Jn6:43-44, to the Jews' complaint in verse 42.

Matt11:27 does not support "predestination". It does not say "I do not choose to reveal the Father to all".

Instead, Jesus clearly says "I will draw ALL MEN to Myself". Jn12:32

As I replied earlier - you would be right had vs 27 not been in the text. And therefore the reason they would have believed is because God would have enabled them to be able to appreciate the miracles in order to believe.

Eventually you and I will come to agreement that if one verse conflicts the WHOLE, then our understanding of that one verse must be suspect.

I think I'm the one who needs scope or something for my mouth - with all the words you keep putting there.

Bottom line - God is soverign over all - including man's will.

Ha! You just endorsed what "ReformedTruth" said.

(Told ya', RT... )

Like I said earlier - you'd be right had vs 27 not been in this text.

As I said, verse 27 does not assert "selective revelation".

 

[Ben johnson]

Ben,

Take a break from your endless circle

Does seem that way, doesn't it? But "patience is a virtue"...

Have you found any answers to what I had stated in my last post to you?
Either Christ is victorious over death or He is not. There is no middle ground here.

We mostly agree; but it's faith that enrolls one in "life".

And conversely, look at 1Thess3:8 --- we LIVE, if we STAND FIRM in the Lord.

We're right back to Rom1:17: "The righteousness of God is revealed from BEGINNING faith to ENDING faith..."

If you don't believe He is Risen, then no one is risen. If you believe His is Risen from the dead, then all mankind will also be rasied, they all were made alive by Christ. It is either/or, nothing in between.

Nooooo --- "made-alive", is "saved"; it's by grace, through faith.

We are either "dead-in-sins", or "alive-in-Christ through faith.

Both your view and CCWoody's with whom you are going in circles have the same problem.

Gak.

( @ Woody)

You are trying to get a dead man to believe.

Dead men CAN believe. 1Cor1:21.

It does not matter how he might believe, it all ends in death because both of your theologies end in death for human beings, nullifying any faith or life eternal.

Not mine...

I know both of you will say that you believe Christ arose, but your theology says otherwise.

Huh-uhhh.

Christ rose, and all WHO believe, are saved.

Are "made-alive".

Are "justified", and "sanctified", and "washed".

By God's grace, through our faith.

 

[Rightglory]

Ben,

We mostly agree; but it's faith that enrolls one in "life".

Can you find a text that says that which would exclude all those other rising from the dead. Is Christ the first-born of the dead, or only of some of the dead?
If faith enrolls life, then one must assume that all those arising on the last day, are being raised to eternal life by faith? If you disagree with that assumption, then what makes it possible for all of mankind to rise from the dead? And if they can be raised other than by faith, why is Christ necessary? How is Gen 3:19 overturned for those who will be condemned to hell, which is not physical death, but spiritual death, the second death?
Now, you are falling into the same trap of the Calvinists, "all" never means all in the Bible.
How could Christ miss reconciling any human beings if He reconciled ALL THINGS to Himself?

And conversely, look at 1Thess3:8 --- we LIVE, if we STAND FIRM in the Lord.
We're right back to Rom1:17: "The righteousness of God is revealed from BEGINNING faith to ENDING faith..."

The context is all of faith, that is why it refers to faith in each, life IN Christ, or Life in the Lord. It is very specifically refering to our spiritual existance IN Christ. Not life, the physical life we recieved through or by Christ. We can live IN Him (spiritual life) because He first gave us life (physical).
You will never find physical life associated with faith, or the result of faith.

We are either "dead-in-sins", or "alive-in-Christ through faith.

Quite contrary. In order to have that choice be valid, or viable, one must first have physical life. You need to recind Gen 3:19. This is the condemnation of mankind to death. If that is not changed, defeated, then all men will remain dead. There is and can be no life (physical) outside of Christ. A man cannot go to hell unless he has life, physical life. God cannot judge a pile of dust, the result of the condemnation of mankind. You have failed to overturn the adage, As in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. You have failed to find a text that overturns, Rom 11:32, Rom 5:18-19, I Cor 15:14-22 as well as all those texts that coroborate His Resurrection, substantiates the Incarnation, that all men shall rise on the last day to stand in judgment.

Dead men CAN believe. 1Cor1:21.

then WHY Christ? It is specifically the judgment against mankind through Adam, "death" physical death, that Christ was needed. It is man's lack of life, his mortality that precluded any spiritual existance with man. It is why I Cor 15:14-19 is so directly specific to this concept. If the dead be raised, then Christ indeed has risen. If the dead are not raised, then Christ is not risen. Which do you believe?
Right now, you believe that Christ did not rise from the dead by your theology.

My statement: It does not matter how he might believe, it all ends in death because both of your theologies end in death for human beings, nullifying any faith or life eternal.
Your response:
Not mine...

As yet you have not refuted that all mankind will not be raised in the last day?
Which texts overturns all of these: Acts 24:15; Acts 23:6; I Cor 15:52, Eph 1:10; John 5:28, John 12: 32, I Tim 4:10, Is 26:19, Dan 12:2, Luke 2:30-32, Rev 20:12-13.

Christ rose, and all WHO believe, are saved.

Saved from hell. But you have most of humanity still dead, because they are just dust, Gen 3:19. Unless you believe that dust has life in and of itself. To me the Bible says that God breathed into man and He became a living soul. So as far as I know, dust does not have life, at least by Scripture. How can Christ be the life, the Light, the Savior of the world, if most of mankind is ommitted? thus the world itself?

Are "made-alive".
Are "justified", and "sanctified", and "washed".By God's grace, through our faith.

You have not shown that as yet. All of mankind is justified, redeemed, reconciled, made acceptable, made right with God by Christ through His Work. (Grace) We then can, are able to believe with purpose, and are justified by faith to God, are cleansed, sanctified by Grace through faith.
It is why Paul in Eph 2: 5 does not add faith and all the translations, I believe, use paratheses around the phrase, (saved by Grace) then believers are specificed and the Grace through faith is added in verse 8. It is the same difference between "the sheep" and "His Sheep", It is the same difference of John 6: 39 from 40 and several more.
We can ONLY live IN Christ because we all have been made alive through Christ.
The ONLY way you can refute the above is find some text that denies that all of mankind will rise from the dead. If you can, then the Incarnation is overturned. Christ did not need to assume our natures, to become man, since our natures were not dead (mortal) thus did not need life. Christ will be proven not to have been victorious over death (for all). The last enemy will not have been defeated, death, mentioned in I Cor 15:26 Verse 32 even says it better.
Can you do that?

 

[cygnusx1]

Hi again, RT. Even though you and I disagree on basic things, we're perfectly in agreement on one thing:

There is no Calvinism, but Hyper-Calvinism.

...

ben you disgust me !


why ?

because of your stubborn and impenitant heart !!

you are stiffnecked ;
http://foru.ms/t3234368&page=3

 

[Ben johnson]

[/quote]Can you find a text that says that which would exclude all those other rising from the dead.[/quote]There are to "resurrections"; as Rev20 says, "Blessed and holy is he who has a part in the first resurrection --- over these the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of Christ and God and shall reign with Him for a thousand years." Rev20:6

The second resurrection is for unbelievers, to judgment and condemnation.

Is Christ the first-born of the dead, or only of some of the dead?

Col1:17 says "He is first-born from the dead", meaning that "He has authority even over death".

He is not Lord over unbelievers.

If faith enrolls life, then one must assume that all those arising on the last day, are being raised to eternal life by faith?

Those in the "First Resurrection", are.

If you disagree with that assumption, then what makes it possible for all of mankind to rise from the dead?

Those raised second, are to be condemned.

And if they can be raised other than by faith, why is Christ necessary?

They are "raised", but they are not granted "immortality". Immortality is awarded at the Final Judgment, to the righteous --- Rom2:6-8 is clear on that.

How is Gen 3:19 overturned for those who will be condemned to hell, which is not physical death, but spiritual death, the second death?

I think I just answered that.

Now, you are falling into the same trap of the Calvinists, "all" never means all in the Bible.

It does in Rom11:32, and 5:18.

How could Christ miss reconciling any human beings if He reconciled ALL THINGS to Himself?

They dynamic is clear --- reconcilliation is TO all things, but for men it conditions on FAITH. Paul specifically said: "He has reconciled you to God through His fleshly body, if indeed you CONTINUE in the faith firmly established and steadfast and not be moved away from the Hope of the Gospel (Jesus)." Col1:21-23

Reconcilliation, is conditioned on faith --- no faith, no reconcilliation.

The context is all of faith, that is why it refers to faith in each, life IN Christ, or Life in the Lord. It is very specifically refering to our spiritual existance IN Christ. Not life, the physical life we recieved through or by Christ. We can live IN Him (spiritual life) because He first gave us life (physical).

Right.

You will never find physical life associated with faith, or the result of faith.

Eternal life is the consequence of faith; condemnation is the consequence of unbelief. 1Jn5:10.

Quite contrary.

How do you "repeal" what Paul said in Rom6? We are EITHER slaves to sin, OR slaves to God and righteousness.

In order to have that choice be valid, or viable, one must first have physical life. You need to rescind Gen 3:19.

Genesis 3:19 only says "you will return to dust". Rev20 speaks of two resurrections --- one to life, the "Rapture", the other to judgment and condemnation.

This is the condemnation of mankind to death. If that is not changed, defeated, then all men will remain dead.

Without receiving Christ, men are dead in their sins.

There is and can be no life (physical) outside of Christ.

Right.

A man cannot go to hell unless he has life, physical life.

God cannot judge a pile of dust, the result of the condemnation of mankind.[/quote]He will be raised for judgment; he still has his sins, which were not washed away by Jesus' blood through his faith.

You have failed to overturn the adage, As in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.

THe key to what you said, is "in Christ"; only those who believe and receive Him, are "in Christ".

Paul said: "If any man be IN CHRIST, he is a new creation; the old has passed (is passing) away, behold all has become new (new things have come)."

You have failed to find a text that overturns, Rom 11:32

Jn1:12.

Rom 5:18-19

Rom5:17.

I Cor 15:14-22

1Cor15:57.

... as well as all those texts that coroborate His Resurrection, substantiates the Incarnation, that all men shall rise on the last day to stand in judgment.

Those in the "Second Resurrection", are already condemned by their unforgiven sin.

then WHY Christ?

What (who) do you think they believe IN? Belief receives Christ --- and it is WHEN (while!) we are dead in sins. Eph2:5-8.

It is specifically the judgment against mankind through Adam, "death" physical death, that Christ was needed.

Christ is the propitiation for sins, the gift by grace of eternal life.

It is man's lack of life, his mortality that precluded any spiritual existance with man. It is why I Cor 15:14-19 is so directly specific to this concept. If the dead be raised, then Christ indeed has risen. If the dead are not raised, then Christ is not risen. Which do you believe?

If Christ is not risen, then our faith is in vain.

Is that speaking of "believers", or "everyone"? 1Cor15:14 It's speaking of "those who have faith"...

Right now, you believe that Christ did not rise from the dead by your theology.

That does not follow.

As yet you have not refuted that all mankind will not be raised in the last day?

All will be raised; those in the First Resurrection (before the "wrath of the Tribulation", but after the majority of the Tribulation"), and those in the SECOND resurrection. The first are saved, the second are not.

Which texts overturns all of these: Acts 24:15; Acts 23:6; I Cor 15:52, Eph 1:10; John 5:28, John 12: 32, I Tim 4:10, Is 26:19, Dan 12:2, Luke 2:30-32, Rev 20:12-13.

Two resurrections. "Blessed and holy is he who has a part in the FIRST resurrection"...

Saved from hell. But you have most of humanity still dead, because they are just dust, Gen 3:19. Unless you believe that dust has life in and of itself. To me the Bible says that God breathed into man and He became a living soul. So as far as I know, dust does not have life, at least by Scripture. How can Christ be the life, the Light, the Savior of the world, if most of mankind is ommitted? thus the world itself?

When Scripture says "Jesus gives life", it refers to "eternal life".

As Jesus said, "Unless you repent, you will die in your sins."

You have not shown that as yet. All of mankind is justified, redeemed, reconciled, made acceptable, made right with God by Christ through His Work. (Grace)

Then there is no need for repentance.

We then can, are able to believe with purpose, and are justified by faith to God, are cleansed, sanctified by Grace through faith.

If all have been cleaned/sanctified/justified, then why is there still a need?

It is why Paul in Eph 2: 5 does not add faith and all the translations, I believe, use paratheses around the phrase, (saved by Grace) then believers are specificed and the Grace through faith is added in verse 8.

It's still the same thing. By grace, by grace through faith, and WHEN we were dead in sins.

Faith which receives grace, makes us alive.

It is the same difference between "the sheep" and "His Sheep", It is the same difference of John 6: 39 from 40 and several more.

Only the "saved", are called "sheep".

The others are goats.

We can ONLY live IN Christ because we all have been made alive through Christ.

Exactly; but "made-alive", is "through faith".

The ONLY way you can refute the above is find some text that denies that all of mankind will rise from the dead. If you can, then the Incarnation is overturned. Christ did not need to assume our natures, to become man, since our natures were not dead (mortal) thus did not need life. Christ will be proven not to have been victorious over death (for all). The last enemy will not have been defeated, death, mentioned in I Cor 15:26 Verse 32 even says it better.
Can you do that?

I think I've supported that reconcilliation is conditional, and faith is causal.

Those who WILL not believe, are not justified/sanctified/cleansed/reconciled.

 

[Ben johnson]

ben you disgust me !

I'm sorry to have offended you, brother. It's always been my contention that "if God sovereignly elects a FEW, and the REST are left to their irresistible/unavoidable demise, then He has predestined THEM, TO their destruction.

"Double-predestination", making God causal to sin.

...either "actively", or if only by "negligence"...

why ?

Because under "predestination", it's all God's choice.

because of your stubborn and impenitant heart !!

Of what need I repent?

you are stiffnecked ;
http://foru.ms/t3234368&page=3

If God predestines the saved, then He also has sovereignly chosen the REST, to CONDEMNATION.

That is my understanding of "Hyper-Calvinism".

 

[CCWoody]

Both your view and CCWoody's with whom you are going in circles have the same problem. You are trying to get a dead man to believe.

Incorrect!!!

The Reformed view is that the new birth logically preceeds belief, just exactly as the Scriptures explicitly state....

[bible]1 John 5:1[/bible]

Recognize that all true Christians will be Calvinists in glory....

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.​

 

[frumanchu]

There is no mistake at all that you talk out of both sides of your mouth again in your attempt to explain how God can predestine "all things" without ordering the sinful actions of men. You speak of what you "must do" and it is obvious what that is, engage in sophisty because you want to have your cake and eat it also, your god predestining everything except hands off when people sin. Like the Arminian, you shift gears pointing away from your god to the heart and will of man. Yet God knows all the minute details of the future because he ordered them, including the sinful words, actions, and deeds foretold in the passion account. Nothing can account for these prophetic details but divine activity to assure the specific sinful actions. Active, hands on. People like yourself though eagerly accept God`s irresistible activity when it comes to your salvation but cry "no no no!" when it comes to the biblical truths involving the divine ordination of evil. But your double mindedness is a stench in the nostrils of God. And you preach on about Joseph`s brothers while having nothing to say about the likes of the Holocaust or the child rapist Chester Arthur Stiles. God foreknew these details as well down to the sound of every groan or plea for mercy because he ordered all aspects the events. Therefore choice is an illusion, for God predestined even the evil actions of men to demonstrate his wrath. And those who would complain about the justice of this are in essence instructed to keep silent. You can`t have your cake and eat it too. We need truth tellers in Calvinism, not lofty tap dancing hoping the difficult issues will go away. The world isn`t impressed or fooled nor are scripturally conscious Christians.

It's always such a joy to see someone like you beat people over the head without even trying to understand where they're coming from.

I never said God does not order the sinful actions of men. I said He does not AUTHOR them. I have no problem whatsoever affirming the fact that God ordains whatsoever comes to pass...including the Holocaust and child rapists.

You're barking up the wrong tree here, pal. Feel free to ask any of the other Calvinists in here about my views on God's sovereignty over ALL THINGS (and to what extent I openly and vocally defend them) before you go any further in condemning me.

 

[frumanchu]

Of course it is (possible). Indeed, 1Cor1:21 says "God is well pleased, THROUGH the foolishness of the Gospel preached, to save those WHO believe".

Believe-through-foolishness, Woody; there it is. Calvinism would have it say "sovereign-regeneration CHANGES the Gospel from 'foolish' to 'power', so that he THEN believes".

According to "Responsible Grace" not only do dead men have to believe before they come to life, but men must embrace something they believe is utter foolishness and untrustworthy before it becomes wisdom in their sight.

Logical contradictions abound in the "Responsible Grace" camp.

 

[cygnusx1]

I'm sorry to have offended you, brother. It's always been my contention that "if God sovereignly elects a FEW, and the REST are left to their irresistible/unavoidable demise, then He has predestined THEM, TO their destruction.

"Double-predestination", making God causal to sin.

...either "actively", or if only by "negligence"...
Because under "predestination", it's all God's choice.
Of what need I repent?
If God predestines the saved, then He also has sovereignly chosen the REST, to CONDEMNATION.

That is my understanding of "Hyper-Calvinism".

come of it ben , I have spent many hours showing you what Hyper Calvinism is , and you wait several Months and then revert back to your original behaviour , Calvinism is not Hyper Calvinism , it is your attitude that is being called into question here , because you have no excuse why you continue to defame Reformed Christians and mislead readers ....... shameful !!

here's the link showing exactly why I am disgusted by your stiffnecked attitude.......

http://foru.ms/t3234368&page=3

6th August 2006, 03:35 PM
" I would report you to a mod for this post , but what is the point ..... YOU are a mod , and yet you post these unsubstantiated and hotly denied accusations! have you ever looked into the history of Hyper Calvinism ...... I doubt it , who is interested in truth when you can just make it up as you go along ben ? why do you think Hyper Calvinism is called Hyper Calvinism ben , here's a clue , it's Hyper , not the real deal , I know you would like it to be the same , after all it is easy shooting imaginary arguements down , and burning straw men ...... it is not so easy facing the truth. Calvinists such as myself make every effort to show you what true Calvinist beliefs are , we quote confessions of faith that are based upon scripture , but are ridiculed because they are not scripture (niether are any of your posts) we make an effort to explain that God does not force anyone against their wills , but this is ignored , we show that the Gospel Offer is serious and unfeigned , but you answer that it is fake ......... how can any reasonable person go on like this ben ? I rejoice in The Lord that we are maligned , and wrongly charged with heretical views , I praise God that this week has taken place , and that I have been falsley charged , libelled. But I do not rejoice in the wrong I have seen done. Finally , Calvinism is the only theology that spares the Christian from fatalism ! " cygnusx1




those who are ignorant have an excuse , you have none.

 

[Ben johnson]

Incorrect!!!

The Reformed view is that the new birth logically preceeds belief, just exactly as the Scriptures explicitly state....

And this diverges from Scripture; regeneration is by the received Spirit, Who is received by belief.

No one can deny Paul's words, "when you were dead in your sins, God made you alive, ...by grace through faith".

There are not two "made-alives", there is not "made-alive and THEN saved", there is only "made-alive, by grace, through faith".

1 John 5:1
Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him.

And this produces zero conflict with the idea that "those WHO believe, are born of God". Look at how John1:12 links to this, and establishes the sequence:

"To as many as RECEIVED Him, to THEM He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe on His name."

In vain would the theological debater attempt to assert that "BECOME-CHILDREN-OF-GOD", doesn't mean "ARE-BORN-OF-GOD".

 

[cygnusx1]

And this diverges from Scripture; regeneration is by the received Spirit, Who is received by belief.

No one can deny Paul's words, "when you were dead in your sins, God made you alive, ...by grace through faith".

There are not two "made-alives", there is not "made-alive and THEN saved", there is only "made-alive, by grace, through faith".

And this produces zero conflict with the idea that "those WHO believe, are born of God". Look at how John1:12 links to this, and establishes the sequence:

"To as many as RECEIVED Him, to THEM He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe on His name."

In vain would the theological debater attempt to assert that "BECOME-CHILDREN-OF-GOD", doesn't mean "ARE-BORN-OF-GOD".

still cutting and splicing scripture !!! shameful!

 

[Ben johnson]

come off it ben, I have spent many hours showing you what Hyper Calvinism is, and you wait several Months and then revert back to your original behaviour, Calvinism is not Hyper Calvinism, it is your attitude that is being called into question here, because you have no excuse why you continue to defame Reformed Christians and mislead readers ....... shameful !!

I'm aware that Calvinists deny the label "Hypercalvinism"; yet the idea of "double-predestination", is why I used the label.

On this site (http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/articles/hypercal.htm ), is the following comment:

A hyper-Calvinist is someone who either:
1. Denies that the gospel call applies to all who hear, OR
2. Denies that faith is the duty of every sinner, OR
3. Denies that the gospel makes any "offer" of Christ, salvation, or mercy to the non-elect (or denies that the offer of divine mercy is free and universal), OR
4. Denies that there is such a thing as "common grace," OR
5. Denies that God has any sort of love for the non-elect.

Do you reject each of these five points?

I would report you to a mod for this post, but what is the point ..... YOU are a mod...

Mods can be reported, as anyone else. But once again I sincerely apologize for angering you, and say again that "I used the term 'Hyper-Calvinism' in regard to the 'double-predestination' (and God sovereignly determines ALL), views."

why do you think Hyper Calvinism is called Hyper Calvinism ben, here's a clue, it's Hyper, not the real deal, I know you would like it to be the same, after all it is easy shooting imaginary arguements down, and burning straw men ...... it is not so easy facing the truth.

In that link above, Phil Johnson says: "Hyper-Calvinism comes in several flavors, so it admits no simple, pithy definition. "

I submit that Calvinism also has "differences of opinion in its followers", so that it is impossible to do justice to ONE view without offending ANOTHER. Also, certain concepts that I find contradictory are stated to be contradictory --- even though Calvinists do not believe they ARE. The best example, is the idea of "free will".

If a man can only choose according to God's sovereign decree, either will to BELIEVE (for the "monergistically-elect"), or if God doesn't want him saved he can ONLY will to disbelieve and sin --- then man really has no choice at all.

And that's why terms like "fatalism" are used...

Calvinists such as myself make every effort to show you what true Calvinist beliefs are, we quote confessions of faith that are based upon scripture, but are ridiculed because they are not scripture (niether are any of your posts) we make an effort to explain that God does not force anyone against their wills...

If a man wills to REJECT God, and God does something to his heart so that he WILLS to believe/follow Him, how is this "not forcing"?

but this is ignored, we show that the Gospel Offer is serious and unfeigned, but you answer that it is fake .........

An offer that requires God to ENABLE a man TO respond, if God then DOES NOT enable him, is not an offer, Cygnus. It's akin to the man digging at the foot of a mountain, and a large boulder is rolling right at him; he can't hear it, because of his headphone-radio. I call and call to him, but he can't hear me. If I know that I must REMOVE his headphones, but I refuse to remove them, have I really called him out of danger?

No.

how can any reasonable person go on like this ben? I rejoice in The Lord that we are maligned , and wrongly charged with heretical views, I praise God that this week has taken place, and that I have been falsley charged, libelled.

With respect, nothing that has been said to you, comes close to Ben being called "Pelagian Heretic", "Shake-n-Bake-Theology", plain "heretic", "works-salvation", "unsaved", etcetera.

I've often ben the recipient of all of those.

But I do not rejoice in the wrong I have seen done. Finally , Calvinism is the only theology that spares the Christian from fatalism ! " cygnusx1

Yet, "fatalism" is a word I've used to describe Calvinism. If a man has no choice in his destiny --- either God SNATCHES him from depravity and monergistically regenerates him so he can ONLY will to believe and follow Jesus, OR God ignores the man knowing that the man MUST will to depravity and firey destruction, then that is zero percent different from the definition of "fatalism".

Mankind being but "flotsam and jetsam in the hands of Sovereign, all-determining, God".

those who are ignorant have an excuse, you have none

I hope I explained myself, and hope you understand my sincere apology at angering you; it is impossible to represent all Calvinists, accurately.

If you begin by presuming that I love you as a saved brother, and would NEVER intentionally set out to defame or injure you, your presumption would be 100% right.

 

[AndOne]

I'm sorry - what exactly does Ben mean by "double-predestination?"

Is it that God predestines some to life and others to damnation? If that is the case - that can hardly be called hyper-calvinism. And I didn't see it in the five points you listed from the sight defining hyper-calvinism - which is right in its assesment.

You really gotta have a clear idea of what Calvinism is before you know what hyper-calvinism is.

Bottom line with hyper-calvinists - they don't evangelize.

 

[frumanchu]

And this diverges from Scripture; regeneration is by the received Spirit, Who is received by belief.

Ben, you continue to ignore a glaring problem with your interpretation of Titus 3:4-7. I have raised the issue four times now...

[post=36115740]Link 1[/post]
[post=39517479]Link 2[/post]
[post=39738157]Link 3[/post]
[post=39785581]Link 4[/post]

...yet not once have you addressed it.

The indwelling of the Holy Spirit was promised as a future even by Christ (John 16:7,13)



The Apostle Peter pointed to this event at Pentecost as the fulfillment of the prophesy of Joel that God would “pour out [his] spirit upon all flesh.” (Acts 2:14-21)


Jesus said plainly to Nicodemus that unless one is regenerated (literally “born again”) he cannot see or even enter into the Kingdom of God. (John 3:3,5).


You say that being born again is only possible with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Since, with few cited exceptions of the Spirit “filling” or “coming upon” in the Old Testament, the saints prior to Pentecost did not have the indwelling Spirit, it follows inescapably that you must believed that no believer prior to Pentecost could have been born again, and thus they could not have seen or entered into the Kingdom of God. This despite the fact that Jesus clearly expected Nicodemus to understand the principle of the necessity of regeneration, rebuking him for "not knowing the basics" (your words)...even though it was not yet possible according to your teachings.


How does Responsible Grace explain this paradox?

 

[Rightglory]

Ben,

My statement: Can you find a text that says that which would exclude all those other rising from the dead.
Your response:
There are to "resurrections"; as Rev20 says, "Blessed and holy is he who has a part in the first resurrection --- over these the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of Christ and God and shall reign with Him for a thousand years." Rev20:6
The second resurrection is for unbelievers, to judgment and condemnation.

there is ONLY ONE general, bodily resurrection which occurs in the last day, the Second coming of Christ.
The "first resurrection" refered to in Rev 20 is the spiritual resurrection all believers experience in baptism. Rom 6 again. That is the first resurrection, whereby we enter into Christ's Kingdom by faith and will be saved through faith. That faith prevents believers from being condemned in that last judgment or the physical one. If you are IN Christ, then the second death, eternal separation has no power over you.
Those with Christ are reigning with Him right now. This is the Kingdom, it has come. It came on Jesus' first day of ministery. Repent, for the Kingdom is at hand.

Col1:17 says "He is first-born from the dead", meaning that "He has authority even over death".
He is not Lord over unbelievers.

You better believe He has authority over death. All authority was given to Him. He conquered death by death. Trampling down death by His own death and resurrection. Death is no more. The condemnation of Adam is no longer in effect. It actually never was since God promised the Messiah at the Garden exist.
Christ is Lord OVER ALL. Is He not the Sovereign Lord? Did God not place all things IN Him, and did He not reconcile all things to Himself, Col 1:15-20.

My Statement: If faith enrolls life, then one must assume that all those arising on the last day, are being raised to eternal life by faith?
Your response:
Those in the "First Resurrection", are.

Yes, they are, but then just how do all those unbeleivers rise from the dead. You stated that LIFE is only granted by or through faith? If you change your mind, just how do they get raised, and why are they different than beleivers. If unbelievers have some other way to be raised, why did Christ need to raise believers differently?

If you disagree with that assumption, then what makes it possible for all of mankind to rise from the dead?
Those raised second, are to be condemned.

Yes, but that does not answer the question. How are they raised. I am assuming you are not sticking to "faith grants life" anymore.

They are "raised", but they are not granted "immortality". Immortality is awarded at the Final Judgment, to the righteous --- Rom2:6-8 is clear on that.

You cannot be raised and not have immortality, eternal existance. Immortality was already awarded mankind in Gen 3:15, it just was not finally and completely fulfilled until the last day when Death is the last enemy.
Rom 2:6-8 is not clear, but vs 11 makes it quite clear that there is no partiality with God. All of mankind will be immortal, they are because Christ arose from the grace and conquered death.He rstored our mortal natures to immortality.

My question:How is Gen 3:19 overturned for those who will be condemned to hell, which is not physical death, but spiritual death, the second death?
Your comment:
I think I just answered that.

You are evading it. You have not yet made any direct statement how the unbeliever can be raised from the dead. You say and agree that they are being raised, but nothing about the cause or how.

It does in Rom11:32, and 5:18.

then you now agree with me. That is precisely why the unbelievers can arise from the dead. God had mercy upon all of mankind, he saved all mankind from death. He gave to all men justification unto life. How plain can it be, Ben. Yet you strolled all around it, and maybe still do.

They dynamic is clear --- reconcilliation is TO all things, but for men it conditions on FAITH.

Why contradict yourself within the same sentence? To be a beleiver an unbeliever must believe, have faith, repent, which is reconciliation of man to God, not the other way around which is what Christ did for mankind. Faith is moot without life. I Cor 15:14-19 again. you cannot get around the fact that Christ restored mankind to life. From mortal to immortal. He recinded the death penalty against mankind inherited through Adam.
Faith has absolutely nothing to do with it. It is all of God, not by the will of man, nor the flesh, but of God.

Paul specifically said: "He has reconciled you to God through His fleshly body, if indeed you CONTINUE in the faith firmly established and steadfast and not be moved away from the Hope of the Gospel (Jesus)." Col1:21-23

But don't take part of one verse and add it to another. Vs 21 is a continuation of the set of verses just before. All man were alienated but He has reconciled, in the body of His flesh (can only be physical reconciliation) for the purpose to present you as beleivers holy, blameless in His Sight, IF indeed you continue in faith. The reconcilation came before faith could take effect and have any meaning. This aligns with all the rest, especially I Cor 15:14-19.

Reconcilliation, is conditioned on faith --- no faith, no reconcilliation.

Yes, the reconciliation that is initiated by man by faith. But again, not even possible unless Christ first reconciled all things to Himself through the Cross, death and His resurrection.

Eternal life is the consequence of faith; condemnation is the consequence of unbelief. 1Jn5:10.

Not at all. Eternal life WITH CHRIST IS THE CONSEQUENCE OF FAITH. and condemnation of unbelief can ONLY happen if that individual has life. Faith does not grant life, physcial life. You will find no text that says so. The problem you are having with these texts that simply say, as above. 'Believe and I will give you eternal life, is that the ultimate goal of Christ is to restore mankind to the ability and capabilty to respond with a consequence. Mankind is restored to life, all of mankind so each and every soul can give an answer to that active call and answer of God to all men to repent. We, that is, all of mankind will give an answer to that universal call, to each and every soul. Made possible ONLY because Christ redeemed mankind. Heaven and hell can not exist if Christ had not come to redeem mankind. Man would have remained under the condemnation of Adam, death, dust to dust, Gen 3:19.

How do you "repeal" what Paul said in Rom6? We are EITHER slaves to sin, OR slaves to God and righteousness

Why the need to recind. It is ONLY possible because of what he stated in Rom 5:18-19. Man needs first to be freed from the bondage to death. He needs life, in order to respond. In order to make a choice of whether he desires to be a slave to sin or the flesh, or to Christ. Under Adam you are not even a slave to either. You are simply dead and convicted. You are dust.

Genesis 3:19 only says "you will return to dust". Rev20 speaks of two resurrections --- one to life, the "Rapture", the other to judgment and condemnation.

Unless dust has life in itself you can stick to your understanding. But Gen also says that God created man from the dust of the earth, THEN breathed life into him and he became a living soul. God is the creator of life, God through Christ is the ONLY one and ONLY way to restore life to man. There are only ONE resurrection in Rev 20. The spiritual one, the first resurrection, as I explained above, occurs at baptism. All of mankind is judged at the Judgement. All will be raised, Christ is indeed the first born of the dead, He is the conqueror over death, period.

My statement: This is the condemnation of mankind to death. If that is not changed, defeated, then all men will remain dead.
Your Response: Without receiving Christ, men are dead in their sins.

Well, yes, but meaningless unless man has physical life first. Man is dead in his own sins without recieving Christ. But all men were dead under the judgment of Adam, one sin, by one man, you inherited death. It would not matter how perfect you were, nor how sinful you were, death was your inevitability. You would not be condemned by anything you did, but only on the basis of what Adam did.

My statement: God cannot judge a pile of dust, the result of the condemnation of mankind. Your response:
He will be raised for judgment; he still has his sins, which were not washed away by Jesus' blood through his faith.

He CANNOT be raised unless given life. He has no sins whatsoever, if Christ did not raise him from the dead. It does not matter what sins, or how many, or how grevious they might be. He was condemned by Adam, not his own sins. That is why God had mercy upon mankind. He created us free for each to make that choice. Thus He freed mankind from the bondage to death, the death of Adam, in order that each could stand in judgment for what HE did in the flesh. Hell does not exist in your theology, unless man, the unbeliever has life. You cannot just say, because the Bible says he is raised the last day, without having a reason, a cause that allows him to be raised. That reason is Christ. He reconciled the world, He gave life to mankind. As in Adam we all die, so also in Christ we all shall be made alive. There is absolutely no text anywhere to be found that can recind that statement. Faith does not grant physical life. It grants spiritual life, spiritual union and communion with God. It was possible for Adam to have communion with God because he was alive physically. But his sin, resulted in death, man fell to being a mortal. A mortal cannot inherit eternal life no matter how much faith, nor as the Bible constantly states, man cannot save himself. How can a mortal being give himself life.

THe key to what you said, is "in Christ"; only those who believe and receive Him, are "in Christ".[]/quote] NO, the key is that by faith we live IN Christ. We are not restored to life in Christ. We need physical life before we can live IN Christ. Physical before spiritual. I Cor 15:46.

Paul said: "If any man be IN CHRIST, he is a new creation; the old has passed (is passing) away, behold all has become new (new things have come)."

But the context is all about our spiritual existance. Living IN Christ, not being made alive in Christ. If you want to hold to your understanding here, then not all men die either. Only those that on the other side of the equation have life in Christ, namely believers, are the only ones to die from Adam. So how do all those others die, from whom or how, or do we have most of humanity still alive from the beginning, having never died?

Cont to part II.....

 

[Rightglory]

Ben,
Cont part II......

My statment:You have failed to find a text that overturns, Rom 11:32
Your answer Jhn 1:12.

Just how does this even address it, unless you now believe that all mankind will actually recieve Him, rather than what it says, "as many as recieve Him.

Rom 5:18-19 Your answer: Rom5:17.

Vs 18-19 is a restatement of 17, so how can it be recinding it?

I Cor 15:14-22 Your answer 1Cor15:57.

AGain, rather than recind, it is substantiating the victory of Christ over death, the sting of sin, is death. and the Resurrection of 14-22 proclaims Christ victory over death as well.

Those in the "Second Resurrection", are already condemned by their unforgiven sin.

But you are assuming that they are no longer condemned through Adam. If not through Adam and through and by their own unbelief, just how did they come to life, in order to stand in judgment. You have yet failed to find a text that overthrows Christ dying and rising, making alive all of mankind from death.

What (who) do you think they believe IN? Belief receives Christ --- and it is WHEN (while!) we are dead in sins. Eph2:5-8.

That's because the question has nothing to do with faith, or believing or even being condemned. I think you misunderstood the question.
We were speaking in the last post and also now, about how unbelievers can be raised from the dead. I stated, if not by Christ then by whom. If by some other means, then why Christ for just believers. Could not God have raised mankind, all mankind the same way as whatever means you have of raising the unbelievers. That is the question. Christ is not a partial victor. He did not fail to overcome death.

Christ is the propitiation for sins, the gift by grace of eternal life.

The atonement was a secondary work of Christ on the Cross. We sin because we are dead, mortal. Because, even if Christ gives mankind immortality it does not occur until the eschotan. Thus man will continue to live in this world with a fallen nature, in a fallen world, and under the wiles of the devil. Consequently because sin separates man from God, God desires union; communion with man, even in this life, sin needed to be propitiated. Thus a believer can repent, can seek forgiveness and be reconciled to God.
Eternal life is of Grace, in fact all grace, there is no faith involved because man had nothing to do with it.

It is man's lack of life, his mortality that precluded any spiritual existance with man. It is why I Cor 15:14-19 is so directly specific to this concept. If the dead be raised, then Christ indeed has risen. If the dead are not raised, then Christ is not risen. Which do you believe?
Your response:
If Christ is not risen, then our faith is in vain.

Yes, but he has risen, thus our faith is not in vain, we and every other human being can beleive if they so desire. If Christ be not risen, we are all still under Adam and to be most pitied.vs19.

Is that speaking of "believers", or "everyone"? 1Cor15:14 It's speaking of "those who have faith"...

It is speaking of believers. But it would be impossible without life for anyone to beleive. you are still under the condemnation of Adam,. permanent death, dust to dust.
Just a note here. If you want only the believes being raised here because of Christ, then you have the Calvinist viewpoint that Christ did indeed elect and predestined only some to beleive, ONLY THOSE THAT HE RASIED FROM THE DEAD. This is precisely what they believe. Only those Christ saved are the elect and will be in union with him.

My comment: Right now, you believe that Christ did not rise from the dead by your theology.
Your response:
That does not follow.

it followed then and it still follows, I think. You do not understand the significance of Christ's real work on the Cross. Above you indicated that that if Christ is not risen, then our faith is in vain. But the context is speaking of the dead not being rasied, not just believers who are dead. If you believe Christ died for only some and saved only some, Christ completely failed to be the victor over death. Satan still controls most of mankind and has power to destroy God's created order by death and worse, can destroy a human being that bears God's Image. Your theology still is not consistant. You still do not fully believe in the Incarnation. You do not believe yet, that as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. You do not really accept Rom 11:32, or Rom 5:18-19 or that all the dead are raised from the dead by Christ.
You will still need to come up with some scriptural text that explains just how unbeleivers can be raised from the dead and overcome the judgement of death against mankind, if it is not Christ.

My statement:As yet you have not refuted that all mankind will not be raised in the last day?
Your response:
All will be raised; those in the First Resurrection (before the "wrath of the Tribulation", but after the majority of the Tribulation"), and those in the SECOND resurrection. The first are saved, the second are not.

There is ONLY one physical resurrection, Ben, but nevertheless, you say they shall arise from the dead, ONLY because the Bible is saying they do. But you have absolutely no theological reason to justify that they can arise from the dead. You have, so far, stated, that ONLY faith grants physical life, eternal life, immortalty. So either these people are being raised as a result of faith, or by what? Can you explain? You do not believe because Christ gave life to mankind by His resurrection, the Incarnation.

My statement: Which texts overturns all of these: Acts 24:15; Acts 23:6; I Cor 15:52, Eph 1:10; John 5:28, John 12: 32, I Tim 4:10, Is 26:19, Dan 12:2, Luke 2:30-32, Rev 20:12-13.
Your response;
Two resurrections. "Blessed and holy is he who has a part in the FIRST resurrection"...{/quote] How does that rescind, they are confirming that all shall rise the last day. Even though there is only one physical resurrection. Explain to me just how a pile of dust, a condemnation through Adam has not been recinded in your theology. You cannot just agree with the Bible text, and not understand why, or how it is happening. Your theology does not align even with two resurrections. even if there were 10, just how do all arise outside of Christ.

When Scripture says "Jesus gives life", it refers to "eternal life".

In most cases, but there are several where it assumes eternal life with HIM. Namely John 3:16. the word, believes, separates all mankind the World that God loved and mankind that He also loved, but the goal is to restore mankind so that union and communion can be accomplished. It can be accomplished freely by man and not be decree or predestination of some which denies this very verse as well.

As Jesus said, "Unless you repent, you will die in your sins."

Yes, Spiritual death, eternal separation from God. Man does not need to concern himself with physical death. It never has been permanent because God gave the promise to recind the judgement upon Adam immediately after he was ejected from the Garden. But Spiritual death is the only death that has a consequence, a permanent consequence against man. There shall be no more sacrifice for sin.

You have not shown that as yet. All of mankind is justified, redeemed, reconciled, made acceptable, made right with God by Christ through His Work. (Grace)
Then there is no need for repentance.

Ah, but that is what the above made possible. It is from what man fell. It is what the purpose was of our being created. To be eternal and in union. Christ restored life to mankind so man, as did Adam, freely chose to either be IN Christ or reject Christ. Repentance is the ONLY thing that reconciles man to God. Man is the initiator of that reconciliation by faith. We were reconciled to God by Christ, so that we could reconcile ourselves by faith to God.

If all have been cleaned/sanctified/justified, then why is there still a need?

Because in our union/communion we constantly sin. Sin separates man from God. We need to persevere, to endure. We need to remain justified, need to be cleansed by confession. We are continually being sanctified. Our salvation is an ongoing journey. It is not an event, but a goal.

It's still the same thing. By grace, by grace through faith, and WHEN we were dead in sins.

Well, to you maybe, but not to Paul. We are saved by Grace, which is life. Man has no imput in that saving from death. That is why faith is not added until later after believers are specified. Then we are saved by Grace through faith. It is all Grace. Grace is not an issue. That is a given.

Faith which receives grace, makes us alive.

NO, grace give life, which then makes faith meaningful, not in vain, has consequence. If we did not have life, faith is vain. I Cor 15:14-19 again.

Only the "saved", are called "sheep".

Yes, the sheep. He calls the sheep, and HIS SHEEP KNOW HIS VOICE. Christ calls all men to repentance, ONLY because He has already saved them all from death. If they remained in death, then faith is vain, calling is meaningless, and eternity, immortality is non-existant. Hell is non-existant. If Christ ONLY redeemed those that also believe, then ONLY heaven could exist. But the crunch is that if not all rise, then Christ is not risen either.

My statement: We can ONLY live IN Christ because we all have been made alive through Christ.
Your response
Exactly; but "made-alive", is "through faith".

That is the classical understanding of Universalism. All those redeemed are also all those saved. Universal salvation. I don't think you believe that. The "all" in my statment is referencing mankind not believers.

I think I've supported that reconcilliation is conditional, and faith is causal.

Reconciliation by faith, Yes, but reconciliation of mankind through Christ has nothing to do with faith, nor does man contribute anything to it. It is an accomplished fact, completed 2000 years ago, promised several more mellenniums before that. But my salvation, the salvation of my soul, me individually is a personal union, a communion with God. It happens ONLY to me and in my lifetime and is apart from any other person being personally saved. You are conflating the two as most protestants do.

Those who WILL not believe, are not justified/sanctified/cleansed/reconciled.

Correct, but this whole process of justification/sanctification is initiated by man, when man believes. He accepts Christ, was led by the Holy Spirit to conviction of his sins.
But the redemption, reconciliation, justification, made righteous, of mankind through Christ is completely separate. It is the Gift that you are offered. It is not the participation in that gift.

 

[Rightglory]

CCWoody,

Incorrect!!!
The Reformed view is that the new birth logically preceeds belief, just exactly as the Scriptures explicitly state....

You have never established that point, Scripture has never taught that faith follows regeneration. It is explicitedly just the reverse.
But, that is not the point I was making in the post to Ben when I also included your view.
You also ONLY believe that Christ died for some, that only some were saved from death. Thus theologically, you still have all men still under the condemnation of Adam. If the dead are not raised, then Christ is not risen. Your view has explicitedly stated that most of mankind is left under Adam. Christ only redeemed the so-called elect, those predestinated. That view theologically precludes that Christ never even arose from the dead.
Furthermore. if left under Adam, then there is no need to call them reprobates, or even unbelievers, and hell does not exist in your view. If under Adam they are already condemned, to death permanently, dust to dust. They essentially no longer exist, as human beings, they have been annihilated.
But like Ben, you will also say that the dead do indeed arise at the last day. But you have no answer as to how. Your internal theology is not consistant, let alone consistant with Scripture.

1 John 5:1
Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him.

All it confirms is that those that believe and live In Christ and show love have been born of God.
There is no order here at all.