How, then, is the Calvinist refuted?

[Rick Otto]

The one on the TV infomercial comes with a 30-day Free Trial.
Talk about respecting freedom!

Yee Haw!
(...sorry. I watched John Wayne in "Red River" with my wife the other night...

 

[drstevej]

You'll buy one??? Kewl!!!!

Sominex Publishing Co ???



Sure, if it is cheap.

 

[heymikey80]

Good post, "LGSJM".
With respect, the only way he can "become convinced of the doctrine of election and tennets of Calvinism", is to study Calvinistic writings. As we've studied Scripture, we've seen every tennet, overturned.

There are the verses thought to support Calvinism --- Rom9:18 overturned with Rom11:32. 1Cor2:14 overturned with 1Cor2:12. 2Cor4:3-4 overturned with 2Cor3:16. Acts13:48 overturned with Acts13:46.

By pitting verses against one another, some theologies like to exclude parts of Scripture.

It's just not worth arguing over the basics of the faith, that Jesus is the starter and ender of our faith, that God grants us faith, that faith comes from the Holy Spirit and not from ourselves.

It's just not an issue Scripture equivocates on.

And the profound errors being made in the Calvinistic idea of godly passivity and human activity are simply that. Errors. Calvin wrote about how he understood this. The arguments proceed right past Calvin and into the straw.

In short this is another "tale full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." Attacks on Calvinism have been made before, by more popular theologians than Ben Johnson.

 

[cygnusx1]

Sominex Publishing Co ???



Sure, if it is cheap.

buy one get 800 free !!!

 

[CCWoody]

Have you ever read the rest of chapter twelve? But, first --- the Greek uses "archegos", leader/prince; and "teleiotes" example. Not "author" and "finisher".

How come it is, Ben, that you must constantly retranslate the Scriptures to make it fit your theology? It makes me think that deep down and even unknown to yourself, you hate the Word of God. The heart is deceitful above all things.

Again, I urge you to stop and learn instead of revealing to all your own ignorance of what your theology means.

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

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.​

 

[CCWoody]

OR, He knows the future, but provides man with sufficient "drawing" (Jn12:32) that he can choose. Thus embodying Paul's words in Rom2:6-8.

You are ignoring the implications of your theology.

Does God know the future as a simple matter of precognition and nothing else? Then, you are a dualist, an eastern mystic.

But, even still, if the future is known, it is STILL fixed and if, for example, the Lord knows that you will burn in hell, there is nothing you can do to change it. You will march relentlessly toward your destiny no matter what choices lay in your path. Even your choices will work together with all things toward your eventual damnation, just as choices will work together with all things toward the ultimate glorification of the elect. Just as we are taught about Predestination in Scripture....

And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose. For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.​

The only question, Ben, is are you Predestined for glory or for eventual destruction in the Lake of Fire. But, rest assured, if the future is known by God, you have a PREdestiny toward which you will march, unable to change. The only difference between simple Arminian theology and Biblical Calvinism is that you have stripped God of being the author of the future and dualistically replaced him with another. The Lord is helpless to prevent the ones he loves from burning in hell. He is impotent.

And, I agree with Pink. That image deserves the respect of no truly thoughtful man.

And that's the only way judgment can be "just".

Judgment is just because man rebelled against God. He deserves damnation. He doesn't deserve salvation. He doesn't even deserve a chance at redemption.

Who are, you O man, to say otherwise?

Let's see if the passages I've cited, are answered.

Is that before or after you've changed words and rewritten them?

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

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.​

 

[nobdysfool]

Nawwwww --- HERE, on the forums. With Scripture.

You've tried, we'll give you that. the stars you see are the one that have come from repeatedly hitting your head against the wall....

The definition of "Straw Man", is to saddle someone with an idealogy that he/she has never asserted, then try to overturn it.

Of which you are the prime example....

Open Theism asserts that "God does not (or chooses not to) know the future". There is no conflict between God knowing the future (as He foreknew us in Rom8), and free will (as those in Rom8 whom He foreknew, are they who loved Him).

If salvation is conditional, based on man's choice, then God is obligated to Man. there is no scripture which teaches that.

These discussions will amount to nothing --- unless we can go right to the foundation.

And every time we try to get to the foundation, you run away.

God's position is receiving man's faith, not authoring it. Heb11:6 and Acts10:34-35 is very clear on that.

And yet Scripture specifically states that God IS the author and perfecter of our faith. Scripture does not "overturn" other scripture. If you see a conflict, it is because you do not rightly understand what you read. the fault is in your understanding, not in scripture.

In fact, in the Acts10 passage, "partiality" is the opposite of "God welcoming those who fear Him and do right".

In other words, Calvinism is the partiality that God is not.

Only because you do not rightly understand the scriptures. This is one of your straw men.

 

[Ben johnson]

publishers are still fightin' over it.

Publishers have not seen it yet; by procrastinating at submission, it's becoming severely polished --- more and more proofs against Calvinism have been added.

Could be 6 days, 6weeks, 6 months...

I doubt 6 months...

the one that wins will be welcomed in bookstores everywhere, as liberators.

"One" what, "wins" what?

We'll be governing ourselves in no time, soon as we burn our prayer rugs & stop bowing toward Geneva 5 times a day... besides, I miss the Friday Night Fish-Fry as well as the Sunday casserole

I have no idea what was your point in this; the only thing publication of my text will do, is drive people to the Word to look up the verses cited.

Readers will find those verses, and will be restricted from their conventional "refutation" --- because they'll have to give real refutation, rather than just "throwing a Five-Way and calling a point refuted".

The verses under the heading of "Smoking Guns", will be impossible to deny. Each "favorite" verse thought to support Calvinism (and Antinomianism, and Eternal Security, and Pre-Trib-Rapture, and Universalism) --- is listed, and discussed.

If my text does nothing but to drive readers deeper into Scripture, and closer to God, then it will be a success.

 

[Ben johnson]

Why bother, Ben ? You won't receive it.

I will receive whatever Scripture supports.

And I think it's hugely erroneous that you believe that one scripture "overturns" another. No such thing is possible.

I agree; but a second Scripture can overturn a faulty understanding of a first.

Scripture is of "one cloth", "one fabric".

Exactly --- which is why I quote so many verses, in the face of accusations of "burying under verses".

It is your erroneous interpretations of scripture which leads you to think this. Your view has been demonstrated to be erroneous many times.

The "demonstration of erroneous understanding", has not happened.

You're just too stubborn to admit it.

Show me one place where "demonstration of erroneous understanding" has not been responded credibly.

I would think that you would, as an act of "love", make gifts of copies of your book to Calvinists, seeing that you believe that you have destroyed it. Why make us pay for it?

I'm sure I'll give away many. There are 8+ copies out right now, readers agreeing to "red-ink mistakes".

Those who were "OSAS", on reading the text, have plainly said: "I see your point; where you're coming from."

Of course, that assumes that your book does so, which it won't.

Was that an opinion, or a fact?

 

[Ben johnson]

By pitting verses against one another, some theologies like to exclude parts of Scripture.

I agree --- but Calvinism must exclude (that is, not-respond-to) many verses.

It's just not worth arguing over the basics of the faith...

Actually, it is --- as Jude said, "Earnestly contend for the faith".

... that Jesus is the starter and ender of our faith

See? This is one thing worth discussing.

Read this carefully --- this is a point I've not made before.

In Hebrews 11, many examples of faith are given. So in Heb12, it's essential to read the Greek, and the context --- verse 2 is saying "Jesus is the GREATEST EXAMPLE of faith".

Thus --- "archegos" (leader, prince), and "teleiotes" (one who has raised in himself an example), fits "God is the LEADER and EXAMPLE of faith", rather than "God is the sovereign-ORIGINATOR and monergistic-COMPLETER of faith.

Read Rom1:17-21; first he states "The righteousness of God is revealed from BEGINNING faith (faith the start), to ENDING faith (faith the goal) --- the righteous shall live BY faith". Then he demonstrates that God is revealed to ALL, and those who REFUSE to believe, receive condemnation.

that God grants us faith

Nowhere in Scripture.

that faith comes from the Holy Spirit and not from ourselves.

With the HEART, man BELIEVES. Saving-faith is not gifted by the Spirit; Rom10:10 forbids that view.

It's just not an issue Scripture equivocates on.

I agree; but you've missed Scripture's clear dictate.

And the profound errors being made in the Calvinistic idea of godly passivity and human activity are simply that. Errors. Calvin wrote about how he understood this. The arguments proceed right past Calvin and into the straw.

The nature of "predestined-election", promotes passivity.

Jesus said, "He WHO hears AND ACTS, is wise; he who hears and does NOT act, is foolish."

In short this is another "tale full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." Attacks on Calvinism have been made before, by more popular theologians than Ben Johnson.

Ben johnson has attacked nothing; he's only shown how Scripture overturns Calvinism.

Verse, by verse.

 

[Ben johnson]

How come it is, Ben, that you must constantly retranslate the Scriptures to make it fit your theology? It makes me think that deep down and even unknown to yourself, you hate the Word of God. The heart is deceitful above all things.

Again, I urge you to stop and learn instead of revealing to all your own ignorance of what your theology means.

Please read what I just wrote to Mike, in post 850. "Leader" and "example" are the clear Greek meanings, and they fit the context.

So many verses oppose "gifted-saving-faith" --- Heb11:6 is one of the clearest.

"Without faith it is impossible to please God; for he who comes to God must believe God is, and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him."

There is no "predestined-faith" in that.

 

[cygnusx1]

Please read what I just wrote to Mike, in post 850. "Leader" and "example" are the clear Greek meanings, and they fit the context.

So many verses oppose "gifted-saving-faith" --- Heb11:6 is one of the clearest.

"Without faith it is impossible to please God; for he who comes to God must believe God is, and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him."

There is no "predestined-faith" in that.

but ;

those in the flesh cannot please God ! Rom 8:8

 

[Ben johnson]

You are ignoring the implications of your theology.

Does God know the future as a simple matter of precognition and nothing else? Then, you are a dualist, an eastern mystic.

Why do you persist in inappropriate labels of me?

But, even still, if the future is known, it is STILL fixed and if, for example, the Lord knows that you will burn in hell, there is nothing you can do to change it. You will march relentlessly toward your destiny no matter what choices lay in your path. Even your choices will work together with all things toward your eventual damnation, just as choices will work together with all things toward the ultimate glorification of the elect. Just as we are taught about Predestination in Scripture....

You are fully "caught", in the web of "fatalism". There is something we can do --- we can choose to believe in Jesus. Jesus said, "Those WHO act, are wise; those who do NOT act, are foolish".

And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God...

Does "love" come before "all things work together"? Or after?

to those who are the called according to His purpose.

How many people are truly called, Woody? Per Matt22:2-14, everyone. If "many are called but few are chosen", how can any "sovereignly-called", be "not chosen"?

For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.

WHO are predestined? Those WHO love God?
Predestined to what --- to be Christlike? Or to salvation? It only says "predestined to be Christlike", doesn't it?

The only question, Ben, is are you Predestined for glory or for eventual destruction in the Lake of Fire.

I have a choice.

But, rest assured, if the future is known by God, you have a PREdestiny toward which you will march, unable to change.

Fore-known, is not fore-caused.

The only difference between simple Arminian theology and Biblical Calvinism is that you have stripped God of being the author of the future and dualistically replaced him with another.

God does not decree anyone to perish, nor does He decree anyone to salvation. Each receives the consequence of their choice, and that without partiality. Col3:25.

Calvinism wrests "consequence", with God's predestination, rather than rightly with man's choice.

The Lord is helpless to prevent the ones he loves from burning in hell. He is impotent.

He has sovereignly chosen to allow men to love Him, or perish. That's well within His sovereignty.

And, I agree with Pink. That image deserves the respect of no truly thoughtful man.

That image, is a "straw man".

Judgment is just because man rebelled against God. He deserves damnation. He doesn't deserve salvation. He doesn't even deserve a chance at redemption.

It's not just if he has no choice.

Who are, you O man, to say otherwise?

Exactly.

Is that before or after you've changed words and rewritten them?

I've been very consistent before.


...and here again...

 

[Ben johnson]

but ;

those in the flesh cannot please God ! Rom 8:8

That's why Rom8:12 says "Therefore we are under OBLIGATION to walk not after the flesh --- if YOU do YOU must die. But if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the flesh, you will live."

Does "obligation" mean "choice"? It can't mean anything else.

 

[cygnusx1]

That's why Rom8:12 says "Therefore we are under OBLIGATION to walk not after the flesh --- if YOU do YOU must die. But if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the flesh, you will live."

Does "obligation" mean "choice"? It can't mean anything else.

no that will not work !


scripture says those in the flesh cannot pleasde God , but you argue with God and say that if they choose they can ................

 

[Ben johnson]

You've tried, we'll give you that. the stars you see are the one that have come from repeatedly hitting your head against the wall....

Of which you are the prime example....

If salvation is conditional, based on man's choice, then God is obligated to Man. there is no scripture which teaches that.

Man is obligated to God; and receives the reward of his choices. I just cited Col3:25, and Rom8:12ff.

And every time we try to get to the foundation, you run away.

Hardly that.

And yet Scripture specifically states that God IS the author and perfecter of our faith.

Where?

Scripture does not "overturn" other scripture.

That's right.

If you see a conflict, it is because you do not rightly understand what you read. the fault is in your understanding, not in scripture.

It's in one of our understandings.

Only because you do not rightly understand the scriptures. This is one of your straw men.

Let's discuss this, shall we?

"God is not partial, BUT he who fears God and does right is welcome."

"BUT", defines "partiality".

God welcomes the reverent/righteous-seekers.

God welcoming the NON-reverent, NON-seeking, is the opposite, that is pointed to by "BUT". It is "partiality".

Calvinism asserts "God receives those who do NOT seek, who do NOT fear God --- and by His sovereign regeneration they THEN seek and fear. This places God as AUTHORING faith, AUTHORING seeking and reverence. And that IS the "Partiality" on the other side of the word, "BUT".

"Not-partial, BUT receives-seekers/reverers".

Partiality is Calvinism, and God is not partial.

Game, set, and match.

 

[cygnusx1]

those in the flesh cannot please God = scripture

yes they can = ben

 

[Ben johnson]

scripture says those in the flesh cannot please God , but you argue with God and say that if they choose they can ................

Scripture says that "walking in the flesh", or "by the Spirit putting to death the flesh", is a choice.

That's why he said "obligation". One is not obligated to do that which is sovereignly-ordained by God.

Do you accept that "obligation", by definition conveys "free choice"?

 

[cygnusx1]

Scripture says that "walking in the flesh", or "by the Spirit putting to death the flesh", is a choice.

That's why he said "obligation". One is not obligated to do that which is sovereignly-ordained by God.

Do you accept that "obligation", by definition conveys "free choice"?

you are not listening ben.

scriptures declare one thing , "those in the flesh CANNOT please God" and you argue against scripture and say that they can !

it's not difficult to see you are in error , just admit it , like I know you are going to.

 

[drstevej]

cygnus is more optimistic than I