How, then, is the Calvinist refuted?

[Ben johnson]

Turning now to a difference, 2 Peter 2:1 says the false teachers deny the Lord who bought them. Your contention is being bought is the same as being saved.
My view is different. I think "bought" refers to Christ dying for all men on the cross, paying the penalty for our sins, and so because the price was so high, we who have received the reconcilation should live accordingly, we who were bought and set free from slavery to sin (reconciled and received reconcilation) should remain slaves to Christ.

No, Van, I don't think "bought" is the same as "saved". I think "bought", is the same as "COULD be saved" --- it is exactly as you said (and you said it well).

But this conflicts the idea of "limited atonement"...

And it reflects on the verse in 1Jn2:2, endorsing the idea of "propitiation to the holos-kosmos", really meaning "whole world".

This is why I read "malista" in 1Tim4:10, as "chiefly/specially/above-all". So the verse is, "God is the Savior of ALL MEN, above all believers." Asserting at once "unlimited atonement", and "the condition of belief"...

 

[Reformationist]

I look forward to hearing your comments on especially the 2Cor3 passage...

Ben, as always I have enjoyed discussing the Word of God with you but I think we're going in circles. I have given you the verses and evidence that I think explicitly state that God must definitively release us from the dominion of sin prior to any act on our part to obey. You have, and still are, denying this to be true. In all good conscience I do not think you will ever turn from your man centered doctrine unless the Lord Himself lifts the veil from your eyes. I say this not as an attack but as an admission of my impotency and reliance upon the only One with the power and authority to do so, our Lord God. If it be His will that you are enlightened to the truth of the doctrines of grace then so be it. I pray that He does so because it is the most comforting and reverential view of the Gospel that I can even imagine. If not, then I still count you as my brother in Christ who does much to spread the Gospel to those less inclined and less informed.

For now I will respectfully disengage from debating this issue with you, though I'm sure I'll be motivated to get right back into the fray with you very soon.

I wish you well and thank you for all the effort and love that you pour out onto the pages of your posts in striving to maintain the truth and sanctity of our blessed Lord's holy Word.

May the Lord continually bless you and your's and mature your faith and love for your brothers and sisters in Christ and all those who have the pleasure of your acumen and godliness.

In closing, I just wanted to commend you on the godly way you have learned to post. I remember, not so long ago, that you did not show such restraint and goodwill. I was doubtful about your ability to moderate these boards as they deserved. I was wrong. You are one of our best mods and, though I disagree with your views of the Gospel, one of our most fervent champions.

God bless,
Don

 

[Van]

Ben, I stand corrected, sorry I misunderstood you. We seem to agree with the doctrine of unlimited atonement, but attaiment limited to believers in Christ. Because Christ paid the price for everybody, the opportunity for salvation is open to everybody and is not limited to pre-selected folks chosen before the foundation of the world. But it is limited to folks who place their faith in Christ during their lifetime.

 

[Dmckay]

Oh snap! It looks like a contradiction!

There is only a contradiction if you hold to an Arminian position. Consider:John tells us that "They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would shown that they all were not of us. Jesus' parable of the sower and the soils taught early on that there will be those who will hear the Word and give superficial evidence of having been saved. However when trials or the cares of this world or even the pleasures of this world take on more importance to them then their first shallow commitment to Christ they will be gone.

There are way too many verses that stand in contradiction to other passages only if you hold to an Arminian theology. The Synod of Dort was held in order to refute these heretical teachings. The Pronouncements of the Synod of Dort were written to refute the 5 postulates of the Remonstrants (the group that later took the name of Arminius. Those Pronouncments, later given the name T.U.L.I.P., were the official position of the non-catholic Christian Church.

 

[Reformationist]

There is only a contradiction if you hold to an Arminian position. Consider:John tells us that "They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would shown that they all were not of us. Jesus' parable of the sower and the soils taught early on that there will be those who will hear the Word and give superficial evidence of having been saved. However when trials or the cares of this world or even the pleasures of this world take on more importance to them then their first shallow commitment to Christ they will be gone.

There are way too many verses that stand in contradiction to other passages only if you hold to an Arminian theology. The Synod of Dort was held in order to refute these heretical teachings. The Pronouncements of the Synod of Dort were written to refute the 5 postulates of the Remonstrants (the group that later took the name of Arminius. Those Pronouncments, later given the name T.U.L.I.P., were the official position of the non-catholic Christian Church.

Great post Dmckay. That was very edifying to me.

God bless,
Don

 

[unimportantbuthisnameis]

There is only a contradiction if you hold to an Arminian position. Consider:John tells us that "They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would shown that they all were not of us. Jesus' parable of the sower and the soils taught early on that there will be those who will hear the Word and give superficial evidence of having been saved. However when trials or the cares of this world or even the pleasures of this world take on more importance to them then their first shallow commitment to Christ they will be gone.

There are way too many verses that stand in contradiction to other passages only if you hold to an Arminian theology. The Synod of Dort was held in order to refute these heretical teachings. The Pronouncements of the Synod of Dort were written to refute the 5 postulates of the Remonstrants (the group that later took the name of Arminius. Those Pronouncments, later given the name T.U.L.I.P., were the official position of the non-catholic Christian Church.

First I start by saying there are to many contradictions in Ariminianism AND Calvinism (both have to deny essential parts of the scripture). Secondly I'm not sure I like being called a heretic because of what ONE man came up with from his fallible few of the scripture, and for those who want to know i'm speaking of Augustine, not Calvin.



Theology is never any help; it is searching in a dark cellar at midnight for a black cat that isn't there. Theologians can persuade themselves of anything." Robert A. Heinlein

 

[Reformationist]

First I start by saying there are to many contradictions in Ariminianism AND Calvinism (both have to deny essential parts of the scripture).

Calvinism denies nothing from Scripture. If you feel otherwise please show these supposed "contradictions" and the "essential parts of Scripture" that we deny.

Secondly I'm not sure I like being called a heretic because of what ONE man came up with from his fallible few of the scripture, and for those who want to know i'm speaking of Augustine, not Calvin.

You're not called a heretic because of Augustine's view of Scripture, at least not by Calvinists or by the Synod of Dort. If you are a Christian that holds to the Remonstrant's position then your views are named heretical because they are unbiblical.

God bless

 

[Reformationist]

Theology is never any help; it is searching in a dark cellar at midnight for a black cat that isn't there. Theologians can persuade themselves of anything." Robert A. Heinlein

By the way, do you know much about R. A. Heinlein?

 

[Reformationist]

Here's a quote by him that may help shine some light on his feelings about religion:

"Don't appeal to mercy to God the Father up in the sky, little man, because he's not at home and never was at home, and couldn't care less. What you do with yourself, whether you are happy or unhappy-- live or die-- is strictly your business and the universe doesn't care. In fact you may be the universe and the only cause of all your troubles. But, at best, the most you can hope for is comradeship with comrades no more divine (or just as divine) as you are. So quit sniveling and face up to it-- Thou art God!" - Robert A. Heinlein

As a Christian you may not want yourself aligned with someone who posts such blasphemy, unless of course, you also feel that way.

 

[unimportantbuthisnameis]

I don't align myself with John Calvin, Charles Spurgeon, A. W. Tozer, and a number of others, but they all had a few things right, just not everything. Furthermore I've noticed that non-Christians have a very realistic sense of the way Christians handle Christianity.

Evangelical Christianity, as everyone knows, is founded upon hate, as the Christianity of Christ was founded upon love” ~Henry Louis Menken

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." Mahatma Gandhi



P.S. I'll quote whoever makes the point that I want to comvey in the most eloquent manner.

 

[Reformationist]

I don't align myself with John Calvin, Charles Spurgeon, A. W. Tozer, and a number of others, but they all had a few things right, just not everything.

You equate the view of Calvin, Spurgeon and Tozar with a non-believer like Robert A. Heinlein who spouts blasphemy and denies the very existance of God because every monkey can find a banana every once in a while? Well, that's sound thinking.

Furthermore I've noticed that non-Christians have a very realistic sense of the way Christians handle Christianity.

Evangelical Christianity, as everyone knows, is founded upon hate, as the Christianity of Christ was founded upon love” ~Henry Louis Menken

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." Mahatma Gandhi

Christianity isn't about Christians. It's about Christ. Your point is moot and, as a self-proclaimed Christian, you should know that. I expect such ridiculous statements from non-Christians. The fact that you give validity to their view speaks volumes.

 

[Reformationist]

P.S. I'll quote whoever makes the point that I want to comvey in the most eloquent manner.

What, are you twelve? "I'll quote whoever I want, na na na na na na.."

 

[unimportantbuthisnameis]

My first point is that I don't belive all Christians get everything right and we as Christians should remember that even we are sinners. And as for the ideas and thoughts of non-believers, I've learned that they are more accepting of a Christian who attempts to understand their beliefs without judgement, even if the Christian disagrees. Futhermore, how else can I understand the views of a non-believer with out giving some validity to their perception (it's an excellent witnessing tool). {The pride and contempt of Christians of non-believers never ceases to amaze me. Why would anyone want to follow a Gospel of hate? What kind of good news is that?}

 

[unimportantbuthisnameis]

What, are you twelve? "I'll quote whoever I want, na na na na na na.."

Does it really matter who said the words if the point remains the same?

 

[Romanbear]

Hi Reformationist;

Calvinism denies nothing from Scripture. If you feel otherwise please show these supposed "contradictions" and the "essential parts of Scripture" that we deny.

Now that isn't true. You take this verse:
1Ti 2:3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior;
1Ti 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

It has been made very clear by you and others here that this doesn't mean That it is God's will that all men be saved. Rather being the Hyper Calvinist you are, you believe only a few are chosen to receive Grace.

You do deny this is speaking about all men Don't you?
In Christ;
Romanbear

 

[unimportantbuthisnameis]

How this for some scripture Calvinists deny:

This day I call heaven and earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live

Deuteronomy 30:19

But if serving the LORD seems undesirable to you, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your forefathers served beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you are living. But as for me and my household, we will serve the LORD ."

Joshua 24:15

Elijah went before the people and said, "How long will you waver between two opinions? If the LORD is God, follow him; but if Baal is God, follow him."

But the people said nothing.

1 Kings 18:21

 

[unimportantbuthisnameis]

Or this?
Acts 7:51 (New International Version)

“You stiffnecked people, with uncircumcised hearts and ears! You are just like your fathers: You always resist the Holy Spirit!

resist

v 1: elude, especially in a baffling way; "This behavior defies explanation" [syn: defy, refuse] [ant: lend oneself] 2: stand up or offer resistance to somebody or something [syn: hold out, withstand, stand firm] [ant: surrender] 3: express opposition through action or words; "dissent to the laws of the country" [syn: protest, dissent] 4: withstand the force of something; "The trees resisted her"; "stand the test of time"; "The mountain climbers had to fend against the ice and snow" [syn: stand, fend] 5: resist immunologically the introduction of some foreign tissue or organ; "His body rejected the liver of the donor" [syn: reject, refuse] 6: refuse to comply [syn: balk, baulk, jib]

appears to me that the word used in the English text shows something of the will, especially seeing how it's the verb in the sentence.

 

[unimportantbuthisnameis]

You're not called a heretic because of Augustine's view of Scripture, at least not by Calvinists or by the Synod of Dort. If you are a Christian that holds to the Remonstrant's position then your views are named heretical because they are unbiblical.

To try to seperate the views of a person and that person is impossible. It is our perceptions, experiences and reactions to those that make us who we are. So to call my views of Anti-Calvinism heretical you are labeling as a heretic as by beliefs and understanding of Scripture have complete influence over my perception and reactions to situations in life.

 

[Beoga]

Hi Reformationist;

Now that isn't true. You take this verse:
1Ti 2:3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior;
1Ti 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

It has been made very clear by you and others here that this doesn't mean That it is God's will that all men be saved. Rather being the Hyper Calvinist you are, you believe only a few are chosen to receive Grace.

You do deny this is speaking about all men Don't you?
In Christ;
Romanbear

what in context shows that 1 timothy 2 is talking about every single man ever? Why do you automatically assume that it is talking about every single man that has ever lived?
Do you even know what HC's believe, or do you just like shouting out false accusations?

 

[Beoga]

To try to seperate the views of a person and that person is impossible. It is our perceptions, experiences and reactions to those that make us who we are. So to call my views of Anti-Calvinism heretical you are labeling as a heretic as by beliefs and understanding of Scripture have complete influence over my perception and reactions to situations in life.

do you believe that calvinisim is heretical?