How, then, is the Calvinist refuted?

[Ben johnson]

Hi, Elife! Welcome to the boards! I know you will be blessed here, and I'm sure we'll be blessed by you. There are no stupid questions; in the end, if those here do not agree perfectly on everything, we'll agree to worship God together through Jesus, and to fellowship in love. When Jesus returns, we'll be with Him; and theological arguments will be finished.

 

[cygnusx1]

The "facts", as have been posted by Calvinists, have been refuted one by one. And still citations appear from 1Cor2:14, 2Cor4:3-4, Mark4:9-11, Ezk36:26-27, Eph1:4-5, etcetera.

Verses are cited which cannot be answered by Calvinists; 1Cor9:23-27 for instance; and Matt23:13, Matt11:21-24.
The Apostle's teaching??? The Apostle's teaching was "universal redemption and atonement, realized personally BY faith", and warning after warning for us to persevere IN Christ.

If Paul said "thinking that we cannot fall is arrogant", how can we not believe him? Rom11:18-23

Peter fell , but Jesus caught Him .......... just like he said "none lost" .

 

[nobdysfool]

(Comments edited)

There comes a point where you realize that nothing will be accomplished or resolved when trying to reason with someone who already thinks they know better than you. It's best to just walk away. Refusing to be drawn in does not concede any points. It's like trying to play poker or blackjack with a stacked deck. I don't believe in no-win scenarios, and I refuse to participate in them, or to feed the confusion of unteachable men.

The reports of Calvinism's demise are greatly exaggerated, and premature at best. In reality, Calvinism is not threatened in any way. Greater men have tried, and failed miserably. This time will be no different.

The Bible says that in the last days, men will depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of demons. My personal opinion is that a doctrinal system that elevates men, elevates their supposed "free will" and self-generated faith into the causal element in salvation, and denies any sort of predestination of the affairs of men, and denies the keeping power of God, is such a doctrine. It is based on poor exegesis, and in many cases, large amounts of eisegesis, not handling the Word of God with any skill, and injecting many presupposed ideas into the scriptures cited as "proof", and a complete unwillingness to be corrected, or to actually learn correctly the theology which is opposed. These are clear facts, whether or not they are acknowledged.

 

[themuzicman]

Actually, the bottom line is that Calvinist proof texts have been exposed as poorly exegeted, but Calvinists continue to cite them.

Muz

 

[nobdysfool]

Opinions vary, Muz.

 

[Ben johnson]

Peter fell , but Jesus caught Him .......... just like he said "none lost"

Hi, Cygnus. Let's discuss Lk22:32, may we?

"I have prayed for you, that your faith not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brothers."

The Greek for "turned again", is "epistrepho"; same word as in 2Pet2:21.

What is it in Jesus' words (about praying for Peter's faith not to fail), that inclines you to think it could not fail?

Why would you think "Jesus was 100% effectively praying to accomplish Peter's preseverance of faith"?

 

[Rick Otto]

that any demonstration of cause & effect disproves predestination?

 

[Ben johnson]

Why do YOU think...
...that any demonstration of cause & effect disproves predestination?

Two things --- first, if man's faith is causal to salvation (meaning, if God receives man's faith), the predestination is overturned; but if God's consideration is causal to man's faith (God causing faith in us), then responsibility is overturned in favor of predestination.

Plenty of verses place God as receiving man's faith rather than causing it (Heb11:6, Acts10:34-35, etcetera.)

Second, if the sequence of "regeneration before belief" is true, then predestination prevails; but if regeneration is from the received-by-belief-Spirit, as Titus3:5-6 says, then responsibility prevails.

In Jesus' words in Lk22:32, Jesus prays for Peter's faith not to fail; were those words "hypothetical-can't-really-happen"? Or were they "100% effective MEANS"? Or were they a true prayer against true apostasy?

Jesus often spoke of "apostasy"; in Jn6:67-70, many Disciples left Him; Jesus asked the remaining 12, "YOU'RE not going to leave Me TOO, are you?" Peter said, "No; we know You're the Messiah". Jesus said, "Did I not choose all twelve, and one is a devil?"

Jesus' answer clearly said "ONE of you IS leaving!" In Jn15:16 Jesus said "I chose you to be Disciples, and appointed you to bear fruit and your fruit should remain."

So it's inescapable that "Jesus appoined all twelve, and one LEFT". Jesus asking if the remaining ones "were leaving", is the same as Jesus praying for Peter's faith to stand.

Calvinism is refuted when we prove that "faith" causes salvation.
Calvinism is refuted when we prove that "regeneration succeeds faith".
Calvinism is refuted when we prove that "God receives man's faith, rather than causes it."

 

[drstevej]

but if God's consideration is causal to man's faith (God causing faith in us), then responsibility is overturned in favor of predestination.

Hogwash. Man is responsible for his sin and deserves death as a result of SIN not simply because he does not believe..

"Unless you believe that I am you will die in your sins."

Sins are the basis of condemnation not simply lack of God-given faith!!

BTW, when does that THE END OF CALVINISM tome yer working on get launched? I want to wear my shirt on that day...

 

[nobdysfool]

...if the sequence of "regeneration before belief" is true, then predestination prevails; but if regeneration is from the received-by-belief-Spirit, as Titus3:5-6 says, then responsibility prevails.

Woody has proven beyond any doubt that regeneration precedes faith, in another thread. Your failure to concede and accept that point does not negate it, or "overturn" it. Your misreading and twisting of Titus does not trump 1 John 5:1

Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God, and everyone who loves the Father loves whoever has been born of him.
(1Jo 5:1) ESV


Every one who is believing that Jesus is the Christ, of God he hath been begotten, and every one who is loving Him who did beget, doth love also him who is begotten of Him: (1Jo 5:1) YLT

​

End of discussion, really. Predestination prevails, because regeneration clearly comes before faith. QED

Jesus' answer clearly said "ONE of you IS leaving!" In Jn15:16 Jesus said "I chose you to be Disciples, and appointed you to bear fruit and your fruit should remain."

So it's inescapable that "Jesus appoined all twelve, and one LEFT". Jesus asking if the remaining ones "were leaving", is the same as Jesus praying for Peter's faith to stand.

Judas was predestined to do what he did. How you can deny that is truly puzzling. Judas' betrayal of Christ was prophesied. That means it was predestined, beyond any shadow of doubt. Jesus chose Judas, KNOWING that Judas would betray Him. Deny all you want, scripture is clear on this fact, and all your twisting, turning and dancing around will not alter that fact. You're wrong, and twice you have been proven wrong. Suck it up and admit it.

Calvinism is refuted when we prove that "faith" causes salvation.

No proof of this lucdicrous concept has ever been provided, to support it the way you obviously mean it. Your distortions of scripture do not establish this. As has been often pointed out to you, despite the apparent deafness, faith is the instrumental means, while Grace is the sufficient means, and Grace only comes from God. Salvation is of the Lord. Perhaps you should spend some time thinking about what that truly means.

Hence, Calvinism - 1, Responsible Grace - 0

Calvinism is refuted when we prove that "regeneration succeeds faith".

Already refuted by Woody, and correct understanding of 2000 years of Greek Scholarship. Faith follows regeneration.

Calvinism - 2, Responsible Grace - 0

Calvinism is refuted when we prove that "God receives man's faith, rather than causes it."

Calvinism does not teach that God causes man's faith in the way you insist wrongly that we say. Therefore, this is a straw man. As such, it is aflame as we speak.

Calvinism - 3, Responsible Grace - 0.

Ben, You have failed miserably at "defeating" Calvinism. If this is the way your "magnum opus" presents your supposed "proofs", you've lost the battle before it has even been engaged.

sorry about your luck....

 

[drstevej]

Responsible "Salvation-Helper" Grace is the better term

 

[nobdysfool]

Responsible "Salvation-Helper" Grace is the better term

I call it "Shake-n-Bake" salvation

"Jesus saved me, AN' I HELPED!"

 

[drstevej]

I call it "Shake-n-Bake" salvation

"Jesus saved me, AN' I HELPED!"

*Was that the 8.6 pound infant baby Jesus ???









Note to Mods: *Taladega Nights reference

 

[Rick Otto]

Otto's sides just split open.

That's funny.
I was just thinkin' last night how to explain Predestination to Free Willies,
& I imagined Doris Day in the background, singing Que Serah. Serah.
I was thinkin' about lookin' for a online video to link to.
Doris is very persuasive. She helped me keep virginity in my theology.

 

[themuzicman]

How typical of the side that lost to engage in this kind of straw man mockery.

Muz

 

[drstevej]

How typical of the side that lost to engage in this kind of straw man mockery.

Muz

Go easy on Ben, please.

 

[Rick Otto]

Actually, the bottom line is that Calvinist proof texts have been exposed as poorly exegeted, but Calvinists continue to cite them.

Muz

There it is in black & white.
The Muz has spoken.
Calvin is dead.

 

[frumanchu]

Two things --- first, if man's faith is causal to salvation (meaning, if God receives man's faith), the predestination is overturned; but if God's consideration is causal to man's faith (God causing faith in us), then responsibility is overturned in favor of predestination.

Once again, Ben, Reformed Theology DOES teach that faith is causal to salvation. This has been explained to you countless times. Why are you now stating that Reformed Theology does not teach what it does in fact teach?

You have presented a false dilemma. Faith is the instrumental cause of our salvation. God's grace is the efficient cause of our salvation.

You have readily affirmed in the past that it can properly said both that we save ourselves and that God saves us. Why can you not recognize this principle when it comes to man causing faith and God causing faith?

Plenty of verses place God as receiving man's faith rather than causing it (Heb11:6, Acts10:34-35, etcetera.)

As stated, this is a false dilemma since God can be both the cause of our faith and the recipient of it.

Second, if the sequence of "regeneration before belief" is true, then predestination prevails; but if regeneration is from the received-by-belief-Spirit, as Titus3:5-6 says, then responsibility prevails.

As repeatedly stated, Titus 3:5-6 does not prove the sequence of faith -> receive Spirit -> regeneration.

"But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by his grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life." - Titus 3:4-7 (ESV)

The words "regeneration" and "renewing" both characterize "washing." Renewal signifies the complete transformation of a person's life that begins when they are regenerated. He saved us through washing (regeneration/renewal), which is an act of the Holy Spirit, who then indwells us at the point of faith. The "washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit" describes the manner in which "he saved us."

The "pouring out" of the Holy Spirit is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, which occurs after faith. The indwelling of the Spirit and the regeneration of the Spirit are disctinctly separate concepts.

This passage simply does not establish the order you claim and cannot be made to no matter how hard one tries.

In Jesus' words in Lk22:32, Jesus prays for Peter's faith not to fail; were those words "hypothetical-can't-really-happen"? Or were they "100% effective MEANS"? Or were they a true prayer against true apostasy?

Peter's faith DID fail to an extent, as evidenced by his denial of Jesus three times to save his own skin. But, as Reformed Theology teaches, he did not fall away fully or finally and was subsequently restored to repentance by Jesus.

"[Saving faith] is different in degrees, weak or strong; may be often and many ways assailed and weakened, but gets the victory; growing up in many to the attainment of a full assurance through Christ, who is both the author and finisher of our faith." - WCF XIV,iii

It is clear from Jesus' words that He expected His prayer to be 100% effective in preserving the faith of Peter. This expectation is implicit in His words "and when you have turned." He fully understood that Peter would fall into grievous sin in denying Jesus, prayed that Peter's faith not fail, and anticipated his subsequent restoration to repentance.

Jesus often spoke of "apostasy"; in Jn6:67-70, many Disciples left Him; Jesus asked the remaining 12, "YOU'RE not going to leave Me TOO, are you?" Peter said, "No; we know You're the Messiah". Jesus said, "Did I not choose all twelve, and one is a devil?"

Jesus' answer clearly said "ONE of you IS leaving!" In Jn15:16 Jesus said "I chose you to be Disciples, and appointed you to bear fruit and your fruit should remain."

So it's inescapable that "Jesus appoined all twelve, and one LEFT". Jesus asking if the remaining ones "were leaving", is the same as Jesus praying for Peter's faith to stand.

This whole exercise means little unless you can demonstrate definitively that Judas was in fact saved. I submit that such a notion is nowhere found in Scripture, and that the opposite is in fact taught.

John 6:67-70 is not speaking about election, nor is there any proof of the notion that Judas was saved, so the point here is moot.

Calvinism is refuted when we prove that "faith" causes salvation.

False. Calvinism also teaches that faith causes salvation.

Calvinism is refuted when we prove that "regeneration succeeds faith"

You have failed to do so.

Calvinism is refuted when we prove that "God receives man's faith, rather than causes it."

False dilemma. God is both the recipient and the cause of man's faith.

 

[Rick Otto]

Who's up next?

 

[frumanchu]

Rick, I haven't posted anything there that I haven't said literally dozens of times. I highly doubt it will make a difference other than to those observing.