How, then, is the Calvinist refuted?

[LJSGM]

For God ( The greatest Lover )
So Loved ( to the greatest extent )
the World, ( the greatest number )
that He Gave ( the greatest act )
His ony Begotten Son, ( the greatest gift )
that Whosoever ( the greatest invitation )
Believeth ( the greatest simplicity )
in Him ( the greatest person )
should not perish, ( the greatest deliverance )
But ( the greatest difference )
Have ( the greatest certainty )
Everlasting Life ( the greatest possession )

I saw this somewhere else, and I just loved it! Had to post it.

 

[cygnusx1]

For the record, I started this thread about two years ago and have since become pretty convinced of the doctrine of election and of the tennents of Calvinism.

i love this post !!!

 

[Ben johnson]

Good post, "LGSJM".

For the record, I started this thread about two years ago and have since become pretty convinced of the doctrine of election and of the tennents of Calvinism.

i love this post !!!

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.

When I say "overturned", I mean "overturned with regard to predestination".

And there are passages that are impossible to overturn. Matt23:13, 1Cor9:25-27 (with 2Cor13:5), John20:29.

Calvinism is a complex structure, crafted with many planks that seem to fit together; but the very foundation is cracked. The nature of God is to receive man's faith, not author it --- Heb11:6 and Acts10:34-35 are very clear on that. The Final Judgment renders to each man according to his choices --- Rom2:6-8 is equally clear. Indeed, the condemnation in Rom2:2-8, is for those who "are SUPPOSED to REPENT, because of God's patience and kindness, but their hard unrepentant heart is making God MAD!"

And there are so many planks left lying on the ground, Scriptures that can never fit the "Calvinist Platform".

To sum up all the discussions --- Scripture presents man as ACTIVE in his salvation, God receiving man's choice (Matt7:24-27, 1Tim4:16, Heb3:6-14 & 4:16); Calvinism asserts man is PASSIVE in his salvation, God AUTHORS faith and DECREES regeneration (1Calvin3:12).

 

[CCWoody]

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.

Only in a fantasy in your mind, Ben.

When I say "overturn", I mean "overturn with regard to predestination"..

What, you mean you have turned to Open Theism!!! Huh, didn't know.


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

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.​

 

[Ben johnson]

Only in a fantasy in your mind, Ben.

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

What, you mean you have turned to Open Theism!!! Huh, didn't know.

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

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).

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

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

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.

 

[Jipsah]

As we've studied Scripture, we've seen every tennet, overturned.

Yeah, we've seen how that works here. "Oh, that verse doesn't really mean what it says...", "Oh, that word doesn't mean what everyone thinks it means..." "Oh, this verse over here negates that verse over there...". Yeah, if you're willing to do enough violence to the Scripture, you can "overturn" the tenets of Calvinism. You can probably "prove that the sun rises in the north, as well. I mean, hey, if you're willing to redefine terms to suit yourself, there's nothing you can't "prove".

When I say "overturned", I mean "overturned with regard to predestination".

Yeah, we've been told that there is no such thing as predestination, and that when the Bible speaks of it it either really means something else or it doesn't count. Right.

Calvinism is a complex structure, crafted with many planks that seem to fit together; but the very foundation is cracked. The nature of God is to receive man's faith, not author it

Really? Howcome
Hebrews 12:2 says "Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith". I reckon this is one of the places where you'll have to tell us what that really means, right?

The Final Judgment renders to each man according to his choices

And without the Lord's intervention, our choises lead us to destruction. Always. If you're depending on your own righteousness (like filthy rags) to get you saved, you're outta luck.

And there are so many planks left lying on the ground, Scriptures that can never fit the "Calvinist Platform".

That isn't the way we work it. Unlike Arminians we don't see the need to try and make Scripture fit our doctrine. We believe that the doctrine ought to fit the Scripture. Radical concept, I know, but it does eliminate the need to "explain away" inconvenient Scriptures as the Free Willies have to do.

 

[Jipsah]

God's position is receiving man's faith, not authoring it.

So much for our Lord being both the author and finisher of our faith, then, eh? Just delete that verse and drive on...

 

[Rick Otto]

Quote:
Originally Posted by brightlights
For the record, I started this thread about two years ago and have since become pretty convinced of the doctrine of election and of the tennents of Calvinism.

i love this post !!!

 

[CCWoody]

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

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).

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

Ben, you must face the facts....

Either God doesn't know the future, in which case, there is NOTHING to Predestine.

or...

God knows the future but didn't ordain it, in which case God is simply a spectator to the future someone else created (can you say dualism). Yet, there is still a Predestination, known but not created by God...

or...

God knows the future because he chose/ ordained/ Predestined that future to occur, just as we Calvinists assert is the truth. Be at peace for God is in control.

But...

if the future is known by God as a mere matter of precognition but not ordination of it, then you still have a certain FIXED destiny, defined theologically as PREdestination. You have not solved the Calvinistic Scriptural delimma. You have merely removed God from being in control of it.

Since...

you deny ANY predestination by your own statements, I conclude, therefore that you deny ANY future known by God.

Perhaps...

you need to stop and ponder what you really assert before you declare laughably that you alone in history seem to have overturned Calvinism.

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

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.​

 

[Epiphoskei]

So much for our Lord being both the author and finisher of our faith, then, eh? Just delete that verse and drive on...

So much for him "beginning the good work in us" too!

Why isn't Phillipians quoted by Calvinists more often? The doctrine is all over it.

 

[drstevej]

Arminianism: a Cart drawn Horse

Horse - Cart

 

[justsurfing]

To sum up all the discussions --- Scripture presents man as ACTIVE in his salvation, God receiving man's choice (Matt7:24-27, 1Tim4:16, Heb3:6-14 & 4:16); Calvinism asserts man is PASSIVE in his salvation, God AUTHORS faith and DECREES regeneration (1Calvin3:12).

Calvinism is sound in these tenets. The old man, the sinful nature, contributes nothing to his salvation and must needs be passive.

The new man, the new nature, is created by God to act with God... or we'd all become paralyzed at conversion and never do the will of God being lead by the Spirit. Those who are lead by the Spirit are the sons of God.

God leads us by His Spirit in our new spirit. Man doesn't even actively "receive" gifts of God. It's part of God actively re-creating man.

Think about it. If you were born with a gift for music... did you "actively receive" the gift? By choice?

No, it was inborn. So are the gifts of faith and salvation... inborn when we are born from above.

These tenets of Calvinism are 100% sound... and it is only boasting to say we contributed to our salvation or received actively making ourselves different and better than those to whom God does not give these same gifts, without repentance, in this life.

Boasting... that's all it is. Man receives gifts by God's grace in his creation... not by his own active will... though some's imagination is quite active in imagining they accomplished their own salvation apart from God's grace by their own acts of response and deeds.

 

[justsurfing]

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

Acts 3:15
You killed the author of life, but God raised him from the dead. We are witnesses of this.

Hebrews 2:10
In bringing many sons to glory, it was fitting that God, for whom and through whom everything exists, should make the author of their salvation perfect through suffering.

Hebrews 12:2
Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.

The scripture plainly states God is the author and perfecter of our faith, the author of salvation, the author of life.

People who resist and reject God's author-ship... resist and reject God's author-ity.

Man wants to be in author-ity over God. What do we call that? When men resist and reject God's author-ity... and want to be in author-ity over God?

At the very least, scriptural/spiritual...error.

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

Calvinism makes an error there. God is not partial. Jesus is the Savior of all men - not just in word but in deed. The Word of God does not return void. When the Word says it, we know that this is all the evidence faith needs to believe the Spirit shall accomplish this by grace... even as our Sovereign God has willed and decreed.

But, one cannot throw out the baby with the bathwater. In seeking to correct Calvinism's errors of partiality... sometimes the cure is worse than the ill. One must remove the error, not that which stands true to scripture.

Just because you don't like that Calvinism is partial... that doesn't mean God is not the author of life, salvation, and faith. The Bible says clearly... oh yes He is. To say anything different is to refuse to come under His author-ity. The Bible said it plain and clear.

God bless,

js

 

[justsurfing]

Simple point:

Some people are saved on this earth, some aren't.

1. Either God did the work of salvation wholly... and chose who would be saved on this earth (correct, imo), or

2. Some people were just more inclined to respond "yes" to salvation... though they had equal opportunity to be saved.

? - to "free willies"... what kind of sense does this make? #2.

If someone is more inclined to respond "yes"... who inclined them that way? What was it about them that was so different? Wasn't that difference in their creation?

Weren't they somehow pre-disposed to say "yes" while others were pre-disposed to say "no"?

Who pre-disposed them?

If people all have equal opportunity... and some say yes and some say no... God is not "off the hook" for pre-destination... anyway.

The fact that different people say "yes" and others say "no" still leaves God on the hook for who is saved and who is not. There is no logical way around pre-destination... of some manner or type... because there are diverse outcomes.

The difference between those who say "yes" and those who say "no" would still be entirely in God's hand in their creation... and pre-dispositions to say "yes" or "no"... if they all had exactly the same amount of grace in calling and influencing them to be saved.

Furthermore, if there was any difference in the level of grace in calling and influencing people to be saved... God would be entirely responsible for that difference as well... and in control of it.

Even if a person would actually "agree" with "free willies" that people make different decisions given the same opportunity... any way a person slices or dices it... God is still in ultimate control of who says "yes" and who says "no".

I'd like to see some real ability to look at the facts, in that some say "yes" and "no"... and there is just absolutely no logical way to deny God is ultimately in control either way.

So, might just as well give up the illusion that God cannot control outcomes. A really thorough examination of the facts reveals it's an inescapable conclusion, imo.

 

[Ben johnson]

So much for our Lord being both the author and finisher of our faith, then, eh? Just delete that verse and drive on...

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

But clearly, per 12:7-9, discipline is optional, and if WE refuse His discipline, then WE are illegitimate and not sons. "SHALL we not much rather BE subject to the (discipline of) the Father of spirits, and live?"

It's clearer (and impossible to deny) when we read verse 25: "Much less shall WE escape who turn away from God".

Yeah, we've seen how that works here. "Oh, that verse doesn't really mean what it says...", "Oh, that word doesn't mean what everyone thinks it means..." "Oh, this verse over here negates that verse over there...". Yeah, if you're willing to do enough violence to the Scripture, you can "overturn" the tenets of Calvinism. You can probably "prove that the sun rises in the north, as well. I mean, hey, if you're willing to redefine terms to suit yourself, there's nothing you can't "prove".

Why don't you deal with some of the verses (and "overturnings") that I cited?

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.

When I say "overturned", I mean "overturned with regard to predestination".

And here is a challenge --- tell us how these verses could possibly accommodate "Calvinism":

And there are passages that are impossible to overturn. Matt23:13, 1Cor9:25-27 (with 2Cor13:5), John20:29.

Yeah, we've been told that there is no such thing as predestination, and that when the Bible speaks of it it either really means something else or it doesn't count. Right.

Oh there is predestination. But we must clearly read what Scripture says about it. In Rom8:28-29, those WHO love God, are predestined to Christlikeness. Period.

Nowhere is anyone predestined to "saving-faith".

Saving faith is charged to men; again, see Heb11:6, Acts10:34-35, then Rom3:26, 10:10, 6:17, etcetera...

And without the Lord's intervention, our choises lead us to destruction. Always. If you're depending on your own righteousness (like filthy rags) to get you saved, you're outta luck.

Cite the verse.

And no, I'm not depending on "my own righteousness". I'm depending on His. See 2Cor5:21.

...but also read 2Tim1:12-14: "I know whom I have believed, and am convinced that He is able to guard that which I have entrusted to Him. Now, (you!) guard, by the Holy Spirit that indwells you, the treasure entrusted to you."

He guards what I entrust, and I guard what He entrusts. Wanna argue that "He doesn't entrust eternal life"?

Jipsah --- I appreciate you. And I would NEVER wish to do anything to damage your faith. Yet --- if what you have diverges from Scripture, can anything bad come out of an honest debate?

I pray not; it is the prayer of my heart that both of us, whether we come to agreement, grow stronger in Him.

And if we increase in fellowship with each other, so much the better.

 

[Ben johnson]

Acts 3:15
You killed the author of life, but God raised him from the dead. We are witnesses of this.

Hi, "Just". I don't see how this verse helps Calvinism...

Hebrews 2:10
In bringing many sons to glory, it was fitting that God, for whom and through whom everything exists, should make the author of their salvation perfect through suffering.

Have you read Heb2:1&3? How about Heb3:6-14? 4:11??? Most of ch10???

Hebrews 12:2
Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.

My previous post dealt with Heb12; I look forward to hearing (uhm, reading?) your comments.

Meanwhile --- how about Heb6:4-6? It is "IMPOSSIBLE" (adunatos --- unable/powerless) to restore them to repentance, WHILE they are fall-ING away. It's also impossible to deny this is speaking of the "saved", or to think they "didn't really fall from salvation".

It's looking worse and worse for Calvinism, eh?

 

[drstevej]

It's looking worse and worse for Calvinism, eh?

When is your book coming out?

 

[Ben johnson]

When is your book coming out?

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

@ RickOtto

Ben, you must face the facts....

Either God doesn't know the future, in which case, there is NOTHING to Predestine.

or...

God knows the future but didn't ordain it, in which case God is simply a spectator to the future someone else created (can you say dualism). Yet, there is still a Predestination, known but not created by God...

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.

We can't toss out Jesus' words in Matt7:24-27, can we?

or...

God knows the future because he chose/ ordained/ Predestined that future to occur, just as we Calvinists assert is the truth. Be at peace for God is in control.

But...

if the future is known by God as a mere matter of precognition but not ordination of it, then you still have a certain FIXED destiny, defined theologically as PREdestination. You have not solved the Calvinistic Scriptural delimma. You have merely removed God from being in control of it.

The basis of "responsibility", correctly reflects man as CAUSAL to his destiny.

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

Since...

you deny ANY predestination by your own statements, I conclude, therefore that you deny ANY future known by God.

Not at all.

Perhaps...

you need to stop and ponder what you really assert before you declare laughably that you alone in history seem to have overturned Calvinism.

I've overturned --- nothing.

Scripture overturns Calvinism.

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

They won't be, because they cannot be.

No disrespect meant towards anyone.

 

[Rick Otto]

publishers are still fightin' over it.
Could be 6 days, 6weeks, 6 months...
the one that wins will be welcomed in bookstores everywhere, as liberators.
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

BEN!! Stop turning things over.

 

[nobdysfool]

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

@ RickOtto

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.

We can't toss out Jesus' words in Matt7:24-27, can we?
The basis of "responsibility", correctly reflects man as CAUSAL to his destiny.

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

Not at all.
I've overturned --- nothing.

Scripture overturns Calvinism.

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

They won't be, because they cannot be.

No disrespect meant towards anyone.

Why bother, Ben ? You won't receive it. And I think it's hugely erroneous that you believe that one scripture "overturns" another. No such thing is possible. Scripture is of "one cloth", "one fabric". It is your erroneous interpretations of scripture which leads you to think this. Your view has been demonstrated to be erroneous many times. You're just too stubborn to admit it.

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?

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