How to become a Calvinist in 5 easy steps

[JAL]

I think you are right, but I will share a short story from life. I got saved in summer of 2010. Shortly after that when I was out walking the Holy Spirit told me to go up to a person with a "message" from God. For some reason it made me terrified, thinking what would happen if I did. I hesitated for some time and the opportunity went by. This lead me to the worst "faith crises" in my life, but that is another story. Anyhow, this woman the Holy Spirit told me to go up to, will someone else deliver that message to her? Or was I responsible for her not getting the message, and possibly not being saved. I have thought about this a lot.

I can also say this. This is the only time in my life God has spoken to me that clearly, and with a clear task...

Personally I think that prayer is the most important factor. So if I had to wager a guess, I'd speculate that other people had effectively prayed her into the kingdom, and God was just using you as a vessel of opportunity. She probably got saved at the next opportunity.

On this thread I argued quite a bit for the importance of evangelism and reaching the lost - but only in general opposition to Calvinism. When I'm being more precise, I try to make a logical and exegetical argument that we are NOT supposed to be evangelizing - our focus is to be on waiting in prayer for revival. Same as Pentecost. When the Spirit of revival falls upon us, He will show us to whom we should preach. Evidently He was leading you to preach to that woman.

Revival is the most effective way to win the lost. If you have any doubts about that, it's probably worth investigating the history and autobiography of Charles Finney.

 

[zoidar]

Personally I think that prayer is the most important factor. So if I had to wager a guess, I'd speculate that other people had effectively prayed her into the kingdom, and God was just using you as a vessel of opportunity. She probably got saved at the next opportunity.

On this thread I argued quite a bit for the importance of evangelism and reaching the lost - but only in general opposition to Calvinism. When I'm being more precise, I try to make a logical and exegetical argument that we are NOT supposed to be evangelizing - our focus is to be on waiting in prayer for revival. Same as Pentecost. When the Spirit of revival falls upon us, He will show us to whom we should preach. Evidently He was leading you to preach to that woman.

Revival is the most effective way to win the lost. If you have any doubts about that, it's probably worth investigating the history and autobiography of Charles Finney.

Ok, I don't know that much about revivals, but we sure need it in this very secular country of Sweden..

What do you think about the story of the eunuch in Acts 8? If Philip hadn't followed the voice of the Holy Spirit, would someone else have delivered the message to the eunuch? How can we know?

 

[JAL]

Ok, I don't know that much about revivals, but we sure need it in this very secular country of Sweden..

What do you think about the story of the eunuch in Acts 8? If Philip hadn't followed the voice of the Holy Spirit, would someone else have delivered the message to the eunuch? How can we know?

Probably we'll never know for sure. I think prophets are privy to a wealth of information not revealed to ordinary readers like us. At this late stage in my life, I don't think I will qualify for prophethood.

 

[Clare73]

As a fallible person, you have no right to presume that, not when 100 billion souls are potentially at stake.

As a fallible person, do you have the right to presume otherwise?

Anyone could shirk a real responsibility by using such words. If my aged parents are starving, and I refuse to feed them, I could deflect with, "Nobody's hunger depends on my doctrine or practice. I'm not the only tool in the divine tool box."

Human hunger and divine salvation are hardly equivalent, although it does make for drama.

Funny how, earlier in the debate, you insisted that Calvinism isn't likely to degrade one's commitment to reaching the lost. You didn't fool me then, and you certainly don't fool me now. Your words confirm it, "Nobody's soul depends on my doctrine nor practice."

Scriptural basis for assuming that I have the power to deny salvation to someone?
More drama. . .

 

[Clare73]

Interesting thoughts. But not everything the apostles did and said were authoritative, as Paul himself said even within scripture, as though in parenthesis, "To the rest I say—I and not the Lord—...", and as we know, Peter got sidetracked in giving ground to the Judaisers. Were anyone's quotes of Jesus' words, if not included in Scripture, authoritative for nowadays as what Jesus really said?

Did Paul not have authority to prescribe for the church?

 

[Mark Quayle]

Did Paul not have authority to prescribe for the church?

Agreed yes! I don't doubt when he spoke, as we call it nowadays, 'ex cathedra', he had the authority to do so. So I'm not sure what you are asking, unless you meant just to better define what I was saying.

 

[JAL]

As a fallible person, do you have the right to presume otherwise?

That's just it - better to play it safe right? Why would you think it's better to take a posture that presumes to toy with the eternal salvation of the lost.

Nor are human hunger and divine salvation equivalent, though it does make for drama.

Exactly. Salvation is even MORE serious, which proves my point.

Scriptural basis for assuming that I have the power to deny salvation to someone?
More drama. . .

Strawman. Just as you DO have the power to feed a hungry parent, likewise you DO have the power to intercede for the lost.


These are weak answers on your part.

 

[Clare73]

Agreed yes! I don't doubt when he spoke, as we call it nowadays, 'ex cathedra', he had the authority to do so. So I'm not sure what you are asking, unless you meant just to better define what I was saying.

I had in mind the "I, not the Lord."

I was thinking that Paul having received so much revelation from Jesus Christ, some of which he could not even repeat, that he would be in a position to authoritatively know what should be done there.

 

[Clare73]

That's just it - better to play it safe right? Why would you think it's better to take a posture that presumes to toy with the eternal salvation of the lost.
Exactly. Salvation is even MORE serious, which proves my point.
Strawman. Just as you DO have the power to feed a hungry parent, likewise you DO have the power to intercede for the lost.
These are weak answers on your part.

I realize that is your opinion.

 

[Mark Quayle]

I had in mind the "I, not the Lord."

I was thinking that Paul having received so much revelation from Jesus Christ, some of which he could not even repeat, that he would be in a position to authoritatively know what should be done there.

Nevertheless, as concerns obedience, did not each mature believer have to answer according to his own conscience, and not that of Paul? If conscience or scripture demanded that Paul's opinions be taken as from the Lord, then so be it. But if not....?

 

[JAL]

I realize that is your opinion.

The need to play it safe is your opinion too. You're just in denial about it.

 

[Clare73]

The need to play it safe is your opinion too. You're just in denial about it.

What fool plays it unsafely?

 

[John Mullally]

Personally I think that prayer is the most important factor. So if I had to wager a guess, I'd speculate that other people had effectively prayed her into the kingdom, and God was just using you as a vessel of opportunity. She probably got saved at the next opportunity.

On this thread I argued quite a bit for the importance of evangelism and reaching the lost - but only in general opposition to Calvinism. When I'm being more precise, I try to make a logical and exegetical argument that we are NOT supposed to be evangelizing - our focus is to be on waiting in prayer for revival. Same as Pentecost. When the Spirit of revival falls upon us, He will show us to whom we should preach. Evidently He was leading you to preach to that woman.

Revival is the most effective way to win the lost. If you have any doubts about that, it's probably worth investigating the history and autobiography of Charles Finney.

In my youth, I had close Presbyterian friends who were into friendship evangelism - and they did well at that with that using sports events to get people to attend their youth groups. Of course, I believe they are saved. It seems that was the only evangelistic method available (as Presbyterians are Calvinists - or Reformed) - the more direct evangelissm methods (like Billy Graham''s use of the sinners prayer) are frowned upon - as the Reformed view the sinners prayer (expressed in Acts 2:38-39) as empty promises - given their view that offering promises for responding to the Gospel as possibly drawing the un-elect.

Contrasiting the above with a horrific statement from Calvin: Imagine someone raising dogs to be tortured for their own enjoyment - that is God as Calvin views Him, as shown below.

“…individuals are born, who are doomed from the womb to certain death, and are to glorify him by their destruction.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 6)​

​

I view that as speaking evil of God, as 1 John 4:16 says that God is love and Paul describes love in 1 Corinthians 13. 1 Corinthians 13 iis not human reasoning.

 

[JAL]

What fool plays it unsafely?

A Calvinist playing it safe would keep double predestination to himself, as it could degrade the church's commitment to evangelism and intercessory prayer.

Charles Finney and Yonggi Cho were possibly the two greatest (post-apostolic) revival preachers in church history. Both attested to interceding for lost individuals by name, and teaching others to do the same - praying until they heard God say, "Yes, he will be saved."

A Calvinist is unlikely to pray for the lost with that degree of faith, perseverance, and determination. Therefore, Calvinism is unsafe.

 

[Clare73]

A Calvinist playing it safe would keep double predestination to himself, as it could degrade the church's commitment to evangelism and intercessory prayer.

Charles Finney and Yonggi Cho were possibly the two greatest (post-apostolic) revival preachers in church history. Both attested to interceding for lost individuals by name, and teaching others to do the same - praying until they heard God say, "Yes, he will be saved."

A Calvinist is unlikely to pray for the lost with that degree of faith, perseverance, and determination. Therefore, Calvinism is unsafe.

And that applies to me, how?

And in the light of predestination of some (Ro 8:29-30, Eph 1:9, Eph 1:11), how is double predestination avoided, when to include only some is necessarily to exclude all the rest?

 

[JAL]

And that applies to me, how?

You actively promote your Calvinistic views on this forum. That is not safe.

And in the light of predestination of some (Ro 8:29-30, Eph 1:9, Eph 1:11), how is double predestination avoided, when to include only some is necessarily to exclude all the rest?

Risking salvations on your fallible interpretations isn't very safe.

 

[Clare73]

You actively promote your Calvinistic views on this forum. That is not safe.

Risking salvations on your fallible interpretations isn't very safe.

Assertion without Bilblcal demonstration is without Biblical merit.

It falls to you to demonstrate the Biblical error in my Scriptural presentations.

 

[JAL]

Assertion without Bilblcal demonstration is without Biblical merit.

It falls to you to demonstrate the Biblical error in my Scriptural presentations.

I need to PROVE that you are fallible?

Are you fallible on these Calvinisim-topics we've been discussing? Or infallible?

 

[Clare73]

I need to PROVE that you are fallible?

Are you fallible on these Calvinisim-topics we've been discussing? Or infallible?

I give up. . .am I?

Non-responsive to the request.

 

[JAL]

I give up. . .am I?

One of your favorite deflective, dancing techniques is to "respond" to a question with a question.

That says it all.