How to become a Calvinist in 5 easy steps

[Mark Quayle]

It's a good thing God will accomplish what He has set out to do, but what really means something to me is that God sent Christ to die for our sins. That's the nave of the whole Bible. To me that is the gospel. Everything else loses its meaning without it. I think Pastor Lassman said it well, but you were not that impressed.

Aaaargh! This format! Now I have to go back and find where you quoted or linked Pastor Lassman. I don't even remember what you're talking about! Been away only 3 days and have only the vaguest recollection of this conversation.

Ok, I've looked awhile and don't find it. Would you mind linking it or giving me the post number?

 

[zoidar]

Aaaargh! This format! Now I have to go back and find where you quoted or linked Pastor Lassman. I don't even remember what you're talking about! Been away only 3 days and have only the vaguest recollection of this conversation.

Ok, I've looked awhile and don't find it. Would you mind linking it or giving me the post number?

 

[Mark Quayle]

Thanks. I must have missed that, because this is the first I remember seeing the video. But I get his point, and yes, he has a point, but even forgiveness of sins has no meaning without the Glory of God, which is the central 'hub' of all of creation and eternity. 'Sins' has no meaning apart from the purity, power, justice and authority —the Glory of God— Christ himself being the "personification" of that Glory. In other words, Christ himself is the 'hub'.

 

[zoidar]

Thanks. I must have missed that, because this is the first I remember seeing the video. But I get his point, and yes, he has a point, but even forgiveness of sins has no meaning without the Glory of God, which is the central 'hub' of all of creation and eternity. 'Sins' has no meaning apart from the purity, power, justice and authority —the Glory of God— Christ himself being the "personification" of that Glory. In other words, Christ himself is the 'hub'.

I don't think sin has a meaning, like a disease doesn't have a meaning more than to kill and destroy. I guess you must say sin has a meaning since God decreed sin. I on the other hand don't have to, since I don't believe God decreed sin.

Why do you believe forgiveness of sins has no meaning without the glory of God?

 

[Mark Quayle]

I don't think sin has a meaning, like a disease doesn't have a meaning more than to kill and destroy. I guess you must say sin has a meaning since God decreed sin. I on the other hand don't have to, since I don't believe God decreed sin.

Why do you believe forgiveness of sins has no meaning without the glory of God?

You said: "I don't think sin has a meaning, like a disease doesn't have a meaning more than to kill and destroy. I guess you must say sin has a meaning since God decreed sin." I don't know what you are getting at there. By "meaning" do you intend something along the lines of what in mathematics is called 'absolute value'? But I do think that regardless of what you intended there, sin has no meaning without reference to offense (rebellion) against God.

You ask: "Why do you believe forgiveness of sins has no meaning without the glory of God?"

Because the Glory of God is behind the whole of Creation, and all that comes to pass within it. 1) Just part of what I said about the forgiveness of sins having no meaning apart from the Glory of God is rather evident, in that God's authority and purity contrasts so completely with the tiniest rebellious notion, that the whole of creation is corrupted by the cosmic treason of that rebellion. It one can't see that contrast it is because they are not aware of God's purity. 2) Then from 'the other side of that coin', the enormity of that sin demonstrates the greatness of his mercy, love and forgiveness, which is also his glory.

 

[JAL]

The Glory of God, which is the central 'hub' of all of creation and eternity.

God's self-glorification is unintelligible in Calvinism. Our loving father glorifies Himself by steering most of his kids into hell-fire?

Calvinists will say, "I'm sure it's the best plan, even if we 'mere humans' cannot comprehend it." That's irrational. It would be a rational excuse if we were ignorant of either (A) the final outcome, or (B) some impelling necessity.

But the Calvinistic God isn't driven by necessity. And we DO know the final outcome - billions of people trapped in hell fire. Hence there's no way that a God of noble character delights in this outcome. If He did, He would be the biggest hypocrite of all, because His book says that He despises those who delight in malevolence.

No theological stance is 100% certain. But why not opt for one that makes a little sense?

 

[JAL]

I myself hate bullies. The Calvinistic Gods finds glory in, and takes great delight in, being a bully?

 

[JAL]

Oh that's right. Calvin himself was a bully. So it would only make sense that he idolized a quintessential bully and then deified him.

 

[zoidar]

You said: "I don't think sin has a meaning, like a disease doesn't have a meaning more than to kill and destroy. I guess you must say sin has a meaning since God decreed sin." I don't know what you are getting at there. By "meaning" do you intend something along the lines of what in mathematics is called 'absolute value'? But I do think that regardless of what you intended there, sin has no meaning without reference to offense (rebellion) against God.

I agree with that. I thought you would say something like the meaning of sin is to show God's glory as He punishes sin on that day.

 

[Receivedgrace]

That passage says nothing about the gifts ceasing. It's talking about spiritual maturity defined as mature prophethood and can be paraphrased thus, "'Now we know only in part, and prophesy only in part, but then [in maturity] we will know in full, and prophesy in full."


Let me explain. Paul is speaking in triplets
....faith, hope, love - these 3 abide
....spoke like a babe, thought like a babe, reasoned like a babe, - these three "cease"
....knowledge, tongues, prophecy - these three "cease" (same Greek word for "cease" is here too).

For the babe, in what sense did the three activities "cease"? They did not cease. They matured. (What ceased are the immature executions). Thus:
- The babe is mature ONLY to the extent he has matured in those three activities.
- Ergo, the Christian is mature ONLY to the extent he has matured in the three activities (prophecy, knowledge, and tongues).

Now I'll prove it. If the gift as a whole ceased, you still have to ask, What reason does the passage give for cessation? Answer at verse 11:
"When I became a man, I put away baby things."

This is heresy! Why so? Because if prophethood itself is childish, then Christ The Prophet was a spiritual babe! He never matured! And it would mean that we who have moved beyond the age of prophets are more mature than Christ!!! Total heresy. The reality is that His prophethood defines maturity. Take a look at chapters 2 and 3: Paul is writing to the Corinthian babes. He is trying to mature them - he is not construing them as more mature than Christ.

Back to verse 11: "When I became a man, I put away baby things." To summarize, Paul is saying that the mature Christian has set aside immature prophecies because he now walks in mature prophethood. This happened even for Christ. At birth, Christ's "prophecies" were childish babbling. He had to mature.

Willing to believe anything except the bible?
With the completion of the NT revelation three apostolic gifts ceased.
What we see today is not genuine, but an imitation intended to lead souls away from biblical truth in search of something that is not true.

 

[JAL]

Willing to believe anything except the bible?
With the completion of the NT revelation three apostolic gifts ceased.
What we see today is not genuine, but an imitation intended to lead souls away from biblical truth in search of something that is not true.

I don't think you even read that post. Clearly it refuted that cessationistic view.

 

[John Mullally]

I don't think you even read that post. Clearly it refuted that cessationistic view.

I completely agree. Paul, as you said, indicates that the gifts continue as believers on earth have not reached perfection (1 Corinthians 13:10).

Paul re-iterates this point in Ephesians 4:11-13, where he indicates that the office of the Prophet (thus implying the continued gifts of the spirit), will continue until we all "come to the measures of the stature of the fullness of Christ" - believers on earth have not met that standard.

Ephesians 4:11 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, 12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the [e]edifying of the body of Christ, 13 till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ;​

 

[Receivedgrace]

I don't think you even read that post. Clearly it refuted that cessationistic view.

Gifts, miracles and signs are temporary. Doctrine is eternal. The word of God is doctrine and will not perish. All those whom Jesus healed and those who were raised from the dead eventually died. Only those who were born again by the power of the word of God, the word Jesus spoke, attained eternal life.

 

[JAL]

Gifts, miracles and signs are temporary. Doctrine is eternal. The word of God is doctrine and will not perish. All those whom Jesus healed and those who were raised from the dead eventually died. Only those who were born again by the power of the word of God, the word Jesus spoke, attained eternal life.

These threads are supposed to be a debate about what Scripture teaches. Since you are not addressing the specific verses discussed in my post, it seems you have no interest in what Scripture has to say.

When I first got saved, I was indoctrinated into cessationism. I thought that gifts were temporary. Later I concluded that Scripture seems to strongly suggest otherwise. No analysis of Scripture is 100% reliable, but I think my stance on this issue is pretty solid biblically.

 

[Receivedgrace]

These threads are supposed to be a debate about what Scripture teaches. Since you are not addressing the specific verses discussed in my post, it seems you have no interest in what Scripture has to say.

When I first got saved, I was indoctrinated into cessationism. I thought that gifts were temporary. Later I concluded that Scripture seems to strongly suggest otherwise. No analysis of Scripture is 100% reliable, but I think my stance on this issue is pretty solid biblically.

Well, here is the problem. The Holy Spirit is 100% reliable in teaching the truth regarding scripture. The Holy Spirit and scripture always agree.
Scripture and history both teach that what passes for gifts, miracles, wonders, and signs today are not biblically sound. If it is not the Holy Spirit and my contention from scripture is that it is not, then what spirit is it at work?
1 Cor 13:8 isn't there to take up space on the page.
Jesus Christ healed all that came to Him when He walked on the earth. All of those healed eventually died. Not all of those healed believed.
I find it difficult if not impossible to discuss scripture with those who do not apply the same meaning to scripture as was intended by God.
God is sovereign in all matters. God is the final authority on all matters related to scripture.
That doesn't make me a Calvinist or a cessationist. God's word is eternal and cannot change. Even with a lifetime of sanctification I still will not have been made perfect. Only when glorified together with my Savior will I be complete.

 

[JAL]

Scripture and history both teach that what passes for gifts, miracles, wonders, and signs today are not biblically sound.

There are approximately 600 million charismatics in the world. Seems a bit presumptuous to assume that none of them had a valid charismatic experience. Even if that were true (and I'm pretty sure it's not), the important question is whether God really wanted the gifts to wane. Perhaps the church isn't seeing a lot of gifts only because they've strayed off track? That would be my opinion.

I find it difficult if not impossible to discuss scripture with those who do not apply the same meaning to scripture as was intended by God.
God is sovereign in all matters. God is the final authority on all matters related to scripture.

Yet you seem to posture yourself as the final authority on Scripture. You tell us your opinion on a passage, and then expect us to take it as fact without bothering to discuss/debate the relevant verses.

1 Cor 13:8 isn't there to take up space on the page.

Case in point. You ignored my discussion of that passage.

Scripture and history both teach that what passes for gifts, miracles, wonders, and signs today are not biblically sound.

You haven't demonstrated anything in Scripture.

The history argument faces several problems.
...(1) Appealing to personal experience (history) as a doctrinal authority challenges Scripture as the only final authority.
...(2) The history argument says, "We are not currently seeing any gifts, in fact it's been a long time. This dry spell proves they ceased." On that logic, the first dry spell in the OT terminated the gifts permanently.
...(3) There's no known legitimate way to apply the history argument. Exactly how many minutes, hours, days, months, or years constitute a dry spell?

I think you've been indoctrinated into cessationism, just like I once was, and your attitude is, "I am already convinced, so don't confuse me with the facts!"

 

[Receivedgrace]

There are approximately 600 million charismatics in the world. Seems a bit presumptuous to assume that none of them had a valid charismatic experience. Even if that were true (and I'm pretty sure it's not), the important question is whether God really wanted the gifts to wane. Perhaps the church isn't seeing a lot of gifts only because they've strayed off track? That would be my opinion.


Yet you seem to posture yourself as the final authority on Scripture. You tell us your opinion on a passage, and then expect us to take it as fact without bothering to discuss/debate the relevant verses.

Case in point. You ignored my discussion of that passage.


You haven't demonstrated anything in Scripture.

The history argument faces several problems.
...(1) Appealing to personal experience (history) as a doctrinal authority challenges Scripture as the only final authority.
...(2) The history argument says, "We are not currently seeing any gifts, in fact it's been a long time. This dry spell proves they ceased." On that logic, the first dry spell in the OT terminated the gifts permanently.
...(3) There's no known legitimate way to apply the history argument. Exactly how many minutes, hours, days, months, or years constitute a dry spell?

I think you've been indoctrinated into cessationism, just like I once was, and your attitude is, "I am already convinced, so don't confuse me with the facts!"

Well, if numbers were indictive of truth then the Muslims would have a strong argument regarding their doctrine.

Scripture interprets scripture through the teaching of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the common denominator present in all genuine believers. The Holy Spirit does not teach one thing to one group and something entirely different to another group.

I've already seen the torture that Pentecostals and charismatics put the scriptures through, and I find it painful.

I have the admonition from Christ regarding the argument about gifts, signs miracle and wonders.
Mat 7:21 ¶ Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
It is common to be religious but only a few are genuinely saved.
Evidences of salvation are not to be found in signs and wonders but in the witness of the holy Spirit with our spirit.
Ro 8:16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

 

[zoidar]

Well, if numbers were indictive of truth then the Muslims would have a strong argument regarding their doctrine.

Scripture interprets scripture through the teaching of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the common denominator present in all genuine believers. The Holy Spirit does not teach one thing to one group and something entirely different to another group.

I've already seen the torture that Pentecostals and charismatics put the scriptures through, and I find it painful.

I have the admonition from Christ regarding the argument about gifts, signs miracle and wonders.
Mat 7:21 ¶ Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
It is common to be religious but only a few are genuinely saved.
Evidences of salvation are not to be found in signs and wonders but in the witness of the holy Spirit with our spirit.
Ro 8:16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

Did they actually cast out demons and did wonderful works, or is that what they think they have done? That is a relevant question, I think.

 

[JAL]

Well, if numbers were indictive of truth then the Muslims would have a strong argument regarding their doctrine.

Shallow argument. There's a huge difference between 600 million Muslims vs 600 million Christians.

Scripture interprets scripture through the teaching of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the common denominator present in all genuine believers. The Holy Spirit does not teach one thing to one group and something entirely different to another group.

So any Christian who disagrees with you on a doctrine such as Continuationism is lying about what the Holy Spirit taught him?

Have you considered the possibility that most of us don't hear the Holy Spirit loud and clear, by reason of spiritual immaturity?

I've already seen the torture that Pentecostals and charismatics put the scriptures through, and I find it painful.

I demonstrated that cessationism tortures 1 Cor 13:8-12. You've repeatedly ignored that analysis.

You seem to think that you are an infallible interpreter of Scripture, at least with respect to several major doctrines. As a result, you're unwilling to objectively evaluate other interpretations. Honestly, I'd prefer to abstain from any further discussion with you.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Did they actually cast out demons and did wonderful works, or is that what they think they have done? That is a relevant question, I think.

And leads to, or at least suggests relevance to what Jesus said, about cleaning the house, and the demon returns and finds it empty, and brings seven worse with him, to inhabit the house with him. Matthew 12:44,45