Logical Problems with Calvinism

[Bible Highlighter]

Come on, that is silly. We all know that God uses His Children to spread the gospel AND to tell people what the Word of God says. That is perfectly in alignment with faith.

First, I am speaking from the Calvinistic perspective and not my own (Which would be Biblical). Second, the Calvinist may believe God uses his people to spread the good news but like I said, such a thing is a contradiction because if it is ultimately God who saves and does not save a person, then the preaching of the gospel is a useless excercise. Also, many Calvinists will tell an audience that they can be saved. But this would be a lie because they are not talking about how some of them have no chance at salvation because they may be damned by God to hell.

In addition, the Calvinist preacher is no doubt out to convince people as the Calvinist poster here. But again, this is all useless if it is ultimately God who saves and does not save people. Their efforts are then wasted and they are trying to save people by their own effort or by works (Which is a bad example to set in their book).


....

 

[ToBeLoved]

You will reply no further because you know you are wrong. Jesus did not put the parable or example she made into her head. She was expounding upon Jesus's parable with a parable of her own.

For example: If you made a parable about how locking your doors can keep people from easily entering into your home, I could expound upon such a parable with an example or parable of my own by saying how people could also easily enter your home by simply breaking your window. The parable I just made is not your parable even though it is related to yours.


...

Isn't a parable another concept entirely that explains the original concept with a story that a person understands?

Jesus talked about Him being the vine and His Children the branches. That He is the good shepherd who looks after His sheep and leads them to places of security. A mustard seed, wheat verses weeds.

I don't see your example as being a parable at all.

 

[GillDouglas]

First, I am speaking from the Calvinistic perspective and not my own (Which would be Biblical). Second, the Calvinist may believe God uses his people to spread the good news but like I said, such a thing is a contradiction because if it is ultimately God who saves and does not save a person, then the preaching of the gospel is a useless excercise. Also, many Calvinists will tell an audience that they can be saved. But this would be a lie because they are not talking about how some of them have no chance at salvation because they may be damned by God to hell.

In addition, the Calvinist preacher is no doubt out to convince people as the Calvinist poster here. But again, this is all useless if it is ultimately God who saves and does not save people. Their efforts are then wasted and they are trying to save people by their own effort or by works (Which is a bad example to set in their book).


....

You're treading on thin ice my friend. I'd punch you in the nose if it'd do any of us any good. You have been told time and time again you do NOT understand our doctrine so you have no right to try to properly explain what we hold to be true. The preaching of the Gospel is NOT useless, no Calvinist I know would ever say that. We recognize that it is not us that has the power to bring anyone to faith, that right is God's by His grace alone. We also do not make any assumptions on who will or will not be saved, again that knowledge belongs to God. We would, just like any other Christian, take every opportunity to bring people to the Lord. If out of a 100 at least 1 does come to know God as a result of my word or deed I would thrilled!

 

[ToBeLoved]

First, of all, many Christians list Jesus's parables so as to include even quick comparisons of things (without a story). Second, the dictionary defines "parable" as being either a story or a statement or comment that can be used as a comparison or an anology.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/parable

So no. This is just you not wanting to admit that OSAS is wrong, so you are putting up defenses so as not to see it.


....

But we are not talking about a dictionary definition. We have in the Word of God examples of parables. So let's discuss the parables that exist and how they were used and not what each of us thinks a parable means. We have examples.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Isn't a parable another concept entirely that explains the original concept with a story that a person understands?

Jesus talked about Him being the vine and His Children the branches. That He is the good shepherd who looks after His sheep and leads them to places of security. A mustard seed, wheat verses weeds.

I don't see your example as being a parable at all.

You are not fooling anyone. If for some reason, making a parable would help to prove OSAS in some way, you would be all for defending for believers in using parables. The ONLY reason you are against seeing how the Canaanite woman used a parable herself is because you know it will refute your belief of OSAS. It's the ONLY reason.


...

 

[Bible Highlighter]

But we are not talking about a dictionary definition. We have in the Word of God examples of parables. So let's discuss the parables that exist and how they were used and not what each of us thinks a parable means. We have examples.

The Dictionary is an accepted form of communication on how we understand words.


...

 

[ToBeLoved]

And as I said before, the Canaanite woman's use of a parable of her own (that expounde upon Jesus's parable)disproves folks here by the fact that they can use parables. The only reason people here are not wanting to see it is because they know it will refute their false idea that they can sin and still be saved.


...

Many people cannot even express their own thoughts clearly. So the thought that it is good for us to talk in parables in only more confusing and will lead to confusion. just as your previous example of what you called a parable, that was not really one.

It is hard enough many times to understand what one is saying in writing. Parables are usually spoken. I'm not sure this would even be the best medium for a parable if we were smart enough to come up with them. Writing only is a hard communication medium that is dependant on how well people write.

 

[GillDouglas]

You are not fooling anyone. If for some reason, making a parable would help to prove OSAS in some way, you would be all for defending for believers in using parables. The ONLY reason you are against seeing how the Canaanite woman used a parable herself is because you know it will refute your belief of OSAS. It's the ONLY reason.
...

"And He answered them, "'Because it has been given to you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given'" (Matthew 13:11)

Who is He, who is you and who is them in this verse?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

You're treading on thin ice my friend. I'd punch you in the nose if it'd do any of us any good. You have been told time and time again you do NOT understand our doctrine so you have no right to try to properly explain what we hold to be true. The preaching of the Gospel is NOT useless, no Calvinist I know would ever say that. We recognize that it is not us that has the power to bring anyone to faith, that right is God's by His grace alone. We also do not make any assumptions on who will or will not be saved, again that knowledge belongs to God. We would, just like any other Christian, take every opportunity to bring people to the Lord. If out of a 100 at least 1 does come to know God as a result of my word or deed I would thrilled!

Well, I would take great glory in you doing harm towards me because the Bible says I would be persecuted for Christ's sake. But again, you yourself said that it is some kind of regeneration that first saves a person, right? That accepting God by hearing God's Word and making a decision to choose Christ based on God's Word is not really an option in your rule book. Or do you believe otherwise? If so, please explain.

Also, saying to a crowd that they can be saved is a lie. You cannot say that because you also say that there are some who have no chance at salvation.


....

 

[ToBeLoved]

You are not fooling anyone. If for some reason, making a parable would help to prove OSAS in some way, you would be all for defending for believers in using parables. The ONLY reason you are against seeing how the Canaanite woman used a parable herself is because you know it will refute your belief of OSAS. It's the ONLY reason.


...

No. It's just a bad idea. On a medium like the written word, confusion happens all the time, as we have all experienced on CF at one time or another.

If I had wanted to try to explain OSAS using a parable I could have done so. It is a bad idea and get's us no where. If you want to put me down in the process, that is on you making judgement's against me, someone you do not even know, incorrectly. That my friend is bearing false witness against your neighbor, breaking a commandment. I would just stick to the point and try not to tell others what they think or would do and concentrate on getting your own, many times confusing point across.

 

[GillDouglas]

Well, I would take great glory in you doing harm towards me because the Bible says I would be persecuted for Christ's sake. But again, you yourself said that it is some kind of regeneration that first saves a person, right? That accepting God by hearing God's Word and making a decision to choose Christ based on God's Word is not really an option in your rule book. Or do you believe otherwise? If so, please explain.

Also, saying to a crowd that they can be saved is a lie. You cannot say that because you also say that there are some who have no chance at salvation.

....

Not just some kind of regeneration, the ONLY kind of regeneration brought about by the work of the Holy Spirit that which changes the condition of the hard heart. Out of mere grace and love, without any foresight of faith or good works, God causes specific men to turn to Him. The method in which God has chosen for these specific individuals to come to that point in their life is different from person to person as their testimony alone is proof enough. Whether its hearing the Word, reading the Word or witnessing the Word in action, ultimately the power of the living Word derives from God Himself.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Not just some kind of regeneration, the ONLY kind of regeneration brought about by the work of the Holy Spirit that which changes the condition of the hard heart. Out of mere grace and love, without any foresight of faith or good works, God causes specific men to turn to Him. The method in which God has chosen for these specific individuals to come to that point in their life is different from person to person as their testimony alone is proof enough. Whether its hearing the Word, reading the Word or witnessing the Word in action, ultimately the power of the living Word derives from God Himself.

No. It is faith that brings a person to Christ and faith comes by hearing the gospel and the Word of God. That is why the Great Commission is to preach the gospel.

 

[Marvin Knox]

Mind is not material.

Tell that to a schizophrenic on meds.

 

[Marvin Knox]

The general idea is that since the Calvinist claim is that one must be regenerated in order to believe (or some such wording) they have been "programmed" to believe by said regeneration.

I don't claim to know what a spirit looks like, where it is in a man, or how exactly it is regenerated by the Spirit of God.

I've heard a lot of theological theories concerning whether we are bi-partal or tri-partal. I've heard Calvinists insist that regeneration comes before faith and I've hear their opponents insist that it worked the other way around.

I've discussed how God hardens hearts and how God opens hearts.

I've discussed the inspiration of the scriptures and prophetic messaging. I've discussed the concurrent actions of God and men as illustrated for us in the scriptures.

I have never heard anyone in my 40 years of discussing theology liken regeneration to "programming".

Opening the spirit of men so that they can be "programmed" - perhaps. But never that regeneration itself was robotic programming.

That's a first.

P.S.

Like I said, the only ones I have ever heard use the terms robots puppets and the like are the opponents of Calvinists - never the Calvinists themselves.

Calvinists usually know exactly what they believe. It would be nice if those who are not Calvinists would cease telling them what they believe.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

This thread demonstrates that legalism warps understanding. Self-righteousness blinds the mind.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

You're treading on thin ice my friend. I'd punch you in the nose if it'd do any of us any good. You have been told time and time again you do NOT understand our doctrine so you have no right to try to properly explain what we hold to be true. The preaching of the Gospel is NOT useless, no Calvinist I know would ever say that. We recognize that it is not us that has the power to bring anyone to faith, that right is God's by His grace alone. We also do not make any assumptions on who will or will not be saved, again that knowledge belongs to God. We would, just like any other Christian, take every opportunity to bring people to the Lord. If out of a 100 at least 1 does come to know God as a result of my word or deed I would thrilled!

Doug, Why are we all responding to this guy? He obviously has issues, and there is no meaningful debate here, so let's focus on other threads that might be more productive and less frustrating. That's my 2 pennies, anyway. . . Prov 26:4, brother.

 

[nobdysfool]

Paul tells us that a man reaps what he sows.

That directly contradicts Calvinism.

In what way?

 

[Marvin Knox]

How does one get "regenerated" from "opened"? They aren't equivalent at all.

They aren't the same words - of course. But they may well involve in this instance the same actions by God.

When we get to Heaven we can ask God how these things work exactly. Until then we just don't know. Like Jesus said, "The wind blows where it will. We hear the sound of it etc."

How can one believe if they do not understand? They can't.

Bingo!

 

[Marvin Knox]

......Anyways, the passage you are reading is a quote from Psalm 14. Psalms are poetic and not to be always taken literally. ...

No it is from the Book of Romans - and I do take it literally.


"There is none who understands,
There is none who seeks for God;" Romans 3:11

 

[Bible Highlighter]

No. It's just a bad idea. On a medium like the written word, confusion happens all the time, as we have all experienced on CF at one time or another.

If I had wanted to try to explain OSAS using a parable I could have done so. It is a bad idea and get's us no where. If you want to put me down in the process, that is on you making judgement's against me, someone you do not even know, incorrectly. That my friend is bearing false witness against your neighbor, breaking a commandment. I would just stick to the point and try not to tell others what they think or would do and concentrate on getting your own, many times confusing point across.

My apologies for trying to say what you are thinking. But you have to admit it does not look well for everyone who is claiming OSAS here that they all just happen to conveniently all deny the use of parables. It is rather suscipicious from my perspective. For I know that if parables were to help the case for OSAS, somebody here would no doubt use it to back up their belief in it.

...