The New “No Straw Man” challenge

[Hammster]

Chapter 3: Of God's Decree
1._____ God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby is God neither the author of sin nor hath fellowship with any therein; nor is violence offered to the will of the creature, nor yet is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established; in which appears his wisdom in disposing all things, and power and faithfulness in accomplishing his decree.

Since sin is a thing, it is a logical contradiction to say that God ordained all things yet didn't ordain sin.

I know.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I did this in General Theology a few years ago because of some of the discussions going on. I thought I’d try it here to see how it goes.


As usual, Reformed Theology is misrepresented by what folks think is being taught. Generally, it’s not accurate, though I’m sure it’s well-intentioned. I’m sure I made some of the same arguments myself.

So here's the challenge. Below you will find links to some various documents that those who hold to Reformed Theology will agree on, at least soteriologically. The challenge is to quote from one of them, and then state why you believe it is incorrect. This will hopefully lead to a reasoned discussion. Any argument that does not start this way will be considered off topic. You are, however, free to start your own thread on that matter.

Here are your links.

The 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith (I would have used the Westminster Confession, but I'm Baptist )

OK, I'll bite.

But I have a question, just for clarification. This is point 1 of the LBCofF:

1._____ Those whom God hath accepted in the beloved, effectually called and sanctified by his Spirit, and given the precious faith of his elect unto, can neither totally nor finally fall from the state of grace, but shall certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved, seeing the gifts and callings of God are without repentance, whence he still begets and nourisheth in them faith, repentance, love, joy, hope, and all the graces of the Spirit unto immortality; and though many storms and floods arise and beat against them, yet they shall never be able to take them off that foundation and rock which by faith they are fastened upon; notwithstanding, through unbelief and the temptations of Satan, the sensible sight of the light and love of God may for a time be clouded and obscured from them, yet he is still the same, and they shall be sure to be kept by the power of God unto salvation, where they shall enjoy their purchased possession, they being engraven upon the palm of his hands, and their names having been written in the book of life from all eternity.

Besides the ridulously LONG sentences people used to write over 300 years ago, my question concerns the words in red.

Is the Baptist Confession saying that their faith will persevere to the end, or is it saying that their salvation will persevere to the end?

Thanks.

 

[Hammster]

Is the Baptist Confession saying that their faith will persevere to the end, or is it saying that their salvation will persevere to the end?

Yes.

 

[FreeGrace2]

This is what I said:
"Is the Baptist Confession saying that their faith will persevere to the end, or is it saying that their salvation will persevere to the end?"

Yes.

OK, that indicates that both are correct.

Well, gots news for you'se.

First, you're half right. Once saved, always saved.

But, you're also half wrong. The Bible very clearly and plainly says that the faith of some will fail, get shipwrecked, etc.

But please don't take my word for it. But please do take the Bible's word for it.

Luke 8:13 - Those on the rocky ground are the ones who receive the word with joy when they hear it, but they have no root. They believe for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away.

Please don't try to argue that Jesus didn't really mean "believe". He did.

1 Tim 4:1 - The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons.

Please don't try to argue with the Holy Spirit either.

1 Tim 1;19,20
19 holding on to faith and a good conscience, which some have rejected and so have suffered shipwreck with regard to their faith.
20 Among them are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan to be taught not to blaspheme.

Nor should you argue with Paul, the greatest theologian of all time.

 

[Hammster]

Okay.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Okay.

Just "ok"?

This is from your OP:

"Below you will find links to some various documents that those who hold to Reformed Theology will agree on, at least soteriologically. The challenge is to quote from one of them, and then state why you believe it is incorrect. This will hopefully lead to a reasoned discussion."

I met the challenge, and proved why a statement from the Baptist Confession was incorrect. And you responded with "ok".

However, your OP suggested a hopeful "reasoned discussion".

So, how does "ok" meet the definition of a "reasoned discussion"?

I have the distinct impression that I could find incorrect statements in any of the sites you provided, and the most "reasoned discussion" I would get is just "ok".

 

[Hammster]

Just "ok"?

This is from your OP:

"Below you will find links to some various documents that those who hold to Reformed Theology will agree on, at least soteriologically. The challenge is to quote from one of them, and then state why you believe it is incorrect. This will hopefully lead to a reasoned discussion."

I met the challenge, and proved why a statement from the Baptist Confession was incorrect. And you responded with "ok".

However, your OP suggested a hopeful "reasoned discussion".

So, how does "ok" meet the definition of a "reasoned discussion"?

I have the distinct impression that I could find incorrect statements in any of the sites you provided, and the most "reasoned discussion" I would get is just "ok".

You said “don’t argue”.

okay.

 

[FreeGrace2]

You said “don’t argue”.

okay.

So, you're going to ignore your own OP about "hopefully having a reasoned discussion" then?

Then why did you word your OP that way, if you're not really interested in having a reasoned discussion about points in the sites you cited?

you are aware, hopefully, that the point I took issue with from the Baptist Confession is refuted by the verses I quoted. Right?

Hopefully, a reasoned discussion will emanate from my question.

 

[Gr8Grace]

I did this in General Theology a few years ago because of some of the discussions going on. I thought I’d try it here to see how it goes.


As usual, Reformed Theology is misrepresented by what folks think is being taught. Generally, it’s not accurate, though I’m sure it’s well-intentioned. I’m sure I made some of the same arguments myself.

So here's the challenge. Below you will find links to some various documents that those who hold to Reformed Theology will agree on, at least soteriologically. The challenge is to quote from one of them, and then state why you believe it is incorrect. This will hopefully lead to a reasoned discussion. Any argument that does not start this way will be considered off topic. You are, however, free to start your own thread on that matter.

Here are your links.

The 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith (I would have used the Westminster Confession, but I'm Baptist )

Canons of Dordt

Heidelberg Catechism

Institutes of the Christian Religion, John Calvin, Christian Classics Books, Bible Study

Please respect what’s being asked. If you cannot, then just post elsewhere. Thanks.

ETA. Since this is now in Soteriology, let’s stick to that.

I will take issue with this one.....and all the other ones could be addressed also.

4._____ Others not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word, and may have some common operations of the Spirit, yet not being effectually drawn by the Father, they neither will nor can truly come to Christ, and therefore cannot be saved: much less can men that receive not the Christian religion be saved; be they never so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature and the law of that religion they do profess

Please show us that unbelievers have "some common operations of the Spirit."

 

[Hammster]

I will take issue with this one.....and all the other ones could be addressed also.

4._____ Others not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word, and may have some common operations of the Spirit, yet not being effectually drawn by the Father, they neither will nor can truly come to Christ, and therefore cannot be saved: much less can men that receive not the Christian religion be saved; be they never so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature and the law of that religion they do profess

Please show us that unbelievers have "some common operations of the Spirit."

They hear the gospel preached.

 

[Gr8Grace]

They hear the gospel preached.

They say 'some'......what's the other operations of the Spirit that unbelievers have?

 

[Hammster]

They say 'some'......what's the other operations of the Spirit that unbelievers have?

Common grace. The rain falls on the just and the unjust.

 

[Gr8Grace]

Common grace. The rain falls on the just and the unjust.

So, why can't they be saved?.........Please don't overlook perfect righteousness and Justice.

Sovereignty can't impugn His Righteousness.......He has 'some' operations for unbelievers....the SAME we had.

Sovereignty can't pick and choose if He impugns His righteousness.........He choose us based on the same "operations of the Spirit" He gives ALL.

 

[Hammster]

So, why can't they be saved?.........Please don't overlook perfect righteousness and Justice.

Sovereignty can't impugn His Righteousness.......He has 'some' operations for unbelievers....the SAME we had.

Sovereignty can't pick and choose if He impugns His righteousness.........He choose us based on the same "operations of the Spirit" He gives ALL.

What exactly do you want me to address?

 

[FreeGrace2]

Gr8grace said:
"Please show us that unbelievers have "some common operations of the Spirit."

They hear the gospel preached.

But not all hear the gospel. So that doesn't really answer the question.

How is this "common grace" and what's the point, in Calvinist thinking?

 

[Hammster]

Gr8grace said:
"Please show us that unbelievers have "some common operations of the Spirit."

But not all hear the gospel. So that doesn't really answer the question.

How is this "common grace" and what's the point, in Calvinist thinking?

It says “may”. So I gave some examples.

 

[Gr8Grace]

What exactly do you want me to address?

You said "common grace." the rain falls on the just and the unjust.

We were unjust before we were saved. Why can't the other unjust people be saved if they believe?

So address this.....If God arbitrarily picks and chooses who He saves through His sovereignty, He would be UNJUST. And His sovereignty would impugn PERFECT justice/righteousness.

The Cross and the way of salvation is revealed to all. All have the choice to believe or refuse.

Came from His sovereignty........ruled by His righteousness/Perfect justice.

 

[FreeGrace2]

FreeGrace2 said: ↑
Gr8grace said:
"Please show us that unbelievers have "some common operations of the Spirit."

But not all hear the gospel. So that doesn't really answer the question.

How is this "common grace" and what's the point, in Calvinist thinking?

It says “may”. So I gave some examples.

Did you miss the last line, where I asked a question?

I pointed out that your "example" doesn't reach all people. So, please explain how your "exampes" qualify as common grace to unbelievers.

 

[FreeGrace2]

It says “may”. So I gave some examples.

btw, are you going to respond to my post #88? It applies directly to your OP.

 

[Hammster]

You said "common grace." the rain falls on the just and the unjust.

We were unjust before we were saved. Why can't the other unjust people be saved if they believe?

So address this.....If God arbitrarily picks and chooses who He saves through His sovereignty, He would be UNJUST. And His sovereignty would impugn PERFECT justice/righteousness.

The Cross and the way of salvation is revealed to all. All have the choice to believe or refuse.

Came from His sovereignty........ruled by His righteousness/Perfect justice.

Why do you think that God owes us anything?