The No-Straw-Man Calvinism challenge.

[Hammster]

It was a combination of the 2nd, 3rd, & 4th headers. I already have a response on the 1st. There is a lot of text there, which is why I didn't try to copy and paste on my phone.

This is the part I'm curious about.

Conferring faith upon those he chose, they can still decide to fully reject such things or not completely follow, example given is the Parable of the Sower.

 

[Hammster]

I think that it pertained to is prayer even effective at all or does God even listen to our prayers because as a Calvinist you do not belive that God listens or cares about prayer, although Jesus Christ clearly prayed and told us to pray and how to pray.

So then did Jesus mess up telling us to pray and that God hears our prayers when the Calvinist belief is God doesnt care.

The thread was started to keep the straw men out.

Please address the OP and don't post false assertions.

Thanks.

 

[ToBeLoved]

@Hammster about my initial response to the OP, post #3, what is your response to that other than the questions at the bottom of it? I will edit those out for sake of discussion.

 

[PuerAzaelis]

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

The honest answer should be that there is very, very little material in such catechisms that should be problematic to anyone.

Of course without forum debates over minutiae the internet would be 100% inappropriate content instead of 99%.

 

[ToBeLoved]

The thread was started to keep the straw men out.

Please address the OP and don't post false assertions.

Thanks.

It's not a false assertation if you read what I was saying instead of policing your own thread for anything you don't want to discuss.

Prayer, although important to Jesus Christ (He prayed each day, away from everyone else to the Father) and told us to pray.

 

[ToBeLoved]

The honest answer should be that there is very, very little material in such catechisms that should be problematic to anyone.

Of course without forum debates over minutiae the internet would be 100% inappropriate content instead of 99%.

Way to minimize other people's beliefs. I'm sure, unless the OP just wants to rank on non-Calvinists he will have this removed for being off topic since he wants to keep this thread focused. We'll see.

I guess you'll just sit back quietly now and read along.

 

[Hammster]

It's not a false assertation if you read what I was saying instead of policing your own thread for anything you don't want to discuss.

Prayer, although important to Jesus Christ (He prayed each day, away from everyone else to the Father) and told us to pray.

I agree prayer is important. I don't think you'll find anything in the three links that says it's not. However, if you do, please post it here.

 

[ToBeLoved]

It could just be that there's an OP, and only one member had actually addressed it.

why don't you pose specific talking points then. Seems to me you are in control to shoot everyone down after they have taken a considerable amount of time writing out a post, only to have it stamped "irrelevant" or "off topic".

We need to not waste other people's time, so maybe you could assist the thread in this

 

[Hammster]

why don't you pose specific talking points then. Seems to me you are in control to shoot everyone down after they have taken a considerable amount of time writing out a post, only to have it stamped "irrelevant" or "off topic".

We need to not waste other people's time, so maybe you could assist the thread in this

The talking points are outlined in the OP.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

This is the part I'm curious about.

Ill look for the specific portion in question

 

[Hammster]

Ill look for the specific portion in question

Thanks.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

So having read the Canon of Dort more completely I better understand Calvinism if indeed that purports to be such.

I am on my phone and so copy and paste is a bit of a hassle, so I cannot in detail no copy it verbatim. But it basically states that:

man was originally created in God's image, with knowledge of God and love towards God but through free will chose to deviate from Him. Thus bringing wrath and condemnation upon himself. Then upon conceiving children, passed that corruption onto each generation, along with the condemnation it came with. And although some light remained in man, man was completely unable to return to the prefall state without direct intervention from the Holy Spirit. It then states that even when God brings "the elect" into a saving knowledge of Jesus, I.e. Conferring faith upon those he chose, they can still decide to fully reject such things or not completely follow, example given is the Parable of the Sower.

This brings a few issues to mind:

It still decrees that God does not reach out to each person, but only to those he decides to. Thus most people are condemned to an eternity in hell before they are even conceived.

If God interjects faith into those he chooses, why only partially (parable of the Sower)? If man is incapable of good, how can God then expect us to develop ourselves to a point of "better" faith?

You know to be honest, my biggest hang up with Calvinism and really predestination in general is the idea that God only grants salvation to some and will never allow it from all others.

We know God is just. We know he will punish all sin. Indeed he already has in Jesus. We also know people are now condemned because "they do not believe in the Son of God" John 3:18

But being just also means being fair. That God is "no respector of persons", and will treat each and everyone will the same amount of grace and judgement. How can he then do so if he himself shows favor to only a select few and not to others? He cannot be just if he only allows certain people to be saved and never grants even a whiff of salvation to others.

It was a combination of the 2nd, 3rd, & 4th headers. I already have a response on the 1st. There is a lot of text there, which is why I didn't try to copy and paste on my phone.

This is the part I'm curious about.

Here is the section in question. I will add BOLD to emphasize:

From the Canons of Dordt

"THIRD AND FOURTH HEAD: ARTICLE 8. As many as are called by the gospel are unfeignedly called. For God has most earnestly and truly declared in His Word what is acceptable to Him, namely, that those who are called should come unto Him. He also seriously promises rest of soul and eternal life to all who come to Him and believe.

THIRD AND FOURTH HEAD: ARTICLE 9. It is not the fault of the gospel, nor of Christ offered therein, nor of God, who calls men by the gospel and confers upon them various gifts, that those who are called by the ministry of the Word refuse to come and be converted. The fault lies in themselves; some of whom when called, regardless of their danger, reject the Word of life; other, though they receive it, suffer it not to make a lasting impression on their heart; therefore, their joy, arising only from a temporary faith, soon vanishes, and they fall away; while others choke the seed of the Word by perplexing cares and the pleasures of this world, and produce no fruit. This our Savior teaches in the parable of the sower (Matt 13)."

 

[Hammster]

Here is the section in question. I will add BOLD to emphasize:

From the Canons of Dordt

"THIRD AND FOURTH HEAD: ARTICLE 8. As many as are called by the gospel are unfeignedly called. For God has most earnestly and truly declared in His Word what is acceptable to Him, namely, that those who are called should come unto Him. He also seriously promises rest of soul and eternal life to all who come to Him and believe.

THIRD AND FOURTH HEAD: ARTICLE 9. It is not the fault of the gospel, nor of Christ offered therein, nor of God, who calls men by the gospel and confers upon them various gifts, that those who are called by the ministry of the Word refuse to come and be converted. The fault lies in themselves; some of whom when called, regardless of their danger, reject the Word of life; other, though they receive it, suffer it not to make a lasting impression on their heart; therefore, their joy, arising only from a temporary faith, soon vanishes, and they fall away; while others choke the seed of the Word by perplexing cares and the pleasures of this world, and produce no fruit. This our Savior teaches in the parable of the sower (Matt 13)."

Reformed Theology affirms that there are some who will hear the gospel and think it's a good idea. But since they aren't quickened, they will "fall away". That's what is taught in the parable of the sower.

Article 10 gives further explanation as to why some will obey.

 

[ToBeLoved]

"THIRD AND FOURTH HEAD: ARTICLE 8. As many as are called by the gospel are unfeignedly called. For God has most earnestly and truly declared in His Word what is acceptable to Him, namely, that those who are called should come unto Him. He also seriously promises rest of soul and eternal life to all who come to Him and believe.

Looks like the regeneration thing is not a done deal. Does is not should. Can is not should. Did is not should.

This is some weird and very sketchy theology.

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

And that is the other problem when communicating with Calvinist.... They can't deal with answers other than what they want to hear!

You did not provide any answers...I think you cannot so you deflect to.other things....follow the op.guidelines

 

[ByTheSpirit]

Reformed Theology affirms that there are some who will hear the gospel and think it's a good idea. But since they aren't quickened, they will "fall away". That's what is taught in the parable of the sower.

Article 10 gives further explanation as to why some will obey.

So does Reformed theology allow for people to be called by God and still remain lost in their sins?

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

Looks like the regeneration thing is not a done deal. Does is not should. Can is not should. Did is not should.

This is some weird and very sketchy theology.

You are not grasping it is not a contingency

 

[ToBeLoved]

You are not grasping it is not a contingency

What?

Did they redefine the meaning of the word "should" now too?

I thought Holy Spirit zapping was a done deal, but I guess not.

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

What?

Did they redefine the meaning of the word "should" now too?

I thought Holy Spirit zapping was a done deal, but I guess not.

Several words are like that....Christ has suffered the just for the unjust that He .......might........bring us to God.
It is not contingent but certain.

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

So does Reformed theology allow for people to be called by God and still remain lost in their sins?

You quoted it in post 64.....3rd and 4th head article 9