The Tulip is broken

[JDS]

No Calvinists nor Calvin ever claimed to be a prophet. Just another cheap shot or lack of understanding.

Yes, I agree, that was a poor choice of words. I don't think Calvin claimed to be a prophet or that his followers claimed that either. Forgive me for this!

 

[drstevej]

Yes, I agree, that was a poor choice of words. I don't think Calvin claimed to be a prophet or that his followers claimed that either. Forgive me for this!

No problem.

 

[cygnusx1]

I am enjoying re-reading John Calvin on Predestination , his replies to Pighius resemble many posts on this board (same misunderstandings and loony logic ) Calvin spikes every gun.

 

[AndOne]

I am not stirring the pot! I have said plainly that I think Calvinism, the tulip, is not true Christian doctrine, but a perversion of it. I am demonstrating it by pointing out the inconsistencies between the rhetoric and the stated doctrines. Those who have commented have accused me of misrepresentation but none has demonstrated it.

Are we required to have a positive view of the TULIP before we can comment on this site?

I do not mean to come across as obnoxious and if I do, I apologize for that but people with whom one has strong disagreements rarely think you are nice!

I really think that most of you are not educated enough in your doctrines to defend them and I think some of you are surprised when I tell you what they are! For instance, I have no evidence that you are familiar with them! So far, you have just been a critisizer.

I have no problem with someone who has a negative view of Calvinism - comment away. But what is really irratating to me is when folks like you automatically write off everything we say.

For example it has been told to you that Calvinists do not try to figure out who is elect and who isn't - but you refuse to hear or understand this.

As I stated already - I have no intention of defending these doctrines to you. You look at my track record on these boards and you will see I have defended them passionately here for years. Sorry that you are fairly new around here - but I'm too weary of all this right now than to do anything BUT criticize you when you put up incorrect information here.

 

[AndOne]

I am not buying that I have made clear mis-statements until you give examples and declare how I have misrepresented you.

When you make statements that Calvinists are fatalists and that they claim to know who is elect and who isn't - and that effects the way they evengalize - you misrepresent ALL Calvinists....

 

[AndOne]

The simplicity of salvation is really what I think Calvin and all his prophets rebelled against. They could just not believe that it is by simple faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ and nothing else and it is for everyone who will simply believe. I think they probably thought it must be more complicated than that so they set out to create a system that would be more worthy of something so grand. TULIP is the result!

You don't need to be a rocket scientist to understand TULIP. It is NOT complicated. All it is is a simple break-down of scripture regarding the concept of Grace. Those who disagree with it simply want to make it complicated...

 

[heymikey80]

I think you are a Calvinist but I do not know if you really understand your own teaching.

Rep Daddy, CygnusX1, nobdysfool, Behe's Boy, MamaZ, anyone else bearing the Calvinist tag:

Would anyone else who considers themselves Calvinistic take issue or accept my claim [up to now] to being a Calvinist, particularly as to soteriology? Please, respond for JDS to see.

Alternatively, you can take a look at my post which drew this fantastic speculation, and say whether you agree with it.

For the record, JDS, I've held offices in the churches of two Presbyterian denominations and taught for seven years in yet a third (PCA, OPC, EPC).

You have presented very little of your actual doctrines for me to comment on. I certainly do not desire to enter in a discussion on philosophy with you. My faith is not based on philosophical musings, it is based on the words of scripture. The words of scripture concerning who can be saved and how they are saved are so simple, I do not know how anyone can miss it.

I have over 5000 posts here from a Calvinist's perspective.

The simplicity of salvation is really what I think Calvin and all his prophets rebelled against.

Well your thoughts are fantasies of your own construction.

My thoughts are attempts to make sense of recorded history, not your Lord of the Calvinist Rings.

They could just not believe that it is by simple faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ and nothing else and it is for everyone who will simply believe. I think they probably thought it must be more complicated than that so they set out to create a system that would be more worthy of something so grand. TULIP is the result!

Read something historical. Then you'll discover so much of your view is tilting at windmills. The Man of La Mancha should really encounter the machinery of the Netherlands as it is, rather than as a group of monsters. Otherwise the conversation is comical.

 

[AndOne]

Rep Daddy, CygnusX1, nobdysfool, Behe's Boy, MamaZ, anyone else bearing the Calvinist tag:

Would anyone else who considers themselves Calvinistic take issue or accept my claim [up to now] to being a Calvinist, particularly as to soteriology? Please, respond for JDS to see.

I don't!

 

[drstevej]

Will the TULIP will be unbroken?

I was reading thru this forum
Amid a dense Pelagian haze
What I saw was rationalization
Verses twisted in unusual ways



Yes the TULIP will be unbroken!
Try and Try dudes Try and Try
There`s new insight that's a coming
Taught by Jesus bye and bye

 

[JDS]

For example it has been told to you that Calvinists do not try to figure out who is elect and who isn't - but you refuse to hear or understand this.

If you read through my post you will find me agreeing with your not knowing. I have stated to one of you that the one who claims his election cannot even be sure because he cannot find one promise from God that he is. You must have God saying you are elect or there is a possibility that you are deceived into thinking you are elect when you are not.

Ge 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made.....

Jer 17:9 The heart [is] deceitful above all [things], and desperately wicked: who can know it?

You must not trust your heart. The word of God is the only thing that is sure!

The man said he was elect
At least he was the last time he checked
He said There is no need to fear
All I must do is persevere

I was chosen I can not die
And my election is the reason why
God promised me deliverance from the curse
But he did not promise in a verse

This salvation is for just a few
And I can't be sure it is meant for you
But I am glad I am elect
But, sad, I have no way to check

 

[drstevej]

If you read through my post you will find me agreeing with your not knowing. I have stated to one of you that the one who claims his election cannot even be sure because he cannot find one promise from God that he is. You must have God saying you are elect or there is a possibility that you are deceived into thinking you are elect when you are not.

Ge 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made.....

Jer 17:9 The heart [is] deceitful above all [things], and desperately wicked: who can know it?

You must not trust your heart. The word of God is the only thing that is sure!

Any Bible statement that JDS personally is right and not deceived by misinterpretation?

Goose <> Gander

 

[JDS]

Any Bible statement that JDS personally is right and not deceived by misinterpretation?

Goose <> Gander

Good morning, Rep Daddy

I wrote a song in my last post. I am calling it the "Psalm of the Elect". I hope you saw it and enjoy it!

 

[drstevej]

Nice beat, theologically pitchy, dawg.

 

[heymikey80]

If you read through my post you will find me agreeing with your not knowing. I have stated to one of you that the one who claims his election cannot even be sure because he cannot find one promise from God that he is. You must have God saying you are elect or there is a possibility that you are deceived into thinking you are elect when you are not.

The ambiguities in such a question prevent people from saying much meaningful in answer to it.

It baffles me why you'd say that no one can know himself, because that's actually repeated in Scripture.

No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. Rom 8:37-39

And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments. Whoever says "I know him" but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him: whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked. 1 Jn 2:3-6

Whoever believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself. Whoever does not believe God has made him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has borne concerning his Son. And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. Whoever has the Son has life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life. I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life. 1 Jn 5:10-13
​

You must not trust your heart. The word of God is the only thing that is sure!

If your heart is indwelt by the Spirit of the God of the Universe?

But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God. Rom 2:29

My flesh and my heart may fail, but God is the strength of my heart and my portion forever. Ps 73:26

By this we shall know that we are of the truth and reassure our heart before him; for whenever our heart condemns us, God is greater than our heart, and he knows everything. Beloved, if our heart does not condemn us, we have confidence before God; and whatever we ask we receive from him, because we keep his commandments and do what pleases him. And this is his commandment, that we believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ and love one another, just as he has commanded us. Whoever keeps his commandments abides in God, and God in him. And by this we know that he abides in us, by the Spirit whom he has given us. 1 Jn 3:19-24
​

There are various other errors in your posting, which I'll leave to another time.

 

[AndOne]

If you read through my post you will find me agreeing with your not knowing. I have stated to one of you that the one who claims his election cannot even be sure because he cannot find one promise from God that he is. You must have God saying you are elect or there is a possibility that you are deceived into thinking you are elect when you are not.

Ge 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made.....

Jer 17:9 The heart [is] deceitful above all [things], and desperately wicked: who can know it?

You must not trust your heart. The word of God is the only thing that is sure!

The man said he was elect
At least he was the last time he checked
He said There is no need to fear
All I must do is persevere

I was chosen I can not die
And my election is the reason why
God promised me deliverance from the curse
But he did not promise in a verse

This salvation is for just a few
And I can't be sure it is meant for you
But I am glad I am elect
But, sad, I have no way to check

You just don't get it - and your response only proves my point. This is not what Calvinism teaches. How about a quote from a well-known Calvinist that supports this? Not "a guy you know...."

 

[AndOne]

Any Bible statement that JDS personally is right and not deceived by misinterpretation?

Apparently not bro.... He must use the one and only VWT of the Bible.

 

[heymikey80]

The Calvinist posters on these forums comment on what they learn from their source materials and pastors and churches. The TULIP is clear cut. For instance the T is for total depravity which teaches that a man dead in trespasses and sins is totally unable to respond to God. He must be regenerated (given life, quickened) in order to be saved.

In terms of responding spiritually to God, that's accurate. But it's already blown by a critical distinction without comment.

God has a few elect that he alone will regenerate and the cross is the means by which he regenerates them.

Wrong. There's actually no determination how many are elect. God regenerates a few monergistically -- by Himself alone. The Cross is means for establishing the covenant of redemption, which includes regeneration. I don't think I'd say that the Cross is the means of regeneration, it is the means of accomplishing redemption as a whole.

He will regenerate no others.

Ambiguous terminology. "will" future? "will" desire? He does actually regenerate no one other than He elects (ie "chooses") to regenerate. But that's ... tautological.

Now, if you agree that I understand this correctly,

... which I don't ...

why would you say that "ALL ARE INVITED TO COME TO THE CROSS"? Who is inviting them and why? Are the evangelists that God sends out speaking for God, or not? I am telling you that this makes no sense. The statement is not consistent with the "T' or tulip.

It's quite consistent. The accused is presented with his charges, even if he has no means of escaping the verdict. The accused is presented with his options, even if it's a foregone conclusion which path he will take.

Is the truth denied to liars? Is the truth hid from evil? Would God ever do such a thing?

Do you think this life is just a myriad of chances to choose, and will not be presented in God's court with evidence for your salvation, or of your condemnation?

Here is one. You would probably say no one can come to Christ unless the Father draws him and whosoever cometh to him he will in no way cast out and so if one is welcome at the cross and comes, it is because the Father has drawn him and will not be turned away. If "all" are welcome at the cross, then it is not hard to figure that all can be saved!

How is it easy "to figure that all can be saved"? It's always a good idea to describe your reasoning.

In one sense yes to a Calvinist all can be saved. But in another, no, all shall not be saved.

Some who come, those without a spiritual desire, aren't drawn there by God. This isn't talking about a physical or social "come to God". This is clear because God will "in no way cast out" those "who come to him". Yet Paul instructs certain people to be cast out: 1 Cor 5. The parable of wheat & tares indicates a common location, but not a common spiritual disposition before God.

The spiritual condition is what God's talking about.

Are you meaning by "all can be saved!" that everyone has this spiritual condition? I would say if that spiritual condition were universal, then salvation would be universal -- according to this passage.

 

[oworm]

The simplicity of salvation is really what I think Calvin and all his prophets rebelled against. They could just not believe that it is by simple faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ and nothing else and it is for everyone who will simply believe. I think they probably thought it must be more complicated than that so they set out to create a system that would be more worthy of something so grand. TULIP is the result!

I had stopped posting in this thread on account of the time that is wasted by me in answering the ignorance that abounds from those who take little, if any, interest to research facts before posting.

The quote above is a classic example of this as the author only needed to do a simple search to find that the doctrines of grace commonly known as the five points of Calvinism, came out of a need to respond to, and address the statements of the Remonstrants.

The assertion that Tulip is the result of some men who set out to create a system that would be grander than the simple gospel itself is a gross and dishonest representation of Reformed theology.

The quote above, and others like it, is evidence that those who post in such a manner only do so with the purpose of causing disharmony and strife to this community.

Personally I think the Calvinists should refrain from posting here and simply let these contentious posts fall over the edge of the page and dissappear into obscurity where they belong. Why waste your time engaging with those who are too lazy to even offer up anything close to a defense based on factual research with an honest representation of their arguments?

 

[JDS]

Apparently not bro.... He must use the one and only VWT of the Bible.

What if a man who is elect and perseveres for 40 years and then falls away from the faith? What if he makes the case many times during those years before he falls away that he is elect? Will it be you that tells him he was never elect because he did not persevere or will it be him who admits he was obviously never elect?

If the man did not persevere he could not be elect, could he? The P is the last petal in the TULIP. It is not negotiable, is it?

 

[A New Dawn]

What if a man who is elect and perseveres for 40 years and then falls away from the faith? What if he makes the case many times during those years before he falls away that he is elect? Will it be you that tells him he was never elect because he did not persevere or will it be him who admits he was obviously never elect?

If the man did not persevere he could not be elect, could he? The P is the last petal in the TULIP. It is not negotiable, is it?

It is not up to you to decide if someone hasn't persevered. Or up to me, or anyone but God. Only God can see in someone's heart to know 1. if the person is elect, and 2. if he has persevered.