Absolutely amazing!!!

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by William C, Jul 1, 2003.

  1. William C

    William C
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2003
    Messages:
    1,562
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hey guys. I'm back from my ten day banishment from the board and I wanted to thank Larry and Glenn for the vacation. I really needed it. [​IMG]

    In that vacation I had the opprotunity to meet personally with 3 of my Cavinistic friends. I discussed these issues in depth with them and all of them are seriously questioning their Calvinistic position. I really do prefer speaking in person with people about these matters. It is soooo much easier to convey your thoughts and not be misrepresented. People who know you don't assume to worst about you and write you off as being a heretic, but they really consider your thoughts and objectively strive to answer them.

    My friends couldn't answer most of my objections and they were openly admitting their doubts about Calvinism after a few hours of conversation.

    I know what some of you Calvinists are going to say. "They must not have been very solid Calvinists!" Wrong! One is in the process of writing a thesis on the subject, one has a Ph.D. and the other has been a Calvinist for 7 plus years and is very well read.

    One of them personally knows John Piper and wants me to meet with him soon to discuss these issues with him. I look forward to that and I'll let you all know how that goes. It may be a while, he is very busy.

    God Bless.
     
  2. tyndale1946

    tyndale1946
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2001
    Messages:
    6,179
    Likes Received:
    226
    Brother Bill back from your vacation already?... Well I am glad you had a nice vacation we did too!... Just Kidding Brother Bill :D ... What would the C/A Forum be without our beloved Brother Bill who keeps us Calvinist and those of our persuasion on our toes ;) [​IMG] ... Then again Brother Bill I am very upset as when someone goes on vacation they are suppose to bring back pictures!... So where are they [​IMG] ... You know I haven't had a vacation in a long time... Maybe Pastor Larry will give me one I could use the rest and promise to bring back pictures... Brother Glen :D

    [ July 01, 2003, 04:31 PM: Message edited by: tyndale1946 ]
     
  3. Major B

    Major B
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/6069.jpg>

    Joined:
    May 6, 2003
    Messages:
    2,294
    Likes Received:
    0
    I've got a friend who is a really good debater and polemicist in politics (lib dem.) With most folks, they get him off their backs by agreeing with him, but they still vote GOP.
     
  4. Major B

    Major B
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/6069.jpg>

    Joined:
    May 6, 2003
    Messages:
    2,294
    Likes Received:
    0
    Here are some things that would sway me from the Doctrines of Grace.

    A new chapter (all the manuscripts had two pages stuck together) Romans 17, which says, "All that stuff about grace and faith without works--I was just kidding."

    Discovery that Erasmus' "Diatribe" was really written by Paul, and Stephens left it out of the TR.

    A notice from heaven that real estate values have taken a dive because of all the empty mansions up there whose planned occupants turned down the asking price. (freewill)

    Discovery that Ephesians 1, John 6, John 10, John 17, Romans 8,9,10,11, 1 Thes, 2 Thes,1 and 2 Tim, Psalm 139, 1 Pet 1, and several other scriptures were all "late additions" and "scribal errors."

    In reality... Naaaaaa! [​IMG] [​IMG] ;) [​IMG]
     
  5. Major B

    Major B
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/6069.jpg>

    Joined:
    May 6, 2003
    Messages:
    2,294
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  6. tyndale1946

    tyndale1946
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2001
    Messages:
    6,179
    Likes Received:
    226
    Brother Bill what do you know the pictures just came in of the three Calvinist brethren you talked to... :confused: :confused: :eek: ... Just ribbing you a little Brother Bill!... Hey what are brethren in the Lord for?... Brother Glen :D [​IMG]
     
  7. William C

    William C
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2003
    Messages:
    1,562
    Likes Received:
    0
    I've got a friend who is a really good debater and polemicist in politics (lib dem.) With most folks, they get him off their backs by agreeing with him, but they still vote GOP. </font>[/QUOTE]One, I'm not that great of a debator.

    Two, these guys didn't just politely agree with me, we discussed the issues and they objectively questioned their own views. Something that not many on this board are willing to do.

    Three, don't compare me to a liberial democrat...I'm insulted. ;)
     
  8. William C

    William C
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2003
    Messages:
    1,562
    Likes Received:
    0
    Or how about just having a basic understanding of the historical context of the day in which those texts were written? Just a little hermenuetics might help you interpret those texts more accurately.

    For example, in John 6 when Jesus says, "No one can come to me..." couldn't he have been meaning, "No one can come to me while I'm here on earth in the flesh..." and not necessarily, "No one can come to me ever..."

    Isn't it possible that only a certain number of the Jews were granted by the Father to learn directly from the Incarnate Word? Some of Israel were chosen, the rest were hardened. That is clearly taught in those passages you listed. Calvinists think the reason some are not able to come is because they are born 'totally depraved'. Hardening is not from birth, its not perminate and its not universal as is 'total depravity.' Hardening is clearly the reason that some are not able to believe as taught in John 12, yet Calvinist would like to apply that teaching to support their views of Total Depravity.

    I know you think you've got this all figured out, but will you please just remove your Calvinistic lenses for one minute and read the text with some objectivity. You might actually learn something.
     
  9. Gunther

    Gunther
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2003
    Messages:
    616
    Likes Received:
    0
    Many people who question a particular theological persuasion do so because they never really grasped the reason they first believed it.

    So many people are pre-trib because that is what they have had forced down them. I am pre-trib because I have done a thorough study on all major systems of eschatology and believe the rest to be seriously lacking. So for me, I believed it through study, and found the other positions lacking. I would say my belief was set both positively and negatively.

    In the same way, I am calvinistic. I both positively affirm that it is indeed truth, and I have found the opposing views lacking.

    Perhaps your friends will dance around the issue a couple of times or their whole life. They need to study so thoroughly that they understand both positively and negatively why they believe what they do.
     
  10. Gunther

    Gunther
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2003
    Messages:
    616
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, it is not possible. The reason we know this is because the very context of Jesus' teaching is salvation and how it is to be accomplished. Jesus demanded faith in him for salvation. In this passage, you would have to relegate that to that same time frame. It doesn't work and really gets into historic criticism. Christ plainly stated that man is not willing (ever) to come to God on his own merit or power. God must intervene.
     
  11. William C

    William C
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2003
    Messages:
    1,562
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  12. Primitive Baptist

    Primitive Baptist
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    821
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's okay, Brother Bill. Most Calvinists can't answer my objections to their position, either. Primitive Baptists are not Calvinists!
     
  13. William C

    William C
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2003
    Messages:
    1,562
    Likes Received:
    0
    Primitive Baptists are "Calvinistic" which is the soteriological issue that we are discussing on this particular board. But thanks anyway for your contribution. :rolleyes:
     
  14. Major B

    Major B
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/6069.jpg>

    Joined:
    May 6, 2003
    Messages:
    2,294
    Likes Received:
    0
    Where I live in far Western KY, (The land that time forgot), Most Arminians are also "yellow dog" democrats, most Calvinists are GOP.
     
  15. Major B

    Major B
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/6069.jpg>

    Joined:
    May 6, 2003
    Messages:
    2,294
    Likes Received:
    0
    As for the hermeneutics crack, try not inventing excuses like "this only applied at the time..."

    Using that reasoning makes the Bible pretty worthless. There is nothing in the historical context to suggest this sermon had a limited application. Is Jesus only the bread of life for the Jews of His time? Do you really want to toss out 6:37-40?

    Oh, and the verb is in the present tense, indicating continuity.

    Oh, and since Jesus is talking about "the last day," that militates against your strange unique interpretation.

    Oh, and would you toss out Jn 6:63 and 68?

    etc. etc. etc.
     
  16. Major B

    Major B
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/6069.jpg>

    Joined:
    May 6, 2003
    Messages:
    2,294
    Likes Received:
    0
    I had LASIK surgery in December, I see just fine. I don't think I have it all figured out, but one thing I know--God Saves Sinners.

    God--by Himself, without assistance
    Saves--all His work
    Sinners--lost, dead, deaf, dumb, insensitive and hating God, honest to goodness really sinners without the least shred of anything spiritually useful in them.
     
  17. Frogman

    Frogman
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2001
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    I've been to Mayfield :D .

    We spent about three months working in fancy farm, the first day there we ate dinner at a little store on hwy 80 outside fancy farm heading toward Mayfield as I remember. I asked the lady as she handed me my sandwich across the counter if there were any good Baptist churches around I could attend to which she replied: "We're all Catholic" I said: "That's ok, and ate my sandwich. I still can't figure out how I missed that fact, after all, everyone did have a statue of Mary in thier yard and there were three Catholic churches within a 15 mile radius...talk about your slow Calvinists....boy howdy!!!! :(

    Oh well...I thought that was amazing :rolleyes:

    Bro. Dallas Eaton
     
  18. Major B

    Major B
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/6069.jpg>

    Joined:
    May 6, 2003
    Messages:
    2,294
    Likes Received:
    0
    Graves County (Mayfield) is Baptist Country, with some enclaves of Catholic and Campbellite churches.

    Out of a population of 33,000, Graves County has over 16,000 Baptists and 47 Southern and 9 independent Baptist churches. Several of our members at Trace Creek (avg Sunday attendance around 1,000) are ex-catholics. There are only two RC churches in Graves County, the third one you mentioned is probably St Denis in Hickman County or St. Johns in McCracken County. Fancy Farm is nearly 100% Catholic, as are the St. John's and St. Denis communities. They are enclaves of Mary in a sea of Baptists.

    Next time you are here, come to Trace Creek, up Highway 131 North. My Sunday School class is room 204A. Our pastor is a Calvinist (the Hillbilly Spurgeon)--in his time at our church (over 30 years), the church has grown from 69 average attendance to an average of nearly 1,000 (1400 on Easter Sunday this year). We baptized 65 last year, and are 'way ahead of that pace this year. So much for Calvinists not being evangelistic.
     
  19. William C

    William C
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2003
    Messages:
    1,562
    Likes Received:
    0
    I never said "it only applied at the time..." I simply pointed out the perspective of the author which gives us another viable interpretation to consider. You consider it a "limited application" because of the presuppositions you bring, the author did not have those same presupposistions and would not have seen the need to clarify that when Jesus said, "Come to me." It would have been assumed that he was speaking about coming to him while here on earth and not necessarily about believing upon him through the gospel which was yet to come.

    Major, you must remember the audience. They are hardened Israel, not all Totally Depraved people as you suggest. Therefore, speech about their inablity to believe must be understood in that context. Read John 12:37-41 again and you will specifically see why his audience could not believe.

    I think you are confused with the PERFECT tense.

    The present tense represents a simple statement of fact
    or reality viewed as occurring in actual time. In most cases this corresponds directly with the English present tense.

    Some phrases which might be rendered as past tense in English will often occur in the present tense in Greek. These are termed "historical presents," and such occurrences dramatize the event described as if the reader were there watching the event occur. Some English translations render such historical presents in the English past tense, while others permit the tense to remain in the present.

    Look at the passage:

    37 All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out.

    [Notice the phrase "the Father gives Me" is used to specifically refer to the apostles in John 17. So, 'come to me' could simply mean come to me while I'm on earth.]

    38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me.

    [Notice that he even refers to himself as being 'down from heaven' to accomplish God's will. He is speaking about His will being accomplished while on earth.]

    39 This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day.

    [Are the apostles (or anyone who believes in Christ while on earth) going to be raised up in the last day? Yes, remember a key interpretive principle; what is true of the saints is true of the apostles but what is true of the apostles may or may not be true of all saints.]

    40 And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day."

    [Notice that he says "everyone who sees the Son." Have you seen the Son? I haven't. Thomas did and Jesus told him 'blessed are they who don't see and still believe." It is clear we are not being referred to in this passage. Does that mean we won't be raised up too? Of course not! If the President was addressing a particular crowd and said to them, "Those of you who work in this factory are going to find releif when I cut taxes." Does that mean only they who work at the factory are getting tax relief? NO. That's his audience. We assume, because of our egos, that everytime Jesus speaks he is talking about us. We must look at his audience and the historical context of the day.]


    Of course not! Again, just because Jesus is addressing a specific audience at a unique time in history doesn't mean that the truths that he reveals about himself are not true. To assume so seems like a desprate attempt to dismiss this arguement.

    Do you throw out verse 70 which says, "Did I not choose you, the twelve, and one of you is a devil?" He spoke of Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, for it was he who would betray Him, being one of the twelve."

    This verse clearly shows the context of this entire passage.
     
  20. Primitive Baptist

    Primitive Baptist
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    821
    Likes Received:
    0
    You're quite welcome, Brother Bill. If I thought your posts actually contributed something to these discussions, I would thank you, too. I'm going to be quite honest with you. Most of what you are advocating on this board is absurd. According to your theological position, God chose the Apostles and Prophets, and only their election is effectual. God did choose everyone else, though, but their election is not effectual because they must "accept" it.

    "According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will," (Eph. 1:4, 5)

    Those who were chosen were also predestinated unto the adoption of children. None who were chosen will eternally perish. They will live with God for all eternity, not for anything they did, but what Christ did for them. Your ideas are crazy, and yes, they are your ideas because the Scripture doesn't support them.
     

Share This Page

Loading...