Calvinism and the God of Second Chances

Gina, I'll be happy to let you make up new rules for the thread some other day. If you can show me a single Scripture that actually says the things listed above, we can move on to your questions. But, mind you, not one of those deep-hidden-meaning things. Something as clearly as 1 Peter 3:9 says that God is not willing that anyone should perish. </font>[/QUOTE]Well. THAT isn't the way it was supposed to work! LOL! Everyone is supposed to listen to ME!

Ok, here's how I view this topic. This is to Wildfire and ANYONE ELSE willing to listen.

You can point out verses that seem to CLEARLY state that man has total free will.

I can point out verses that seem to CLEARLY say the opposite.

We could post "clear" verses to each other until the sky turns polka-dotted, and it won't prove anything.

People have been doing it for years on this thread.

It's pointless.

There are a ZILLION books out there on the topic.

If you truly feel you have the knowledge and authority to settle the debate online in a thread, or even twenty threads, more power to ya, but I have a suggestion. (apart from we all need to get over ourselves if we think we can "win" a debate on this topic)

Here's the suggestion. Quit doing what everyone else has been doing for years. We can all go out and get books written by people with more study and authority on the topic than we have.

What NEEDS to be done is equal treatment of the "clear" verses, and that means you can't ignore the ones that point out lack of free will and I can't ignore the ones that point out free will.

I can't tell you how tired I am of being called a heretic and that I believe in the doctrine of devils and so forth by everyone and their mamma. I'm sure that both sides are.

"Come, let us reason together".
TOGETHER.

I haven't met anyone on here, EVER, apart from one former member who has, sadly, passed on, that was willing to look at ALL of the verses in context, sit down, study, and have real discussions that were sane, left out sarcasm, and left off stating "this is how it is", and instead studied and posted with the person of the opposite opinion, rather than against them.

If you or anyone else can do that, it's worth coming together and studying this. On God's terms. Not with my rules, not with yours.

Anyone game?

 

Yes, I have entertained the idea. Then dismissed it. If they're already believers, why is God patiently waiting for them to become believers? And if He's waiting for the nonbelievers to become believers, hasn't He already, according to Master Calvin, predestined them?

Sorry, it just doesn't work. You can't keep flipping back and forth. </font>[/QUOTE]II Peter 3 is in the context of the Second Coming of Christ. Peter is addressing objections by people who say He is not coming again. If you interpet II Peter 3:9 to include all people, then Jesus would never come again, unless you believe at some point every individual on Earth will be saved. When Jesus comes again, there will undoubtedly be unbelievers on Earth. But He's not willing that any should perish, so why would He come again knowing that some are not saved? </font>[/QUOTE]Nothing in 2 Peter 3:9 says He won't come until everyone believes. It merely says He is patient, not willing that anyone should perish.
</font>[/QUOTE] Oh... so instead of just accepting what it says, we must accept an explanation designed to conform to your system, right?

Notably "patient" is your word... not God's. In fact, the very context of the verse tells us precisely who is being spoken about. It says "but is longsuffering toward us"... and who was Peter writing to? Believers, not the lost at all.

If those being addressed were believers then this question is moot.

You'll have to do better than just say so since the context clearly notes that it is God's promise to "us" that is being discussed... and not the ungodly men of verse 7 who are to be judged.

"Decision" by any reasonable definition is a "work". "Choice" does not have an effect. "Decision" about a choice is what has an effect.

Given the "choice", the "decision" of unregenerate, natural, carnal men will always be themselves over denial of self unto godly repentance.

Those who believe are only those who have been born of the Spirit. John 3:5-8.

 

Can you point me to the Bible text that says "any man"? You are here lecturing us about staying true to what the text actually says and the literal translation here is "any"... not "anyone" or "any man".

And, yes, there is a meaningful difference if "any" points back to "us" and not to "all of mankind/any man"... which is not to be found in the context of that verse.

And of course they don't... unless they are stripped of context and misconstrued the way you have attempted.

Effectively he does since the context for verse 16 is set by the dialogue with Nicodemus found in the verse leading up to it.

The question: Who are the "whosoever"? The answer: "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God."

IOW's, those not born again are blind to the kingdom of God and will not believe.

You are right. It says that His promise is true and is unwilling that any of "us" should perish.

 

Wow, a history lesson. Thank you. Naturally, being an ignorant person I didn't know any of that, and it all proves that the Bible doesn't mean what it says.

Sorry ... that's sarcasm. But:

If Calvinism is a misnomer, how did you know what I was writing about? Obviously it's not a misnomer, but simply another name by which the false doctrine is recognized.

Yes, you can trace much of Calvinism's false doctrine back to Augustine who, by the way, is credited with being the founder of the Roman Catholic Church. Augustine also believed that you could not get into heaven without being baptized into the Catholic Church. Are you suggesting that he is the basis of sound theological argument?

Ahhh, all the rest. The favorite arguments of those trained to follow the teachings of Jean Chauvin, the Frenchman who never actually was a Reformist. Show me the scripture, not the arguments of men! Show me one plain, clear verse that says that all of the other verses don't mean what they say. </font>[/QUOTE]Wild, I was going to respond but have decided not to. I will not play the sarcasm game. It is my opinion that really don't want to uncover the truth, you just want to rant and rave. I'm moving on.

 

"Whosoever" has the meaning of "anyone", which I assume would include "any man".

 

No. Wildfire's method and standard for debate is that we don't assume or interpret. It only means what it obviously means... from his perspective of what it means to be "obvious" of course.

Further, whosoever does not mean anyone within that context. "Who" might mean any one but whosoever is a qualified group.

 

The word "whosoever" is taken from "pas", which does indeed have the meaning of anyone, which is the correct context in verse 16, and why "whosoever" and "whoever" are the english words translated from the greek.

 

I just posted this on another thread:

I think this is what Scott J. is trying to get at.

 

monergistic regeneration, ie regeneration precedes faith...

1Jo 5:1 esv Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God, and everyone who loves the Father loves whoever has been born of him.

Joh 1:12-13 esv But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God,
(13) who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

Joh 6:63 esv It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is of no avail. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.


wildfire advises

ahhh... but we should trust you..... riigghhtttt, how many years of Greek and Hebrew have you had wildfire? what makes you qualified to "correct" our English translations?

blessings,
Ken

 

Yes. Thanks Andy.

 

Maybe you have heard of it...THE HOLY SPIRIT. Who cares how many years of HUMAN KNOWLEDGE a fellow believer has. He has everything he needs, and pretty much explains the reasoning of calvinists...follow the smart man.

 

Dear friend,
In response to this:Calvinists will fall back (like the post above) on Ephesians 2, etc., and say that believing equals works and therefore can't be part of the equation. But in all of the many, many passages that talk about repentence, faith, and believing, not a single one of them says that God must first regenerate the person before they can believe. Not one.
The Lord says to Nicodemus in John 3:3 that unless one is born again,he cannot see the kingdom of God.
Nicodemus is befuddled and ask a pretty silly question.
The Lord says to him that flesh is flesh and the spirit is spirit. Is the Lord not saying to him that flesh can never bring to birth the spirit?
Isn't the Lord telling Nicodemus in verse 8 that the spirit is bringing to birth everyone that He chooses to bring to birth?
Is not the Lord giving Nicodemus the assurance that now that you believe in Me,you have everlasting life as verses 15 and 16 state?
Verse 21 is most profound and rarely noticed by folks who are focused only on John 3:16. All the above from John 3:1 through 21 have all been done in God.
Perhaps the greatest error that is made concerning the Lord's dialogue with Nicodemus is verse 16 is presented as an invitation to come and help yourself get born again through your believing.
When in reality,all the Lord is saying in verse 16 is that because you believe,the action in verse 8 has already taken place and you can take comfort from it.
I cannot find that the Lord told Nicodemus to contribute anything to the new birth. If by chance I have overlooked a requirement of man to help himself get born again from above,then please feel free to show me and I will most certainly change my religious thinking.
One of the grandest themes in the Bible is Paul's conversion. The Lord ambushed him as he was going about to persecute those who confessed Jesus. Paul wasn't looking for the Savior. On the contrary,the Master was looking for one of His sheep. How can your heart not melt when you read Paul's statement in Galatians 1:15? "For when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb and called me through His grace".
Paul tells us who is the source of not only his faith,but love also.
1 Timothy 1:14 "And the grace of our Lord was exceeding abundant,with faith and love which are in Christ Jesus".
And lastly, Ephesians 6:23. "And peace to the brethren,and love with faith,from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ".

 

Okey dokey then.

Goodness, people are hard hearted! How silly is it to desire strife rather than decent conversation?

As you wish.

Someone pm me when all the CvA threads are done, and let me know who finally had the right answer that changed everyone's minds to the one, perfect, reply, ok?

 

wildfire says:

The Bible says:

Analyze this (apologies to Robert de Niro and his fans).

Not one, but four.

Oh, and it will probably help you if you study what hardened his heart means, with regards to Pharaoh.

A wildfire can burn itself out, sooner or later. No disrespect.

 

Maybe you have heard of it...THE HOLY SPIRIT. Who cares how many years of HUMAN KNOWLEDGE a fellow believer has. He has everything he needs, and pretty much explains the reasoning of calvinists...follow the smart man. </font>[/QUOTE]so... since all Christians have the Holy Spirit... all Christians are free to change our English translations? This does not seem wise....

blessings,
Ken

 

The Bible says:

Analyze this (apologies to Robert de Niro and his fans).

Not one, but four.

Oh, and it will probably help you if you study what hardened his heart means, with regards to Pharaoh.

A wildfire can burn itself out, sooner or later. No disrespect. [/b]</font>[/QUOTE]The text does not state the "quickening" happens prior to faith, on the contrary "with Him" is the catalyst.

 

Gina L

I desire to be like that.

 

There is none righteous, no, not one;
11 There is none who understands;
There is none who seeks after God.

- Romans 3:10-11

Also, Romans 9. Now, I know we disagree with each other on the interpretation of these verses, but to keep repeating the same mantra of "not one verse" supports your view is tiresome. It reminds me of those who deny the Trinity who say there is "not one verse" that has Trinity in it or defines it. Well, sure, but orthodox Christians understand many passages to be speaking of the Trinity and they formulate their doctrine from those verses. Same thing here - you and I have come to different formulations, that's all.