Calvinists' Conversions

Cypress

Logic only applies so long as it supports the tenets of calvinism. Otherwise, refert to tenet 1, total depravity.

 

Rippon

What did God say would happen to Adam and Eve if they ate the fruit? Die. Which means separation.

Did he say they would no longer be able to respond to God positively? No.
Did he said they would not be able to believe God's word when they heard it? No.

Show me in all of scripture where it says man is not able to believe God's word when he hears it.

 

Let me know when you find it because i've been looking sense 2003 when I left Calvinism in search of it.

 

Responsibility, is a word made up of two root words. Can anyone guess what they are?

Response

and

ABLE

Meaning, ABLE to RESPOND. Something the doctrine of Total Depravity removes from mankind.

BTW, the objector in Romans 9 is not an Arminian objecting to Calvinism's teaching, it is a Jew objecting to Paul's teaching about the judicial hardening of Israel. Its good to understand the historical context to understand the intent of the author.

 

quantumfaith, I assume your asking me, so I will answer.

It is, some do and some don't. I think many of us have at one time or another had doubts slip in regarding our salvation. If others of my acquaintance have had such doubts, they have not discussed them openly.

I doubt if Calvinism or non-Calvinism plays much of a role in the matter.

At the same time, Arminians who believe one can forfeit salvation, by definition must have some doubts.

 

I have heard something similar from a fellow who said he was a super Calvinist. His solution was to not bother to share the gospel, as "those who will be saved will be saved regardless." I was left speechless at this. How can anyone who calls himself a Christian say (with a straight face) that you should not spread the gospel message?

I realize that I am not schooled in either side of this discussion, but such claims are well outside the bounds of God's word. Jesus said many are called but few are chosen... but the many were stilled called. How can anyone believe if they have not heard? I firmly believe that all will not be saved, or even most.

However, I am not God and I do not know which will and which will not head the message of salvation. Therefore I would be shirking my duty as a follower of Christ to not preach to all the message of salvation, whether the hearers are the elect or not. I may share with 100 people and only one of those were in the elect... but they all looked the same and all were lost and without God.

Sure, God could use someone else to reach that one, but it should have been me to do it. Like I said, I am not schooled on either side... but I know my Lord and I know what He has said in His word. He knows who will and won't accept Him, but He does not tell us this. If He did we would know exactly who to go and tell and that would be that; life would be simpler, but that is not His way of doing it.

From best I can tell this whole argument is a dog chasing its tail. It is rather pointless and, should it ever catch its tail, it wouldn't know what to do with it.

 

I find that hard to believe -- unless he was trying to use a new term to describe his Hyper-Calvinism.

Yesiree, that's a Hyper-Calvinistic sentiment. That stuff is not Calvinism proper.

I'm in full agreement.

 

In don't guess I understand the point of this thread. Is it to insinuate that Calvinism is a parasite that lives off of Arminian churches and ministries?

If not, what is the point?

 

I think the point of the OP is to show how believers are saved not understanding the Gospel in the lens of reformed theology. I think it's a good and valid point considering the Holy Spirit is the one who leads us to the Truth in the first place to receive salvation...if reformed theology is absolute truth, or "THE Gospel" as some maintain here...why don't we believe that from the get go?

I didn't see this thread back in the spring, but I will say it's quite false for those who maintain the non cal side doesn't' understand God's sovereignty. Salvation can only be given based on us understanding our condition and God's sovereignty over our condition.

 

Yes...but was she saved by understanding the Gospel given by a calvinist...or the Gospel of a calvinist?

That was a good story, it sounded similar to the the approach Paul used on the pagans on Mars' Hill, but I know of those who were saved by hearing that their entire life would be played out on judgement day in front of everyone, and that's not necessarily true.

 

Wow, you are brave...your daughter has guy friends!! Mine will too...when she turns 30...

I agree that the Gospel is by grace through faith...but did your husband tell him that he needed to be one of the elect, he needed to be loved by God and not hated, he needed Christ to atone for his sins and if was one of the many unatoned for it didn't matter what he believed, he needed to be regenerated before he could understand what was being told to him, and he needed the gift of "saving faith"...or "if you believe in your heart what I am saying you will be saved"? If the latter...that is the Gospel of the "non cal"

 

In regards to preaching the calvinist understanding of the Gospel, I have yet to hear someone preach along the lines of "Today God might be talking to your heart, convicting you...but then again, He might not as the majority are on the broad path of destruction and God has only decided to save a few of you while leaving the rest to yourselves. If He is talking to you, you WILL come...and if not, you cannot come. God loves some of you (don't take "the world" literally in John 3:16 when you see it held up in the end zone of a football game), but hates the rest. You are clay of which God has formed some of you for His glory and the majority for destruction. When someone tells you 'Jesus loves you' on the street, they may or may not be right. When kids sing "Jesus loves me", that is a song only half correct as some of those very children will grow up and not be given saving faith, meaning they were never loved."

If this is the TRUE Gospel...why is it not presented this way? If Paul was a calvinist as some on here comically maintain, why did he not preach in such a manner? If the DoG are as beautiful as stated, why does it seem the Gospel is always presented in an "Arminian" fashion even by the staunchest calvinist? If it's truth...be truthful, no?

 

I see. I don't think that most people believe in the Trinity when they get saved. Yet, as they mature they come to understand it.

That is how it is with Calvinism.

 

That's absolutely awesome! It sounds a great deal like many of the conversions under Jonathan Edwards.

 

The difference is one is absolute truth that is not up for debate and the other is man's understanding of absolute truth (salvation) that has been widely debated.
Are you alluding to the fact those who don't hold to this soteriology have not matured spiritually...and what about those who once held to that understanding and changed positions?

 

You are going to get miffed at me for this but I suppose that you want me to answer honestly.

Yes. I think it is a maturity issue. For those who switched over I think it is because they never really understood the position when they held it.

I don't understand the "absolute truth" comment. The Trinity has certainly been debated.