"Election"

Now, PB you've been pretty easy to get along with, don't let the bully on the block influence you too.

 

What more can I say? I think Spurgeon got it right, you say he got it wrong while throwing in the "Spurgeon makes two very common mistakes which we might expect from someone without any formal education:"
I can not elaborate further on what Spurgeon has written. It's plain and as far as I can grasp, it is true. So, if your goal was to win the so called "debate". With pleasure, you win. </font>[/QUOTE]Well typically when someone posts something on a discussion board they actually discuss it, but hey whatever floats your boat.

 

Oh, no, ain't gonna let that happen. I just forgot the smiley.

 

Here is the best introduction to the "Calvinist future scenario" that contains the central point "Sure I COULD have IF I had CARED to".

I shall add it here.

In Christ,

Bob

 

5 and 4 pt Calvinist Future Scenario:
“Showing” the requirement of 4 and 5 point Calvinism to have the “luxury” of a cold disregard for the non-elect “When the non-Elect are finally Known”. This scenario simply removes that “luxury” in order to emphasize the point 4-5 Pt Calvinism makes about God Himself – vs the view that “God so Loved the World that He Gave…Really” (something that both Arminians and 3-pt Calvinists seem to Agree on).

In Christ,

Bob

 

And where in Matthew 7 is there a verse that even remotely suggests this scenario you concocted in your investigatively judging mind could occur in heaven ?

 

Bob, Bob, Bob,

For every time you whip out the same old pull-at-the-heartstrings manipulative story, I can whip out the SAME story from an Arminian view.

When the Arminian/Pelagian finds himself in heaven enjoying the perfect love, unity and selfless concern for others that is not possible here on this sinful earth - and then peeking over the ramparts of heaven - observes his OWN precious sweet daughter who passed the age of accountability as the MANY of Matt 7 -- now writhing in the agony of eternal roasting in hell - he may well run to his sovereign lord with the cry "Oh My Lord, my great God and Savior! Couldn't you have done Something for my precious child??"

And of course the answer will come back that Arminians/Pelagians so love to hear - "Why of course I COULD - IF I had Cared to! I am God, after all, and I could have changed her heart to turn to me and be saved. In fact, that is what I had originally planned. But I got so tired of watching you preach free will that I figured in her case, I'd let her choose of her own free will. And guess what she chose? The same thing everyone would choose if I left it up to their own free will. And now, thanks to you wearing me out with your incessant error, you can watch her burn in hell for eternity of her own free will."

Or if you prefer the simpler version...

And of course the answer will come back that Arminians/Pelagians so love to hear - "Why of course I COULD - IF I had Cared to! I am God, after all, and I could have changed her heart to turn to me and be saved. But I let her choose of her own free will. And guess what she chose? So now you can watch her burn in hell for eternity of her own free will."

 

Someone said, 'When the Arminian/Pelagian finds himself in heaven enjoying the perfect
love, unity and selfless concern for others that is not possible here on this
sinful earth - and then peeking over the ramparts of heaven - observes his
OWN precious sweet daughter who passed the age of accountability . . . '

Again, you err not knowing the Scripture. Revelation 7:17c says, that when we get to Heaven Jesus is going to remove this kind of memory from our thinking. ' . . . and God shall (future tense) wipe away all tears from our eyes.'

 

Ray Berrian said:

Surprise. It was your 'Christian' friend Bob Ryan who said that.

 

Matt 7 gives us the "fact" that there are FEW saved and MANY lost. This is clear even to the most casual reader of the text. I think we "all" get that.

The "future scenario" merely removes the option that Spurgeon takes in his presentation with the lost. His focuse is EXCLUSIVELY on the saved and when confronted with the lost mere throws the question back on the questioner as if "HOW DARE you question God who is free to do whatever PLEASES Him. Only be glad that it PLEASES Him to graciously save YOU" -- and so ... have no second thought for what it might also PLEASE Him to do to your precious child.

This is clearly in Spurgeon's text and it is faithfully reproduced in the scenario.

I know it stings a little to see it put so clearly - but so far neither you nor any Calvinist has brought up a principle FROM Calvinistm FROM Spurgeon's quote that in ANY way challenges the scenario.

That is "instructive" to the reader, I must say.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Surprise. It was your 'Christian' friend Bob Ryan who said that. </font>[/QUOTE]While I did not insert the "Arminian/Pelagian" in that quote above -- Rather I think that was someone trying to turn the tables and ASK "yeah? So what would the Arminian story say in that SAME case??"


Thought you would never ask!! (I have posted the scenario enoug times now so that this question should have been thrown back at me by now).

Some have argued that plugging our doctrine into the future scenario to see what we are really saying about God - is not valid since our doctrines may not always fare well in that exposed light of day.

Lets try the Arminian view of the future - where you go to heaven as one of the "FEW" and find that your precious child was one of the "MANY" of Matt 7.

(Note: There is a God, there will be a day of judgment, not everyone is going to heaven. So we would then have the following scenario - that you might "expect" if the doctrines of Grace as seen in the Arminian teachings are true..).

But some Calvinist could “really” think that the Arminian idea of “God who so loved the WORLD” (as described above is) in fact an “awful” idea.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Bob Ryan:

Please quote the Scripture.

Thank you for your thinking that we are so good at the Bible that we immediately know what the Scripture is saying even if you generalize it by saying Matthew 7.

 

Clearly you are not reading the Arminian posts.

You are still stuck in "Calvnist" mode. See my scenario above for the Arminian view.

Again this is "Another" Calvinist principle inserted here.

Perhaps some remedial context would help. The "idea" is to take ACTUAL Arminian points and SHOW THAT THEY result in the future scenario.

NO Arminian point says "God gets so tired of watching Arminian preach about free will that He gives up".

NEITHER do Arminians claim that EVERYONE would choose death EVEN if ENABLED to choose life (only a Calvinist would assume such a thing).

And we see "again" Nick has inserted a Calvinist belief into the scenario he seeks to use to "test" and "explain" logical consistent results if using PURE Arminian principles.

This attempt to come up with a compelling scenario by Nick fails as we see that point after point is in fact CALVINIST in his scenario.

To be objective you must first LEAVE the Calvinist POV and actually USE Arminian points AS I have used Spurgeon's.

See?

Lesson #1.

In the Arminian view God ALWAYS cares for ALL.

Lesson #2.

In the Arminian view God ENABLES choice AND provides wave after wave of compelling, convicting, motivation for choosing LIFE to ALL (God sends the Holy Spirit to CONVICT THE WORLD of sin and righteousness and judgment).

Lesson #3.

At some point in refusing - "stubbornly refusing repentance" those who are supernaturally ENABLED to choose life but who CLING to death anyway (as we see in Romans 2:2-4) create a heart that has become hardened and MORE waves of mercy will have no effect - they only further annoy and irritate the wicked.

In Christ,

Bob

 

You are welcome.

Here it is

Matt 7

In Christ,

Bob

 

What you fail to realize is that this has nothing at all to do with eternity. This has something to do with the Christian life.

Here is the context:

These were spoken to the children of the kingdom of God, not those outside of it. It has the same message and application as 'abide in me, for without me ye can do nothing', 'looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith', 'I am the vine, ye are the branches', 'I am the door....', 'I am the good shepherd'.

Paul speaks of the same principle when he says in 1 Cor. 3:11-12:

For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;


The Lord Jehovah thru the prophet Hosea talks of it this way in Hosea 4:6 -

My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.


Better luck next time, Bob Ryan. In your hatred for Calvinism and its adherents, you try to make up a misrepresenting scenario and connect it to a Bible verse, and shoot yourself in the foot in the process.

 

Matt 7 makes it clear that EVEN in the church among the "chosen people of God" it is the MANY who are lost and the FEW who are saved.

Peter makes the same point saying "it is time for the judgment to begin with the house of God -- and IF it is with difficulty that the righteous are saved what of the wicked"?

The point remains. The MANY vs the FEW is God's summation of those lost vs those saved. It is clear as day in Matt 7.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Bob Ryan said
In the Arminian view God ENABLES choice AND provides wave after wave of compelling, convicting, motivation for choosing LIFE to ALL (God sends the Holy Spirit to CONVICT THE WORLD of sin and righteousness and judgment).

I can see how this would cover all who hear the gospel many times, as some in America have.

How does it apply to those who never hear the gospel? What excuse will God give for the lost daughters of countless millions, if Arminianism is true?

In Him

Ian

 

Bob, you just don't get it. No system of soteriology will make your contrived emotional scenario comfortable to anyone. Not Calvinism, not Arminianism, not Pelagianism, nothing.

God, wasn't there anything you could do to save my precious daughter?

Pelagian 1: Yes, I could have changed her heart to love me and be saved, but that would be a Calvinist God, not me. So instead, I left it up to everyone's free will to choose to believe or not to believe. She chose not to believe, so now you'll simply have to watch her roast in hell for eternity. Too bad. Those were the rules I chose, and those are the rules by which she'll have to suffer for eternity. Let's have another look at her screaming of her own free will, shall we?

Pelagian 2: Technically it is within my power to change the heart of anyone on earth to love me and be saved. But if I did that, someone might perceive me as a divine puppeteer, and I couldn't have that. So rather than risk being perceived as such, I just let her do what she wanted, to do, and now she'll just have to roast in hell for eternity. Too bad.

Pelagian 3: Technically, it is within my power to save anyone on earth, but I am a gentleman and don't apply any pressure on anyone to be saved. I simply offer salvation gracefully, and if they choose to receive it, great. If not, then too bad for them. Let us gentlemen gather 'round in our smoking jackets and watch 'em roast in hell for eternity, including your precious daughter.

Pelagian 4: No, sorry, bud. I couldn't do anything for her. I may be powerful enough to create the universe, but I'm not very good at saving people against their own free will. Call it a weakness. Anyway, let's watch your daughter roast in hell for eternity, okay?

Arminian 1: Yes, I could have saved her if I had only applied more power through the Spirit to draw her to me. But I made up my mind early on to go only so far and no farther with the Spirit's power I use to persuade people. And it simply wasn't far enough to save her. Sorry, those are the rules I made up, and those are the rules by which she will suffer for eternity. So you'll just have to watch her scream in agony for eternity. Too bad.

Arminian 2: Well, of course I could have saved her, but not according to the rules I set. My rule is that I send out the Gospel message, which itself is the power by which I cause people to repent and be saved. It just didn't work on your daughter. Hey, I created the universe and everyone in it, but sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Why didn't it work on her? Dang if I know. I guess either she wasn't built to respond, or the Gospel just didn't have enough power behind it. Regardless, thems the rules, and thems the breaks. Let's go back and watch her scream in agony in hell, shall we?

Arminian 3: Technically, I'm powerful enough to save anyone, but according to my arbitrary rules, she had to hear the Gospel to be saved. Ironically, in her case, if she had heard it, she would have been saved. But I don't actually get in and make sure the Gospel is spread to everyone - I depend upon man to spread it. And nobody seemed to get around to telling your daughter the Gospel, so she never got the chance to be saved. If you hadn't died at her birth, maybe you could have spread it to her, but that's just the way things work out. Too bad. So you'll just have to content yourself with watching her scream in agony as she roasts in hell because nobody told her the Gospel.

Calvinism 1: Yes, I could have saved her if I had known her and elected her before creation, but I simply didn't. Too bad. Let's go watch her suffer in hell, okay?

So what's the moral to this story? God is God, and He does everything according to His good pleasure, not Bob's good pleasure or my good pleasure. And we have no right to presume what God should or shouldn't do according to our emotions -- or anything else of man, for that matter.

 

Romans 1 "So that they are without excuse" speaking of those to whom nature witnesses.

Romans 2 "NOT the HEARERS of the Law but the DOERS of the Law will be Justified...
For WHEN GENTILES who do not have the scriptures do INSTINCTIVELY the things of the law they SHOW the things of the law WRITTEN ON THEIR HEARTS..."

And then notice 2:26 -- the clincher about those uninformed Gentiles.

HOW can this be??

"I will DRAW ALL MANKIND unto Me" John 12:32

"I will send the Holy Spirit to CONVICT THE WORLD of sin and righteousness and judgment" John 16.

So though this may be sad for the doctrines of Calvinism - it is GREAT for the Character of God AND the Arminian view of salvation.

In Christ,

Bob

 

The Arminian view seems to be working.

"... so I came back to her with wave after wave of compelling, convicting, enabling mercy JUST as I did with you."

You "keep" leaving that out of your Arminian scenario EVEN though we BOTH know this is a key part of the Arminian story. Go ahead - put the ARMINIAN position in your scenario and SHOW that it does not work.

You seem to be timid about doing this.

BTW - thanks for that quote of yours where GOD not only did not "care" for her - HE actually actively tried to harden her heart BEYOND just human TD. I have added that one in.

In Christ,

Bob