Featured "some of you" believe not

What? You defend a doctrine you know little about? Here is an article on the subject from a Reformed site.


http://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/90-296

No, Calvinism teaches the effectual call makes you believe. The scriptures teach the word of God works in them that believe, the exact opposite.

Here is an example. Suppose someone told you the grocery store is giving away a hundred dollars worth of free food, all you have to do is go down and get it.

Well, if you believe you will go down. Your faith will effectually work to cause you to go down.

If you do not believe you will not go down.

It is faith that causes the word to effectually work in you.

What is the context of this verse?

 

I was effectually drawn by the Father to the Son,by the Spirit...before I knew anything about reformed,non reformed....:wavey::wavey:

Jesus seeks and saves those given to Him by the Father.

 

As I said to Amy, there is much other scripture besides this, there is Stephen telling the Jews that they do always resist the Holy Ghost.

Acts 7:51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.

You can't resist something that is not holding you or pulling on you. A fish that is freely swimming in the lake is not resisting you. The moment you hook him and attempt to draw him in, then he can fight against you and resist you. Words have meaning.

King Agrippa was almost persuaded. This shows the Holy Spirit was having an influence on him, it was drawing or enticing him to believe, yet, as far as we know, he never did become a Christian.

And as I mentioned before, king Agrippa also refutes Total Inability as Paul said he KNEW Agrippa believed the prophets.

Acts 26:27 King Agrippa, believest thou the prophets? I know that thou believest.
28 Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian.

So no, I do not form my beliefs from one single verse of scripture, I look at scriptures overall to determine what I believe. There is much scripture that easily refutes Irresistible Grace.

 

Oh brother! You are so full of yourself. I do not know of anyone who repeatedly quotes his own self like you!

Simply insisting you are correct doesn't make it so.

 

OH HOGWASH. There's no such thing as "effectual calling" The BIBLE says "DRAW" the same way in Jeremiah as it does in John 6. Plain and simple. You continue to add presupposition garbage to God's word. It has nothing to do with "gathering all nations". Verse 34 is STILL ABOUT ISRAEL. But anyway, using YOUR logic on John 6:39-40, Jeremiah 31:3 comes before Jeremiah 31:34, so the definition of DRAW comes before verse 34. Verse 33 CLEARLY says "this covenant will I make with the HOUSE OF ISRAEL" You just read a whole bunch on nonsense right into the text. Jeremiah 31 says nothing about "Gathering all nations". It says gathering ISRAEL from all nations.

Israel's resistance was NOT overcome. They were DRAWN and REJECTED GOD. Jeremiah 31:3 says 'I HAVE drawn thee" not "I WILL draw thee" to fit your presuppositional at-some-time-in-the-future application. Can you tell the difference between the "I WILLS" and "I HAVEs"?? God DREW THEM, and THEY WOULD NOT. The "I WILLS" are what God is going to do at the millennial kingdom, the I HAVES are WHY HE HAS TO DO IT AGAIN because Israel WOULD NOT (Matt 23:37).

You refuse to accept the plain reading of Scripture that clearly shows that God had DRAWN Israel, and Israel RESISTED and REJECTED God. That's why Jeremiah 31:4 has to say "AGAIN I will build thee".

Your view on Judas does not fit Scripture, IT FITS YOUR ARGUMENT. Your argument, however, is not based on Scripture. The account with Judas only seems to contradict John 6 when you READ EFFECTUAL CALLING INTO THE TEXT. You want to dance around the text and use human reasoning to explain it way, but WHAT DOES THE BIBLE SAY? It makes no difference that he was a devil, Jesus said that...OK wait for it, pay close attention to this..

HAVE I NOT CHOSEN YOU TWELVE -John 6:70

He didn't say He CHOSE ELEVEN, and yet all Calvinists use John 12 and 17 to tie presuppositions together but do not apply the terms "CHOSEN" and "GIVEN" consistently. CONSISTENTLY applied, these verse show that the Father GAVE Judas to Christ, Christ had CHOSEN Judas, and Judas was LOST. Why? Because He did not come, and that blows the Calvinist interpretation of John 6:37 and John 6:44 to the moon and back. There is not contradiction with John 6:37-44, ch 12, and 17:12. The conflict is in the erroneous Calvinist definition of CHOSEN, DRAW and GIVEN that must be eisegeted with man-made theological presuppositional terms to explain the condundrum that the plain reading of the Bible does to their system.

 

None of those scriptures teach that some men are called with a powerless "general" call, and that others are called with a powerful "effectual" call.

Show me where ANY of these verses say any such thing. You can't do it.

 

No one takes you serious at all.I do cut and paste but I say so openly.

I do not plagiarize Jonathan Edwards and claim I wrote it.Everyone is onto you so I need not waste too much time with your bogus ideas...false greek,and everything else they have caught you offering up.

 

You just keep telling yourself that over and over again, and maybe someday you will be convinced. :thumbs:

 

Burl Ives called and wants his beard back. If I was going to plagiarize anyone, it certainly wouldn't be a Calvinist slave owner. You can't even get the right author that I quoted, and of course I never said it was mine, I just let you believe that because you and your buddies were so caught up trying to prove me wrong that I knew you would contradict anything I said, and it worked like oil on a piston. I'm pretty sure you still have nightmares about getting outwitted like that that you refuted your own colleagues. Thanks for bringing that up though, I almost forget. That was one of the funniest things I've seen was a Calvinist arguing against his own theologians.

You have spent way too many nights in a cramped up truck bed. Get some exercise and stretch out once in a while. Eat a Snickers. You're not you when you're famished.

 

LOL, you still don't get it. If I said my neighbors NEVER go to church, no, not one, would you understand that to mean they were UNABLE to go to church?
NO, and no logical and thoughtful person would ever assume that, yet that is exactly what you are doing, reading INABILITY into scripture where it is not mentioned.

Just because these persons have always resisted the Holy Spirit does not mean they are unable to repent and believe. You simply assume Total Inability, this scripture (and no scripture) does not say, prove, or even imply inability.

I agree, but this does not mean a person cannot think another way. Jesus said his disciples were indeed willing to obey him.

Mat 26:41 Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.

This was BEFORE the disciples received the Holy Spirit, so Jesus is speaking of their natural spirit here, and Jesus said they were WILLING. You can't simply ignore scripture you don't like.

You are grasping straws now. Paul always preached with the Holy Spirit.

I do not have to refute irresistible grace, it is not mentioned in scripture one single time. You need to prove that it exists.

 

If the Holy Ghost is irresistible, then it makes no difference how you butcher Romans 8:7 because regardless of whether a sinner is "ALWAYS" resisting, irresistible grace says HE CAN'T. Acts 7:51 doesn't say that "Because they were unable, they were always resisting because they were bound to their nature" No it doesn't say that. According to irresistible grace, God CHANGES THAT MIND SET so even if you interpretation of Romans 8:7 were correct (and it's isn't by a long shot as I've already proven), it would MAKE NO DIFFERENCE HERE because they resisted the HOLY GHOST. You can't RESIST unless you are CALLED.

Your entire brush off of Acts 7:51 totally contradicts your own view of total inability for ALL OF US were dead in trespass and sins. We were ALL like that unsaved person who sinned. Just because you claim that the audience in Acts 7 was "always resisting" because of Romans 8:7 means nothing. ALL OF US were once a Romans 8:7 if that's how you wish to view it, yet the evidence in Acts 7 shows that the grace that was offered by the Holy Spirit (which IS the Holy Spirit's role-John 16:8-9) was RESISTED. It can't be called RESISTANCE if they are never CALLED. Your argument only shows that they resist naturally, but that doesn't explain how they are RESISTING THE HOLY GHOST. Acts 7:51 is a death blow to Calvinism no matter how you try and spin it.

 

Ach

It did not work at all.I clearly said no one would pick on you if you posted those things.You did not out wit anyone by your lying. You are lying right now...go look at what I posted.....why lie ACH??

You are delusional.I could not believe you would lie then or now but it seems to not be a problem for you:thumbs:

It did not happen.....so the joke is your post.

Thanks for your concern Ach:wavey: If you repent and get serious about scripture I would look forward to helping you.:thumbs:

Here is what I said ACh-