The hidden dangers of Calvinism

Didn't calvanist live under bridges and when people walked over them they jumped out and ate them? :laugh:

Sorry I couldn't help it with the title of the thread.

 

Man has cognitive ability to accept or reject Scripture and that Scripture is never apart from God except out of context.

You cannot prove that ever. All men are natural unless you're suggesting SOME men are created supernatural.


Quote:
"Limited atonement" denies "who so ever will".

Yes it does, God is not limited to who He can save nor is man as a whole limited to who can respond to the Gospel!

A man's will MUST be first broken BEFORE he ever could be saved! Any man who professes Christ apart from having his will broken has never been "Fixed".

Probably the grossest error of calvinism! Some do not, then they do. It is then they become chosen, not chosen before, else they had no need for regeneration which makes them alive unto God, holy and without blame before Him in love!

Suggestion that God chose men to be saved before the foundations of the world smacks in the face of being unregenerate, even by the calvinist's standard.


No man has ever been holy and without blame BEFORE they got saved.

 

I don't have to. 1 Cor 2:14 plainly states it. Use your cognitive abilities.

Perhaps you are ignorant of the way these terms are used. In the Bible "natural" man is opposed to the "spiritual" man. It is speaking of the unbeliever and the believer. The unbeliever is the natural man, the state into which all are born. One only becomes spiritual after salvation.

Correct, which has nothing to do with limited atonement. Again perhaps you are merely ignorant of what limited atonement means. Limited atonement means that Christ actually paid for sins, removed the guilt and punishment for them from sinners.

True, and this is a key point of Calvinism.

Which is no problem for Calvinism.

Can you show any Scripture where someone is chosen after belief?

No, again you appear ignorant of what you are denying.

It is what Scripture teaches in 1 Thes 2:13 and Eph 1:4. s

Correct, another key point of Calvinism

 

Um, you're saying that no man can resist the Holy Ghost here, that IS simply WRONG!

God is big enough and the only limit to grace is man's refusal to accept it.

Seems you forget that God created man in his own image: man has an individual will apart from God or he could never disobey. satan has a will that definitely is opposed to God's perfect will. Suggesting that neither exist ultimately makes God alone responsible for sin and that would make God the sinner and not man.

The danger of calvinism is exposed yet again.

Well at least you see that the view rates it, although I didn't exactly say your view was, yet it is viewable.

Um, "God saves people in spite of their view of the Gospel"????:laugh: Then you just sliced faith right out of the plan and discredited enormous amounts of Scripture which PROVE you WRONG!

Eyes to see and ears to hear IS man's ability to view the Gospel and it is man's ability to accept by faith or reject sight and hearing spiritually altogether, this is even a simple aspect of the power of faith.

 

So now you're saying that when God spoke to the dry bones and flesh appeared on them those bones already had flesh?:laugh:

Already have the Bible position that the voice of God speaks to that which is dead and man chooses to remain in sin and staying dead until his will becomes broken and he realizes he needs God and cannot save himslef.

Anything extarbiblical is right in the same mix with heresy and apostacy. It could be called calvinism soup.

So tell me, how is something alive unto God which is Biblically dead?

 

You haven't seen me say that. I don't believe it, and I don't know of any Calvinist who does. The Bible plainly says that people resist the HOly Spirit. That is not the question of "irresistible grace."

I wouldn't argue with that.

Why does it seem I have forgotten that? I haven't said anything about that. You aren't reading closely.

Where's that?

What? Please try to write more clearly.

Please be more careful. This sloppiness is inexcusable. I said nothing about slicing faith out of the gospel. My point was clear: If you deny the sovereignty of God in the gospel, you can still be saved by it. God will save you in spite of your denial. He will not save anyone without faith.

Not sure what you have in view here. You will have to be more clear.

 

No, I didn't say that at all.

That's not the Bible position really.

Interesting. So baseball is heresy and apostasy (please work on your spelling). There is a lot that is extrabiblical that is not heresy or apostasy.

God makes it alive (Eph 2:5).

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Salamander
You cannot prove that ever.

I don't have to. 1 Cor 2:14 plainly states it. Use your cognitive abilities.


Quote:
All men are natural unless you're suggesting SOME men are created supernatural.
Perhaps you are ignorant of the way these terms are used. In the Bible "natural" man is opposed to the "spiritual" man. It is speaking of the unbeliever and the believer. The unbeliever is the natural man, the state into which all are born. One only becomes spiritual after salvation.[/quote] You're really sounding confused now, first you say that only some men are elect because they are regenerate which does mean they are alive spiritually, now you're saying they were dead and now are spiritual which indicates regeneration.

Another fallacy of calvinism exposed.

Sounds limitless to me in that whosoever will can be saved.

And no one has ever said that calvinism doesn't make use of some truth.

Which you offer nothing but rebuttal of my remarks and no proof.

They certainly weren't holy and without blame before him in love until AFTER they were saved: they were without excuse, blamed/condemned and unholy before Him.
Eph 1:4 teaches this and opposed to what calvinists try to say it does.

I've only denied that which staunch calvinists proclaim/ I have not denied the Bible once.

Yet calvinism attempts to say in Eph 1:4 that men were chosen in a state of being holy and without blame prior to salvation. If this isn't what they say then to make this a proof text for calvinism means that God created men in a saved condition and everyone else has no choice, yet man chooses to accept the Gospel by excercising faith.

You still are confused.

 

Speaking of confused, I never sais that “only some men are elect because they are regenerate.” They are elect before they are regenerate. They are regenerate because they are elect. All men are born sinners, dead in sin and separated from God. Not all stay that way.

Again, I have to ask you to be more careful to read what is being said. You don’t get to make stuff up.

Again, you are showing that you are ignorant of what limited atonement means. Calvinism fully affirms that whosoever will can be saved. God will not save anyone who is not willing. The question is “Why are they willing?”

But more to the point, none of that has anything to do with limited atonement. You need to learn what limited atonement is.

What is there to rebut about that. You were correct. Some do not believe and then they do. We agree. Do you want me to offer proof about something we agree on?

Excellent. We agree again.

No it doesn’t. Eph 1:4 says they were chosen to be holy and blameless, not because they were holy and blameless. If they were holy and blameless they wouldn’t need to be chosen.

But I noticed you avoided the question I asked you: Can you show any place in Scripture where someone is chosen because they believed?

Actually, you have shown that you do not know what “staunch Calvinists” proclaim.

You have denied that God chooses people to salvation from the beginning.

Can you show any Calvinist who says this?

I am confused about what you are saying. It makes no sense. I am not confused about Calvinism or the Bible on this point.

 

But I am quiet sure that every man/woman that has ever breath air into their lungs an was blessed to live a average length of life has not heard the Gospel. I am asking pacific about those individuals. For that person, will thet go to heaven through ignorance or split hell wide open?
What say ye?

 

Your last statement make the better sence. I say that GOD is sovereign and that way, it takes a heavy burdon off of your shoulders that you cannot meet the mark. You cannot carry so heavy a burdon although you won't to. That doesn't mean that you should just shuck even trying in your weak way. We are only human and can do as much as lies in us but GOD is just and the all mighty Judge.
I won't say that they will be lost.

 

If there is a person who has not had the Gospel presented to them, which I'm not so sure of myself, it is because they have rejected Truth at some point in their life. They are held accountable for unbelief because they at some point rejected God.
We err in thinking it is solely up to man's presentation of the Gospel in order for someone to be saved. Christ presented himself to Saul (Paul) on the road to Damascus. Rev. 14:6 speaks of an angel that presents to Gospel of salvation. Man is commanded to also do this, but I think we limit God by stating if a man can't reach a tribe in a remote part of the world, the Gospel cannot be given to those people. It is also an impossibility to prove a negative (there are those who haven't heard).

 

The scripture plainly says: "For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse.." Romans 1:19-20

The theory being that if someone enquires after God, He will send a missionary to tell them of the gospel.

A simple statement.

Cheers,

Jim

 

We just need to model our approach to evangelism after Paul's.

 

A former pastor put it this way," If they reject the light that they have, God is not under any obligation to send them more light."

 

In some of the darkness of Africa, Missionaries have said that when the come into them, there are some that have been waiting for the good news, and and there are some that won't to put them in the big cooking vessel.

 

I do think that the answer to the question, what about those who've never heard the gospel, is answered in Romans 2:12-15.

Let's start with v. 15 "...which show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness...."

Even if they have never heard of Jesus, and have never heard the gospel, they have the law written in their hearts. They have a sense of right and wrong. They have a conscience. But they do not have the Law, as the Jews did.

V. 14 describes the Gentiles as a "law unto themselves."

If, then they are not condemned for reject Jesus, of whom they knew nothing, what is the basis for their condemnation? It is, I think, for a failure to keep
their own moral code. V. 15 says that conscience, or inner moral code, accuses or excuses them. They have their own moral code and still can't keep it. And neither can we who have heard the gospel.

At the judgment, they will acknowledge that they are guilty and without excuse, and that their punishment is justified.

Similarly, we are also guilty and acknowledge that we deserve eternal death. But our plea will be the blood of Jesus has covered our sin.

Earlier, one poster insisted that everybody has heard the gospel, else God wouldn't be fair. Or, they suggest that a just God won't send people who hell who've never heard the gospel.

I think my answer covers both objections. But if people will be saved without hearing the gospel, let us bring our missionaries home, please.



.

 

Rats, a double post!

 

Rats, the hated triple post.

 

I do believe you saying that everyone in the world past tense and present tense has heard the word of GOD. I will say that GOD is not linited with his power and will. Yes he can reach to whom so ever he will. As stated somewhere in the nt, I just can't remember at this present time, that if he were to command, even the roccks would cry out to him.