Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by Yeshua1, May 9, 2013.
What would be your main beef?
Do you lump 4/5 pointers together as saying same things?
Might be interesting to get them to explain their understanding of Calvinism.
Most cannot discern the difference between Calvinism and hyper-Calvinism.
The well has been poisoned.
Either Fillet Mignon or NY Strip....:smilewinkgrin:
Now your talking about venison & no, they are different types of meat. :laugh:
Post number 2 translated says if you think Calvinism is false doctrine, your understanding of Calvinism is flawed and obscure and confused.
The TULI of the Tulip has been defined in published articles many times. So there is no confusion as to what Calvinism is. Anyone who claims these doctrines are not understood is simply muddying the waters.
Total Spiritual Inability asserts that men in their fallen, natural, men of flesh state cannot understand any spiritual thing at any time. Calvinism adds to no one understands, the extrapolation, no one understands at any time. However since men of flesh received the gospel with joy, it is clear men of flesh can understand some spiritual things some of the time. Thus the Biblical doctrine should be Limited Spiritual Ability which can be lost through hardening.
The U asserts Unconditional Election of individuals for salvation before creation. However 2 Thessalonians 2:13 teaches God chooses for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth. Clearly then our individual election for salvation is conditional.
Limited Atonement teaches Christ did not lay down His life as a ransom for all, but only for the supposedly preselected elect. Never mind God desires all to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth and Christ became the propitiation or means of salvation for the whole world.
Irresistible Grace claims once a person is entering heaven, they are being compelled irresistibly by God's grace, and therefore could not be blocked by false teachers teaching false doctrine. Matthew 23:13 to the contrary.
The sound doctrine of once saved, always saved does not depend upon any part of the aforementioned mistaken doctrines of Calvinism.
Can we get a 1 sentence response please?
Would be interesting to see what they would view differences as being!
Many seem reluctant to explain their system of salvation, as that would be to "label" it!
just as long as its non cal, fine for them!
I have no problems with the five points of TULIP, but the name Calvin makes my blood boil. Someone said they were going to cook a smores in celebration of the burning of Servetus. That goes right along with the character of Calvin. Michael Servetus' torture lasted thirty minutes. John Calvin's burning is lasting an eternity as we speak.
remember my brother, that we ALLm deserve to be roasted like chestnuts on the open fire, so Calvin went to heaven same way you and I make it, thru the death of the Son of God who died in our place before Holy God!
No one knows anyones eternal destiny for sure. I believe the other day you mentioned that Paul was also a murderer. It is true he aided in the murder of Christians, such as Stephen. I do not think there is any reference to his actually carrying out the crime. The difference between Paul and John Calvin is, after Paul was saved, he ceased his campaign against Christians. In Christ he was a new creation. John Calvin had the same evil mindset of murder until the day he died. Why did he continue murdering after he was saved? Draw your own conclusion. Anyway, thank you for calling me "my brother," as it is very comforting.
I certainly do not hate Calvinism... now some calvinists is a different story... :tongue3: but then I am not too fond of alot of traditionalists.
I don't agree with Calvinism, but I don't think it's a heresy or anything even close to it. It's just a different way to explain soteriorlogy, so why would I hate it?
I'm not sure my problems would fit in a brief post.
For Calvinism to be right, God has to be the reason there is evil. I understand and have heard the arguments against this conclusion, but none of them have been convincing. That makes God either uncaring, maniacal or worse, both!
That should be enough to get the fire stoked up pretty hot.
Then why does it say that God is not the author of Evil in the 1689 Confessions of Faith?
FAR more important is that the bible states that God cannot do evil, nor does he entice others to do such, for he is light, and NO darkness abides in him!
That is a very good discussion point!
that was one of the hardest things for me to grasp, how God did ordained/decree all that happened, yet also those such as satan and adam did as they wanted to do!
What helped me is to realise that God is NOT doing that in linear time, not step 1 to 2 to 3 , as ALL was ordained from eternity to happen, and that also he did not react to the falls of satan and Adam, He already ordained what was happening, but they freely chose to sin also!
Just because the WCF says 2 + 2 does not equal 4, no one should accept the irrational assertion. It says God ordains (predestines) whatsoever comes to pass, yet is not the author of sin. God somehow ordains (predestines) sin yet is not the cause. Yeah, right. Keep chucking those logical impossibilities till the cows come home.
Hyper-Calvinists proudly proclaim the obvious, God is the author of sin, but main-line Calvinism hide under the cover of absurdity.
The Biblical doctrine is God either causes or allows whatsoever comes to pass, thus God is not the author of sin.
I don't care for any position, dogma, stance, theology, soteriology, exegesis, thesis, other-ology or other-ism, etc. that places God in any kind of box. From my experiences, that's what 5-pointers do, as do their opposites and many positions in-between.
God's bigger, period.
Bigger than all of man's attempts to define and codify. And, thank God for that. I'm very comfortable with the understanding that I must embrace an infinite Creator. And I find it utterly awesome and mind-blowing that yet, He is fully revealed in scriptures...I feel so small.
That said, I understand and appreciate the value in all the "isms" and "ologies" as I would any common tool. Examples; a hammer, pliers, a wrench, a PC, ad infinitum.
If I understand it right the differance is Que Sera Sera
Probably one of my biggest "beefs" with Calvinism (among many as it is a lengthy debate) is that it ultimately leads to Arminianism.
A Calvinist can not have any real assurance of salvation if the criteria of being saved depends on being of the elect and chosen by God. When the Bible says to examine yourselves whether you are in the faith (2 Cor 13:5) where is the Biblical test to verify that you are one of the elect?
There is a difference in having assurance of your salvation knowing that 1 John 5:13 says that you CAN KNOW, and then hoping that you are saved based on whether God elected you. Since there is no way to verify whether you are elect, then the test for salvation ultimately rests on works in a Calvinist context.
The only way that a Calvinist can truly attempt to confirm his/her election is if they maintain good works unto the end, and that is classic Arminianism.