Featured Who are, "Those thou hast given to me..."

how is that a word game? I don't care anything about John Calvin. I was simply asking for a quote. No word games. I mean both statement very literally. you made a statment about Calvin that was not in the original quote. I asked for a quote. But as I've statement many times, Calvin is not a real concern of mine. I have 0 of his books. Never read him other than a quote.

Even if it were true, you shouldn't be insulting. Stop making excuses for the childish behavior. And no, I don't insult people's intelligence.

Another insult form you. 0 quotes of an actual word game.

again no. Never play word games. Looks like just a smoke screen by you.(not to mention a lie.)

Very well and good. But if you truly loved your brothers in Christ you would, yes, not let people continue in error but would not insult.

...excuses, excuses, excuses.

again, no word games. It's called you were interpreting something Calvin said as "caused" which wasn't valid. God determining something will happen doesn't mean he causes something to happen. God can determine something will happen by allowing it to happen. He doesn't have to necessarily cause it to happen for it to happen. Again, no word games. Just a simple difference in interpretation. Calvin's original quote never said anything about God causing sin.

I don't believe God is the author of sin and neither does any Calvinist that I know of here. There may be an exception or two, but I know at least for me God is not the author of sin. God uses sin for his purposes(death of Christ, selling of Joseph in slavery) but that doesn't mean God is the author of sin.

I don't believe God directly causes all things. I believe God has determined all things, but that doesn't equal God causing.

I don't believe any contradiction as I don't believe God causes people to sin nor does God temp people to sin.

 

even Winman admited that he insulted me

I don't believe Winman has ever said that nor did I say or imply that he did. Not even winman thought that. I was making a statement of common ground.

Yes, winman as far as I can tell quoted Calvin correctly. He just added to his original quote by a misinterpretation of determine equals causes which isn't true.

 

Actually...No one takes that site very seriously...except perhaps, you Calvinists...it is entertaining sometimes...and does add some rhetorical flair....but no one really takes the bulk of their opinions from it. I guess, except some mal-informed Calvinists. No Arminian is quite foolish enough to put a lot of stock in it. You still appear to not understand your opposition Icon. Sorry, you don't. You simply do not understand the difference between a confessional Arminian and a Calvinist...In all your studies...you have missed or ignored the difference between the two. Most PHD's in Calvinism have majored in "mis-representation of Arminianism". You do such repeatedly as does your home-boy "reformed baptist"

 

Wow, finally caught on ...but you can't allow this ilk to destabilize your sence tranquility. The calm man, having learned how to govern himself, knows how to adapt himself to others; and they, in turn, reverence his spiritual understanding & feel that they can learn from him & rely upon him. The more tranquil a man becomes, the greater his success, his influenced, his ability to communicate God's perfect will for our lives. Brother, be that light that shines for the world to see! :godisgood:

 

I pay attention to all who insist on blaming God for mans sin.This is wickedness that is always to be opposed...not embraced:wavey:

 

I didn't misinterpret anything, I showed you directly from Calvin's own words that he believed God CAUSED all things including evil.

It is actually you that has misinterpreted Calvin. Look at the quote that Icon provided;

Calvin was speaking of Augustine here, and he agreed with Augustine. He said when Augustine used the term "permission" he means that the will of God is the supreme and primary CAUSE of EVERYTHING.

Augustine didn't really believe God permits man to sin at all, he believed God CAUSED men to sin. What he is really saying is that unless God permits a man to sin, he is unable to sin. This is what Calvin also said when he said that the devil and men cannot CONCEIVE of evil unless God permits, NO, that he COMMANDS it.

So, Calvin and Augustine redefined what permit or permission means as something determined and caused by God.

 

Well said brother! :thumbs::thumbs:

 

So you understand command equals cause? Is that correct?

 

What a laugh, it is Calvinists and Calvinism that has been accused of making God the author of sin for centuries. Some of the quotes I provided of Calvin were in response to Georgius who accused Calvin of making God the author of sin. This was 450 years ago!

No one has EVER accused non-Cals or Arminians of teaching that God is the author of sin.

The reason Calvinism is accused of making God the author of sin is because it is so. You can deny it all you want, but that is the logical end of Calvinism. Calvin actually said God was the author of sin, I provided the quote.

 

:laugh::laugh::laugh: Not to worry HOS.....a few months ago everyone said there are no arminians on BB....I just watch and see who blames God for sin....
I see you, winman, skan, and van.....have voluntered recently.

keep moving the target...good idea....

I understand doctrinal truth as a plumbline.....so when you and the others deviate.....you give yourselves away...lol.
You increasing offer less scripture.....just more and more snide comments.
I understand!

 

Of course not...
No...you believe the scripture is why. They just seek to get under your skin, because you see how they do not understand the verses.
:laugh::laugh:

 

No, that is how Augustine and Calvin understood it. You have seen the quotes, read them carefully. Augustine and Calvin believed that anything God commands MUST happen. His command is the cause.

I do not believe that, God commands many things that we do not obey.

Calvin said incredibly contradictory statements such as when a man disobeys God, he is actually obeying God's will. He believed God's secret will was that the man disobey his commandment. This is pure lunacy. You have God's revealed will and his secret will in opposition to themselves, God is divided against himself!

But that is exactly what Calvin taught.

 

Winman,
Others have tried to tell you many times....you are not understanding what you read...
We are not sure if it is deliberate, or you are sincere and misunderstanding.
That is why it seems like contradictions to you.

Let me illustrate from this post-
yousay;

 

Calvin also did not believe that when Adam sinned that death and the sin nature naturally passed on all his descendants as some have argued here;

Do you see what Calvin writes here? The sin nature and death did not pass upon all men naturally because of Adam's sin as many argue here, Calvin said this was God's decree. If you were born a sinner, God decreed it, it did not happen as a consequence of Adam's sin.

 

I do not want to say anything unkind to you here. I
think you are not getting it,as the conclusions you come up with do not follow the point of discussion. I cannot re-read everything with you as this is speculating about what a man taught, and what he meant by what he said.
calvin was not an apostle....we should only spend extra time looking at scripture.

For what it is worth...here is calvin on romans 5:12
Sin entered into the world, etc. Observe the order which he keeps here; for
he says, that sin preceded, and that from sin death followed. There are
indeed some who contend, that we are so lost through Adam’s sin, as
though we perished through no fault of our own, but only, because he had
sinned for us. But Paul distinctly affirms, that sin extends to all who suffer
its punishment: and this he afterwards more fully declares, when
subsequently he assigns a reason why all the posterity of Adam are
156
subject to the dominion of death; and it is even this — because we have all,
he says, sinned. But to sin in this case, is to become corrupt and vicious;
for the natural depravity which we bring, from our mother’s womb, though
it brings not forth immediately its own fruits, is yet sin before God, and
deserves his vengeance: and this is that sin which they call original. For as
Adam at his creation had received for us as well as for himself the gifts of
God’s favor, so by falling away from the Lord, he in himself corrupted,
vitiated, depraved, and ruined our nature; for having been divested of
God’s likeness, he could not have generated seed but what was like
himself. Hence we have all sinned; for we are all imbued with natural
corruption, and so are become sinful and wicked. Frivolous then was the
gloss, by which formerly the Pelagians endeavored to elude the words of
Paul, and held, that sin descended by imitation from Adam to the whole
human race; for Christ would in this case become only the exemplar and
not the cause of righteousness. Besides, we may easily conclude, that he
speaks not here of actual sin; for if everyone for himself contracted guilt,
why did Paul form a comparison between Adam and Christ? It then
follows that our innate and hereditary depravity is what is here referred to.

 

Not COMMANDED, but DECREED. I don't think the two terms mean the same thing. God's decree was that Man would fall and face God's justice; that God the Son would bear that justice on behalf of those who believed on Him, and that from the fallen race of Adam He would redeem some to eternal life.

These things were decreed "before the foundation of the world," but they weren't "commanded" as though the command could be disobeyed by a defiant creation that had it's own plans to carry out.

One of the reasons I believe in sovereign grace is that it exalts God to absolute Master of all His creation - every act of every creature - rather than turning God's will into "God's hope" and leaving it in the hands of corrupt sinners to carry out.

The Arminian picture of Almighty God as a frustrated deity who must pace heaven's floors wringing his hands and hoping someone on Earth will "let him have his way" is just too offensive for me to take it seriously.

 

Exactly the way I see it as well! Thanks for sharing.