Why Calvinists and Arminianists are both wrong

Actually, I think it would be much more accurate say...

"Why Calvinists and Arminianists are both correct." :thumbs:


:godisgood:

 

I think it's fair to say that you have read very little of Spurgeon's works. The ones making that claim about Spurgeon simply haven't a clue about the man. It's as silly as saying George Whitefield wasn't really a Calvinist.

 

Excellent !!!!!

 

"There has long been a great doctrinal discussion between the Calvinists and the Arminians upon many important points. I am myself persuaded that the Calvinist alone is right upon some points, and the Arminian alone is right upon others. There is a great deal of truth in the positive side of both systems, and a great deal of error in the negative side of both." ---Charles Spurgeon

 

"Have you never seen the hard work that some brethren have to shape a Scripture to their mind? One text is not Calvinistic, it looks rather like Arminianism: of course it cannot be so, and therefore they twist and tug to get it right. As for our Arminian brethren, it is wonderful to see how they hammer away at the ninth of Romans: steam-hammers and screw-jacks are nothing to their appliances for getting rid of election from that chapter. We have all been guilty of racking Scripture more or less, and it will be well to have done with the evil for ever. We had better far be inconsistent with ourselves than with the inspired word. I have been called an Arminian Calvinist or a Calvinistic Arminian, and I am quite content so long as I can keep close to my Bible. I desire to preach what I find in this Book, whether I find it in anybody else's book or not;" ---Charles Spurgeon

 

Ah, the quote game to try to prove CH Spurgeon wasn't a Calvinist. Well two can play that game:

- CH Spurgeon

- CH Spurgeon

The prince of preachers never went away from the doctrines of grace, because they are Biblical

- Spurgeon

 

"perhaps Calvin is made the standard, and what business has any man to think a single thought beyond Calvin? Blessed be God, we have gone a little beyond that; and we can say, "Increase our faith." With all our admiration for these great standard divines, we are not prepared to shut up ourselves in their little iron cages; but we say, "Open the door and let me fly—let me still feel that I am at liberty. Increase my faith, and help me to believe a little more."" ---Charles Spurgeon

 

- CH Spurgeon

Dude, I know what your trying to do and it ain't going to work

 

I disagree I learned Calvinism from Scripture and that is were it comes from, pure Scripture. Armininsm was a response that didn't square with Scripture

 

How presumptuous and arrogant to claim this. Scripture taken from context results in calvinism. I rejected calvinism (I was one) due in part to Scripture and the blatantly clear contradictions found therein.

 

Than I am, because I rejected the other belief which leads to RCC and away from Christ. Calvinism is directly from the Bible, the other view is directly from man.

 

Hogwash. RCC is one branch of arminianism, but the non-cal position doesn't lead to RCC by default. Calvinism is directly from man, hence the name. The biblical view is neither arminianism nor calvinism.

 

Wrong, Calvinism is directly from Scripture and arminism lead me to the RCC so don't presume to tell me something you don't know.

 

I think it's pretty obvious where the lack of knowledge is.

 

Than why keep it up if you have no know;edge, it is very clear you don't. [offensive language edited], a smart man knows the Bible contains all the doctrines of grace.

 

When I first came here I outlined where all the doctrines of grace are from Scripture.

 

I know. So you were wrong.

Either that, or because they don't want to lie and say something that they don't believe.

I understand it fine. I think "most of us" do.

Of course. That is what the Bible teaches. That is not what you accused them of believing. You said they taught that it makes no difference whether they believe or not. But the truth is that both Sproul and MacARthur think it does make a difference.

Here you say that it is impossible for faith to be a requirement for election. That is what the bible says. That is not saying that faith is not a requirement for salvation. Election and salvation are not the same thing.

I don't konw how you are using "foundation" here, but I would say that God is foundation of salvation. It is all about him and because of him, through grace alone by faith alone in Christ alone. That is Calvinism.

 

Oi wasn't addressing scripture. I was addressing a misrepresentation that someone made.

Your perception is clearly wrong. Most of my 20,000 posts have probably been on this topic, and I have been among the few rigidly insisting that we talk about Scripture.