"The election hath obtained it"; and "the rest are blinded", #Ro 11:7

[Silverhair]

None, NOT ONE had or ever would have a possibility to be Saved.

God Chose many, however.

The rest were left, to be more blinded than they were to start with.

"The election hath obtained it"; and "the rest are blinded", #Ro 11:7

Alan proof texting really does not work. You need to look at the context, who was Paul speaking about? The Jews, this is where calvinism shoots itself in the foot. You grab random verses that you think support your view and deny clear scripture that shows your view is wrong. The constant contradictions that I see in posts from calvinists just convinces me all the more that that theology is wrong.

 

[Silverhair]

A.W. Pink was not a hyper-Calvinist. He actually resigned from the pastorate of two churches when they objected to him preaching the Gospel freely (mentioned in his biography by Iain Murray).

Did he preach man had a free will so as to trust in God for salvation?

 

[Silverhair]

I respect your position on this. Maybe you are right. I was just explaining how total depravity affects our response to the gospel. I do believe that we choose. I believe that our choice is real and based on our will and there are plenty of verses showing this. But there are plenty of verses showing that more is needed than just moral persuasion in this. I believe there is actual spiritual work done on us in order for us to ever truly believe. And at this point in my life I'm beginning to understand how much the Holy Spirit is keeping all of us once we are saved.

I can agree to a point. Does God drawn us, yes does God force us, no. When you say "actual spiritual work done on us in order for us to ever truly believe" could you expand on that?

 

[Silverhair]

The thing about A.W. Pink is that he is too hard for most modern Calvinists and most winsome Baptists. If you read his writings on saving faith he so limits it and ties it to obedience that he loses most modern Calvinists who would rather discuss the metaphysical issues of sovereignty and future events. Pink had a heavy emphasis on saving faith as involving the heart and will and a huge emphasis on warning us not to be deceived by a false faith which will give us a false security until we wake up in Hell. He is worth reading.

I actually read a number of quotes from A W Pink, like "Salvation is by grace, by grace alone. Nevertheless, divine grace is not exercised at the expense of holiness. It never compromises with sin. It is also true that salvation is a free gift..." which I agree with but then in another quote he writes "The mere fact itself that God’s will is irresistible and irreversible fills me with fear, but once I realize that God wills only that which is good, my heart is made to rejoice." But he seems to have failed to realize that the will/desire of God is that all me saved so are all those that are lost overruling Gods' will? Or is His will to save only for a select few and thus the lost have a valid complaint against God as they were irresistibly lost.

This is what I find in calvinism, they fail to think their views through to the logical end.

 

[Silverhair]

A.W. Pink was not a hyper-Calvinist. He actually resigned from the pastorate of two churches when they objected to him preaching the Gospel freely (mentioned in his biography by Iain Murray).

When you read some of his quotes that is the conclusion one has to come to. Quotes can be found here Pink, A.W. - Grace Quotes

 

[DaveXR650]

I can agree to a point. Does God drawn us, yes does God force us, no. When you say "actual spiritual work done on us in order for us to ever truly believe" could you expand on that?

I just think that there are enough scriptures that talk about the Spirit's working or our needing to be born again that when combined with what we all learn from just looking around at how prone to error we all are - well I come to the conclusion that actual supernatural creative work is involved in our salvation, which is why I lean towards Calvinism. I don't think it's a matter of your salvation or anything like that though, if you don't agree. God forces us I guess in the sense that no matter how you describe it the fact is that we absolutely would not have done so on our own. That, combined with the fact that in all this you are dealing at the level of our will means that saying we were forced or captured or chosen is not too excessive of a way to describe it. We are not healthy, untainted, smart folks who are carefully evaluating the gospel propositions and then making a rational choice. Our wills were in a sense overcome or creatively changed.

 

[DaveXR650]

This what I find in calvinism, they fail to think their views through to the logical end.

I think the confusion comes from thinking things through too much and then the logical ends don't work! You are correct in that you quickly run into logical walls when you read Calvinist theology. Martyn Lloyd-Jones admitted it, MacArthur admits it. I discovered recently that John Owen admits it. The idea of real personal responsibility before God and salvation being all of God is difficult to reconcile. For me though, I think the same thing happens with other systems, and the scripture references people on here keep giving are true so what is the answer? I personally believe that my choice is real and that salvation is all of God and I admit I cannot completely reconcile this in my mind.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

When you read some of his quotes that is the conclusion one has to come to. Quotes can be found here Pink, A.W. - Grace Quotes

That would be because you know nothing either of Pink or Calvinism.
Thanks for the Grace Quots link. Some very precious truths there.

 

[Silverhair]

That would be because you know nothing either of Pink or Calvinism.
Thanks for the Grace Quots link. Some very precious truths there.

The one consistent that you will get from calvinists is the phrase "you do not know calvinism" or something to that effect. But I do not have to know calvinism as all I have to do is deal with what is posted on here and other boards by calvinists. The reality is that when dealing with calvinists it is like picking something out of a mixed bag,, your never sure what you will get.

As for Pink as I said in another post i agree with some of what he said but only to a point and then he runs of the rails as far as the bible is concerned.

 

[Silverhair]

I just think that there are enough scriptures that talk about the Spirit's working or our needing to be born again that when combined with what we all learn from just looking around at how prone to error we all are - well I come to the conclusion that actual supernatural creative work is involved in our salvation, which is why I lean towards Calvinism. I don't think it's a matter of your salvation or anything like that though, if you don't agree. God forces us I guess in the sense that no matter how you describe it the fact is that we absolutely would not have done so on our own. That, combined with the fact that in all this you are dealing at the level of our will means that saying we were forced or captured or chosen is not too excessive of a way to describe it. We are not healthy, untainted, smart folks who are carefully evaluating the gospel propositions and then making a rational choice. Our wills were in a sense overcome or creatively changed.

Of course there is supernatural work involved. We can't save ourselves God has to save us. But where it makes you lean into calvinism it makes me lean away from it.
Whereas you do not see man as able to evaluate the information that is presented to us by God I see that is exactly what God wants man to do. That is why man can and is judged for his response to that information.

 

[Silverhair]

I think the confusion comes from thinking things through too much and then the logical ends don't work! You are correct in that you quickly run into logical walls when you read Calvinist theology. Martyn Lloyd-Jones admitted it, MacArthur admits it. I discovered recently that John Owen admits it. The idea of real personal responsibility before God and salvation being all of God is difficult to reconcile. For me though, I think the same thing happens with other systems, and the scripture references people on here keep giving are true so what is the answer? I personally believe that my choice is real and that salvation is all of God and I admit I cannot completely reconcile this in my mind.

"The idea of real personal responsibility before God and salvation being all of God is difficult to reconcile." Actually if you look at how man has a free will by which he can turn and trust in God for his salvation it is really is not that hard. I personally believe that my choice is real and that salvation is all of God and that is just what I find in the biblical text.

 

[DaveXR650]

@Silverhair. I don't have a problem with what you say above. It's just that with what I know of biology, psychology, and my own natural cynicism, I tend to have a much lower view of our free will. I think it is easy to manipulate, fickle, changeable and tends to be as influenced by the group we run with more than any virtuous thought on our part. Add to that the verses that support our depraved nature and our tendency to sin and you have me leaning more toward the Calvinistic system. This whole thing really is a rescue operation by God toward us and Calvinism emphasizes that.

As a side note, be aware that Pink is useful and his writings make you think but a lot of Calvinists think he makes salvation too hard. Some say he didn't even attend church for the last 12 years of his life. When you read him, especially his works on saving faith you can't forget that God loves us and puts up with a lot - otherwise none of us would make it.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

The one consistent that you will get from calvinists is the phrase "you do not know calvinism" or something to that effect.

It is one consistent thing that you will get from Calvinists, because it's true. Go away and do some study: read some Bunyan, some Spurgeon, some Lloyd-Jones, yes, and some Pink as well, instead of the caricatures you've read that tickle your fancy but bear no resemblance to reality. If you're going to critique something, it's just common courtesy to know something about the subject.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I think the confusion comes from thinking things through too much and then the logical ends don't work! You are correct in that you quickly run into logical walls when you read Calvinist theology. Martyn Lloyd-Jones admitted it, MacArthur admits it. I discovered recently that John Owen admits it. The idea of real personal responsibility before God and salvation being all of God is difficult to reconcile. For me though, I think the same thing happens with other systems, and the scripture references people on here keep giving are true so what is the answer? I personally believe that my choice is real and that salvation is all of God and I admit I cannot completely reconcile this in my mind.

This is exactly right. Spurgeon also says much the same thing. But the fact is that the Bible teaches very clearly God's sovereignty in salvation and human responsibility. Our fallen, finite minds struggle with this and tend to drive us either towards the Scylla of Hyper-Calvinism or the Charybdys of Pelagianism..
The answer is simply to believe the Bible and humble ourselves before God.. In His mind these things are reconciled, but as He tells us, '"...My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways," says the LORD. "For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways, and My thoughts than your thoughts"' (Isaiah 5:8-9).

 

[Silverhair]

It is one consistent thing that you will get from Calvinists, because it's true. Go away and do some study: read some Bunyan, some Spurgeon, some Lloyd-Jones, yes, and some Pink as well, instead of the caricatures you've read that tickle your fancy but bear no resemblance to reality. If you're going to critique something, it's just common courtesy to know something about the subject.

So your telling me that what you calvinists say on here is not really calvinism? Or the calvinists that I quote are not really good enough calvinists for you.

When I contend with you or anyone else it does not matter if they are calvinist or whatever view they promote, if it does not comport with the bible I will point it out to them. You treat calvinism as if it is the standard by which we should judge someones faith. That is an error on your and most calvinists part. I am not here to support any particular view, just the bible.

You think calvinism is biblical I do not and I find that the views put forward by many calvinists are contradictory and not well though out. The bible is to be the final authority not you, me or any one else.

By the way I have read Spurgeon and even Piper but they do not dictate how one is to understand the bible.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

You think calvinism is biblical I do not

There we have it in a nutshell. Have a great day.

 

[Silverhair]

There we have it in a nutshell. Have a great day.

Why else would I contend with it unless I did not consider it biblical? Have I not shown that to you before?

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Why else would I contend with it unless I did not consider it biblical? Have I not shown that to you before?

And why would I? If you want a proper discussion, you need to get past this "I just believe the Bible" stuff and do your brothers in Christ the courtesy of accepting that we too "just believe the Bible."
The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain and infallible rule of all saving knowledge

And if you've read Spurgeon, you show a very poor understanding of what he preached..

 

[Silverhair]

And why would I? If you want a proper discussion, you need to get past this "I just believe the Bible" stuff and do your brothers in Christ the courtesy of accepting that we too "just believe the Bible."
The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain and infallible rule of all saving knowledge

And if you've read Spurgeon, you show a very poor understanding of what he preached..

What do you expect me to do, agree with the calvinist point of view? When I say a calvinist point of view is not biblical it is because I do not think it comports with the text of the bible. Martin how many times have I been told I do not understand calvinism and also been told that calvinism is the gospel. Am I expected to accept those comments without a reply?

Martin when you say you believe the bible I do not doubt that you do. I am just questioning how you understand what the bible says. The calvinist's require God to be deterministic but that is not the God of the bible so that is what I point out to you.

I have had a number of calvinst writers suggested to me as what I should read but from what I have seen on the boards if that is what they are teaching then I am not interested. As you may know I had never even heard of this C vs A fight until about ten years ago so it has just been the bible for me. It has served me well for over 60 years so why change.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

What do you expect me to do, agree with the calvinist point of view?

What I expect you to do is to treat other Christian views with respect, and to understand that "I just believe the Bible" is not an argument

When I say a calvinist point of view is not biblical it is because I do not think it comports with the text of the bible. Martin how many times have I been told I do not understand calvinism and also been told that calvinism is the gospel. Am I expected to accept those comments without a reply?

You are entitled to your view, but I am entitled to say that it is based on an ignorance of what Calvinism actually teaches. One of Bob Dylan's early songs ends with the line, "And I'll know my song well before I start singing." I commend that attitude to you.

Martin when you say you believe the bible I do not doubt that you do. I am just questioning how you understand what the bible says.

So do you see how pointless it is for you to keep saying, "I just believe the Bible"? You accept that I believe it; I accept that you believe it, so let's take that as a given and discuss where we differ on what the Bible teaches.

The calvinist's [sic] require God to be deterministic but that is not the God of the bible so that is what I point out to you.

You need to define for me what you mean by 'deterministic.' Is this passage deterministic? 'For truly against Your holy Servant Jesus, whom You anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the people of Israel, were gathered together to do whatever Your hand and Your purpose determined before to be done.' Or this one? 'The king's heart is in the hand of the LORD, like the rivers of water; He turns it wherever He wants.'

I have had a number of calvinst writers suggested to me as what I should read but from what I have seen on the boards if that is what they are teaching then I am not interested. As you may know I had never even heard of this C vs A fight until about ten years ago so it has just been the bible for me. It has served me well for over 60 years so why change.

This is an appallngly arrogant statement. So you are in a position to say that men like Tyndale, Bunyan, Whitefield, Spurgeon and others, not to mention great missionaries like Carey, Brainard, Judson, Paton and so forth didn't know or believe their Bibles, and therefore you don't need to read them? Really?[/QUOTE]