Calvinism Critiqued by a Former Calvinist

And this is what leads to the problem of objectively considering all sides of an issue. What happens is that a Calvinists (especially a younger less educated one) thinks he understands "Arminian" views but really only understand something like the "foresight of faith" explanation and then dismisses it as being false. Then they become so entrenched in their view they can't objectively consider anything else. It's like the quote in my sig says:

“The moment we want to believe something, we suddenly see all the arguments for it, and become blind to the arguments against it.” - George Bernard Shaw

The problem is that MANY Calvinists haven't ever objectively considered the true scholarly Arminian perspective and MOST can't fairly articulate it thus proving to me they are not giving it a fair hearing and a just consideration.

But you won't hear the scholarly explanations of the Arminian perspective...you just hear the "easy believism" and "seeker sensitive" crap that has pushed many toward the extreme of Calvinism.

And I'm fine with that if I feel my view has at least been understood and objectively considered. I rarely feel that here.

I couldn't agree more! :thumbsup:

 

When Jbh speaks of choice, it is deflection and misdirection away from the real issue. The issue is not whether the unelect will choose sin, that is a given (actually a circular argument), the real issue or question is WHY the unelect will always choose sin.

The answer to that is that he believes man is born a sinner with a depraved nature. Although no man made this choice, it was imposed upon him the moment he was conceived, Jbh falsely and unjustly blames the man for doing the only thing he can possibly do. He simply looks at the choice made by the depraved sinner, ignoring the CAUSE of this depravity that influenced the choice.

In the Calvinist view, man is like a robot that is hardwired by it's creator to always choose A. You may offer unlimited choices, A, B, C, D... but the robot will always choose A. But the Calvinist will look away from the cause of this choice and misdirect others to simply look at the choice made by the robot.

Your video was not accurate, in that the man had only one choice. They will deny this. No, the Calvinist will say you had two options but you chose A. This is where they stop. The Calvinist will ignore that a man was hardwired to always choose A by God (in the Calvinist view).

 

[

That is their free moral will being exercised!

bible teaches that ALL are dead in Adam, ALL are sinners, ALL have fallen short of glory of God, NONE rightousness, NONE seek after God, but instead create and worships gods of their own making!

We are fallen, sinners whost natural 'bent" is to worship ourselves, NOT God.... We make up fale gods and false religion, and have saved by good works, to appease ourselves, keep us as "God"

Your video was not accurate, in that the man had only one choice. They will deny this. No, the Calvinist will say you had two options but you chose A. This is where they stop. The Calvinist will ignore that a man was hardwired to always choose A by God (in the Calvinist view).[/QUOTE]

Having a good time bashing your Straw man Cal stick figure yet?

 

Jf, you confirm what I said, you focus on the choice, and not what caused the depravity that influenced the choice.

You believe you were born a sinner hardwired to choose against God don't you? Then how can you be responsible for doing the only thing you can do?

Explain that to me, how can a person be responsible for doing the only thing he can do?

 

No, I have not listened to the Auburn Ave messages, but I would be willing to listen to them. (or read them in written form)

Do you have a link? If so I'll check them out.

 

It is very dangerous.....I have the sermons on my home computer...but am on the road now...start here...
http://flockalert.wordpress.com/2009/06/19/what-is-the-federal-vision-is-it-heresy/

http://reformedonline.com/view/reformedonline/A Refutation of the Auburn Avenue Theology.htm

 

It is dangerous. These also deny the fact that repentance is necessary for salvation. They need to, in so doing, and in their denying Biblical revelation, count the cost of their error.

Anyone denying repentance necessary for salvation is in error.

 

Out of curiosity.....what is the alternative to Doctrines of Grace? Is it free willism? So you can do as you please cause there are no parameters on you....God just steps back and allows his children to frollick in corrupting sin & from that your to see your sins & come to faith & repentance?

 

Luk 15:13 And not many days after the younger son gathered all together, and took his journey into a far country, and there wasted his substance with riotous living.
14 And when he had spent all, there arose a mighty famine in that land; and he began to be in want.
15 And he went and joined himself to a citizen of that country; and he sent him into his fields to feed swine.
16 And he would fain have filled his belly with the husks that the swine did eat: and no man gave to him.
17 And when he came to himself, he said, How many hired servants of my father's have bread enough and to spare, and I perish with hunger!
18 I will arise and go to my father, and will say unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before thee,

Sin sure brought this fellow to repentance. And God did not compel him to repent. He came to himself, he realized sin had ruined him. He had hit rock bottom.

Sinners are not unable to recognize their lost state and recognize God offers what is better as many here falsely teach. Jesus himself showed this.

 

Sin did not bring this fellow back....rather depravity, starvation & humiliation did that & I'm not saying that thats a bad thing. The Lord has various ways to bring his children back.

But I am thankful for being awakened for without that active push, I and many like me would not know the glory of Gods love.....kinda like falling off a horse or scales falling from your eyes so that you can finally see:thumbs:

Praise God from whom all blessings flow. Thanks for the GRACE!

 

What push? This fellow's shame, humiliation, and poverty were the natural consequences of his actions. He spent all his money, God did not take it from him.

But more importantly, Jesus shows that a natural man can be aware of his lost state and desire to repent of it. It says he "came to himself".

Those who say a man is so depraved he cannot repent are in error.

 

Iconoclast...

I read the material refered to as the "Auburn Avenue doctrine" in your link. I agree completely with you that what I read there is extrememly dangerous teaching.

But that Auburn Avenue material is very much different then what I have been exposed to up until now from those associated with the NPP. could it be that the Auburn Avenue material does not represent the NPP views accuratly?

 

No...it is accurate...I heard the original messages.....I will try and find them for you....it is like roman catholic theology...we work for justification and sanctification!

 

But in your Free Will Belief system, God can change his mind & relegate the guy to hell where he belongs for being a greedy self indulgent fool. After all, God should be able to have the same will you do, right? Therefore your saying God, like us is capricious.

 

Where did this come from? I didn't say anything about God.

 

You quoted a parable by Jesus as a proof text to disavow a doctrine. Correct?

 

Yes, I quoted the parable of the prodigal son that refutes a doctrine of Calvinism.

So what? What is your point?

 

Youve already made my point ....though I'd doubt you would see it.:smilewinkgrin: