Really. So if a person rejects Christ today, they are non-elect? Couldn't they be saved a year from now even though they rejected Christ? How do you tell who isn't the elect while they are still living on earth?
t
The answer is no you cannot. Nobody knows who the elect are and who the non elect are.(yes, we know that a believer is elect) That's why we must tell all the gospel and let God do the rest. You can tell them that if they believe, they will be saved. No Calvinist would deny that. (ok...well except for hypers)
Do you purposefully misrepresent, or are just just continually mistaken. Calvinist already on here(meaning this thread) have said they don't believe that God has only chosen a "few." Do you believe God has chosen a "few"? I'm assuming you believe in election(conditional).
That's not true.
I honestly think that the reason many are not already Calvinists is because they don't really know what Calvinism is.
I know that was true for me.
I think this statement is evidence that it is true for Amy.
Calvinists believe the Bible when it says that around the throne there will be
a multitude which no man can number out of every kindred and tongue.
There will be a vast ocean of redeemed humanity forever glorifying the lamb for his infinite love and his indescribable grace displayed at Calvary.
But this is still called a "few" by the Lord Jesus.
Did you know that the Sword prints Spurgeon sermons but edits out all the Calvinistic content???
Is that not absolutely AMAZING?
I met a guy who was Free Will Baptist then Independent Baptist.
He wanted his pastor to adv ise him on some good reading material.
His pastor was not a Calvinist and did not know that Spurgeon was a Calvinist but loved to read his sermons in the Sword so he told the guy that he cannot go wrong with Spurgeon.
The guy, following his Arminian pastor's advice started reading Spurgeon and BECAME A CALVINIST!
Um, I didn't read the whole board, but this is exactly what Spurgeon did. And I am betting his evangelistic efforts were more effective than yours...
However, I do not do this, most of the time, because Jesus didn't, nor did the apostles. Both Jesus and Paul taught this doctrine to believers. They did not proclaim it on the streets, simply because it is a doctrine only the regenerate can understand and appreciate.
AHHHH so your the one incharge of deciding who's works are greater than anothers.
Good to know, but something tells me if you are doing what God is telling you to do then there is no one who's works are greater.
May I suggest, try following the Lord and not a famous person.
There are blessings that you can not get any other way.
Ian Paisley is awesome. Calling the Pope the Antichrist takes a LOT of guts. I met him in person years ago when he came to our former church to preach at a tent meeting. Northern Ireland was lucky to have such a good Christian man in their government for so many years.
I have many of his sermons downloaded from SERMONAUDIO.COM. What an awesome website!
urr I'm wary of stating online where exactly I'm from, (that's why I just generalize and say Ontario) not because I don't trust YOU in particular but any Tom, Dick or Harry on the internet could search these forums. I don't even say where I'm from on my Facebook, lol. I guess I'm paranoid - I don't trust inturwebz privacy :p I usually only tell ppl stuff like that through PM's or e-mail.
How disingenuous. The question addressed specifically why no Calvinists evangelized this way. I was giving an example of one. It is very dishonest of you to try and repaint my response, as if I was following a man.
I agree we should follow God, and His word, and not a man. So when the scriptures say that none can come, unless given by God, we should trust it, instead of following men (Arminius, Pelagius) and adding "free will" into texts that say nothing about it. When the scriptures say faith is "given" by God in exact measure, we should accept it, and follow it, instead of the doctrine of men who would try to change it into a "choice" or a "prayer."
I have told you I am not an Arminian as defined.
I don't believe God looks through the corridors of time to see who would be saved...I don't believe man can lose his salvation, yet you deliberately and blatantly dismiss it and still choose to call me an Arminian.
That was not a drive by post, it was a reminder as this has not been the first time you have heard this from someone who refers to themselves as a "non cal".
Would you like me to refer to you as a Roman Catholic from now on since you share the belief of Augustinian original sin, the virgin birth and the Trinity...and then when you tell me you are not a Roman Catholic I then refer to you as a "Roman Catholic who likes to call himself other things"?
Well, there are three camps from what I know...maybe there are more.
There is the understanding that the elect were chosen FOR salvation.
There is the understanding that the elect are those who have believed.
There is the understanding the elect are jewish believers, "true" Israel ("not all Israel is Israel")
We have talked about this and you tried to distinguish yourself form Arminism and failed except in one point- eternal security, which BTW Arminius may have believed as well.
You do not believe in Total Depravity- in fact you are actually left of Arminius here closer to Pelagius the only distinguishing factor being that you do believe that men are born with a sin nature.
Arminius believed in Total Depravity basically like Calvinists.
You do not believe in unconditional election- how do you believe God elects?
You do not believe in Particular Redemption- you believe what Arminians believe about this.
You do not believe in Irresistable Grace-
You do believe in a form of Perseverance of the Saints.
That makes you about four fifths Arminian.
It kind of just makes you an inconsistent Arminian.