Calvinism - TULIP - "T"otal Depravity

At times sky you remind me of a dog I use to have. He hopelessly chased his tail around and a round.

Last week you were saying things like...all calvinist are crazy because they believe in Lordship salvation where one SHOWS they are committed in following Christ. This week its you calvinist just sit there in the pews and do nothing and are not committed. What will it be next week sky? Back to LS? Mix in a few quotes by the great "Rogers" and you can about sum up your posting.

Just face it....it is your hate that drives you sky. So much so, that you fail to see the poor logic you use.

 

You thereby refuse to answer two of the thorniest issues for Calvinism as a credible, biblical system of theology.

Claim "total depravity" all that you want and then take it back when denying that man is "as bad as he can be." He's either "TOTALLY depraved" or he's not. Either every baby who dies goes directly to hell or your "sin nature" paradigm is "busted!" There are no other answers for their salvation in scripture.

But you've gotta love how Calvies squirm when their tenets are put to the real test! :laugh:

skypair

 

oh brothers:BangHead:

and around and around with that tail we go.

 

Do you hate false preaching like Jesus did, James? The test of truth is can it be found to be biblically in error, is it not? The test of truth is whether it REVEALS God or hides God ... and I don't find it biblically satisfying that Calvinism doesn't know how God chooses whom He does to salvation when God Himself tells us how He does so. To me, you're preaching a false theology.

I don't find it the least bit scriptural either to say that God is unresponsive to men's prayers (God doesn't "change the outcome" when we repent as in "the sinner's prayer"). Yet your current spokesperson, RC Sproul, says "Prayer changes your mind, not God's."

Calvinism does not even have a suitable, biblical paradigm for God. Tell me that that would not be false teaching if found in another's system of theology.

Yes, I hate that men say they are "elect" rather than saying they are "saved" -- "chosen by God" rather than "chose God." The former presumes that, since we are "regenerated" in spirit, we just "reform" our walk and we are assured of heaven. And that is the "commitment" they make, to "works," which is why you can't understand my aversion to their LS at the same time I decry their "passive salvation." If you are going to just assume your regeneration/salvation and move on into works, you are, indeed, missing the biblical gospel. And that would be false teaching, too, right?

skypair

 

It seems then that you do agree with me that it is your hate that drives your theology. What you fail to see, is that that hate blinds you from truth, and in the end you post folly.

RC who?
RC is not my spokesman. Please show me one post where I have quoted Sproul and for each time I have quoted Sproul I will give you 100 quotes by you from Rogers. I'm not sure I have ever quoted Sproul on the BB, nor have a met him, nor have I ever read a book by him. He has no idea who I am, so how could he speak for me?

Having said that, going by what you just said Sproul said, and this would be subject to the truth of what he says, I would agree with Sproul.

Sky, believe you me you do not want a God that changes. Prayer changes mens hearts not Gods.

.
why in the world would you claim this sky????

You have yet to prove it exist. Once you do this we will talk.

Yes...it is clear you do hate. You feel it is your dety to help out God here, for Calvinist are saying things that do not line up with your doctrine. Its your doctrine sky, not Gods. Debate of the truths can build a strong faith on both sides. But when driven by hate, you loss you logic and show your flesh. You anger shines greater then you points you try to make.

And this is why you live in hate. You will not listen to others. You are so sure Calvinist are wrong because "rogers" told you so, that you will not listen to what they have to say. How many times has it been told to you that election and being "saved" are not the same? And yet you keep posting this junk, so it is clear you never listen.

Like it or not sky, if you are a believer you are "the elect", no matter what "rogers" said. However, "the elect" is a group. "Election" is a action. This action is done by God before you were born.

Now it is true that after the action of election, that person that God has chosen will come to God and be saved, for the work of God never ever fails.

Again ...how many times has someone told you that Calvinist believe a person must believe???? Remember you fight over LS??? Remember the word repent that Calvinist use??? Now would be a good time to drop the hate and listen.

You are right about one thing. I do not understand your logic when it comes to LS.

Again regeneration is not the same as salvation under the Calvinist model. Please take the time to learn the systems before making an argument. The regeneration/salvation idea belongs to the free-will system not Calvinism. Maybe this is why you just don't get it. You are mixing terms between systems.

Drop the hate sky. Trust me on this one.

 

Mine is no more "blind hate" than Jesus' was.

Apparently he does speak for you and Calvinism then. You really ought to read some of his work, James.

As do you. Yet you claim out of love, not hate. Well, we both know what it is in some degree. Unless we serve the Truth, it is pride, right?

Only if it discovers common truth. It never builds strong, rational faith in the one who is pursuing a lie at all costs.

Election means the salvation decision was made eons ago and can never fail, even for the deceased infant who has no capacity to believe. Far as I can tell, Calvinism came up with this scheme so they could baptize the elect of original sin and assurre their parents of them going to heaven -- just like the Catholic tradition from whence the some of the Reformers' doctrines came (The Protestant Reformation was really just The Protestant Revision of Catholicism in many ways).

Lordship Salvation means what the words say. If Jesus is not your Lord, you are not saved. Good so far. But how is one to prove He is Lord? Not by calling upon Him in a repentant sinner's prayer -- not by choosing Him -- but by the reformed "Catholic works" program of a new lifestyle.

And again, the Bible doesn't allow the Calvinist definition. In Mt 19:28, regeneration is the event of the resurrection with Christ. NO one is resurrected before they are called as Calvinism describes it, friend. In Titus 3:5, Christ "saved us" (past tense) by regenerating us in spiritual baptism/resurrection (cf. 1Cor 15:29) from our dead souls. But first WE have to die to self-spirit/self-will -- lay down our own lives in repentance before we can be resurrected in regeneration.

I know your intentions are good, James. I don't hate you. It's the unintended consequences of your theology that is the problem because it is inaccurate in so many ways and, therefore, divisive.

And as I have just demonstrated, the free will is the biblical truth. The Calvinist model is deceptive in that 1) biblical regeneration is concurrent with salvation, not with understanding spiritual truth/the word of God, and 2) it is definitely not before repentance unto salvation. REgeneration is new birth -- born again. There is no instance of spontaneous (causeless) regeneration in scripture yet you maintain that the lost "elect" person is spontaneously "regenerated" to hear the "effacacious call" to be "born again"/saved. Did you follow that? Unless regeneration = salvation, the Calvinist has the born again being born again -- the resurrected being resurrected again.

Surely if we are to "sharpen each other's faith," as you say, we need first to have common biblical definitions to work with. Election is clearly not unto salvation in scripture. In the scriptures, God chooses/elects individuals and groups (even Pharoah, right?) unto HIS own purposes. And regeneration is NOT the same as conviction of sin and revelation of the gospel that the scriptures say leads to salvation, but is, instead, the result of our response to these if we repent. There are more but I pray for you because only the Holy Spirit can reveal these things to you. I am not nor is anyone here, apparently, adequate to the task of removing the scales from your eyes. Like Rogers said, "God's Bible + Satan's dictionary = apostacy."

It is clearly why one of us "doesn't get it." :tear: I would simply ask, "Who is defining your terms, James?"

skypair

 

Sky, Jesus had full understanding and was not blinded from the truth. He is the way the truth and the light. This is yet another example of allowing your hate to blind you logic. I’m sure you did not mean to say such a silly thing.

Sky, see you did not listen. RC does not know me. Really he does not. Stop guessing and listen. How can RC speak for me, if he has never met me? He can’t.

My duty is to believe the truth no matter who disagrees with me. Hate should never be a part of your doctrine, because then the truth will be shaded my the hate.

We do not have to agree to become stronger in our faith. And who is pursuing a lie? Or this this yet another slam about my salvation?

Maybe it does to you, but this is not the Calvinism model. How will you ever learn what a Calvinist believes if you can’t get this simple truth down. I alone have told you many times what Calvinist believe. You need to write this stuff down.

,

I agree with this. It was God that made that decistion eons ago. I’m glad you said…”it can never fail. If God loved Cain the way He love John, then Gods love failed. So it is clear God did not love each man the same.

If this be true…and you have yet to prove it true, even after all these years, then this is pure Calvinistic election. The baby had no choice…no free-will….but God saved them based on his own will “who has no capacity to believe.”

Now this is a interesting way to approach history. Guess at it. Maybe you should read a history book or something because this guessing game is not working for ya.

j

Catholics are Synergists just as you are. Please read this..

Not really. Reformers were reforming the RCC church. Later some wanted to go part way back. This group that wanted to go part way back toward the RCC is your group. Read a history book.

That is the stranges statement you have posted in a while.

I rest my case. You do not understand LS. Calvinist do not hold to antinomianism found in the easy-believes of free-willers.

You have been given verses to support this view many times. If you do not write them down don’t blame me.

The Bible

 

I pretty much understand the underlying theory, jd. But here's the fault --- those "good" acts/"eggs" are themselves responses to God consciousness. We, everyone of us, act "good" from our limited knowledge of God.

If we are able to respond to God in those ways, then it is clear 1) that we do have a free will and 2) that, perceiving the gospel truth plainly preached, we are capable responding to it as well (per Rom 10:14).

And let's be honest and truthful --- we don't have to know all spiritual truth in order to become saved. Just as in the case of our time-to-time good acts, one key concept (the gospel) and our obedient response to it is all that is required. That is what creates the "spiritual man" we see in 1Cor 2 (which is a good study of the whole process, BTW. Paul is telling them that until they believed the gospel (2:5-6), the mysteries and "hidden wisdom" of God were just as hidden from them as from the world!

So let's just take an example of a godly concept that even a lost person can respond to -- fairness. Fairness is part of our conscience from early on. It is not a saving concept -- just a revelation of God to us. When we treat people fairly, we do a godly thing. When we treat them unfairly, it is an sinful thing and we soon find out about it because of God's wrath.

skypair

 

Perhaps you have heard the saying "Hate the sin but love the sinner." That's what is in play here.

Sure, one grows stronger in true faith and one in false faith. That is, one becomes closer to "the knowledge and faith of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:" (Eph 4:13) and the other becomes that much more shrouded in darkness.

I guess that since you next remark ("I agree with this.") that I got it right that you don't mean I need to study the Calvinist model anymore, right?

Well, I'm sure it's true that Calvinists teach this. They even go so far as to ascribe their salvation to "God knows who would have believed." :laugh: The whole "shuck and jive" is worthy of God's wrath.

Calvin and his mentor, Augustine, both believed baptism cleansed of "original sin" unto salvation of the "elect" (who were basically the children of Calvinists).

At what point do Calvinists become "synergists" and start earning their crowns? and start believing that God is "the rewarder of them which diligently seek Him?" (Heb 11:6)

Calvin, it's obvious from "The Institutes," wanted to go back, alright -- the Augustine of Hippo but not all the way back to Jesus of Nazareth and His Apostles. That's where most of the Reformed theology was derived from -- Augustinian "tradition," not scripture, per se.

I really think you need to concentrate on having good defintions for "election," "regenerated," "foreknowledge," "sin nature," etc. -- terms you are now avoiding responding to. I believe that if you had a good biblical knowledge of these, you would see right away that Calvinism couldn't bring you to "the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ."

skypair

 

Hi, rip. You still don't "understand" us, do you? OF COURSE the Lord foreknows "those who are His." I'm not even disagreeing with you. :type:

So it would amaze you if I knew more than Calvin??? I "understand" Calvin just fine. That is why I reject him.

OK, let's get serious -- "mano-a-mano." What are your definitions of "election," "regenerated," "foreknowledge," "sin nature," etc. To you, "election" means "chosen of God" but to salvation, not to purpose. Where do you find that?

"Regenerated" means "given spiritual ability" vs. Mt 19:28, "the resurrection."

"Foreknowledge" means "foreordained" vs. "foreseen."

"Sin nature" means, to you, "born dead in sin" whereas I say it means we are born with "fleshly instincts."

Your turn. :laugh: Can you handle the Truth?

skypair

 

Reformation Arminianism & total depravity

Reformation Arminianism affirms total depravity. Human beings since Adam and Eve are born in sin, preferring evil to good. They are all in willful rebellion against God and unable to change. Being by nature depraved human beings, no one is able, no one can, no one will respond to the gospel offer in faith. Left alone, no person would ever accept Christ.
Arminians acknowledging the need for a work of grace within the sinner that enables the sinner to exercise faith and be saved. Rather than regeneration this work is what Arminius called "prevenient" or "preventing" grace. This grace precedes faith.
JS​

 

We are totally depraved in every sense of the word depravity and indeed we have the very real potential to act out that depravity apart from the common grace gifts of God with the institution of government-law and it's imposed morality and violation reprisals for the sake of domestic tranquility.

Also the Spirit of God is in the world reproving and restraining sin (which restraint appears to be dwindling).

Some even go a step further and refine their morality with religion.

However, morality no matter how good, as we all know, is not the key to the door of heaven.

A high and refined morality is also used in self deception in religion as a substitute for the "righteousness of God". The word Jesus used was "hypocrite" which in its basic semantic means a "mask wearer"

Genesis 6:5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.​

Genesis 8:21 And the LORD smelled a sweet savour; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done.​

John 1:29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.​

1 John 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

1 John 4:10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.


HankD​

 

Hi, John -- and Welcome to BB! :wavey:

The problem with your analysis is that this is more than just a Calvinist vs. Armenian debate. The biblical view is that men are born a) innocent but b) instinctively "fleshly" -- and "fleshly" is in direct competition with "godly." Man will ALWAYS and NATURALLY yield to the flesh rather than to God. It's built in just like in ducklings who instinctively follow the "mother-figure" that first presents itself! Do you see the difference between this and "being a sinner"/"sin guilt?"

I "see" the "prevenient grace" argument but it is sad that it has to be "couched" in those terms. Why not just say that the Holy Spirit presents His "case" for Jesus and EVERYONE has the opportunity to respond intellectually, emotionally, and -- most importantly -- willfully to the gospel (whether it be "everlasting gospel," "gospel of the kingdom," or "gospel of Jesus Christ")?

skypair

 

That's a good testimony to what I call the "7 eyes/7 horns" of the Lamb, Rev 5:6 that God "sent forth into all the world." "Common grace gifts," as you call them, are the testimony to ALL generations of ALL men through innocence, conscience, family, human government, law, kingdom, and the Spirit that there is a God Who orders all things and to Whom we must answer! Do you see how easy it is to find God? Not at all like the Calvies say -- that you must be "regenerated" to see Him. But if they would read Rom 1:19-20 or Rom 2:14, they would know better than to make silly claims.

skypair

 

I agree man is corrupt and undeserving of Salvation but to claim man is unable based on a few verses that never state that all men are unable is stretching it a bit far. The only possible inability that I see is man's ignorance of God. Which is why we have been commanded to preach the gospel to the whole world.
The Bible clearly says that the gentiles will hear the gospel;
Act 28:28 Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it.

So the inability of fallen man is proven to not be true as Calvinist claim it is.
MB

 

Personally, I claim neither the writings of calvin or arminius as my guide.

However there is a Scripture written that appears to clearly teach that there is an enlightment which every man (anthropos) has been given:

John 1;9
That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

This also is a gift of grace and it is to every man.


HankD