1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Featured False accusations.

Discussion in 'Calvinism & Arminianism Debate' started by 37818, May 1, 2021.

  1. 37818

    37818 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2018
    Messages:
    6,358
    Likes Received:
    536
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Calvinism, Arminianism and other.
    When false accusations are made, meaning accusing the other side of believing what the other side does not believe, it never persuades.

    Each of us comes to our own points of view for reasons. The reasons may not be good reasons to another person.

    Common ground. The written word of God should be our common ground.

    The points of disagreement are more than the 5 points of the TULIP.

    1 Corinthians 1:10 , "Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment."

    No one believer can fix this or make obedience to this insruction to be followed.

    Think. Do you really think the other fellow really sets out to believe what is false?

    There is how we know what we know comes before what we know.

    How we understand words.
    Who we believe.
    The logic we use.

    How can we frame what one believes over against the other person we disagree with without accusing that person of believing something that person does not believe?
     
    #1 37818, May 1, 2021
    Last edited: May 1, 2021
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. MB

    MB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2006
    Messages:
    5,897
    Likes Received:
    237
    Faith:
    Baptist
    IMO it's hypocritical
    MB
     
  3. 37818

    37818 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2018
    Messages:
    6,358
    Likes Received:
    536
    Faith:
    Baptist
    How do we frame what we believe over against the other person we disagree with without accusing that person of believing something that person does not believe?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. utilyan

    utilyan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2016
    Messages:
    5,068
    Likes Received:
    287
    They don’t call the devil “accuser” for no reason.

    Blaming finger-pointing and fault finding is the core of every sin.

    one can tell that attitude-spirit to take a break.
     
  5. RighteousnessTemperance&

    RighteousnessTemperance& Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2017
    Messages:
    5,389
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    Faith:
    Baptist
    If you back it up to this point and find irreconcilable differences, then how do you proceed further? There is little basis to talk about what the other person believes, unless you first adopt his methods, definitions, and terminology. And if you don't do that, that is, accept his terms, then won't what you say about his beliefs essentially be a lie?

    But if you understand the problem that well, then you should see that the impasse is just that. That's the way I see it.:Wink
     
  6. utilyan

    utilyan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2016
    Messages:
    5,068
    Likes Received:
    287
    You could do the opposite.
    Argue the opposite in the best possible light and make a case stronger than what they had in mind.

    like if your not a Calvinist be a Calvinist for one day and floor it with the best possible argument. Don’t vilify and fix it best way possible.
     
  7. 37818

    37818 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2018
    Messages:
    6,358
    Likes Received:
    536
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Depends what the issue is. What different presuppositions are being made.

    One needs to be able to understand the other view correctly. To either be able to change one's own view or if the view one holds is actually correct to maybe help the other part at the very least understand one's view. But that does not mean the other person will even consider it

    If the terms simply disallow what is true then what? Change what is actually true for what is not true?
    Well one cannot think for the other party. And there maybe some presuppositions the other party holds which is another issue which needs to be dealt with first. Cannot argue against what is not known.
     
  8. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    21,024
    Likes Received:
    2,398
    Faith:
    Baptist
    It is always better to let the other person define (and defend) their beliefs instead of assigning to them a view you hold of their positions. This has been a consistent issue on the BB - especially in this section.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. AustinC

    AustinC Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2020
    Messages:
    3,601
    Likes Received:
    730
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Often, I find that people refuse to follow their assertions to their ultimate conclusion. Instead they make an assertion, thinking it resolves problems, but they just haven't considered the implications. When confronted with the need to consider the implications, they refuse and instead the double down on their faulty assertion.
     
  10. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    21,024
    Likes Received:
    2,398
    Faith:
    Baptist
    True, but given most of the topics here it can be more complicated (in applying human logic to some doctrines, particularly that concerning issues of two different types of beings or wills....i.e., human and divine).

    For example, the logical conclusion of divine predestination is human choice has no consequence and no responsibility can be ascribed to man (as God nd not man determined what man will do). BUT the logical conclusion of free-will theology is that man's decision is the crux of man's salvation. Both (of the "logical conclusions") are ultimately unbiblical.

    Another example is the logical conclusion of a man stepping out onto water is that the man will sink (given the density of water compared to the human body trying to walk or stand upright on the water, the man has to sink).

    That said, these "logical conclusions" cannot just be dismissed or overlooked (which is often the case). They pose legitimate challenges, not necessarily challenges that prove the inverse or negate the "illogical position", but definitely challenges that need to be considered and addressed.
     
  11. 37818

    37818 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2018
    Messages:
    6,358
    Likes Received:
    536
    Faith:
    Baptist
    And what if two different logical conclusions are being looked at. A mere general redemption versus a general redemption where a particuar redemption is part of the general redemption. Not the same.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. RighteousnessTemperance&

    RighteousnessTemperance& Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2017
    Messages:
    5,389
    Likes Received:
    1,038
    Faith:
    Baptist
    My own general conclusion from these discussions is that there is an impasse.

    In part this is due to differing definitions that make the arguments either impossible or not worth pursuing. In other cases, the arguments depend on heavily weighting evidence that seems dubious or much less weighty.

    I'm not interested in trying to untie the resultant Gordian knot, and taking a sword to it won't satisfy a great many others.:Wink
     
  13. MB

    MB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2006
    Messages:
    5,897
    Likes Received:
    237
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Invitation requires choice.It also means it a free choice sense it is not a demand.
    Mat 11:28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
    Mat 11:29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.
    Mat 11:30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.
    MB
     
  14. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    21,024
    Likes Received:
    2,398
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I absolutely agree with the passages you provide. But I never really had an issue believing salvation is a choice and something under the sole jurisdiction of God (accepting biblical divine predestination and human free will is not something I view as problematic).

    But others do need to at least minimalize some teachings to emphasize others (they stumble on one or another doctrine because they cannot reconcile both with their reasoning).

    In doing so they often misrepresent opposing positions.
     
  15. AustinC

    AustinC Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2020
    Messages:
    3,601
    Likes Received:
    730
    Faith:
    Baptist
    General redemption is universal atonement, which is universalism.
    Go ahead and argue for universalism.
    The problem is that people arguing for general redemption refuse to recognize and acknowledge they are indeed arguing for universalism.
    So, to claim particular redemption falls within general redemption is simply redundant.
     
  16. 37818

    37818 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2018
    Messages:
    6,358
    Likes Received:
    536
    Faith:
    Baptist
    While it is true Universalism uses general redemption as an excuse for it's claim. It is an intellectually dishonesty to accuses Christians who do not believe in Universalism of that error because they believe in a general.unlimied atonement. My view, I hold particular redemption is part of the general redemption an so cannot be Universalism.
     
  17. 37818

    37818 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2018
    Messages:
    6,358
    Likes Received:
    536
    Faith:
    Baptist
  18. AustinC

    AustinC Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2020
    Messages:
    3,601
    Likes Received:
    730
    Faith:
    Baptist
    You refuse to follow your view to its conclusion, which is universalism. Therefore, you are either being intellectually dishonest or unwilling to honestly look at your position.
     
  19. AustinC

    AustinC Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2020
    Messages:
    3,601
    Likes Received:
    730
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Ryrie's question beggs itself.

    Berkhof asks the correct question.
    I am amazed how semi-pelagians, like Ryrie, refused to accept the clear conclusions of scripture and instead seek a circular question that will result in what they want the Bible to convey, not what it actually conveys. Dispensationalism is inherently dishonest in its hoop jumping to make the Bible fit into its tortured models.
    Your website shows us that tortured attempt to try avoid the logical outcome of it's assertions, which is indeed universalism.

    I encourage you to throw out such dependence upon a secondary source filled with false assertions and actually go read your Bible. You will be amazed what the Bible actually teaches regarding whom Jesus shed blood actually redeems.
     
  20. 37818

    37818 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2018
    Messages:
    6,358
    Likes Received:
    536
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Your arguments make no sense. Since I reject Universalism. And you cannot be reasoned with. It must only be according to your view.

    How do you think one's name is gotten into the book of life? The only promise is one's name to never be removed, Revelation 3:5. 1 John 5:4-5.
     
Loading...