IF CALVINISM IS TRUE, WHY AREN'T ALL BELIEVERS CALVINISTIC?

Me too. This is actually why I started the thread, "If God wants all people to be saved, why does anyone perish?" I originally did it for fun, because watching the wacky responses here was fun. But that other thread has actually generated some fascinating responses that are fun in a different way -- it's amusing to watch the Pelagians wiggle and squirm when confronted with the obvious consequence of their doctrine -- that God is saying, "Here's what I want, but nevertheless, not my will but thine (man) be done." The Arminians and Pelagians are having a hard time swallowing that one -- and rightly so.

 

Well, let me ask you , Bob Ryan. Do you believe that a person is saved solely by grace thru faith apart from the law ?

If you say yes, how does that square with your denomination ? Is your denomination Arminian ?

If you say no, then what in tarnation are you doing here where both Calvinist and Arminian are agreed that the sinner is saved apart from the law and strictly by grace thru faith ?

I did not mind your being here until you started misrepresenting Calvinists with your post in another thread by quoting somebody who is obviously an Arminian creating a Calvinist scenario about heaven, you did not include the poster's name.

This is a forum on merits and demerits of what both sides believe, not a forum to malign the other side at all costs.

 

Yes, I was making a joke ... lighten up folks. I believe many arminians are saved, in spite of their doctrine and not becuase of it. I also believe many calvinists are saved. It was a joke ...

An extreme, unbending loyalty to Scripture.

Because 1) we do not know what the decreed will of God is in this matter. It may be his will that you change your position to come to the knowledge of the truth through this medium.

2) Because truth is important to defend.

Herein lies the crux of your theology. You are determining truth by what "seems to you." Go back and study how many arguments from the arminian side are built on this platform of human reason and logic. What you need to get past is what "seems to you" and embrace what God has actually said.

 

You missed the essence yet again. Just a hint ... no matter how many times you repeat this, it still will not be true for the vast majority of Calvinists. Give it up. We believe God loves the world.

 

Skandelon,
Haven't read through all the posts but wanted to comment on your first.

We are to Grow in our knowledge (2 Peter 3:18). We are not expected to understand everything about the Bible (Trinity, specific workings of God's plan in salvation, etc.). God even said the following about heresy:

For there must be. also heresies among you, that they which are approved. may be made manifest. among you. 1 Cor

God's plan is outlined in Rom. 8:29:
For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate [to be] conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

Although we are told to strive for correct doctrine our understanding is never perfect.
His plan "is" for us to be made perfect in doctrine but that time lies in the next life (rom. 8:29).

In Christ

 

i can't speak for why you do not, but I know for me, I had to come to the place where I didn't put my own mind and thinking ability above hte text of Scripture. As I have pointed out before, go back and read some of your posts and notice how many times you talk about how things seem to be, or what is logical, or something similar. There is certainly a place for logic, but in deference to Scripture, not the other way around.

I think it is result of the Holy Spirit's work in my own heart through a long struggle with these things about 10 years ago.

It is not of myself and I have nothing better than the rest of you.

To the first, perhaps God is working in your life to bring you to that point. God does not make a new man overnight, but sanctifies him through the experiences of life. As for why I try to convince you, if it might even be called that, God uses messengers of the truth to pass on his truth. No one is free from influence by teachers. But God brings teachers into people's lives in conjunction with his sovereign plan and the work of the Holy Spirit to mold their theology.

As for why he does it differently for different people, I don't have an answer beyond that of Moses ... that the secret things belong to God. He is God; he does whatever he pleases ... I don't really question that ... I submit to it and try to live each day in light of his truth.

 

I have not seen many here recently posting with arrogant assurance. I have seen a few come close, but I don't read every single thread so I don't know. My point is that your reading of the text is heavily influenced by what "seems right" to you. In fact, I pointed it out the other day in a question you never answered. In that thread, you plainly stated the fact. I believe that your handling of the text is inadequate to deal with both the near and larger contexts of Scripture.

Haven't read it.

I already answered that.

So, its of God?

I already answered that too.

I don't think it is a matter of success. I don't think God fails at anything. Scripture specifically mitigates against that, which is one of hte major theological problems with your position.

Wrong ... This is what I mean by you basing your position on logic and the human mind. This whole line of questioning is an attempt to get me to go beyond Scripture to satisfy your desire for it to conform to your way of thinking.

Because you don't use it in the same way. You use it to argue against the clear teaching of Scripture. This is not a matter on which Scripture has clearly revealed itself.

To question why God does what he does is, to me, arrogant confidence. God is God ... he doesn't have to explain himself to us. He has chosen to give us his word and we are to submit to it fully ... I think it is a dangerous road you are headed down with this type of questioning. But it is exactly what I talked about ... the elevation of the human mind to the position of arbiter of truth. You will believe it so long as you can understand it and it "seems right" to you. I don't think that is a good method of determining truth.

 

Someone said, ' . . . the elevation of the human mind to the position of arbiter of truth.'

Ray: Oh, I thought that Armnians and Calvinists both used their mind to try to understand truth; what mechanism do you use for understanding truth?

'You will believe it so long as you can understand it and it "seems right" to you'

Ray: I only believe what I have been guided to understand via the Spirit of God. [I John 2:27] My understanding of truth does not fall within the brackets of what 'seems right to me.'

'I don't think that is a good method of determining truth.'

Ray: Right. Use something else other than your mind and God's Word, the Bible comparing Scripture with Scripture and studying contextually. Just knock at the door of John Calvin; he will open the door through one of his surrogates.

 

The difference is that the mind has to be submitted to Scripture. What I have pointed out many times to you and others is that you base your doctrine on what seems right. You have done that with your idea that election is the result of belief. To this day, you have never supported that with anything but your own thinking. You have yet to show one verse of Scripture, and every time I ask you, you just ignore it.

The word of God clearly teaches unconditional election of individuals to salvation from before time. To deny it based on the fact that it doesn't seem fair for God to do it, or to claim that he is unjust to do that as you have done is to make your own mind the arbiter of truth.

When you compare Scripture with Scripture, your doctrine is soundly refuted by the words of God. You have never been able to support much of your teaching from Scripture and in the time you were away, that didn't change. You came back repeating the same stuff you left saying ...

To blame what you believe on the Spirit of God is dangerous. God has not led you to contradict his word. He has not led me to either. The point is that I cannot presume that my understnading is correct. You cannot either. The fact remains that your understanding is explicitly contradicted by God has said in his word.

The word of God is the arbiter of truth, and when it is properly understood in comparison with itself, the truth is made known to man. When people refuse to submit their minds to it is when the problems arise.

 

I already answered this several times, Skan. The answer is still "No, I can't explain it." That is the basic answer to all of your repeated questions above. My answer in the first post on this page was As for why he does it differently for different people, I don't have an answer beyond that of Moses ... that the secret things belong to God. He is God; he does whatever he pleases ... I don't really question that ... I submit to it and try to live each day in light of his truth. If you ask again, I will give you the same answer. You see, I don't have all the answers. And what doesn't make sense to me (as in this question), I let it stand. I don't try to force an interpretation on the text to fit my own mind.

But herein lies the problem. You haven't actually used Scripture to show problems. You have used Scripture read in light of what seems right to you. And that is my objection to your use of Scripture.

For instance, you bring up hardening again. I gave you answers before. My essential answer was I do not know how it all works out. I know that Scripture teaches that God hardens people. I know that Scripture teaches that man cannot respond to God apart from God's enablement. How exactly they fit together, I don't really know. I do not feel compelled to assert my own mental abilities to understand things that God has not revealed. You say that God doesn't harden people who can't respond anyway because that doesn't make sense. That is a textbook case of your asserting your mind over Scripture.

You are. There is no debate about that. God has commanded you to believe his word, not to explain it all.

Why??? Why "must" this be so? Does Scripture say this? Or are you asserting your mind as the arbiter of truth? I don't know that this is true at all. I think we all live in varying levels of submission to the Holy Spirit, oftening varying by the minute. That doesn't mean we deserve reward or praise. I guess if you wanted to push the issue, maybe there is something there, but I don't really see the point of that. We could apply your idea to any doctrine, such as bibliology or pnematology.

I have already thought about it and answered it, several times.

No, I think it is dangerous becuase it departs from Scripture that God has revealed into things God has not revealed. I think it is dangerous becuase it leads to questioning the justice of God, in direct disobedience to Rom 9-11, regardless of who you think is being referred to in those verses.

I haven't run from anything. I quit answering the same things time and time again. But every question you have asked I have given some sort of answer to. In many cases, you didn't like the answer. That is fine; it really is. But don't pretend like I ran. I simply got tired of answering the same old stuff time and time again. My attempt at answers are all there somewhere.

My doctrine doesn't belong to me. To the satisfcation of my conscience, I have reconciled it with God. If you differ, than that is for you to decide. I am not scared of "inconsistency." My goal is not perfect consistency. My goal is loyalty to God's word. I do believe your doctrine is grossly inconsistent. I think you are overlooking many hard passages because you don't want to deal with them. But I have dealt with all of your passages at one time or another and you know it. To accuse me of a smokescreen is simply inappropriate. You know better.

 

Here is the link to the question you didn't respond to.

http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/35/1124.html

 

Skandelon said
I agree. God does "use" messengers as a means to accomplish his ends, but the fact that these chosen "means" fail in many cases to convince Arminians only goes to show that they are apparently NOT sovereign means, but means that are dependant upon the RESPONSE of men. Right? In other words, God apparently doesn't irresistably call men to Calvinism, but yet you believe He irresistably calls them to salvation, which leads me to the question as to WHY NOT go all the way and call men irresistably to correct doctrine? Why leave doctrine as a response of men's will when salvation wasn't left up to them? And what causes certain men to believe true doctrine and other false doctrine?

Same reason can be asked regarding sanctification. Why does God leave us not fully holy? Is it because we have free-will and He won't interfere to make us more holy? How come when we die we become instantly perfect? Is it not the case that our regenerated will would GLADLY be perfectly holy now, but God has chosen to bring us there by degrees?

Likewise with our understanding of His truth. We - our new man - would all gladly know fully as we are known - but God has chosen to bring us home in various degrees of enlightenment. We bear the responsibility for any sinful neglect of His word, but enlightenment is entirely of Him.

So our understanding IS sovereignly appointed - to be partial now, and to be perfect then. We are NOT free to be as unholy as our old man wishes, nor as ignorant as he wishes, for God moves in us to will and do for His good pleasure, Phil.2:13.

What causes some to hold to error and others not? Plain ignorance for some. Sinful pride for others. Sinful lusts also. But if God chooses to humble a proud spirit, or free a lustful one, or make wise an ignorant one - then it WILL happen. That one's will WILL be changed, their mind enlightened. Happens all the time.

BTW, Wesley's life is open to serious moral question and Billy Graham has compromised the gospel repeated with Rome, so better examples of good Arminians need to be found.

In Him

Ian