Non-Calvinists: Best argument?

The problem with that is that we are ALL in rebellion before salvation. So how is it that some are saved?

 

That answer to this question proves how good a person's theology is. I know that my statement appears controversial. Perhaps it is.

 

The Jewish culture taught and the Bible teaches that God created everything. We as Americans tend to follow a Greek philosophy of compartmentalizing everything seperate from each other. The Jews did not do that. They viewed God as being involved in everything. The Jews saw everything much as a circle with everything inside of it. The Greeks saw things much like a number of compartments seperate from each other. in one of the compartments is God and another box held something else.

The best argument against Calvinism is that it is idolatry to focus on Calvin. The Bible teaches to focus on Christ the author and perfecter of our faith. I am a Christian, not a Calvinist or Moony or any other idol worshiper.

 

The Bible teaches that salvation is found only in Christ and those who call on the name of the Lord will be saved.

 

Exactly, and calling on the name of the Lord implies free will does it not?

 

Just about as much as saying that anyone who runs faster faster than the bear will be saved.

 

I'm not really sure I follow your logic. Would you mind clarifying a bit?

 

You don't know what you are talking about. I'm a Calvinist, but I've read very, very little Calvin. What you've just said is just plain uninformed and ignorant. I really don't care what Calvin has said and I think most of the Calvinists worldwide don't follow Calvin but rather Christ. And to catagorize Calvinists with the cult of Moonies, is just outrageous and unhelpful to the conversation. I hope that other non-calvinists here would concur.

 

Calvinists do not worship John Calvin . That kind of language and level of understanding harms whatever cause you wish to promote .

Most Calvinists study the Bible very much -- it's front and center . But godly and instructive books by Calvin , Henry , Gill , Owen , Spurgeon and others would be a boon to one's spiritual progression .

 

Hi Amy

We are all in sin because we are born in sin however, each time we sin we first have to make the decision to comit the act of sin. When the light is shown on each of us, we are all wanting to hide from it. We don't want others to see what liars we are, or what theives we are, what ever we are but, once exposed it's to late everyone who could see it, did. This is what preachers are needed for, to shine that light on everyone they can. The man can rebel that's his decision however, not all do and if they don't they will hear the gospel. If they keep listening they will be convinced and convicted of their sin. Then they can hope they might be saved by the faith of Jesus Christ.
We aren't saved by our faith we are saved by the faith of Jesus Christ Paul wrote;
Gal 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

The obstacle that keeps us from being saved is our rebellion. If we do not decide to rebel we will be saved. Rebellion is not listening to the gospel. Rebellion is the refusal to accept the truth. Rebellion is the rejection of Jesus Christ, Rebellion is the only obstacle that keeps us from Salvation.
MB

 

J.D. Said: 2. Most Calvinists do not believe that "God make someone for the sole purpose of their going to Hell". But if He did, who are you to question it?

:wavey: I would question it!

II Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentence.

 

There are many writers about Bible but none hold a candle to the writers of the Bible. None of those you've mentioned have or had a perfect understanding of the scriptures. So why should we rely on the teachings of men when we have the teachings of God Him Self?
MB

 

And to what group is Peter addressing when he refers to them as "us-ward" ? It certainly isn't all of humanity .

 

My return question would be....

And to what group is Peter addressing when he refers to "any"? I beleive there he is talking to ALL of humanity.

 

'Any' is addressed to the same group of 'us-ward' . Peter is speaking to the elect-to-be .

 

MB,

Whether you want to admit it or not, your participation in this Board is a form of teaching - you are providing us with your interpretation of the Bible. So according to your reasoning above, you should not even rely on your own teaching since you yourself are merely a man. I'm sure your retort would be that your teaching is "based on the Bible." Well, I'm guessing that other teachers who differ from you would say the same thing about their own teaching. So we are back to square one, aren't we? Essentially, you have created a circular or absurb argument with your "anti-teacher" rant.

 

We do have to 'rely' on their writings . We have God's Holy Word . However , the Lord in His good providence has raised up a number of godly and scholarly men who sought to expound the Word of God . Their writings aren't canonical or inspired , but they do help us . To dismiss them would be foolish in the extreme .

 

Rippon - good point. We do not "rely on" teachers, but we do benefit from them, and it was that anti-teacher sentiment that I was responding to in MB's post.

 

In the verses prior to II Peter 3:9 it talks about the earth being destroyed in the flood. In these verses they are waiting once again for the world to come to an end and for "the day of judgement and perdition of ungodly men."

But in verses 8 & 9 Peter is telling them that God does not measure time like we do but the end is coming.

The reason for what seems to be a delay to them?

God is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentence.

 

Gottcha' Andy . We are in solid agreement .