Question for free willers

Was it a matter of mere semantics when some Puritans were put to death in the 1550's ? Those who denied free will , for instance were put to the flames .

 

And Bob, I said very clearly that the Bible teaches both the responsiblity of man for his decisions and the absolute sovereignty of God. I quoted 2-3 verses for each statement. Calvinists have no problem with both statements from Scripture. You are the one with the problem with what the Scripture says. You are the one who thinks they are contradictory. I said they were compatible.

 

By who? The Catholic Church durring the reign of Queen Mary I perhaps?

I am not Arminian since I don't agree with their doctrine of falling from grace; but it was the Calvinists who were heavy handed in their dealings with Arminians. And not at all Christian like I might add.

"The Synod of Dort was convened to resolve the Arminian/Calvinist controversy. It lasted from November 1618 to May 1619, seven months. It was the largest and, next to the Westminster Assembly, the most imposing of all synods of the Reformed Churches. Besides representatives from the Netherlands, delegates from England, Scotland, the southern provinces of Germany, and Switzerland shared in its proceedings. Episcopius was the chief spokesman for the Remonstrants, the fire-breathing Gomarus led the charge against Arminianism. The Remonstrants requested an opportunity to discuss their views at the Synod, but were denied the opportunity. They soon realized that what they thought would be an open forum for theological discussion was in fact a hearing, and that they were in effect being tried for heresy.

The Calvinists were rather heavy-handed in their dealings with their 'Arminian' brethren. For refusing to subscribe to the Canon of Dort, some 200 ministers were deprived of their positions, eighty were banished from the country. Those who continued to minister were sentenced to life in prison. In 1621, a Lutheran professor at Wittenberg, in response to an overture of fraternity from the Dutch Reformed, writes these remarks:

"What good there is to be expected from such brethren, may easily be gathered from the Synod of Dort and their proceedings. The Calvinists had several disputes with the Arminians, particularly about the article of grace or election, in which the latter defended our opinion, and the former that of Calvin. In this controversy, the Calvinists showed so much heat, that, by a hasty decree of that synod, they condemned the Arminians and their doctrines, without allowing them to make any defense, depriving them of the exercise of their religion, and banishing their most eminent ministers from their country forever. Was not that a very brotherly proceeding? If they thus treated such who differed from them in one article, namely predestination, what must we expect who differ from them in so many?"

http://www.btinternet.com/~gracegospel/calvin_and_arminius.htm

This is a very even handed article that shows the history of both movements, and takes them both to task for their errors.

And I must say when reading this concerning Calvinism's roots that Jesus' words in Mt. 7:15-20 came to mind.

 

Rippon was not saying that there never were calvinist persecutors. He was trying to point out the fact that words matter - they have meanings, and they can cost you your life.

 

In some places that is true...

..but not on the internet! :D

 

In some places that is true...

..but not on the internet! :D </font>[/QUOTE]I'm placing you on the virtual racks! RECANT YOU ARMINIAN! RECANT! :mad: :D

 

Is this the beginning of the Internet Inquisition, or II, for short?

 

I hear the ghost of Servetus calling from my bedroom. I shall dream tonight of taking my vengence on Arians, Pelagians, Semi's, Arminians, paedobaptists,... :mad: :mad:

HA HA HA HA (you know, like the count on sesame street)!!!

 

In some places that is true...

..but not on the internet! :D </font>[/QUOTE]I'm placing you on the virtual racks! RECANT YOU ARMINIAN! RECANT! :mad: :D </font>[/QUOTE]Owwwwwwwwwww!

BTW...you can only pull me 4/5 of the way. I'm only a four point Arminian.

 

If there is no such word as cant(my mommy said so)how can there br a recant?

 

Calvinbaptist;

quote
the choice is held out to man to believe or reject and he is held responsible for that choice.

When you say man, are you saying "all men", or just the ones chosen before the foundation of the world?

And when you say Choose. Are you saying all men has a choice whether to believe and be saved or disbelief and be dammned?

If so, what is the difference between the so called free-willers and the so called Calvinist?

 

Calvinbaptist;

Glad to know you say the Bible teaches that all men have a choice to either server God or not.

 

Thanks Brother Bob. We do need our armor when posting on the Baptist Board.

Christian faith, ituttut

 

Here is the problem ittitut. Here is the substance of a post I made on another thread in response to a question about me claiming that people are held responsible for their decisions:

But don’t all other’s say the same thing as you. There are few and far between, those that “make-up” their belief.

The Catholic’s can back-up their belief with scripture just as we; as can “The Calvinist church (Presbyterian church)”, “Wesley’s Methodist church”, and on it goes. All Christians are just as you. They try to figure out how to live in what they believe. This is why I am a “dispensational Baptist”. I am just as you, but you are of the “Calvinist” bent, being a “Calvinist Baptist”.

We run into problems when we “run back” to the “fathers”. We get stuck on the wrong scriptures. The answer is not found in Romans 9.

Sounds like a good testimony for the “dispensational” gospel, Christ gave to Paul.

Sure glad we are not those who don’t believe Jesus

Calvinists believe that all these scriptures are true. We believe the Bible teaches God's absolute sovereignty and we believe the Bible teaches man's responsibility. When we say this, we get the following reply:

</font>[/QUOTE]But you say you are a Calvinist. This is the theology of a man. Calvin broke from the Catholic church as the Protestant reformation period was beginning. It is John Calvin that developed a number of doctrines.

A good number of denominations came from this “theology”. Arminius brought up as a Calvinist further confused the issue by rejecting and brought in his own “theology”. This then formed another theological belief as to the subject of “predestination”. Other than “freewill” Baptist’s, most all Baptists are Calvinistic. Baptists are known more for their dogmatic stance on “baptism”, otherwise they would be Presbyterian I suppose for that is the Calvinist theology.

We try to do justice to everything the Scripture says and we get told our view doesn't work. So, who do you (not you personally) have a problem with? Not with me, but with the Bible. </font>[/QUOTE]Please read my post again. I asked a question. Evidently no one other than you and Brother Bob are interested in conversing with me. I can understand that as they have to put their thinking cap on when they do. As said within Christendom “isn’t antinomy the order of the day on this subject ever since?” Is this a true statement? I believe it is. I didn’t commit to this. I asked the question, “which am I”. This is a leading question to be sure, but none have ventured forth to give an opinion. So I’ll answer that I am neither. I just do not believe in “theology” that comes by man.

Christian faith, ituttut

 

I am saying every person who has ever lived has the choice to, at the very least, believe in the true God or reject that God and make up a god of their own. Romans 1 is clear that they choose wrongly. It is not that the choice wasn't out there. It is that, because of their sin nature, they will choose idolatry. (I know that this is where you will disagree with me.)

No. Obviously, not everyone hears the gospel. They reject the natural revelation of creation and God gives them nothing more, but turns them over to their own sin as judgment. Some He reveals more to and they believe. Once they believe, we find out that they are, in fact, chosen before the foundation of the world.

If so, what is the difference between the so called free-willers and the so called Calvinist? [/QUOTE]

Big difference, although I do believe we are all saved. The five points pretty well outline our differences. We do all believe the Bible, so we will cross paths many times. Honestly, even though we debate and argue, I think we're all friends here. ;)

 

So are you saying God allows us to make the choice?Or are we governed by irrestable grace where we have no choice but to accept God's grace?