Enjoy Delphi Forums ad free! Click here.
Faith Issues,News & Religions -  Is Calvinism Correct? (1327 views) Notify me whenever anyone posts in this discussion.Subscribe
 
From: Ginger (TGANNON) DelphiPlus Member IconSep-11 4:41 PM 
To: crusedude  (41 of 131) 
 40910.41 in reply to 40910.28 

Limited Atonement:  while Christ did die for the world, the effectiveness of the atonement will only be for the elect.  Thus, we can view it as limited Atonement. Biblical support comes from;

Ginger>so, don't bother praying for others to be saved because it's already been written in stone those who are. What happened to grace and mercy?  What about those in John 3:16 who are the "whosoever"?

 

 

 

     

Psalm119:105 "Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light for my path"

 
 Reply   Options 

 
From: crusedudeSep-12 8:27 AM 
To: Secundus555  (42 of 131) 
 40910.42 in reply to 40910.35 

>But the men whom the Apostles themselves taught never believed or taught what Calvin taught.

I have explained my reasoning, using other parts of the Bible than just Paul's writings, for agreeing with Calvin.  The writings of the Apostles in the Bible teach me.  And I see that Calvin agrees with what the Biblical Apostles teach.  If I thought the Apostolic teaching in the Bible disagreed with Calvin, I would reject Calvin.  My final authority is the Bible, not church fathers or even Calvin.  I've read some of the church father's writings.  Some I agree with, some I don't.  The Bible is the final authority.  

And I resolutely reject your interpretation of the Bible regarding God's sovereignty verses man's freewill in soteriology.  My reasons have been explained in previous posts using more parts of the Bible that just Romans 9.  Until you can show me from the 66 books of the Bible where I'm wrong, I will still reject your soteriology regarding freewill, etc.  And, as explained in my previous posts, you have not proved my interpretation wrong.  

Crusedude

 

 
From: crusedudeSep-12 8:59 AM 
To: Ginger (TGANNON) DelphiPlus Member Icon  (43 of 131) 
 40910.43 in reply to 40910.41 

Ginger>so, don't bother praying for others to be saved because it's already been written in stone those who are. What happened to grace and mercy?  What about those in John 3:16 who are the "whosoever"?

The verses that I quoted below my comment on Limited Atonement explain my reasoning on the "whosoever" part of the gospel.  I cordially invite you to read and consider them, as well as, my other posts.

Praying for unbelievers and spreading the Gospel is something we should do because we're told to Mt. 28:19-20, and that's reason enough.

Grace and mercy are parts of anyone being saved, since there's none that deserve to be saved Ro. 3:10.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
From: Caryn (haleyC987)Sep-13 11:35 AM 
To: crusedude  (44 of 131) 
 40910.44 in reply to 40910.28 

Would you mind explaining your Tulip view about the human will, since the will as we know it is as free as God created it to be, for we humans are created limited where God is not.  Otherwise, we would be God and He not.

I've not heard it said "whosoever" wills in Him shall have eternal life, but "whosoever" believes in Him shall. (Jhn 3:16)  Will you please reconcile Romans 9 with John 3:16?    It seems people are much quicker to reject scripture toward an understanding what with it being much easier to reject than to reconcile, yet all while God is still yet reconciling people to Himself through Jesus.  And we already know it's not about who is right, but what is right, at least as we can know right.  With all what can appear a lack of reconciling scripture going on, I'm just hoping people aren't loving their own salvation more than God Himself.

It is said "willing" a thing and "believing" a thing have never been known synonymous, for the human will is known more at headstrong informational (whether real or imagined) to action initiated by thoughts toward words and behaviors done, where belief is known heart-strong assurance of understanding whether first knowledgeable about that or not, for without understanding first given to and toward knowledge (Pro 2:6) there is no knowledge but simply information comprised of mere human ideas and opinions "about" somebody's ideas and opinions, and on and on it goes.  This is why it is said "information is not knowledge."  And why it is said overall, it doesn't take head-smarts to believe God toward one's own eternal salvation, but it does take the heart, first.

 

 

 
From: crusedudeSep-14 7:23 AM 
To: Caryn (haleyC987)  (45 of 131) 
 40910.45 in reply to 40910.44 

Your reply was interesting philosophizing.  I utilize a more direct approach.  

My past posts have cited scripture to explain my belief on the "whosoever" part of the gospel.  You can accept or dismiss said belief and reasoning.

And now, will you please reconcile Jn. 3:16 with Romans 9.

 

 
From: Caryn (haleyC987)Sep-14 9:39 AM 
To: crusedude  (46 of 131) 
 40910.46 in reply to 40910.45 

crusedude said...

Your reply was interesting philosophizing.

What part.  Any understanding I might have comes from Jesus' teachings and sayings.  I'm pretty sure He's never been known a philosopher though.

crusedude said...

I utilize a more direct approach.  

As compared to what?

crusedude said...

You can accept or dismiss said belief and reasoning.

Who's looking toward accepting and/or dismissing whatever?  That nobody knows what they don't know, there is always more to learn about what you already know.  I couldn't care less what people want to believe, just was simply interested in the understanding about the foundation.

crusedude said...

And now, will you please reconcile Jn. 3:16 with Romans 9.

I don't understand what is called the tulip foundation enough, and it sounds like you don't either. 

 

 

 
From: Bob (Bobbylee7) DelphiPlus Member Icon Posted by hostSep-14 10:16 AM 
To: Secundus555  (47 of 131) 
 40910.47 in reply to 40910.40 

I do not see this as a Salvation issue. A person is not saved or condemned because of their beliefs regarding Predestination. Good people of conscience can disagree on this matter and still be a faithful Christian.

bob>It is salvational, life long calvinists get sick of it and God and turn from God in the process. Mark Twain is a good example. At the end, he completely turned away from God and spoke harshly about Him, thinking calvinism was what the bible taught and his quotes about God showed he became an atheist. So, it was salvational as in rejecting calvinsim he had to reject God. 

Calvinism is a mistaken Interpretation of Scripture, but it is not HERESY.

bob>It is a lie. The core of it is predestination thinking a very few are predestined to be saved before they are born and the majority are not and nothing anyone does in this life can ever change that, building from that core misunderstanding it only gets worse and worse. 

There are many men and women of faith who are Calvinists that I greatly love and admire, and consider them good, godly people. We may disagree on this issue, but it does not divide me from them because of that disagreement. 

bob>If you talk to those who are calvinist and actually know enough about it to make decisions on it, they will vary on how many points they accept, it's very hard to find a 5 pointer. I have spoken to presbyterians who didn't even know what calvainsm is. 

But it IS an important issue as it touches so many facets of our faith.

bob>It's salvational, it's confusing, it's completely wrong. 


 

 

 
From: Bob (Bobbylee7) DelphiPlus Member Icon Posted by hostSep-14 10:25 AM 
To: crusedude  (48 of 131) 
 40910.48 in reply to 40910.45 

3:16 with Romans 9.

John 3:16  For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 

bob>This is speaking to everyone, God so loved humanity/everyone that He gave His Son for salvation, anyone and everyone who comes to Christ can be saved.

bob>This is speaking to the "first born" they are predestined to become the first followers of Christ who are born again and it's their job to also spread the good news. The bible has classes of followers, saints, elect, chosen, called, captured, first born and ect. All verses in the bible do not apply to every class. 


 

 

 
From: Secundus555Sep-14 10:59 AM 
To: Bob (Bobbylee7) DelphiPlus Member Icon  (49 of 131) 
 40910.49 in reply to 40910.47 

Bob (Bobbylee7) said...

bob>It is salvational

No. It is not. Our Salvation does not hinge on what we believe about Predestination. 

Bob (Bobbylee7) said...

life long calvinists get sick of it and God and turn from God in the process. Mark Twain is a good example. At the end, he completely turned away from God and spoke harshly about Him, thinking calvinism was what the bible taught and his quotes about God showed he became an atheist. So, it was salvational as in rejecting calvinsim he had to reject God. 

The same can be said for belief in Biblical Inerrancy and Literalism. Fundamentalism has created more Atheists than Calvinism ever did. (For this example, YOU would be considered Fundamentalist as well).  Are you going to tell me that you think it is dangerous and "salvational" to believe the Bible is 100% inerrant and should be taken literally, especially regarding Creationism? 

Talk to 100 Atheists and 90+ will be from a Fundamentalist background. Fundamentalism creates more Atheists than Liberalism even. Because it is an ALL-OR-NOTHING belief system. If any single thing of a Literal Interpretation of the Bible can be demonstrated to be false, or if the slightest doubt enters the mind, the whole faith shatters. It is a very Brittle kind of faith that leads many to assume that if any little thing they were taught isn't true, the WHOLE THING isn't true.

Would you call THAT a "Salvational issue"? It fits the bill far better than Calvinism does.

No one is saved or condemned because of what they believe regarding Predestination.

And those who DO believe in it are every bit as much saved as you and me. 

It CAN be taken to an unhealthy extreme, and THAT IS harmful. But in general, Calvinists are good, godly people. I just happen to believe that their belief in Calvinist views of Election and Predestination are mistaken. 

I don't see it being taught by ANYONE prior to John Calvin. Not even St Augustine of Hippo would have agreed with many of Calvin's teachings. 

Bob (Bobbylee7) said...

bob>If you talk to those who are calvinist and actually know enough about it to make decisions on it, they will vary on how many points they accept, it's very hard to find a 5 pointer. I have spoken to presbyterians who didn't even know what calvainsm is. 

Laypeople are often uninformed about the Bible and about Theology. 

If you ask most Evangelical Christians to explain the Trinity, most of them won't be able to or will get it completely wrong.

Does that mean the Trinity isn't true? No. It just means they are ignorant and often poorly instructed. 

I know MANY full 5-point Calvinists who understand their Doctrines VERY well. But you and I tend to have different circles. Many in my sphere of influence and in my circle of friends are far better educated Theologically than the average Christian. And the number of full Calvinist who know their stuff in the SBC are growing because moretmore Baptist preachers are going to Seminary and the Baptist Seminaries are very Calvinist these days. 

Presbyterian ministers DEFINITELY understand Calvinism, and most are full 5-point Calvinists. They are all REQUIRED to go to Seminary, and ALL of their Seminaries are Calvinist. 

Most Presbyterian churches teach Calvinism from the pulpit, though they may not call it "Calvinism", they will just call it "Biblical teaching". But laypeople often don't understand or listen closely to what ANY preacher says from the pulpit. Layperson ignorance is not a basis for evaluating any doctrine. 

Laypeople often don't know or read their Bible. Does that make the Bible wrong? No. It just means they are ignorant. 

Most if your arguments against Calvinism could be used against your OWN beliefs as well. 

The REAL reason Calvinism is wrong us that it is Unbiblical and it was completely ABSENT from Christian beliefs for 1,500 yrs. 

"All that is old may not be gold, but if it is NEW then it CANNOT be true!" - old saying in theological circles.

If nobody before Calvin ever taught Calvinism, then it was a NEW belief that was NOT taught by the Apostles or their disciples or anyone else before Calvin. Therefore, it cannot be said to be "Apostolic doctrine".

They will say, "But the Apostles wrote it in the Scriptures!" No. They have INTERPRETED the Scriptures to mean what no one in 1,500 yrs of Christian History and belief ever taught. 

An unprecedented Interpretation means it was NOT Apostolic teaching....unless they want to say that the Apostles were BAD TEACHERS and were completely unable to pass on these teachings to their own disciples, and that EVERYONE before Calvin got it wrong. Which would make John Calvin, in effect, a PROPHET OF GOD, who has "restores" a "lost Apostolic teaching" to the Church. 

But no Calvinist I have ever met wants to make any of those claims. 

 

Secundus

 

 
From: Caryn (haleyC987)Sep-14 5:34 PM 
To: Secundus555  (50 of 131) 
 40910.50 in reply to 40910.49 

That explains it.  Thanks, Secundus.

If you don't already have, thought you might find this interesting:

"The new atheists assert that unethical behaviour under the banner of religion (especially by Christians, Jews and Muslims) is the major cause of some of the most dangerous global conflicts of recent years, and presents the greatest threat to the future survival of civilisation itself." 

http://researcherslinks.com/current-issues/The-New-Atheism-and-Religious-Fundamentalism-Are-They-a-Mirror-Image-of-Each-Other/9/5/334/html

 

Navigate this discussion: 1-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 ... 111-120 121-130 131
Adjust text size:

Welcome, guest! Get more out of Delphi Forums by logging in.

New to Delphi Forums? You can log in with your Facebook, Twitter, or Google account or use the New Member Login option and log in with any email address.

Home | Help | Forums | Chat | Blogs | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
© Delphi Forums LLC All rights reserved.