The god of Calvinism's arbitrary decision.

[Carbon]

Wow, what a list of questions you have there. But let's see, this is post # 217 and you have not given anyone who is reformed the courtesy of considering anything they have had to say. And now, you want me to answer all these questions?

Is the salvation of a man dependent on his choice to receive or reject Christ? (I am asking you, a Calvinist).

If not, my next question is, can a person make a choice to receive Christ and yet not be accepted for that he is of the non-elect?

And, if a person does not make a choice to receive Christ, might he be saved anyway for that he is of the elect?

If the answer to either of these questions is yes, then man does not have a choice in the matter of whether or not he is saved.

If the answer to them is yes, then salvation is dependent on the choice of a man to receive or reject Christ; and therefore there is something that we do in order to procure salvation; and the salvation of a man is dependent on his choice to receive or reject Christ. So, if the answer to the first question was no, you should probably reconsider.

I as a man born dead to the things of the spirit I was not able to make a decision to accept Jesus as my Savior while still as the natural man. Were you an exception? Was Adams's breach of the Covenant not imputed unto you?

 

[Carbon]

Nope, the Bible teaches it.

Oops, wrong. The bible is the word of God, it does not teach humanism.

Hope this helps.

 

[justbyfaith]

Isn't it nice you can believe what you like? No one is forcing you to believe anything?

Yep.

That is because where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.

 

[justbyfaith]

And thats one of your issues. You don't hear correctly when it comes to Calvinism. Oops.

So, Calvinists don't teach that grace precedes faith?

Could've fooled me.

 

[justbyfaith]

Oh, that blessed assurance. None of the elect will be lost. But once that last one is born and comes to the Lord, its a rap!

As soon as the last person makes their final decision to receive or reject Christ, it's a rap.

And you do not have blessed assurance. Even if you did what it takes to be saved, there is always the possibility that you are of the non-elect and therefore rejected.

 

[Carbon]

So, Calvinists don't teach that grace precedes faith?

Could've fooled me.

It's obvious you don't understand enough about these things to even ask a question.

 

[justbyfaith]

So far just about all your arguments are. Oops.

You are not refuting anything as of yet. But keep trying.

No, they are not straw-man arguments, except maybe to you.

If you don't believe what I have been refuting, then what I have written is not addressed to you.

Also, what I am writing is addressing the logical conclusions of what is believed in Calvinism; however most Calvinists do not understand the implications of what they teach. They do not follow things to their logical conclusions. If they did, they would see that I am addressing the implications of what is taught by Calvinism.

 

[Carbon]

As soon as the last person makes their final decision to receive or reject Christ, it's a rap.

And you do not have blessed assurance. Even if you did what it takes to be saved, there is always the possibility that you are of the non-elect and therefore rejected.

Well, I need sleep. Church tomorrow.
You chew on these things, since you are not a Calvinist, you couldn't possibly understand deeply enough. Unless God opens your eyes and you become a Calvinist, you should get used to asking a Calvinist about things pertaining to Calvinism.

TTYL

 

[justbyfaith]

Wow, what a list of questions you have there. But let's see, this is post # 217 and you have not given anyone who is reformed the courtesy of considering anything they have had to say. And now, you want me to answer all these questions?


I as a man born dead to the things of the spirit I was not able to make a decision to accept Jesus as my Savior while still as the natural man. Were you an exception? Was Adams's breach of the Covenant not imputed unto you?

As I have told you before, I was enabled to receive Jesus when I was drawn to Him by the Holy Spirit.

 

[justbyfaith]

Oops, wrong. The bible is the word of God, it does not teach humanism.

Hope this helps.

Right. The Bible does not teach humanism. That means that predestination according to foreknowledge is not humanism. Because the Bible teaches it (Romans 8:29, 1 Peter 1:2).

 

[justbyfaith]

It's obvious you don't understand enough about these things to even ask a question.

On this very thread, certain Calvinists have taught that grace precedes faith.

Therefore, I think that you are being evasive.

 

[justbyfaith]

Well, I need sleep. Church tomorrow.
You chew on these things, since you are not a Calvinist, you couldn't possibly understand deeply enough. Unless God opens your eyes and you become a Calvinist, you should get used to asking a Calvinist about things pertaining to Calvinism.

TTYL

That would be expedient if a Calvinist were inclined to answer my questions.

And, btw, although I am not a Calvinist, it should be clear that I have the Holy Spirit as I have fulfilled the condition of a promise to receive the Holy Spirit (in Acts 2:38-39).

Therefore, I am not the natural man.

 

[justbyfaith]

Well, I need sleep. Church tomorrow.

Sweet dreams.

 

[Carbon]

That would be expedient if a Calvinist were inclined to answer my questions.

And, btw, although I am not a Calvinist, it should be clear that I have the Holy Spirit as I have fulfilled the condition of a promise to receive the Holy Spirit (in Acts 2:38-39).

Therefore, I am not the natural man.

No worries. It's not my job or position to judge anyone's salvation. That my friend, is God's business.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

Do you agree with Rome Bob?

Nope. It's ALL GOD. no exceptions.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

No worries. It's not my job or position to judge anyone's salvation. That my friend, is God's business.

Paranthetic: The sermon today dealt with a person's Christian testimony being "verified" by the testimony of the people who KNEW them (family, friends, etc.) and also by that which the person's life has produced. It's kind of a "Book of James" thing - i.e. if one's CLAIM OF FAITH produces NOTHING in terms of good works, then by inference, the person doesn't HAVE FAITH at all - just "religion" and/or "theology".

 

[prism]

Nope. It's ALL GOD. no exceptions.

Does that include God's sovereign choice in election?

 

[atpollard]

However, the Holy Spirit is able to bring a person to being half-alive.

Is that like being a little bit pregnant?

 

[ReverendRV]

Some have contended that the decision of the god of Calvinism to send certain people to hell isn't arbitrary. I give them the opportunity here to back up their statements.

Since those who go to hell, in Calvinism, don't have a choice in the matter, how is God's decision to cast them into hell not arbitrary.

Those who are elected to salvation are elected unconditionally;

And therefore there is also no condition (other than God's will) that sends certain people to hell.

How is that not an arbitrary decision?

I have been accused of misrepresenting Calvinsim by speaking of these things.

But is not what I am saying logical?

But it is not language that the Calvinist would like to be applied to his doctrine.

Why is that?

Is it not because it is a true indictment on what is believed by the Calvinist?

The God of a Calvinist is the LORD Jesus Christ of the Bible. Do you agree?

God sends people to Hell FIRST, because Adam is their Representative as their Fallen Head. Answering objections to Calvinism, is found by referencing the Fundamentals of the Faith...

Calvinists should also be Fundamentalists...

 

[makesends]

Your idea of what Calvinism teaches may be different from what most Calvinists believe; and that is probably the reason why you do not believe I am refuting Calvinism. In this, what I am writing is not addressed to you, but to those who believe the things that I am refuting.

Let me put it a little more plainly. What you have posted might threaten your notions —and maybe the notions of some others— of Calvinism, but Calvinism's doctrines are not threatened by anything you have posted. Yes I might have missed some of your posts, but guessing by the tenor and content of what I did read, no, I don't think you have threatened Calvinism's doctrines. But I don't need to read your posts to think you have not. Calvinism gets its doctrines from Scripture, read with reason. It's hard to unseat that or to chip away at its foundations.