What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Objections to God's Sovereignty Answered..........Some

Tenchi said:
This is a great example of how bias blinds. From my perspective, I saw Leighton refusing to debate on James's terms. That's an important debate strategy, in my opinion. Though it's been awhile since I watched the debate, I don't recall Leighton refusing to do any exegesis at all. I'll have to take a look at the debate again and see if what you've asserted is actually so.



I've watched enough of James' podcasts and online exchanges with folks to be...extremely disinterested in talking with him about anything. I don't know why you are unable to see it, but James comes off as very pedantic and patronizing, a combination toxic to positive dialogue, as he has demonstrated again and again.



And? Is this supposed to justify James' ugly behavior?



But others have done so many times. Leighton has, again and again; but James responds with consistent and astonishing hubris, ad hominem, poisoning-the-well and Strawman argumentation, and so on. In light of this, why would I want to have my own, personal experience of such things with James? He appears to scorn all criticism, though it confronts him from many witnesses. I'm not eager to rebuke such a man and get to myself dishonor (Proverbs 9:7).



Leighton isn't satisfied. And James appears to hate that this is so. You can tell by the sour manner in which he responds to Leighton's challenges to him.



Biblical confidence divorced from a Spirit-controlled heart and mind inevitably produces "puffiness." James is enormously confident in his knowledge of the Bible, but I see little that indicates that he's under the control of the Spirit of Christ. If he were, his "biblical confidence" would conform to the description of the servant of the Lord that Paul gave to Timothy (2 Timothy 2:24-25). But I don't see such conformity in how James interacts with Leighton. Instead, there's just a whole lot of ugly "puffiness."



This is a great example of the incredible distortion that bias creates and how vital it is that God is in the mix overcoming such biases and leading us to His truth. When I read what you wrote here, I realized the depth of your investment in Reformed doctrine and the impossibility of any adjustment to your resulting severe bias (save by the work of God).

In actuality, Leighton does not commonly quote Reformed theologians in an out-of-context way but has sometimes read through pages of what they've written, or has played ten, or fifteen, minutes (or more) of their spoken remarks in order to establish the full context of what they've communicated. I've also seen him repeatedly, on his podcasts, go back-and-forth with scholarly Calvinists, giving them plenty of opportunity to fully express their views. It can only be the distortion of a deep bias, then, that could prompt you to describe Leighton in the false manner you did above. What does such readiness to contort the facts in service to your views suggest about the productiveness of discussion with you? Nothing good, I think.
Click to expand...
Well You keep your Boy Leighton, I will go with Dr. White, lol
I will react to you as you also demonstrate an extreme bias. No problem, I got it. Those who hate reformed teaching follow a game plan. I have seen it before, several times...enjoy Leightons dishonest choice meats.
 
Some obscure clear bible verses.

I have seen people actually read passages backwards to twist truth.
Eph1:3-14 is one sentence in the greek language.people read starting at vs13, and read it back to verse three. They hate election and predestination so they put man first as if man first believes then he gets elected. Anything but the truth.
 
Iconoclast said:
Some obscure clear bible verses.

I have seen people actually read passages backwards to twist truth.
Eph1:3-14 is one sentence in the greek language.people read starting at vs13, and read it back to verse three. They hate election and predestination so they put man first as if man first believes then he gets elected. Anything but the truth.
Click to expand...
You are exactly correct.

Many claim to believe in God's Sovereignty, until they get to election and predestination.

I have posted these verse many times and have been told that they do not see it in the verses. They get angry and because and twist the Scripture for their own purpose.

I have always concluded, that these types of people do not like that the Lord has chosen them (if they are truly regenerated) they would want to have had the choice to choose God.

These are the same people that say you can lose your salvation, but that is a whole different doctrine, that is not allowed to be discussed on this forum.

If I had to depend on myself to be saved and stay saved, I would still be going to hell no matter what I did.

Grace and peace to you.
 
Some offer emotional rather than biblical answers.

Have you ever talked to a person who says... I could not worship a god who sends people to hell?
In the same way, those who go to emotions rather than scriptures cannot piece the puzzle pieces together because of similar emotional ideas that are just plain wrong.
To suggest God is not just , or God cannot elect who he wants is foolish.
 
Iconoclast said:
Some offer emotional rather than biblical answers.

Have you ever talked to a person who says... I could not worship a god who sends people to hell?
In the same way, those who go to emotions rather than scriptures cannot piece the puzzle pieces together because of similar emotional ideas that are just plain wrong.
To suggest God is not just , or God cannot elect who he wants is foolish.
Click to expand...
Foolish indeed.

Yes many let their feelings and emotions guide them, I have heard some say that feelings and emotions are the Holy Spirit in them. I do not find that to be Biblical.
 
Some have been poorly instructed.

I have visited churches where those teaching were attempting to oppose the grace of God.
They always offer the same strawmen over and over. FREE WILL, ROBOTS, .FATALISM, UNIVERSALISM, Calvin THIS, CALVIN THAT. SERVETUS, Augustine, Gnostics...anything but scripture,

Those in the pew never hear the truth. Many are poorly instructed in the faith.
They have no biblical base. They have false teachers saying there is no need to learn or use confessions of faith. Then they substitute entertainment for worship.
 
Some have not received instruction,

I have met many people who have not been instructed on much of anything.
I always try and offer truth to them to see if God will grant them to welcome the truth.
I do not blame the people but the false pastors who avoid truth, or who themselves have not searched it out. There are more than any one would imagine.
 
Tenchi believes in eternal security.most arminists do .

I try not paint with a broad brush but I do know the various groups locally .I have attended a few on thrr ends of the spectrum .

Locally we have two old churches one Wesleyan and the oldest and the other a decade younger hyper Calvinist.


I need to look at the primitive Baptist church theology again .they may be more reformed and not hyper .
 
Some have rejected the instruction.

It comes down to the effectual call. People who are not elected will never welcome truth.
Their self-will is still in rebellion to God ,so they settle for a religious life without the real Jesus.
Michael Horton wrote a book called Christless Christianity.He surveys many places where only a religious shell remains
 
Iconoclast said:
God has indeed defined this for us, so your objection holds no water.
Isa46.:9-11...psalm115 Dan4:35 do very well.
I think such an objection seeks to water down the God revealed in all of Scripture.
Those who struggle with grace water down the meanings.Hopefully that was not your intent.
Click to expand...
That men of God who understood God wrote about what they knew does not mean that when you read the Bible, you have exactly the same understanding. This is the mistake you are making, thinking that you perfectly understand as the authors did.
 
jasonc said:
Tenchi believes in eternal security.most arminists do .
Click to expand...
Arminians like to plead the 5th...osas...which is yet another false teaching which makes it hard to explain to them
jasonc said:
I try not paint with a broad brush but I do know the various groups locally .I have attended a few on thrr ends of the spectrum .

Locally we have two old churches one Wesleyan and the oldest and the other a decade younger hyper Calvinist.


I need to look at the primitive Baptist church theology again .they may be more reformed and not hyper .
Click to expand...
I believe most to be hyper cals.
 
Iconoclast said:
Arminians like to plead the 5th...osas...which is yet another false teaching which makes it hard to explain to them

I believe most to be hyper cals.
Click to expand...
Reading that .I thought the church of Christ is legalistic .
No ac ,no musical instruments.immersion baptism .no missionaries and no Sunday school.

That would explain why 1210 old Dixie hwy would have next to zero consumption of power .I could simply input the last read and it wouldn't reject it .irc they used less then 40 kwh per month .
 
Dorothy Mae said:
That men of God who understood God wrote about what they knew does not mean that when you read the Bible, you have exactly the same understanding. This is the mistake you are making, thinking that you perfectly understand as the authors did.
Click to expand...
DM,
Years ago within the first 5 to seven years as a believer i went through and tried to find out what were the main teachings in scripture. the first two books I ever read outside of the bible were systematic theologies, after reading Kingdom of the cults first.
Was listening to cassettes and radio sermons every night when i worked night shift. Once i had a theological base, I listened to many who do not believe as I do.
I saw how weak and inconsistent they were.
I know most of the opposing arguments. I could oppose the teaching more than those who dislike it. I know what verses are going to be offered.
The thing is I welcome any biblical correction, but most cannot offer it.
 
Iconoclast said:
DM,
Years ago within the first 5 to seven years as a believer i went through and tried to find out what were the main teachings in scripture. the first two books I ever read outside of the bible were systematic theologies, after reading Kingdom of the cults first.
Was listening to cassettes and radio sermons every night when i worked night shift. Once i had a theological base, I listened to many who do not believe as I do.
I saw how weak and inconsistent they were.
I know most of the opposing arguments. I could oppose the teaching more than those who dislike it. I know what verses are going to be offered.
The thing is I welcome any biblical correction, but most cannot offer it.
Click to expand...
Seems like you are satisfied with the outcome.
 
Iconoclast said:
I am not yelling at anyone. I wear glasses and like a larger font. I change colors to emphasize what are key portions of verses.
Click to expand...
It is yelling for the reader and you can change the font back to normal without bold before you post it, you know. You could consider the reader and not merely yourself.
 
Iconoclast said:
DM,
Years ago within the first 5 to seven years as a believer i went through and tried to find out what were the main teachings in scripture. the first two books I ever read outside of the bible were systematic theologies, after reading Kingdom of the cults first.
Was listening to cassettes and radio sermons every night when i worked night shift. Once i had a theological base, I listened to many who do not believe as I do.
I saw how weak and inconsistent they were.
I know most of the opposing arguments. I could oppose the teaching more than those who dislike it. I know what verses are going to be offered.
The thing is I welcome any biblical correction, but most cannot offer it.
Click to expand...
Could you point out these “weak and inconsistent” positions. I am curious.
 
Iconoclast said:
What are some of the objections that are in view?
The names of those who object are not revealed to protect them.
Here are some objections that we can see any day, on many discussion boards.

1]We don't believe God does the choosing.
Click to expand...
Who thinks this? Straw man as Jesus clearly teaches clearly teaches no one comes to the Father except the Lord draw him. So one refuted.
Iconoclast said:
2]We believe that God reveals Himself and the person gets to choose if they wish to obey God or not.
Click to expand...
No, no one thinks this either. I have never heard this view. You can attack the parable of the different types of soul if you wish. That is closer to what non-calvinists likely believe.So strawman two down.
Iconoclast said:
3]

Hello Jason
Be the best believer and serve God just as you are. Do not worry about the label now.
I use labels because that saves time to identify views on theology.
All Christians are really Calvinists but they just do not fully know it yet.
Click to expand...
Very much untrue. Could hardly be more false.
Iconoclast said:
In time God will clarify it when they see actual teaching and not caricatures that distort truth.
I have heard many people who said at first they hated the teaching, who now have seen it and are strong advocates of it.
Click to expand...
I know people who believed calvinism and saw differently and are strong advocates against it.
Iconoclast said:
Bring your strongest questions and objections. We will remove some obstacles for you, but God gives the increase!
Click to expand...
I have discussed this with many calvinists and it usually results in them calling doubters nasty names. Almost without exception.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top