The Five Points of Calvinism

[Deborah13]

It's 'merely' Jesus praying that they will.

I see where you're at now. Thanks for your time.

Jesus prayed so it Will be as He prayed because surely His Father would answer His pray, His desire.
Was the cup taken away from Him when He prayed in the garden? No. The Father's will was done.
Luk 22:42 Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.
So it is God's Will that All men be saved. .
1Ti 2:3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
1Ti 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
But all men are not saved, therefore, all men, cannot mean all men
If we stop there it might seems that God really didn't mean all men, just some men but.....
Deu 30:19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:
Jesus said that He would draw All men to Him.
Joh 12:32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.
Jesus must not mean all men because not all men come to Him. Therefore, He must not draw all men. But.....
Rev 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.
He knocks but the man has to open the door.
Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Eph 2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
Salvation (eternal life) is a gift of God. By His grace, through faith. Where does that faith come from?
Rom 10:16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?
Rom 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
Rom 10:18 But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world.
Rom 10:19 But I say, Did not Israel know? First Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation I will anger you.
Rom 10:20 But Esaias is very bold, and saith, I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me.
Rom 10:21 But to Israel he saith, All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.
Israel heard God speak to them, therefore they had the faith to receive it. But they didn't because they were disobedient. It wasn't because God kept them from hearing.
I believe this is the same reason that not all men will be saved. They hear and receive the faith to believe but they refuse to act on it, out of disobedience and being stiff-necked.

Calvin said God doesn't really call all men. That God didn't give them grace and the faith to believe, He didn't really knock.
Calvin said that a Sovereign God's desire will anyways be done.
I agree. But our Sovereign God in His wisdom determined that His desire was that man should be free to choose Him or not.

 

[Chopper]

As I said, we're not told definitively. I think all we can do is speculate.

Your are right. That is a very honest answer, and I agree.

 

[chessman]

I already addressed this:

"Eternal life is not believing that Jesus was sent by the Father. Eternal life is knowing God and Jesus, let's look at the text.

"And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent." John 17:3 (ESV)

The bolded is the main thrust of Jesus' statement, that they know God and Jesus Christ.

If you think Eternal Life does not include a 'main thrust' of believing that Jesus was sent by the Father, then you should have stopped your bold text formatting prior to the word "Christ" in your above statement.

I quote with my emphasis from Easton's Bible Dictionary: "To believe that "Jesus is the Christ" is to believe that he is the Anointed, the Messiah of the prophets, the Saviour sent of God, that he was, in a word, what he claimed to be."

Easton's Bible Dictionary
Christ
Anointed, the Greek translation of the Hebrew word rendered "Messiah" (q.v.), the official title of our Lord, occurring five hundred and fourteen times in the New Testament. It denotes that he was anointed or consecrated to his great redemptive work as Prophet, Priest, and King of his people. He is Jesus the Christ (Acts 17:3 ; 18:5 ; Matthew 22:42 ), the Anointed One. He is thus spoken of by (Isaiah 61:1 ), and by (Daniel 9:24-26 ), who styles him "Messiah the Prince."
The Messiah is the same person as "the seed of the woman" (Genesis 3:15 ), "the seed of Abraham" (Genesis 22:18 ), the "Prophet like unto Moses" (Deuteronomy 18:15 ), "the priest after the order of Melchizedek" (Psalm 110:4 ), "the rod out of the stem of Jesse" (Isaiah 11:1,10 ), the "Immanuel," the virgin's son (Isaiah 7:14 ), "the branch of Jehovah" (Isaiah 4:2 ), and "the messenger of the covenant" (Malachi 3:1 ). This is he "of whom Moses in the law and the prophets did write." The Old Testament Scripture is full of prophetic declarations regarding the Great Deliverer and the work he was to accomplish. Jesus the Christ is Jesus the Great Deliverer, the Anointed One, the Saviour of men. This name denotes that Jesus was divinely appointed, commissioned, and accredited as the Saviour of men (Hebrews 5:4 ; Isaiah 11:2-4 ; 49:6 ; John 5:37 ; Acts 2:22 ).
To believe that "Jesus is the Christ" is to believe that he is the Anointed, the Messiah of the prophets, the Saviour sent of God, that he was, in a word, what he claimed to be. This is to believe the gospel, by the faith of which alone men can be brought unto God. That Jesus is the Christ is the testimony of God, and the faith of this constitutes a Christian (1 Corinthians 12:3 ; 1 John 5:1 ).
​

There's a lot to Jesus' prayer in v23, where He prayed that other believers know Jesus was/is the Christ (You sent Me, that is). A whole lot.

 

[FreeGrace]

If you (Doulos) think Eternal Life does not include a 'main thrust' of believing that Jesus was sent by the Father, then you should have stopped your bold text formatting prior to the word "Christ" in your above statement.

I quote with my emphasis from Easton's Bible Dictionary: "To believe that "Jesus is the Christ" is to believe that he is the Anointed, the Messiah of the prophets, the Saviour sent of God, that he was, in a word, what he claimed to be."

Easton's Bible Dictionary
Christ
Anointed, the Greek translation of the Hebrew word rendered "Messiah" (q.v.), the official title of our Lord, occurring five hundred and fourteen times in the New Testament. It denotes that he was anointed or consecrated to his great redemptive work as Prophet, Priest, and King of his people. He is Jesus the Christ (Acts 17:3 ; 18:5 ; Matthew 22:42 ), the Anointed One. He is thus spoken of by (Isaiah 61:1 ), and by (Daniel 9:24-26 ), who styles him "Messiah the Prince."
The Messiah is the same person as "the seed of the woman" (Genesis 3:15 ), "the seed of Abraham" (Genesis 22:18 ), the "Prophet like unto Moses" (Deuteronomy 18:15 ), "the priest after the order of Melchizedek" (Psalm 110:4 ), "the rod out of the stem of Jesse" (Isaiah 11:1,10 ), the "Immanuel," the virgin's son (Isaiah 7:14 ), "the branch of Jehovah" (Isaiah 4:2 ), and "the messenger of the covenant" (Malachi 3:1 ). This is he "of whom Moses in the law and the prophets did write." The Old Testament Scripture is full of prophetic declarations regarding the Great Deliverer and the work he was to accomplish. Jesus the Christ is Jesus the Great Deliverer, the Anointed One, the Saviour of men. This name denotes that Jesus was divinely appointed, commissioned, and accredited as the Saviour of men (Hebrews 5:4 ; Isaiah 11:2-4 ; 49:6 ; John 5:37 ; Acts 2:22 ).
To believe that "Jesus is the Christ" is to believe that he is the Anointed, the Messiah of the prophets, the Saviour sent of God, that he was, in a word, what he claimed to be. This is to believe the gospel, by the faith of which alone men can be brought unto God. That Jesus is the Christ is the testimony of God, and the faith of this constitutes a Christian (1 Corinthians 12:3 ; 1 John 5:1 ).
​

There's a lot to Jesus' prayer in v23, where He prayed that other believers know Jesus was/is the Christ (You sent Me, that is). A whole lot.

And John 20:31 sums it up quite clearly:

"but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have (eternal) life in His name."

 

[jBird]

Hi folks.

I made the first post in the debate thread between Butch and I. I must apologize to taking so long but I'm limited in the amount of time I can dedicate to debating. I must also apologize for the formatting. I type it up as fast as I could and didn't even thought to check the forum limits on characters per post of if the bold, emphasis, italics, etc. would copy over. I ended up just over 18000 words and 54 pages. Most of the text is taken directly from the Authorized King James Bible believing it important to still to biblical verses and categories rather than scholastic or theological.

Yours in the Lord,

jBird

THE DEBATE THREAD HERE

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Hi folks.

I made the first post in the debate thread between Butch and I. I must apologize to taking so long but I'm limited in the amount of time I can dedicate to debating. I must also apologize for the formatting. I type it up as fast as I could and didn't even thought to check the forum limits on characters per post of if the bold, emphasis, italics, etc. would copy over. I ended up just over 18000 words and 54 pages. Most of the text is taken directly from the Authorized King James Bible believing it important to still to biblical verses and categories rather than scholastic or theological.

Yours in the Lord,

jBird

THE DEBATE THREAD HERE

That's basically an impossible amount to expect someone to be able to respond to all at once. I recommend working on being more concise, and even agreeing to a character limit prior to the debate if necessary. If the arguments are too long, then there will be points left unaddressed. I always keep my arguments down to 2-4 and then formulate my arguments succinctly and briefly and allow for the rebuttal period to further flesh out the arguments. Having a debate is different from writing a systematic theology, as debates are generally won based on how persuasive they are, and writing too much can lose the audience, and even take a hit in conduct, as it puts your opponent in a position where he can't possibly hope to address it all.

Honestly in my opinion, this debate should restart and an agreement on keeping an argument and rebuttal down to one post each, per round of the debate. 14 full posts is wayy too much material to deal with in a debate, nor would anyone read that to be honest.

 

[jBird]

Ahhh, the misunderstandings presented in this thread, the unbiblical presuppositions, faulty logic, etc. dictated a long and lengthy explaination from the dreaded "Calvinist" side. I had to explain some the history of the debate before we could even begin to get to the scriptures...which I did. Don't worry though I doubt I'll stick around very long. Out of respect for the status quo I'll make few posts and fade away.

Things can get back to normal then.

Yours in The Lord,

jBird

 

[FreeGrace]

After checking out the debate thread, it seems an actual debate will not occur, given the length of jBird's several posts

jBird's view lumps anyone who believes in free will in the Arminian camp. Which is false. Calvinism cannot prove that God determines (as in causes) all actions, and numerous passages clearly involve free will: Deut 11 and 30 are just 2 examples of the choice that God gives to man.

Consider the Greek word "kletis", translated "called" in the NT. It means "invite". Another example of free will; man is invited to believe the gospel.

The better way to debate Calvinism is the same way to debate with Arminians. That means asking for clear verses that support their claims.

For example, where is it taught that Christ died ONLY for the elect, per the 3rd point of TULIP? There aren't any. In fact, there are many verses that clearly state that Christ died for ALL. Yet, they try to twist "all" into "all of the elect", yet without any support from the context.

Where are the verses that tell us that God causes all things? Nowhere.
Where are the verses that tell us that God's grace is irresistible to some and resistible to others? Nowhere.
Where are the verses that tell us that there are no conditions for salvation, yet the Bible is full of linking salvation based on faith in Christ? Nowhere.
Where are the verses that tell us that God chooses who will believe, which is the foundation of their doctrine of election. Nowhere.

jBird cannot provide any verses that plainly answer any of these questions.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Ahhh, the misunderstandings presented in this thread, the unbiblical presuppositions, faulty logic, etc. dictated a long and lengthy explaination from the dreaded "Calvinist" side. I had to explain some the history of the debate before we could even begin to get to the scriptures...which I did. Don't worry though I doubt I'll stick around very long. Out of respect for the status quo I'll make few posts and fade away.

You are welcome to address them at a reasonable length in this very thread, and I would be more than happy to oblige those objections with a response. However, I was only giving you some pointers about debating, as Butch5 isn't going to respond to 54 pages worth of material. I don't know if you have debated elsewhere, but whether the debate is via written text or through verbal dialogue there is either a character limit or time limit, so that both get an equal and fair hearing. It would be unreasonable to expect Butch5 would be able to respond, and even further unreasonable that someone would then read over 100 pages worth of material.

Also, many of us here such as myself are very educated when it comes to the Calvinism and Arminianism controversy and do not need a lengthy discourse on it. I do not know what you mean by the "status quo," there are Calvinists here and Arminians and there is no expressed "status quo," for what should be believed here. How it works here is we express our disagreements in respect and kindness and address the issues at hand. Particular to this thread, we are discussing the merits of Calvinism, and thus far we have gotten to some interesting discussions as it relates to certain texts in the Gospel of John.

I personally would love your feedback, as long as it is a reasonable amount to respond to as per the Terms of Service. Hope you stick around!

 

[chessman]

I ended up just over 18000 words and 54 pages

That's basically an impossible amount to expect someone to be able to respond to all at once.

I share the same observation as Doulos does above. I think it's asking too much to expect Butch5 to respond to the opening multi-page presentation.

I'm limited in the amount of time I can dedicate to debating.

We are all limited in the amount of time we can dedicate to debating doctrines. I'm sure Butch5 has other obligations, responsibilities and desires that would prevent him from adequately responding to jBird's over 18,000 word opening.

jBird's and Butch's acceptance of a 1/1 debate started within this thread here (on this sub-topic below):

I can address this [see below] here or in the debate whichever you'd prefer.

The point I was trying to make was against the unspoken assumption in Calvinism that it wasn't possible for her [Lydia] to open her own heart...

Addressing the "unspoken assumption" might be a good place to focus in on. That is, if it's an 'unspoken assumption' then it might be difficult to debate it and come to any kind of Biblically based conclusion on that point, one way or the other. Therefore, 'speak' it in Biblical terms.

My point is, that the underlined debatable question above/below (specifically) is what you both agreed to debate 1/1:

You said, "Just like Lydia in Acts whose heart was opened before she could believe". Aren't you assuming that her heart had to be opened before she could believe? I don't see anything in the text that says that. I don't see any reason she couldn't have opened her own heart. It seems to me that that conclusion is drawn from a presupposition.

Since you invited us all in this thread to read the opening of the debate, I did notice jBird has addressed this passage/example specifically within his multi-page opening (post #13/14).

Just my thoughts/observation/suggestion.

 

[Butch5]

Ahhh, the misunderstandings presented in this thread, the unbiblical presuppositions, faulty logic, etc. dictated a long and lengthy explaination from the dreaded "Calvinist" side. I had to explain some the history of the debate before we could even begin to get to the scriptures...which I did. Don't worry though I doubt I'll stick around very long. Out of respect for the status quo I'll make few posts and fade away.

Things can get back to normal then.

Yours in The Lord,

jBird

This is an interesting post after reading your opening statement. In this post you mention unbiblical presuppositions and faulty logic. What do you consider hundreds of passages of Scripture taken out of context?

I don't think anyone wants you to go away. We welcome opposing opinions here.

 

[jBird]

This is an interesting post after reading your opening statement. In this post you mention unbiblical presuppositions and faulty logic. What do you consider hundreds of passages of Scripture taken out of context?

That is what the debate was about. What is called Arminianism is not sriptural, what is called Calvinism is. The debate thread was a spinoff of this thread.

I don't think anyone wants you to go away. We welcome opposing opinions here.

Thanks Butch. This forum is a hotbed of anti-Reformed rhetoric. I did what I could. Perhaps my first set of posts were overwhelming and for that I apologize. I did try to address the accusations already raised, the arguments already presented in this thread, which explains the length. I've presented a case from scripture placing emphasis on the inability or total depravity of man.

I was overwhelm by the amount posted against Reformed theology in this thread so I do know the feeling. If you want to scratch the debate that's fine. I planned to move on shortly anyway. I bit off more than I can chew considering the time constraints I'm under.

Peace brother, I truly mean it. May God bless you.

jBird

 

[jBird]

PS: As I can see folks in this thread are helping Butch...how is it a one on one debate? lol

(This forum is not a one on one debate forum. Obadiah)

 

[Butch5]

That is what the debate was about. What is called Arminianism is not sriptural, what is called Calvinism is. The debate thread was a spinoff of this thread.

Actually, while yo may be correct about Arminianism I'd argue that Calvinism is Biblical. I believe I've shown that in my opening statement.

Thanks Butch. This forum is a hotbed of anti-Reformed rhetoric. I did what I could. Perhaps my first set of posts were overwhelming and for that I apologize. I did try to address the accusations already raised, the arguments already presented in this thread, which explains the length. I've presented a case from scripture placing emphasis on the inability or total depravity of man.

It's fine to address the arguments raised in this thread, however, that probably should be done in this thread. You've presented a case, but, I'd argue that its not base on context. Every passage of Scripture is part of a bigger thought.

I was overwhelm by the amount posted against Reformed theology in this thread so I do know the feeling. If you want to scratch the debate that's fine. I planned to move on shortly anyway. I bit off more than I can chew considering the time constraints I'm under.

Peace brother, I truly mean it. May God bless you.

jBird

I'm fine with the debate. I don't feel that I have to address every passage of Scripture presented to address the issue of whether or not the Reformed doctrines are Biblical. I can show from logic that they are not.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

PS: As I can see folks in this thread are helping Butch...how is it a one on one debate? lol

This isn't the debate thread, and it isn't that we simply prefer him to you, that's not the case. I don't know you to be honest. However, we are basing our assessment off the merits of what you posted, which we deemed to be unreasonably long. Nothing personal, it was meant to be constructive in nature.

 

[WIP]

 

[reba]

Hi folks.

I made the first post in the debate thread between Butch and I. I must apologize to taking so long but I'm limited in the amount of time I can dedicate to debating. I must also apologize for the formatting. I type it up as fast as I could and didn't even thought to check the forum limits on characters per post of if the bold, emphasis, italics, etc. would copy over. I ended up just over 18000 words and 54 pages. Most of the text is taken directly from the Authorized King James Bible believing it important to still to biblical verses and categories rather than scholastic or theological.

Yours in the Lord,

jBird

THE DEBATE THREAD HERE

debate
noun
1.
a discussion, as of a public question in an assembly, involving opposing viewpoints:

jBird using that style of posting puts many/most off... The writers point gets lost.. Debate is a point counter point discussion...I would have enjoyed reading such.. Being one of these people who is one the fence about Armminism and Calvinism .. i was so hoping for a discussion...

 

[Doulos Iesou]

That is what the debate was about. What is called Arminianism is not sriptural, what is called Calvinism is. The debate thread was a spinoff of this thread.

It appears that your opponent was under a different impression as to what the debate would be on, given the context of your conversation here. This is why it is good to be very clear about the parameters of the debate prior to starting.

Thanks Butch. This forum is a hotbed of anti-Reformed rhetoric.

This forum welcomes the free expression of dissension on the matter of Calvinism and Arminianism, therefore, myself and others used Scripture to counter the claims of Calvinism. You are free to oppose these views, but don't think that you're not welcome here because some of us disagree.

I did what I could. Perhaps my first set of posts were overwhelming and for that I apologize. I did try to address the accusations already raised, the arguments already presented in this thread, which explains the length. I've presented a case from scripture placing emphasis on the inability or total depravity of man.

It would have been better to address the arguments I made in this thread, where I could see them and respond to them myself to be honest.

I was overwhelm by the amount posted against Reformed theology in this thread so I do know the feeling. If you want to scratch the debate that's fine. I planned to move on shortly anyway. I bit off more than I can chew considering the time constraints I'm under.

I for one will be bummed if you leave, there aren't enough Calvinists around. I'm sure you don't like just preaching to the choir.

 

[jBird]

Yup. I understand. That's why I ask for a formal debate but that wasn't accepted.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

I am willing to have a formal debate on the matter of Calvinism if anyone is interested.