The God of Calvinism

[DivineNames]

So Calvin is right on with the bible. The whole key in the free will issue is that since none of us knows who is called, then salvation is open to all

What?

That is absurd. :silly:

So you don't believe God when he says he will harden whom he wants to harden and have mercy on whom he wants to have mercy. Is that correct?

Nor do you believe Paul when he says; "The man without the spirit does not accept the things that come from God for they are foolishness and he cannot understand them because they are spiritually discerned."

Who do you think gives us the Holy Spirit? The toothfairy? :o Or perhapes there is no God and we give it to ourselves. Sorry, Charlie, but as Jesus said; "You did not choose me, I chose you." "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him." Again, God makes the decisions of the universe, not you.

What does all this have to do with your ridiculous claim that salvation is open to all, on the grounds that, "none of us knows who is called"??

 

[DivineNames]

One can no more decide to believe than he can decide to become perfect. That wreaks of human arrogance and pride which is from the devil.

What you have previously said-

God wants all to be saved as much as I want all my children to be saved. But God knows that each of us has to come to our own understanding of why we need Him or we would not recognize the degree of his love. He therefore gives us the option of seeking him or rejecting him. Forcing himself down out throats only makes us want to resist him all the more.

http://www.christianforums.net/viewtopi ... c&start=30

Would you like to explain the apparent inconsistency?

 

[DivineNames]

As for the “article†uh well it is not very convincing to me…if anything I see more of a lack of understanding about Calvinism.

If it is misrepresenting Calvinism, then could you explain?

 

[Heidi]

One can no more decide to believe than he can decide to become perfect. That wreaks of human arrogance and pride which is from the devil.

What you have previously said-

God wants all to be saved as much as I want all my children to be saved. But God knows that each of us has to come to our own understanding of why we need Him or we would not recognize the degree of his love. He therefore gives us the option of seeking him or rejecting him. Forcing himself down out throats only makes us want to resist him all the more.

http://www.christianforums.net/viewtopi ... c&start=30

Would you like to explain the apparent inconsistency?

"Free will" can best be illustrated by the relationship between parents & children. Parents create an environment in which their children "feel free" to make their own choices when in reality, the parents are creating the environment for them to do so. But it is paramount that the child thinks he is making is own decisions so he can do what he wants. But the parents know what the children's choices will lead to. And that is how God treats us. He wants us to come to an understanding inside ourselves of why we need him. And we can only do that by reaping the consequences of our actions.

God has repeatedly told us who he is. But if we don't understand why we need him, then we cannot possibilby understand that he is merciful. No sin, no mercy.

 

[bbas 64]

Will be so kind as to explain to me why the greatest writers, evangelists, preachers, and missionareis of the 1600's to the 1890's were "Calvinists?

No Armenian today is producing 1/2 the results those men did.

Would you be so kind as to explain why God used Georege Whitefield and CH Spurgeon and others to get such tremendous results and have such a profound affect by adhering to such a doctrine?

It was their aim to make people work until you felt "elected".

I read some of Calvin's original works and while he is very smart, I think he totally missed the point of scripture by reading his own meanings into the text and I also feel that he was illiterate of other Bible verses.

My pastor points to CH Spurgeon as a Calvinist who believed that you could choose.

Good Day, sothenes

I would hardly suggest that your pator do some more reading. I would just be interested in what work of Spurgeon he got such a novel idea.

Peace to u,

Bill

 

[Sothenes]

Good Day, sothenes

I would hardly suggest that your pator do some more reading. I would just be interested in what work of Spurgeon he got such a novel idea.

Peace to u,

Bill

Apparently Spurgeon did debate other pastors. I'll try to email or call the church for more information so that I can deliver a bibliography.

How many people have actually read all five volume's of Spurgeon's Sermons?


I preach that every man who believes shall be savedâ€â€that every man who comes shall find mercy. People ask me, "But suppose a man should come who was not chosen, would he be saved?" You go and suppose nonsense and I am not going to give you an answer. If a man is not chosen he will never come. When he does come it is a sure proof that he was chosen. Says one, "Suppose any one should go to Christ who had not been called of the Spirit." Stop, my brother, that is a supposition thou hast no right to make, for such a thing cannot happen; you only say it to entangle me, and you will not do that just yet. I say every man who comes to Christ shall be saved. I can say that as a Calvinist, or as a hyper-Calvinist, as plainly as you can say it. I have no narrower gospel than you have; only my gospel is on a solid foundation, whereas yours is built upon nothing but sand and rottenness. "Every man that cometh shall be saved, for no man cometh to me except the Father draw him."

http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/0052.htm

The above is quoted from Spurgeon. He apparently is a five point Calvinist who believed that the elect chose to believe through preaching. Just listen to the arguments Spurgeon gives because it is though Spurgeon is answering the Calvinists who are skeptics.

 

[JM]

"The old truth that Calvin preached, that Augustine preached, that Paul preached, is the truth that I must preach to-day, or else be false to my conscience and my God. I cannot shape the truth; I know of no such thing as paring off the rough edges of a doctrine. John Knox's gospel is my gospel. That which thundered through Scotland must thunder through England again."â€â€C. H. Spurgeon

I own all his writtings, he's a Calvinist, some take his statements out of context and apply them to all Calvinists but he was speaking to hyper Calvinists.

http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/articles/hypercal.htm

Spurgeon said, "It would not be possible for me too earnestly to press upon you the importance of reading the expositions of that prince among men, JOHN CALVIN!"

"... I have my own private opinion that there is no such a thing as preaching Christ and him crucified, unless you preach what now-a-days is called Calvinism. I have my own ideas, and those I always state boldly. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else."

"We look upon them as being five great lamps [Calvinist TULIP] which help to irradiate the cross, or rather five bright emanations springing from the glorious covenant of our Triune God, and illustrating the great doctrine of Jesus crucified. Against all comers, especially against all lovers of Arminianism, we defend and maintain pure gospel truth."

 

[Heidi]

Why do people care about what Calvin said? He's only a human being! We have one teacher and that is the Christ. If all Christians listened to Jesus instead of fallible human beings, there would be no division among us. Paul also told us that. But, many Christians don't listen to Paul who heard directly from Jesus, either.

 

[mutzrein]

Why do people care about what Calvin said? He's only a human being! We have one teacher and that is the Christ. If all Christians listened to Jesus instead of fallible human beings, there would be no division among us. Paul also told us that. But, many Christians don't listen to Paul who heard directly from Jesus, either.

I agree with you Heidi . . . but!!

It is these fallible human beings who have interpreted what scripture says. And they have told us what it means so that when we (also fallible human beings) want to follow Christ we get hoodwinked into believing we are when we are really following the doctrines of men.

But that doesn't describe anyone here does it? Surely not.

 

[Sothenes]

I own all his writtings, he's a Calvinist, some take his statements out of context and apply them to all Calvinists but he was speaking to hyper Calvinists.

http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/articles/hypercal.htm

Spurgeon said, "It would not be possible for me too earnestly to press upon you the importance of reading the expositions of that prince among men, JOHN CALVIN!"

I and others see Spurgeon's 'doublespeak' and understand what Spurgeon is trying to do.

 

[Sothenes]

Losing their election

I was wondering how people can get blotted out of the book of life if they were never elected? Or were all people elected and those who chose not to believe become non-elect?

 

[DivineNames]

One can no more decide to believe than he can decide to become perfect. That wreaks of human arrogance and pride which is from the devil.

What you have previously said-

God wants all to be saved as much as I want all my children to be saved. But God knows that each of us has to come to our own understanding of why we need Him or we would not recognize the degree of his love. He therefore gives us the option of seeking him or rejecting him. Forcing himself down out throats only makes us want to resist him all the more.

http://www.christianforums.net/viewtopi ... c&start=30

Would you like to explain the apparent inconsistency?

"Free will" can best be illustrated by the relationship between parents & children. Parents create an environment in which their children "feel free" to make their own choices when in reality, the parents are creating the environment for them to do so. But it is paramount that the child thinks he is making is own decisions so he can do what he wants. But the parents know what the children's choices will lead to. And that is how God treats us. He wants us to come to an understanding inside ourselves of why we need him. And we can only do that by reaping the consequences of our actions.

God has repeatedly told us who he is. But if we don't understand why we need him, then we cannot possibilby understand that he is merciful. No sin, no mercy.

Heidi, do you accept Calvinism or not?

Do we all have the ability to make a free choice to accept Jesus?
Or does it all come down to God electing certain people?

 

[DivineNames]

As for the “article†uh well it is not very convincing to me…if anything I see more of a lack of understanding about Calvinism.

Well lets look at one claim that it makes-

When the philosophy that drives Calvinism is projected to its logical conclusion, even Satan's activity is an extension of God's sovereignty. God sovereignly controls Satan's every move. This makes God the author of everything evil, and the most wicked sinner of all. Some Calvinists actually admit this, and seek to defend it from Scripture. If ultimately God sovereignly is in control of everything, and if free will of man, angels, or even Satan, is ultimately under the control of God, then the responsibility for all wickedness and evil must be placed at the feet of God Himself.

http://www.pfrs.org/calvinism/calvin09.html

So the claim is that some Calvinists will acknowledge that God is the, "author of everything evil". Is this true? Can anyone comment on this?

 

[Nocturnal_Principal_X]

So the claim is that some Calvinists will acknowledge that God is the, "author of everything evil". Is this true? Can anyone comment on this?

Any Calvinists who makes such admittance is in error.

 

[Drew]

I think that anyone who claims that God is in control of every event in the universe does indeed face the challenge of explaining how this does not make God the author of evil. If I were to imagine myself as a Calvinist (which I am not, at least in terms of what I understand Calvinism to entail), I suppose I would respond (off the top of my head) with something like the following: There may be a kind of necessity to the presence of evil - even God cannot accomplish his wonderful purposes without creating and using evil. So the evil that God indeed "author" is necessary and unavoidable in order to accomplish something great.

I do not actually believe this, in part because of the descriptions (e.g. in Revelation) of the world that is to come - a world where all tears are wiped away and there is no more suffering. So it seems that God indeed can have a "universe" without evil. I also believe that the descriptions of man before the fall convey the idea that evil was not necessary to accomplish God's purposes - Adam and Eve did not have to eat the fruit.

These are sweeping statements that I am not even going to pretend to defend in this post. However, it seems much more likely that God was indeed "constrained" in order to make a universe that is rich and wonderful, but He did not need to author evil. I submit that God may have needed to create free will, to give up some of his control of the world, in order to create a world rich with possibility for love and relationship between God and man and between man and man.

I fully acknowledge that this view still makes God seem responsible for evil in that he created the possiblility of evil, where none had previously existed. Perhaps, though, this is a "chance" that He had to take in order to create a world in which truly rich relationships can exist.

 

[JM]

I own all his writtings, he's a Calvinist, some take his statements out of context and apply them to all Calvinists but he was speaking to hyper Calvinists.

http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/articles/hypercal.htm

Spurgeon said, "It would not be possible for me too earnestly to press upon you the importance of reading the expositions of that prince among men, JOHN CALVIN!"

I and others see Spurgeon's 'doublespeak' and understand what Spurgeon is trying to do.

You see what you want, he's clear, I've read many of his works and know what you say is in error.

 

[JM]

So the claim is that some Calvinists will acknowledge that God is the, "author of everything evil". Is this true? Can anyone comment on this?

Any Calvinists who makes such admittance is in error.

I've never heard of that either.

 

[bbas 64]

Good Day, sothenes

I would hardly suggest that your pator do some more reading. I would just be interested in what work of Spurgeon he got such a novel idea.

Peace to u,

Bill

Apparently Spurgeon did debate other pastors. I'll try to email or call the church for more information so that I can deliver a bibliography.

How many people have actually read all five volume's of Spurgeon's Sermons?


I preach that every man who believes shall be savedâ€â€that every man who comes shall find mercy. People ask me, "But suppose a man should come who was not chosen, would he be saved?" You go and suppose nonsense and I am not going to give you an answer. If a man is not chosen he will never come. When he does come it is a sure proof that he was chosen. Says one, "Suppose any one should go to Christ who had not been called of the Spirit." Stop, my brother, that is a supposition thou hast no right to make, for such a thing cannot happen; you only say it to entangle me, and you will not do that just yet. I say every man who comes to Christ shall be saved. I can say that as a Calvinist, or as a hyper-Calvinist, as plainly as you can say it. I have no narrower gospel than you have; only my gospel is on a solid foundation, whereas yours is built upon nothing but sand and rottenness. "Every man that cometh shall be saved, for no man cometh to me except the Father draw him."

http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/0052.htm

The above is quoted from Spurgeon. He apparently is a five point Calvinist who believed that the elect chose to believe through preaching. Just listen to the arguments Spurgeon gives because it is though Spurgeon is answering the Calvinists who are skeptics.

Good Day, Sothenes

I will await an answer from your church...

I have not read them all. Not sure how this quote proves your assertion.

Saying that Scripture is the primary cause is mmuch differnet than what you posted.

Peace to u,

Bill

 

[DivineNames]

I own all his writtings, he's a Calvinist, some take his statements out of context and apply them to all Calvinists but he was speaking to hyper Calvinists.

http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/articles/hypercal.htm

I will quote from that article-

Hyper-Calvinism is sometimes defined as the view that God will save the elect apart from any means. Some, but very few, modern hyper-Calvinists hold such an extreme view. Those who do hold this view oppose all forms of evangelism and preaching to the unsaved, because they believe God will save whomever He chooses, apart from human means.
The most famous example of this kind of hyper-Calvinism was when John Ryland heard William Carey talking about becoming a missionary to India, and told him, "Sit down, young man. When God decides to save the heathen, He will do it without your help."

JM has been kind enough to tell us about a possible danger in Calvinism. You go down that path, you may reach the conclusion that you don't need to worry about trying to convert people.

 

[AVBunyan]

You go down that path, you may reach the conclusion that you don't need to worry about trying to convert people.

Then will you explain to me why the greatest evangelists and missionaries of the past believed in election?

Will you please explain this?