Scotth1960
Member
[/QUOTE]How did I take what you said out of context?
I still must say that the way you are representing Calvinism is a straw man. We get no choice on our sinful, human, rebellious nature. With that Calvinists would agree, but to say that we get no choice in whether we are saved or not, that is a misrepresentation. We absolutely get a choice and we all choose to rebel and not to be saved. But God changes the nature of some so that they choose to be saved.
So then, we don't choose our nature, but we do make choices of faith.
Do you know the difference between the nature of a person and the choices they make? They are not the same thing.
Very much I see you misrepresenting Calvinists. You might do it in malice, and you might honestly believe you understand what Calvinists teach, but you do not.
I am not sure what you mean by "Calvinists still make decisions based upon their fleshly desires?"
--- If by this you mean that the Calvinists understanding of salvation is a fleshly desire, I would disagree strongly. There is no doctrine more self abasing then Calvinism. Calvinists believe that from birth, even from conception we were born in iniquity (Psalm 51). Our rebellion is so deep that we cannot change any more then a leopard can change its spots. (Jer 13:23 Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil. ) On the other hand, you believe that man is not so rebellious. You believe that man is not so sinful.
It certainly takes less grace to save someone who already loves God and wants to be saved then to have to first change the nature of a rebel so that God can save him.
Ahhh, but free, while you may believe that Christs shed blood is necessary for a person to be saved, you cannot say it is all that is needed. You must say that a person must first make a free will decision and accept this grace. Do you remember how you said "his blood paves the way." Can you not see your inferior view of the saving value of the blood of Christ. You are the one who said "his blood paves the way." And then you must tell me what must be added to the blood of Christ, that is our faith.
While I agree that faith is the human requirement for justification, I would never ever say "his blood paves the way." I would say his shed blood is all that is needed. Because of his blood, he changes our nature, and by this change of nature he provides us with the ability to have faith.
Free, so far you have not even come up to Arminianism. Without admitting a prevenient work of Grace you are still at pelagiansm.
I may as well argue that with Calvinism, no one has a choice in whether they are saved or not, so it becomes God forcing himself on those whom he chooses. But love which is forced isn't love at all, it's rape. Agreed?
Friends, One Calvinist who talked with me on another website was very negative. He denied that human beings have free will. He said some people are predestined to hell. He was very uncharitable and negative. God forgive him.
I find Calvinism to be very unbiblical.
In Erie Scott Harrington