glorydaz
Well-known member
:hammer:
Unconditional Election vs. Total Depravity
- Thread starter Clete
- Start date
:hammer:
It's easy to find out what Calvinists believe. I hear there's something called: Google.
It's SAD to see after all of your 'Scholarly posts,' you still have zero reps? Can you explain that to 'Old GM?'
Did you remember to 'Pay the Piper?'
There are none who are worthy (Rom. 3:23), at least not in the manner you mean it! Paul's statement to the Thessalonians is something of a figure of speach. Taken the way you intend, stands Paul's ministry on it's head and turns the gospel of grace into a gospel of law.
There is One and only One that is worthy, Jesus Christ Himself and only Him - ever!
If (when) I make it to heaven, it will not be because I am worthy of it but because He is and I have been hidden in Him. It isn't about what I do but about what I believe about what He has done for me (Rom. 3:22-24). Simple belief in the biblical facts about Jesus Christ and His death and resurrection is how all of us started when we were born again, as recorded in I Corinthians 15:1-4. This is the faith by which we began, and it is the same faith by which we are to “stand” (I Cor. 16:13), “walk” (II Cor. 5:7) and “live” (Gal. 2:20). “As you have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him” (Col. 2:6) for we are complete in Him (Col. 2:10).
Things Which Gracious Souls Discover
A seed embodies in full the reproduction of the life from which it came. That much is complete and can never be added to. “Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible” (I Pet. 1:23). “Thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed” (Lev. 19:19). It is to be “not I, but Christ” (Gal. 2:20). The Seed has been implanted—now the entire question is one of growth and maturity. This alone will bring forth fruit that abides. “The development of the divine life in the Christian is like the natural growth in the vegetable world. We do not need to make any special effort, only place ourselves under the conditions favorable to such growth. Fruit ripens slowly; days of sunshine and days of storm each add their share. Blessing will succeed blessing, and storm follow storm before the fruit is full grown or comes to maturity. - taken from Principles of Spiritual Growth - Miles J. Stanford.
- To “hope to be better” is to fail to see yourself in Christ only.
- To be disappointed with yourself, is to have believed in yourself.
- To be discouraged is unbelief, as to God’s purpose and plan of blessing for you.
- To be proud, is to be blind! For we have no standing before God, in ourselves.
- The lack of Divine blessing, therefore, comes from unbelief, and not from failure of devotion.
- Real devotion to God arises, not from man’s will to show it; but from the discovery that blessing has been received from God while we were yet unworthy and undevoted.
To preach devotion first, and blessing second, is to reverse God’s order, and preach law, not grace. The Law made man’s blessing depend on devotion; Grace confers undeserved, unconditional blessing: our devotion may follow, but does not always do so, in proper measure. - Romans, Verse by Verse, William R. Newell
A seed embodies in full the reproduction of the life from which it came. That much is complete and can never be added to. “Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible” (I Pet. 1:23). “Thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed” (Lev. 19:19). It is to be “not I, but Christ” (Gal. 2:20). The Seed has been implanted—now the entire question is one of growth and maturity. This alone will bring forth fruit that abides. “The development of the divine life in the Christian is like the natural growth in the vegetable world. We do not need to make any special effort, only place ourselves under the conditions favorable to such growth. Fruit ripens slowly; days of sunshine and days of storm each add their share. Blessing will succeed blessing, and storm follow storm before the fruit is full grown or comes to maturity. - taken from Principles of Spiritual Growth - Miles J. Stanford.
The effort for today's Christian is not in doing good works but in believing the gospel. The good works will come but not by effort. A tomato plant does not toil to produce its fruit; it simply produces fruit by its nature. The advantage tomatoes have over us is that there is nothing in the heart of a tomato plant at war with producing good fruit. We, however, have the flesh to contend with which is at war with the Spirit that is within us. Crucifying it can only be done by faith in the finished work of Jesus Christ in whom we have died.
This whole "crucifying the flesh" idea is a concept I've heard batted around in churches my whole life practically and I never understood it. It seems like I was constantly asking, "How does one crucify their flesh?" I never understood it and I don't thing I ever would have understood it until I understood the unique message and ministry of the apostle Paul and his Gospel of the Mystery. The key is not for me to crucify my flesh but that it has already been crucified in Him. All there is for me to do is believe it. The fruit, all fruit that will last, comes as a result of that belief.
I have, in recent weeks, gotten away from my traditional sign off at the end of my posts. I'm going back too it!
Resting in Him,
Clete
P.S. You should read this....
You Cannot Live the Christian Life by Pastor Bob Hill
First of all, if you don't use the [ quote] tag, there's a very high percentage chance that I won't see your post!
My response to your statement is that saying it doesn't make it so.
You do get that simply stating your doctrine does not do anything to defend your doctrine in any sort of debate, even one as sloppy and informal as this one.
Also, your comment is an obvious self-contradiction. "Our action is the result of sin." What can that even mean, even in the Calvinist paradigm? According to your doctrine every action we take is sin!
Sin begets sin, you'll say but there has to be a first cause! You'll say Adam's sin caused all the sin that followed, except that to say such thing forgets about Lucifer's sin which begat Adam's. Is it your contention then that Lucifer or Adam, either one, had a free will and could have chosen not to sin?
If so, then, once again, you'd be in conflict with not just what Calvin himself taught but also with what nearly all Calvinist believe. That being that Lucifer and Adam did precisely what they were predestined and created by God to do before either of them existed.
“The devil, and the whole train of the ungodly, are in all directions, held in by the hand of God as with a bridle, so that they can neither conceive any mischief, nor plan what they have conceived, nor how muchsoever they may have planned, move a single finger to perpetrate, unless in so far as he permits, nay unless in so far as he commands, that they are not only bound by his fetters but are even forced to do him service” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 17, Paragraph 11)
...Nor ought it to seem absurd when I say, that God not only foresaw the fall of the first man, and in him the ruin of his posterity; but also at his own pleasure arranged it. (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23)
...Nor ought it to seem absurd when I say, that God not only foresaw the fall of the first man, and in him the ruin of his posterity; but also at his own pleasure arranged it. (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23)
Those are Calvin's own words and they are accepted by every Calvinist on this website as well as probably every Calvinist you know.
So, which of us ignorant?
Clete
You are ignorant. To quote you: Saying it doesn't make it so
The difference is that I don't merely state things and think that the truth of what I say is self evident. I make real arguments. Arguments that you are completely incapable of refuting.
If what I said isn't so then find me a Calvinist (here on TOL or anywhere else) that disagrees with what Calvin said.
One could make the argument that Spurgeon disagreed with Calvin but you don't want to be associated with Sprugeon either because his arguments (and yours) clearly imply that we choose our actions and are thereby sovereign over our repropabation, a position that is wholey inconsistent with the rest of Calvinist doctrine as evidenced by, not only Calvin's own words but the full throated endorsement of what Calvin said by every single Calvinist on this website. In other words, as I said at the beginning, I didn't merely say it.
Resting in Him,
Clete
Last edited:
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
It is you who obviously does not understand what he wrote here:
The main purpose of this section is to demonstrate that the Jews fall short of God's righteousness. Nonetheless, one must still account for the assertion that those who do good works will be granted eternal life. Probably the dominant interpretation is that these verses are hypothetical. Eternal life would be given if one did good works and kept the law perfectly, but no one does the requisite good works, and thus all deserve punishment...At this stage in the argument of Romans, however, it is impossible to argue conclusively against the hypothetical interpretation" (Thomas R. Schreiner, Romans, 114-15).
Hypothetical: "If something is hypothetical, it is based on possible ideas or situations rather than actual ones."
Schreiner recognized that what is said in the following verse by Paul is "hypothetical," meaning that it is possible that it can happen as stated:
"Who will render to every man according to his deeds: To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life" (Ro.2:6-7).
Schreiner admits that it is possible that a person can receive eternal life by his own "deeds" or "works."
And since it is possible that can only mean that a person has the "ability" to gain eternal life by his own works. After all, since it is possible then it cannot be denied that every single person has the ability to do it. If you want to argue that a person does not have the ability then it would be "impossible" for him to attain eternal life by his works. And even Schreiner admits that it is possible.
Since the Lord Jesus was made like His brethren "in all things" then the fact that he lived a sinless life proves that all people have the "ability" to live a sinless life.
But sooner or later every person decides to go his own way instead of the Lord's way and ends up sinning. And that sin cannot be blamed on Adam or anyone else.
Again, Clete, what is important is God's word. You can whine about some dead guys all you want. Reformed theology focuses on the sola's. Sola Scripture, Sola Gratia, etc. These are established in God's word.
What you are doing is quoting men without quoting the scripture they observed. I could do the same thing about Pelagius and then call you a Pelagian and expect you to respond to what Pelagius wrote as though his words are what you base your life upon.
If you want to whine about what Calvin and Spurgeon said, be my guest, but that is irrelevant to me.
I understand that he is referring to an impossible theoretical question. Meaning he is saying it's not possible, but if it were...
Reformed theology is evidenced in scripture. Calvin is one person who recognized this theology oozing from the pages of scripture. Honestly, a person has to be blind not to see God's predestination, election and choosing in scripture.
No they aren't. Sola Scriptura is not biblical at all. It's the most blatantly self-contradictory doctrine in all of Christianity!
You can continue to attempt to recast the debate in terms that make you less uncomfortable but I won't let you succeed.
The point of the thread is that Calvinists are not consistent with their own doctrine. Spurgeon wasn't and neither are you. Every single moment of their lives testifies to the fact that we have a free will and their own arguments imply exactly that and yet Calvinism proper and Calvin himself denied it outright as do many of the morons who make the argument that presuppose a free will!
If you did, it wouldn't be a parallel to what I'm doing here, although I can see why you'd think so.
The difference would be that I am presenting regular, normal Calvinist doctrine. There is a whole thread devoted to my attempting to find a Calvinist who would deny believing the things that I've quoted from Calvin and not only were there no takers for denying them, on the contrary, every single one of them to a person not only didn't distance themselves from the quotes but they endorsed them outright!
I am not presenting a Straw Man version of Calvinism. In fact, a big part of the reason I quote Calvinists and Calvin himself directly is precisely because Calvinist routinely accuse me of misrepresenting their beliefs! I AM NOT DOING SO! If you think I am then find me a Calvinist author anywhere or any Calvinist on this website that will deny believing in the things I've quoted.
It ought not be irrelevant to you if you claim to believe in any sort of Calvinism because they are only the two most famous Calvinists in the history of Calvinism. And, as I've said already, what I've quoted of Calvin is totally normal Calvinist doctrine. If you don't believe me, print off the opening post of that thread I linked to with all the Calvinist quotes and show the list to the pastor of your own church and ask him if there's anything there that he disagrees with. If he's a Calvinist pastor, there won't be a single one that he'll disagree with. Not one syllable of any of them. That's because it's not Calvin that I'm harping on, it's Calvinism. There is a reason it's called Calvinism, by the way. Maybe you might want to look into that as well.
Saying it doesn't make it so.
You keep trying to change the subject but I'm not one third as stupid as you think I am.
Resting in Him,
Clete
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
That is not what he was referring to. He was referring to something that is possible, at least in theory.
I see no reason to continue on this thread since you are unable to understand simple concepts.
There are many, many Godly reformed person's, both male and female. None of them follows anyone, but Christ Jesus. They read the scriptures and let it speak (Sola Scriptura) while placing tradition beneath scripture. It is not surprising that reformed person's read scripture and find agreement in God's Sovereignty, predestination, election and choosing. The Bible oozes, from Genesis to Revelation, with God choosing his saints as well as choosing to use wicked people to accomplish his ordained will. You cannot find a passive God who subjects his Sovereignty below the human will. Yet, you seem bound and determined to lift up humans while attempting to cast down God.
I understand you are wrong in your comprehension of what he said. I am thankful if you choose to stop.
You keep making this same point!
It is not relevant!
The issue isn't Calvin, it's Calvinism! How many different ways is there to say it?
They claim to do this but they don't. There's isn't a syllable of Calvinism's distinctives anywhere in the Bible. People generally don't believe what they believe because they've read the Bible. They believe what they are taught to believe and follow along dutifully.
No, it isn't since they believe the doctrine first and read the Bible in light of that doctrine.
If you believe this then where's the objection to my quotes of Calvin coming from?
You're the one who says that God doesn't cause sin. You're the one who agrees with Spurgeon that repprobation is all of man while salvation is all of God.
This implies that human beings are sovereign over their own reprobation and yet here you are now saying the opposite.
Go figure!
I haven't even presented my doctrine on this thread, you dolt!
The whole point of the thread is to demonstrated Spurgeon's contradictions of Calvinist doctrine. YOU are the one who agreed with Spurgeon!
Resting in Him,
Clete
Your focus is on the wrong issue. If you are resting in Christ, you will focus on scripture. But, so far you have avoided scripture. You therefore miss Reformed theology because you miss the scripture that forms it.
I have debated Calvinism for decades.
There is not one single syllable of Calvinism's distinctive doctrines anywhere in the Bible.
That'll be the last time I repeat that on this thread. If you want to make a biblical argument for some particular Calvinist doctrine, I invite you to start your own thread where I'll gleefully crush your arguments to powder.
This thread, however, is about Spurgeon, one of the most famous Calvinist in history, teaching that people are sovereign over their own reprobation, in direct conflict with not only what Calvin himself taught but also with normal Calvinist doctrine (i.e. with the rest of his own doctrine).
If you don't want to discuss that then get off this thread.
Clete
By the way, did anyone else notice the instant contradiction in this post that consisted of all of two whole sentences!
Make a baseless and totally unsupported accusation and then say that saying it doesn't make it so.
How is it possible that anyone can do that?
:rotfl: