Results 1 - 12 of 12
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Bad Arguments Against Calvinism | John 15:16 | Jesusman | 37959 | ||
Hello, You don't get my point, do you? Look at calvinism closely. I mean very closely, and follow it to it's logical conclusion. It begins by placing Man in the passive role within Salvation, and puts God in the active role. As it continues, Calvinism places a strong emphasis upon the power of God and his will to do whatever he chooses. Follow that same thought to it's logical conclusion. Not it's biblical or desired conclusion, but the conclusion that you reach if you follow the same thinking all the way through. You get what I previously posted. PLacing God as responcible for sending people to hell, when the Bible teaches that Man alone is responsible. Let me clarify. The area that I see as unjust is the Calvinist teaching of election. According to Calvinism, only the "elect" are offered Salvation, and the rest of Mankind is left as being "vessels of Wrath", doomed for eternal torment in hell. According to the infamous Pauline passage in Romans 9, by which almost all of Calvinism is defended by, God alone controls everyhting in the universe, and nothing happens without his approval. That belief alone begins with God being responsible for Sin because neither Man nor Satan could have rebelled in the first place if God did not "Will" it to happen in the first place. This is biblically wrong. Romans 1:18-32 teaches that the responsibilty for Sin is upon Man. Romans 5:12 supports this, as does Isaiah 43. Another factor with calvinism that places God as being responcible is if you follow it through to the conclusion. The requirement for entrance into heaven is whether or not a person has been saved. This is undeniable. According to calvinsim, only those who have been "touched" by the Holy Spirit has been saved, or "elected". Romans 8:14 seems to support this. So, it is clear in calvinism that only those who have been saved will enter heaven, and that God approaches only the "elect". Ephesians chapter 1 teaches that those who have been saved have also been "predestined". Now, we come to the kicker. The question that is often asked is "did Jesus die for the sins of the elect only or for all of mankind?" I am not going to hang around this question, but go on to a different one. "Is man dead in sin, or is he in slavery to sin?" Choose you're answer carefully. Due to space limits, I'll finish this in the following post. Jesusman |
||||||
2 | Bad Arguments Against Calvinism | John 15:16 | John Reformed | 37984 | ||
Dear Bruce, You underestimate what calvinism teaches when you concluded that it inferred that: "God alone controls everyhting in the universe, and nothing happens without his approval." Calvinism teaches that God has predestined ALL things. So, nothing happens outside His will. I don't understand why this upsets some folks but provides comfort and security to others. John Reformed |
||||||
3 | Bad Arguments Against Calvinism | John 15:16 | EdB | 37990 | ||
John I guess the disturbing part of your reasoning would be that we would have to conclude from what your saying, it was God’s will for the fall of man in the garden. EdB |
||||||
4 | Bad Arguments Against Calvinism | John 15:16 | John Reformed | 37998 | ||
Dear Bruce, We are now getting down to the heart of our differences. Has God ordained everything that has occured or will ever occur? At this point human reason is of little value. We must go to the Word which alone is truth. Act 15:18 "Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world." (KJV). It's obvious given the context that, James had recognized God's eternal purpose to include the gentiles into The Body of Christ. Eph 3:11 "This was in accordance with the eternal purpose which He carried out in Christ Jesus our Lord,". Paul assures the Ephesians that God's eternal purpose was fulfilled in his ministry and so not to be anxious over his current imprisonment. Heb 6:17 "In the same way God, desiring even more to show to the heirs of the promise the unchangeableness of His purpose, interposed with an oath". His purpose never is changed nor can it be. Eph 1 3-11. What is the plain sense of this passage? I don't want to burden you with the weight of all the scripture that speaks of God's eternal purpose and the inevitability of it's accomplishment. I would prefer to hear your thoughts on what I have put forth thus far. But, to answer your question: Yes God did foreordain man's fall and all else as well. Perhaps you can do a word search on foreordination or predestination before responding. Just a suggestion. Brother John |
||||||
5 | Bad Arguments Against Calvinism | John 15:16 | EdB | 38004 | ||
John While I can agree that God knew the fall was going to occur and that he allowed the fall to occur. I can not believe God willed the fall to occur. In other words I can see no evidence in scripture that God wanted man to sin. God gave man a choice, obey or rebel. God then allowed man to make that choice, knowing full well man would choose wrong. Nonetheless the choice was still man's. EdB |
||||||
6 | Bad Arguments Against Calvinism | John 15:16 | John Reformed | 38011 | ||
Dear Ed, In two short notes you have managed to plunge us both into a debate that is at least hundreds of years old. The soverignty of God and the resposibility of man. Good work! Tell me, could God have prevented the Fall? He knew it would happen. Why did'nt He change His plan, or step in and prevent the serpent from entering the Garden? Or did everything that happened suit His eternal purpose? God Bless Ed, John |
||||||
7 | Bad Arguments Against Calvinism | John 15:16 | EdB | 38019 | ||
John Unless I have missed something this debate has raged on this forum for nearly a year. It has become all consuming for some. And a great annoyance for others. Still others have left the forum because they were bored to tears over it. Even more have threatened to leave because of it. Your question could God prevent the fall? Yes He could. Why didn't he? Because God wanted free will creatures not robots. God wanted man to love Him not because he didn't have a choice but because man choose to love the One that first loved him. This whole issue of man’s will is the issue Satan presented to God in the Book of Job and even Satan was smarter than many. He never once inferred that Job didn’t have a choice or that it was God’s irresistible will. Satan said Job served because God was paying (bribing him) to do so. God said test the reason for yourself. If Job didn’t have a choice as your saying then the test of Job was nothing and the whole story was just that a story. I don’t believe that for a minute and I pray neither do you! Look at Jonah, God said go to Ninevah, Job exercised his free will and went to Tarnish. Again if Jonah didn’t have choice then the whole story of Jonah is just that a story. I don’t believe that either and again I pray you don’t! Now if God gave Job a choice and God gave Jonah a choice, I have to believe God gave me a choice. Therefore I see no reason for this discussion to go on. EdB |
||||||
8 | Bad Arguments Against Calvinism | John 15:16 | Hank | 38023 | ||
Hi, Ed. You're quite right. This debate has raged on and on -- too far, too far. Enough is ENOUGH! I propose two things: (1) That all participants in the Calvinism debates agree to STOP IT! Cease fire. You've had your say, over and over and over again. All you're doing is re-runs. We've heard it too much and too many times already. (2) Direct all new questions to the archives, tell the questioners to use Search and let it go at that. We are going nuts having to put up with this debate that has no end, no solution, no more possible value or edification to anyone. Has one single soul been swayed from his original roosting place on this issue? If you exist, come forward. --Hank | ||||||
9 | Bad Arguments Against Calvinism | John 15:16 | John Reformed | 38032 | ||
Dear Hank, I'm sending to you the reply I sent to Ed. Subject: Bad Arguments Against Calvinism Note: Dear Ed, What is the question under discussion? "Bad arguements against Calvinism". Who posed the question? Zacht. Is Zacht a calvinist? No. Subject: Bad Arguments Against Calvinism Note: John You said: I guess the disturbing part of your reasoning would be that we would have to conclude from what your saying, it was God’s will for the fall of man in the garden. EdB Dear Ed, Why did you get involved in a question your sick and tired of? You'll have to answer that one for yourself, because I don't have a clue. I have no wish to impose my understanding on any one. However, how are theological arguements to be discussed without putting forth the truth as one sees it? Hank, I believe that I am being treated unfairly. Tell me please, given the suject under discussion, how in the name of sam hill, can a person reply to this Subject "BAD ARGUEMENTS AGAINST CALVISM (FOR PETES SAKE) but not mention the topic at all? John |
||||||
10 | Bad Arguments Against Calvinism | John 15:16 | Hank | 38035 | ||
The answer, John, is simple and clear: Don't! The archives are brimming over with arguments, for and against, Calvinism. My point, which I shall repeat with and for emphasis, is: Let's put an END to these debates now. --Hank | ||||||
11 | Bad Arguments Against Calvinism | John 15:16 | John Reformed | 38039 | ||
Dear Hank, How do you propose to end a debate that is so fundamental to each sides understanding of God? Will calvinists agree to never mention the soveriegnty of God? Will arminians promise that they will never espouse man's freedom to choose? I seriously doubt it. I for one, find it impossible to discuss Scripture without interpreting the meaning. Sooner or later a someone is bound to ask what the writer of Scripture meant by "the world" in John 3:16 or some other verse we disagree on. Now what do we do? I believe each one of us should be informed by his own conscience. Behave to one another as courteously as we can and be admonished by Our Lord's command to love oneanother. I see nothing wrong with a vigorous debate over God's truth. If I'm wrong, prove it. If I don't have the grace to ackowledge my error, woe to me! At least my blood will not be on your hands. What Say Ye, John Reformed |
||||||
12 | Bad Arguments Against Calvinism | John 15:16 | Hank | 38041 | ||
John, whether airing Calvinistic/Reformed views over and over is "a vigorous debate over God's truth" is itself highly debatable. Let's try to look at this forum in the perspective from which it was conceived by the Lockman Foundation. They named it StudyBibleForum with the idea that it would be a trustworthy internet study Bible -- one to which anyone could go to find helpful exegesis on various Bible subjects. John, what kind of study Bible would anyone want to purchase that contained a long, drawn-out debate on Calvinism to the exclusion of many other subjects on which the Bible speaks? If one wished to buy a book on Calvinism's pros and cons, he would buy a book so labeled, not one that advertised itself as a study Bible. Now, if Lockman would agree to change this web site from StudyBibleForum to Debates on Calvinism, then I should think one would be in his proper sphere to debate the issue to his heart's content, from now till the end of time. But this is not a platform designed for proponents or opponents of Calvinism to air their views over and over, ad infinitum. This is, I say once again, a StudyBibleForum, not a platform for advertising the merits or demerits of Calvinism or any other ism. I happen to be Southern Baptist, but I consider it most improper to extol over and over the correctness of Southern Baptist doctrine or the joys of being a Baptist or -- worse still -- to confront every non-Baptist on the forum with the propaganda that my views all are right and their views all wrong. Think about it. Are you the one being put upon, or you the one who is putting his views rather strongly upon others of the forum? --Hank | ||||||