[BibChr]

Vines said that the Greek word for "whosoever," which occurs more than a thousand times in the New Testament, carries the idea of "anyone, anywhere, anytime. Whosoever believes in Him is John's normal way of describing saving faith."

That he would emphasize this, as if any Calvinist would deny it, is a HUGE clue that he has no idea what he's talking about.

Which, normally, would be a bad thing.

[Tennessee Nana]

BTTT

[DonaldC]

This conference is interesting considering early baptists and calvinists were for the most part in agreement.

[r9etb]

Here are the key questions:

1. What happens to those who don't agree with one or more of the "five points?" Answer: Nothing.

2. What happens to those who agree with it in full? Answer: Nothing. (Indeed, TULIP theology would seem to demand that the answer is "nothing.")

It seems pretty obvious belief or non-belief in "five point Calvinism" is irrelevant to salvation.

[CanaGuy]

John Calvin...about the only Frenchman who ever made any sense. He’d spin in his grave like a lathe if he caught a glimpse of today’s welfare crowd.

[MayflowerMadam]

My parents’ pastor is a 5-pointer. My cousin’s husband once told Pastor that “If it hadn’t been for Carol bringing me to church, I never would have been saved.” Pastor said, “Yes, you would have.” (alluding to the Election point). The church never has evangelists. Missionary effort is dismal compared to most Baptist churches. His ministry is focused on visiting the sick and elderly and that’s about it. Sad.

I don’t care if someone’s a 5-pointer or not; “go ye into all the world and preach the gospel” is still there — so do it!

[bperiwinkle7]

John 3:16 for God did so love the world, that His Son—the only begotten—He gave, that every one who is believing in him may not perish, but may have life age-during.
-—Young’s Literal Translation

Everyone who is believing...means something different than the concept “whosoever will” which is implied in the above argument...

James White, Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church, and Alpha Omega Ministries, has a good exegesis of the above.

http://www.prbc.org/Sermons2.htm

Scroll down to “Common Attacks Against Reformed Theology” pt II, John 3:16, 17.

The rest of it is good, too.

[topcat54]

P -- PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS

Ken Keathley, dean of graduate studies at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, covered the fifth point, perseverance of the saints. Ironically, he said, many Arminians and Calvinists arrive at basically the same answer: Assurance is based on the evidence of sanctification in one's life.

It figures that an Arminian would confuse perseverance with assurance, moving as they do from a Christocentric to anthropocentric theology.

[HarleyD]

Vines said that the Greek word for "whosoever," which occurs more than a thousand times in the New Testament, carries the idea of "anyone, anywhere, anytime.

Apparently Vines doesn't understand the "outward" and "inward" calling concept. Of course God calls everyone. No one listens. Noah preached for 120 years all the while he was building an ark for 7 people. It is the Holy Spirit's job to convict people of sin, righteousness and of judgment. One has to admit that the Holy Spirit does just that 100% of the time if He is God. He does not fail to convict people of their sin. With Vines rational, the Holy Spirit doesn't truly convict anyone of anything.

TOTAL DEPRAVITY - "Does that mean we are born guilty before God?" Patterson asked. "I do not think that can be demonstrated from Scripture.

"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned" (Rom. 5:12).

If you are dead, then you can't do anything to respond to God.

Bingo. God leads us to repentences, gives us our faith, and grant us our wisdom from above. Which of these would you like to deny?

UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION- Land said, "I believe in a God who is so sovereign and so omniscient that He can break out of Calvin's box

Sorry but what one believes and what the scriptures plainly states are two different things.

Joh 15:15-16 "No longer do I call you slaves, for the slave does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all things that I have heard from My Father I have made known to you. You did not choose Me but I chose you, and appointed you that you would go and bear fruit, and that your fruit would remain, so that whatever you ask of the Father in My name He may give to you."

LIMITED ATONEMENT - "The debate is very much about the sufficiency of the atonement," Allen said. "In the high Calvinist position on limited atonement, Christ is only sufficient to save those for whom He suffered ... the non-elect according to that position are not savable

If one were to give this any moderate thought, those who die without Christ are NOT covered by the blood of the Lamb. The atonement is limited no matter how one looks at it. It only covers believers.

IRRESISTIBLE GRACE - Lemke said that while Calvinists don't deny people can resist the Holy Spirit in some situations, they believe the effectual call is irresistible. "It doesn't seem to me that [the effectual call] helps in this particular situation, because the Jews after all were God's chosen people, they were under the covenant. If you have a covenant theology, then these people would seem to be among the elect

Lemke makes a mistake that the nation of Israel was a type of the church. The church holds both wheat and tares, even as the nation of Israel did. Those non-believers in the convenent tasted of the heavenly fruit but never enjoyed. Same way with those who are in the church who will cry out, "Lord, did we not..."

It is interesting that Lemke quotes from John 5. John 5 is rather clear for irresistable grace.

Joh 5:21 "For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son also gives life to whom He wishes.

The Son gives life to whom He wishes. It is not something that we do; a point ignored by Lemke.

PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS - Ironically, he said, many Arminians and Calvinists arrive at basically the same answer: Assurance is based on the evidence of sanctification in one's life. While the Reformers taught that assurance is the essence of faith, the doctrines of the hidden will of God, limited atonement and temporary faith undermine this assurance, he said. Some argue that final justification is obtained by perseverance. "Doesn't this come close to a works-based salvation?" he asked.

I don't know ANY Reformer that comes to this conclusion. After stressing that salvation is all of God, it is rather ironic that Keathley would try to pin a works-based salvation on Calvinists. It makes me think that he's a bit nervous on the subject. The natural conclusion of the Arminian who has "free will" is to say that if God gives a person "free will" does He ever take it away? If not, then can't they say that they no longer wish to be saved? Don't they have to do things to show that they're walking in the faith? How much do they have to show? There are a number of Arminians that believe one can lose their salvation and it is a natural, albeit wrong, conclusion.

Stanley challenged the audience to obey God and leave the consequences to Him. "If you obey God, can you fail?" he asked.

Many men throughout the ages thought that they were "obeying God". And, yes, many men have failed. Why not simply follow God and allow Him to lead.

Sorry but none of this is good scripture analysis of the TULIP. ;O)

[PAR35]

First Baptist Church of Woodstock, Ga.

I understand that a former pastor of that church is now a preacher in a Reformed denomination.