| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 04/19/2004 7:52:52 PM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
This thread has 183 abuse reports. It’s now locked. Maybe you can all get along better on the next thread. |
Posted on 03/10/2004 9:37:27 PM PST by malakhi
| Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams |
1. Somebody help me out here. What else would election and predestination be about, on an individual level, if not salvation?
2. From the review: "... I see lots of "poison the well" comments and name calling in the book reviews from my old fraternity but they cannot escape the facts...."
[Then in the very next paragraph the reviewer quotes from Dr. Vance:]
"...To obscure the real issue, a vocabulary has been invented to confuse and confound the Christian..."
Let's see; people who disagree with Dr. Vance have deliberately conspired to invent a vocabulary with the express intent of confusing and confounding Christians in order to obscure the real issue. A very neat trick it is to be able to in one breath complain about others poisoning the well, and then in the very next breath, by proxy no less, do the the same thing oneself. It appears to me that the reviewer's "repentance" is half-hearted.
Cordially,
Talk about out of context. The author should read 1 Timothy 2:1-3 before citing verse 4. The “all men” in verse 4, in context, refers to men from all walks of life, not to each and every individual on the earth. Also, anyone who insists upon interpreting the “all” in 1 Timothy 2:4 to mean “each and every” must explain what happened to all that tax money the Chinese peasants paid when Caesar Augustus sent out a decree, “that all the world should be taxed” (Luke 2:1), and that “all [including each and every Chinese peasant?] went to be taxed” (Luke 2:3).
In 2 Peter 3:9, the “us-ward”, “any”, and “all” that Peter referred to are the saints of God, the elect. Peter’s epistles were written specifically to believers, as the first sentence of his second epistle (and first epistle as well) clearly states:
Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ: Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord
Therefore, Calvinists spin out abstruse and academic theories like Covenant of Redemption, the Covenant of Grace, Supra-infra-sub-lapsarianism, -- theories that are typically not arrived at by the typical believing student of the Bible. No, it takes theological eggheads the like late Augustine, John Gill, or Beza to develop and teach theories like these and teach them as biblical soteriology. The result is a loss of Biblical truth for some vain and extreme traditions of men.
Can't trust those dead white men. This is typical Christian anti-intellectualism. Read 2 Peter 3:15-18. Christian ignorance is not bliss.
For thirty years I’ve never even heard of Calvin, Reformation, God’s sovereignty or anything else in the Protestant (Baptist-focus mostly) church. During that time there were MANY passages of scriptures and theology I couldn’t reconcile (foreknowledge, predestined, etc.). I just kept them on the back burner.
Then I heard one sermon by John MacArthur (who I didn’t know was a Calvinist) on Philippians 2:6-11 and the sovereign grace of our Lord Jesus and that was enough for me. No one had ever talked about God’s sovereignty that I can remember in all my years being a Christian and attending many different types of denominations. I started researching God’s sovereignty and that landed me to the Reformation and John Calvin. (No one else talks about it.)
In reading though the TULIP I see nothing that conflicted with any scripture (all 5 points). In fact, many of the verses that I’ve always struggled with (e.g. the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart, the salvation of Jeremiah and John the Baptist before they were born, etc.) suddenly are clear to me. To ensure this theology was correct (because of all the years of never hearing about this) I looked through pages and pages of the writings of the early church fathers, creeds and the Reformation. After spending over a year researching this on both the pros and cons, I’m convinced this is EXACTLY what the church originally thought and the church has moved away from this concept.
Don’t take my word for it. Mark down every time you hear anyone talk about God’s sovereign will. You’ll only need the back of a postage stamp.
What’s astonishing to me is how this seemingly innocuous viewpoint can generate such animosity and hatred among believers of other persuasions as is evident by your references. Whenever I start talking about God’s sovereignty I always get the “Yes, but…” as if this is an attribute like His love, mercy, or anger. God’s sovereignty is not an attribute. It’s God’s position. And the only way to truly understand God’s love is to understand God’s position.
You do not see the contradiction in that ??
You believe you had the free will to chose to become that creation when you chose to believe .
So your salvation did not add anything to you..it took away what many seem to think is their greatest gift.
I do not create that new man. I do not transform myself. I do not save myself. I realize my need to be saved and cry out to the Father to save me from this body of sin and death. It is God who does the saving by His Grace and Mercy and the work of His Son Jesus Christ.
Sure you do, because without your permission God could only sit and hope you would elect Him . You held all the power .
Calvinists believe that man is dead in sin and trespasses , that our will is bound up because of the fall (remember that Adam no longer had the free will to restore himself to the position he had held.) That is because his will was in bondage to sin. As paul put it we were servants to sin .
That dead will could not , would not ever "choose " to make Christ it's Lord without the grace of God loosening that binding . So when we were saved God ADDED to us , He took NOTHING AWAY . His grace reconfigured our wills so that we are able to Choose Him .Only then can we have a true picture of what sinners we are and desire to choose God.
The scriptures says that Satan entered into Judas (Luke 22:3). In other words, he was possessed. Are you saying that Judas allowed himself to be possessed?
Does such happen any other way?
Actually the predestination of the betrayal is very clear in scripture. Satan did not just "posses" him. Satan was placed IN him
Jhn 13:2 And supper being ended, the devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's [son], to betray him;
The plan from before the foundation of the earth
This doesn't say that Satan was placed in him. It says that the devil put the thought/desire in Judas's heart to betray Jesus.
The distinction I'm making is between "the devil entered into Judas" and "the devil was placed in him".
It's our choice which.
I totally agree. This would seem to be contrary to the Calvinist position, though.
"I'd say that everything that made Judas Judas (up to that point in his life) ... mandated that he make the choice that he did."
The scriptures says that Satan entered into Judas (Luke 22:3). In other words, he was possessed. Are you saying that Judas allowed himself to be possessed?
Hmmm ... I've never considered that Judas was possessed ... let's see where this takes us ...
The first thing that I would say is ... whatever the state of Judas' soul ... he was responsible for it.
Why would I say this ?
Simply because he had been keeping company with the One Who could have ... at a moment's request from Judas, rendered his soul incapable of possession by Satan, ... or freed from such possession.
He had winessed this done by Jesus and the other apostles on numerous ocassions.
But it is obvious that he had not asked for such a deliverance.
It appears that he had been spiritually distanced from Jesus for sometime.
But let's' move on ahead ...
Do you believe that Judas was not responsible for the state of his soul at that point ?
Do you believe that Judas was totally overpowed by Satan, ... such that he (Judas) had no control over his subsequent actions ?
Harley , I did not know much Protestant doctrine when I was saved. I did not know the "sinners prayer' or what the bible said on it.
One night as I asked God who he was , I was overcome in His grace and when to my knees in repentance . I gave him my miserable life . What I remember very clearly was the next morning my first thought was that I needed to find a Presbyterian church (All I knew was their name came from predestination) . I knew that this was an act of God that had to be predestined, because I did not know what being "saved' really meant .
It reminds me of the scripture . Rom 10:20 But Isaiah is very bold and says: "I was found by those who did not seek Me; I was made manifest to those who did not ask for Me
Do you believe that man has a truly free will?
By "truly free will", I mean the ability to distinguish between, and to choose, either good or evil. Are our choices free, or is it illusion, and all our "choices" predetermined?
On the contrary. Calvinists would say that Judas was foreknown and predestined to betray our Lord Jesus.
It is more contrary to a "free will" belief which would say Judas had a choice, he just made the wrong one.
Please remember Jesus himself said that have I not chosen you and yet one of you are a devil. If Judas hadn't already made the choice I wonder how Jesus knew which choice Judas would make?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.