4 Impossible questions for non-Calvinists to answer

Jimmy
Legendary Member

Manna: 170
Offline

Offline

Mood:

Posts: 6041

Blog entries (0)

Re: 4 Impossible questions for non-Calvinists to answer

« Reply #30 on: October 09, 2009, 10:28:27 AM »

Quote from: skala on October 08, 2009, 12:41:28 PM

God created Adam, who was not a fallen creature, because Adam was not "in Adam"! That's absurd. So, no, it is not God's fault that Adam's descendants have the nature they have. It is Adam's fault, who represents the entire human race. Adam's choice to disobey is the choice we would all inevitably make.

We will never see eye to eye because one of us believes in the "fall" and the other doesn't. I post for the same reasons you do: so that other readers of the forum can see that your view, too, is not without opposition. But you see, I have Paul's writings to back me up. Just what exactly do you think Paul means by "In Adam, all die".

If anything happened to mankind because of Adam's "fall", then only God could have made that happen. There is no known mechanism of physical genetics that could have caused such a thing. There is no record in the Bible of "spiritual" genetics that would have caused such a thing. The reality of the effect of Adam's sin upon mankind is given in Gen 3:22 where God ejected Adam and Eve from the Garden and thereafter prohibited any access by them and all their descendants to the tree of life. The implication is clear. The tree of life had the power to sustain life indefinitely. There is no indication that God originally created man to be physically immortal. So long as man was protected by the tree of life in the Garden, then he would not die. When kicked out of the Garden, the natural course of events for all living beings was in force. The natural course of events as God created is that men, like all othe beings, die unless otherwise prevented from doing so.

Quote from: skala on October 08, 2009, 12:41:28 PM

Why do men die Jimmy, according to Paul? Because they are "in Adam". Adam is the representative of all who are "in him", in the same way Christ is the representative of all who are "in him". If you deny federal headship (the fall), that men are "in Adam", then you must likewise deny Paul's argument that men are "in Christ" and therefore, no salvation exists.

In Adam all die < -- all who are in Adam will die
In Christ all live <-- all who are in Christ will live

Ridiculous. This is one more example of changing the meaning of the same word in a single sentence. When you say in Adam all die, your interpretation here necessarily carries a different meaning of the word "all" when used with Adam than when used with Christ.

Your assumption is that the condemnation Adam due to his sinning was somehow imparted to all mankind. Let’s look at that. Before going to Romans 5 it is worthwhile to point out that it might seem that the Jews held similar ideas also. In John 9, Jesus disciples asked the question about the cause of the man born blind. They obviously felt that the man’s blindness was punishment for sin, and possibly even the sin of the parents. So perhaps the idea of condemnation of a man being the direct result of the sins of the parents was common among the Jews. But God had long ago had dismissed that idea. Ezekiel addresses that concept specifically in chapter 18..

1 Then the word of the LORD came to me saying,
2 "What do you mean by using this proverb concerning the land of Israel saying, 'The fathers eat the sour grapes, But the children's teeth are set on edge'?
3 "As I live," declares the Lord GOD, "you are surely not going to use this proverb in Israel anymore.
4 "Behold, all souls are Mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is Mine. The soul who sins will die. ,

Then later in the same chapter, we have,

20 "The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.

Now God specifically tells us here that the son will not be condemned for the father’s sin. Neither will the father be condemned for his father’s sin. All the way back to Adam’s son. God says that Adam’s son will not be condemned for the father’s sin. Adam's sin is not imparted to his son, his son's son, or any decendent after that including you and me.

So apart from any action directly from God, there is no way that Adam’s sin can be imparted to his descendents. And God specifically tells us that he has not done that. That God was referring to the condemnation of eternal punishment, or the second death, is apparent because we all know that oftentimes we suffer physically here on earth directly due to the sins of others. The death of someone at the hands of a drunk driver is an obvious case. Child abuse or spousal abuse is another. Virtually all of the hardships that we encounter in life can be traced one way or another to the sins we commit or to the sins committed by others. So clearly Ezekiel is addressing eternal condemnation.

Quote from: skala on October 08, 2009, 12:41:28 PM

I can't understand how can you read Romans 5 and still deny the fall, original sin, federal headship, etc. You're a smart guy Jimmy. These words speak for themselves. There is not much need for fancy interpretive footwork in order to get these words to say something other than what they clearly say. How can you not read this the same way I do?

Rom 5:12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned--
Rom 5:13 for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law.
Rom 5:14 Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.

What exactly do you think Paul's argument here is? Here is my offering of an interpretation, and you can challenge if you'd like.

Sin is not counted when there is no law. And the wages of sin is death. Yet people were dying between Adam and Moses, before the law was given. So technically, anyone who lived between Adam and Moses (when the law was given) were not dying because of their own sins, for sin is not counted when there is no law. They were not technically guilty of breaking any commands, and therefore not sinning. Yet "death reigned from Adam to Moses". People were dying, therefore, not because of their own sins, but because they were "in Adam".

Rom 5:15 But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man's trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many.
Rom 5:16 And the free gift is not like the result of that one man's sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification.
Rom 5:17 For if, because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ.
Rom 5:18 Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men.
Rom 5:19 For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous.

So men were dying between Adam and Moses, before there was a law guilty of breaking, because "one man's trespass led to condemnation for all men" and "one man's disobedience made many sinners".

No, I don’t think so. When we read that the wages of sin is death, the death that is spoken of here is eternal death, the second death. Physical death is the natural law of creation of all living things. As I pointed out above, in the case of Adam and Eve, physical death was abrogated by eating from the tree of life so long as they lived in the Garden. Once they were kicked out, then the natural processes of death took over.

Paul’s argument of death apart from the law from Adam to Moses makes it very clear that it is physical death that he is talking about. It is clear that this death has nothing to do with sin, one way or another, Adam’s or ours. Death (physical death) reigned because that is how God created all living things. Paul inserts that comment to specifically separate the consideration of physical death from the subject of spiritual death that immediately follows. We know this because in fact vv.13-17 are parenthetical. The central theme of his message goes from v.12 to v.18. If you read it that way, it becomes even clearer what Paul is actually saying.

So then what was Paul referring to in v.18. I my opinion, I think that Paul was dealing with the false idea of original sin that many Jews held, in spite of Scripture specifically denying it (Ezekiel 18). But that really doesn’t matter. Because what v 19 says is, “whatever you think is the result of Adam’s disobedience, it has been totally and completely offset by Jesus’ obedience. And as with all consequences of Jesus’ sacrifice, it is retroactive back to the very beginning.

So, ironically, the passage in Romans 5 doesn’t teach original sin; it teaches original grace. Notice that Paul is not dealing with the effect of Jesus’ “obedience” on the sins that men commit. He is dealing specifically with the impact of what Adam did. The “all men” that are condemned in v.18 can not be any different than the “all men” that are justified in v.18. The “many” that are made sinners in v.19 can not be any different than “the many” who are made righteous in v.19. When Paul says "all men" he means exactly that and nothing less.

This is made even clearer by Paul’s repetitive reference to the impact of Jesus’ obedience being “much more” (vv. 15.17) than the impact of Adam’s disobedience. How anyone can think that is true if the effect of Adam’s disobedience is to all mankind, but the effect of Jesus obedience is only to the few elect is simply ludicrous.

Quote from: skala on October 08, 2009, 12:41:28 PM

And yet you deny original sin?

Absolutely. In fact as I indicated what Paul is actually proclaiming is that it is not original sin but in fact original grace.

Quote from: skala on October 08, 2009, 12:41:28 PM

My question is, on what basis can a person who denies original sin affirm that all men will inevitably sin? Unless, of course, you don't affirm that all men inevitably sin. Then you are a pelagian.

All men sin for the same reason that Adam sinned. He was given a choice to make and he made the wrong choice. John described it very succinctly in 1John 2, where he said,

16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world.

And sooner or later all men (except the one man Jesus) succumb to the world. Adam did; Eve did; I did; you did. And the first time that we do that knowingly, we become sinners.


	Logged

skala
Member

Manna: 4

Offline

Mood:

Posts: 106

Blog entries (0)

Re: 4 Impossible questions for non-Calvinists to answer

« Reply #31 on: October 09, 2009, 05:40:21 PM »

So since the verse uses the English phrase "all men", you are saying that 100% of humanity, head for head, are justified and receive life?

Since the verse says:

Rom 5:18 Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men.

If you answer "no, not all men will be ultimately justified, and live', then this statement of yours is false:

Quote

When Paul says "all men" he means exactly that and nothing less.

If you answer "yes, all men are justified and will live", then you are a universalist.

The only alternative is to admit that the English phrase "all men" (Greek: pas anthropos) does not always mean 100% of all humanity head for head, everyone who ever lived, is living, or will live. In the Greek, "pas" is used quite differently than "all" is used in English. For example "The love of money is the root of all evil". All evil? Or some evil? You are trying to force the Greek word "all men" or "pas-whatever" to always mean the same thing every time, but it does not. It outright has two definitions:

1. individually
1. each, every, any, all, the whole, everyone, all things, everything
2. collectively
1. some of all types

Instead, by "all men", Paul means "all men in Adam" (a type), and respectively, "all men in Christ" (a type). This is made evident by Paul's own conclusion to his own argument:

Rom 5:19 For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous.

"Many were made sinners" because of Adam, and "many will be made righteous" because of Christ. It is the smaller group of men in Christ removed from the larger group of men in Adam. What Adam did affected "all who were in him", and what Christ did affected "all who were in him".

Rom 5:14 Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.

According to Paul, Adam was a "type" of Christ. Hence, Christ is "Adam #2".

Quote

There is no indication that God originally created man to be physically immortal. So long as man was protected by the tree of life in the Garden, then he would not die. When kicked out of the Garden, the natural course of events for all living beings was in force. The natural course of events as God created is that men, like all othe beings, die unless otherwise prevented from doing so.

Physical death is the natural law of creation of all living things. As I pointed out above, in the case of Adam and Eve, physical death was abrogated by eating from the tree of life so long as they lived in the Garden. Once they were kicked out, then the natural processes of death took over.

And further and further from orthodoxy you get. What's the point in threatening sin with the punishment of death if death is already natural?

Paul says:
Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death..

Wages means "earns". We earn death by sinning. What you have said is not orthodox.

Finally:

Psa 51:3-5
(3) For I know my transgressions, and my sin is ever before me.
(4) Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight, so that you may be justified in your words and blameless in your judgment.
(5) Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.

Psa 58:3 The wicked are estranged from the womb; they go astray from birth, speaking lies.

Born in sin, conceived in sin, sinful from the womb, according to David.


	Logged

Christian Forums

Re: 4 Impossible questions for non-Calvinists to answer

« Reply #31 on: October 09, 2009, 05:40:21 PM »


	Logged

Jimmy
Legendary Member

Manna: 170
Offline

Offline

Mood:

Posts: 6041

Blog entries (0)

Re: 4 Impossible questions for non-Calvinists to answer

« Reply #32 on: October 09, 2009, 08:09:20 PM »

All you have concluded is that the disobedience of Adam was far more effectual than the obedience of Christ. I think that is probably what you believe. That is the logical conclusion of the concept of original sin.

And while the meaning of "all" might well be different in the different contexts, I do not believe that Paul would have used different meanings for the same word in the same sentence when obviously comparing the merits of Adam's disobedience to Jesus' obedience. That is particularly true when the change in meanings would leave the obedience of Jesus less effectual than the disobedience of Adam in contrast to his stated comparison attributing to Jesus "much more" so than to Adam.

In the wages of sin being death, you are beguiled by Satan exactly as Eve was. She too believed Satan when he mocked God with "You surely shall not die!" (Gen 3:4). The death that God spoke of to Eve was not physical death, but spiritual death. The physical death was not due to sin, but due to being ejected from the Garden. Our physical death is not due to sin. That is the way we were created. That is Paul's message concerning physical death of those from Adam to Moses since sin was not imputed. Clearly the wages of sin is the second death.

Concerning Psa 51, if you wish to take v.5 to be a literal statement of fact and not simply the exaggeration of a penitent David, then you must also take v.7 to be a literal statement of fact for the solution. Bring on the hyssop.

As far as orthodoxy is concerned, your complaint of my beliefs being nonothodox is really pretty funny. There is almost nothing about Calvinism that can be considered orthodox where salvation is concerned. In fact of all the five TULIP petals, only original sin might be considered orthodox. And even there the concept of total inability is definitely not orthodox.

But from my perspective, I really don't care much one way or the other about what might be and what might not be orthodox. And I suspect when push comes to shove, you don't either. If your only argument is that I have strayed from orthodoxy, you have lost the argument.

But I still am waiting for you or anyone else to tell me how the sin of Adam effected the spiritual state of all mankind. If the sin of Adam indeed contaminated the spirits of all mankind, then it could only have been God's doing when He created Adam. Thus if original sin correct, then it is God and only God who is responsible. If man is born a spiritually dead being as you profess, then it is God who instills the dead spirit in the new born. You can believe that if you wish. I won't. And it does no good to deny it; there is no other mechanism for it to occur. The spirit, dead or alive, is from God and from no other. It was that way at the beginning with Adam and it is that way now with us. It is the very epitome of God's declaration that we are created in His image. It is in the spirit that we are in His image.


« Last Edit: October 09, 2009, 08:26:12 PM by Jimmy »	Logged

marcus
Junior Member

Manna: 0

Offline

Mood:

Posts: 19

Blog entries (0)

Re: 4 Impossible questions for non-Calvinists to answer

« Reply #33 on: October 12, 2009, 04:59:09 PM »

Quote from: skala on October 01, 2009, 03:59:57 PM

An argument from the Shepherd's Fellowship forums

The Non-Calvinist or Arminian theological position amounts to a practical accusation against God of either dishonesty or inaccuracy. Since I’m sure none of our Arminian or Non-Calvinist brethren would ever intentionally call God a liar or suggest that He is wrong or in error about anything, I challenge any Non-Calvinist to vindicate his theology from this charge by answering the following four questions:

Question 1

Moses said, “If…thou shalt seek the Lord thy God, thou shalt find Him, IF thou seek Him with all they heart and all thy soul” (Deut. 4:29). Isaiah equivocated seeking the Lord with calling on Him: “Seek ye the Lord while He may be found, call ye upon Him while He is near” (Is. 55:6). And of course, “Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Rom. 10:13).

...BUT—the Word of God says very plainly: “There is NONE that seeketh after God” (Rom. 3:11).

Yet there are many people who have been and continue to be saved. But if the Holy Spirit-inspired text of Scripture says “There is NONE that seeketh after God”, and if salvation happens ONLY as a result of a person seeking God, then every time someone is saved, it makes God a liar, because He said “There is NONE that seeketh after God.”

...So, we ask—Did God lie when He made that statement, or was He mistaken, or is there another possible explanation?

Question 2

2...The Word of God says plainly, “There is no man that sinneth not” (1 Kings 8:46), indeed, “There is not a just man upon earth that doeth good and sinneth not” (Ecc. 7:20).

...The Lord Jesus Christ said, “I am the light of the world” (Jn. 8:12), and “I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on Me should not abide in darkness” (Jn. 12:46). There is no way to be saved apart from coming to the Light, that is, coming to the Lord Jesus Christ, because “there is no other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved” (Ac. 4:12). So, people are saved when they come to the light.

...BUT—the Word of God says very plainly: “EVERY ONE that doeth evil hateth the light, NEITHER COMETH TO THE LIGHT” (Jn. 3:20). Therefore, since all men are sinners, they all fall into the category of “every one that doeth evil”—therefore all men hate the light and do not come to it. But, if the Holy Spirit-inspired text of Scripture says, “Every one that doeth evil (every human being) hateth the light (Jesus Christ), neither cometh to the light”, then every time someone is saved, it makes God a liar because He said the only way a person can be saved is to come to Jesus Christ, the Light of the world.

...So, again, we ask—since people are being saved every day, did God lie when He stated that all human beings hate the light and none of them come to the light? Was He mistaken when He said that, or is there another possible explanation?

QUESTION 3

3...We know that only the gospel is “the power of God unto salvation” (Rom. 1:16)—nobody can be saved apart from hearing and believing the gospel (Rom. 10:13-15).

...The apostle Peter wrote that evangelists “preached the gospel...WITH the Holy Spirit sent down from heaven” (1 Pet. 1:12). Therefore, the gospel can properly be described as one of “the things of the Spirit of God” (1 Cor. 2:14).

...People who are condemned are described as “them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved” (2 Thess. 2:10). So it is evident that receiving the gospel is the path to salvation, and not receiving the gospel forfeits salvation.

...BUT—the Word of God says very plainly: “The natural man RECEIVETH NOT the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them” (1 Cor. 2:14). ALL MEN are born into the world in this “natural” condition, because “that which is born of the flesh is flesh” (John 3:6). So therefore, if all men are born and live in this “natural” condition, and “the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God” and the gospel is presented by human preachers “with the Holy Spirit”, then every time someone is saved, it makes God a liar because He said the only way to be saved is to receive the gospel, and yet He also said no man receives the gospel because men are “natural” and the gospel is one of the “things of the Spirit” that they all consider foolishness and therefore reject.

...So, once again we ask—since people are receiving the gospel and being saved every day, did God lie when He said nobody receives the things of the Spirit, or was He mistaken when He made that statement, or is there another possible explanation?

QUESTION 4
4...All men are born in the “natural” condition and are described as being “flesh” and “in the flesh” because “that which is born of the flesh is flesh” (Jn. 3:6). Furthermore, the Word of God says, “They that are in the flesh CANNOT please God” (Rom. 8:8).

...BUT—the Lord Jesus plainly stated, “There is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth” (Luke 15:10). Surely the joy of God is what inspires the joy of the angels “who do always behold the face of My Father which is in heaven” (Mat. 18:10).

...THEREFORE—since repentance is something that pleases God, and all men are naturally “in the flesh” and in that condition they “cannot please God”, then no man is capable of repenting, which is an indispensable element of salvation, for Jesus commanded men to “Repent ye, AND believe the gospel” (Mark 1:15), and He pronounced severe judgment and condemnation on certain cities not just because they did not believe, but “because they repented not” (Mat. 11:20). Therefore, since repentance is necessary for true salvation, being a defining characteristic of true belief in Christ, and since people are repenting and being saved every day, it makes God a liar because He said those who are in the flesh cannot please Him.

...So, once again we ask—Did God lie when He said those who are “in the flesh (all men apart from salvation) cannot please God” and yet people please Him every day by repenting and getting saved? Was He merely mistaken when He made that statement, or is there another possible explanation?

The challenge is very clear: Non-Calvinists and other Arminians are left with four impossible questions to answer: How can people be seeking God and getting saved when God says nobody ever seeks Him? How can people be coming to the light and getting saved when God says nobody ever comes to the light? How can people be receiving the gospel and getting saved when God says nobody ever receives the things of His Spirit, which include the gospel? How can people be pleasing God by repenting and getting saved when God says they cannot please Him, and yet repentance does please Him?

The Calvinist has absolutely no problem answering those questions, and he can do it without distorting the meaning of ANY of the Scriptures on either side of those apparent contradictions. The Non-Calvinist, however, is forced by his unscriptural theology to conclude that God is either lying or mistaken in His statements on one side or the other of the above questions.

-----------------------

As said above, the Calvinist has an explanation (a Biblical one) about how and why people are getting saved. What is your explanation on how people are getting saved in light of the great "cannot" verses of the Bible?

Concerning your first question. In Rom 2v17-24, Paul is proving to the Jews that they are just the same as the sinning Gentiles, in fact, that seems to be his line of thought right through his writing. Just a few verses later in Rom 3v9 he is still referring to the Jews and their sinfulness by saying," are we any better that they,"?, and how he previously in Rom 1v18-32 stated they were all the same. Then Paul starts to quote the Jewish Law to prove to them, the Jews, how they were the same as the Gentiles. His quotations of scripture was from Ps 14, 53, 5v9, 140v3, 10v7, 36v1, Pro 1v16, Isa 59v7-8. He quotes the Jewish Law, to prove to the Jews, that they are the same as the non Jews, ie, the Gentiles. He proves that he is referring to the Jews in Rom 3v11, by saying," now we know that whatever the Law says, it says to those under the Law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty", verse 19. The Jews were under the Law, not the Gentiles, Rom 3v1-2, Deut 4v5-6, therefore, as v 19 states, Paul was quoting the Law, to prove the sinfulness of those under the law, ie, the Jews, and not every single person under the sun!(even though all are sinners)
Paul done this because the Jews seen themselves as better than the Gentiles etc, just look at their treatment of Jesus when he talked to sinners etc, Matt 9v11,"...why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners"? This was the spirit that Paul was talking about in Rom 3 etc. The Jews had willfully rejected their God, and their Law proved it! It also says that no one seeks god, and not that no one can seek God, there is a big difference in those to statements, a very big difference indeed. They, the Jews didnt seek God due to their rebellion.
Also, in Rom 1v21,28, it shows that people can know God, veres 21, yet refuse to acknowledge him, they did not want to retain the knowledge that they had of him. And it was their own personal rejection of their knowledge of God, which made God give them up to their own sinfull lusts, which in turn lead them further into sin. In other words, it was their own deliberate rejection of God, which condemned them; they had the understanding, but rejected it! So much for irreistible grace and total depravity!
I will answer your other questions when I have time. Marcus


	Logged

Wycliffes_Shillelagh
Designated Reality Checker
Legendary Member

Manna: 206
Offline

Offline

Mood:

Gender:

Posts: 5632

Blog entries (0)

Re: 4 Impossible questions for non-Calvinists to answer

« Reply #34 on: October 12, 2009, 08:49:38 PM »

Quote from: skala on October 01, 2009, 03:59:57 PM

Question 1

Moses said, “If…thou shalt seek the Lord thy God, thou shalt find Him, IF thou seek Him with all they heart and all thy soul” (Deut. 4:29). Isaiah equivocated seeking the Lord with calling on Him: “Seek ye the Lord while He may be found, call ye upon Him while He is near” (Is. 55:6). And of course, “Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Rom. 10:13).

...BUT—the Word of God says very plainly: “There is NONE that seeketh after God” (Rom. 3:11).

Yet there are many people who have been and continue to be saved. But if the Holy Spirit-inspired text of Scripture says “There is NONE that seeketh after God”, and if salvation happens ONLY as a result of a person seeking God, then every time someone is saved, it makes God a liar, because He said “There is NONE that seeketh after God.”

...So, we ask—Did God lie when He made that statement, or was He mistaken, or is there another possible explanation?

Yes, it's a hyperbole.

Either that or the Bible is in serious error in its history:

2Ch 15:4 But when they in their trouble did turn unto the LORD God of Israel, and sought him, he was found of them.

2Ch 17:3-4 - And the LORD was with Jehoshaphat, because he walked in the first ways of his father David, and sought not unto Baalim; But sought to the [LORD] God of his father, and walked in his commandments, and not after the doings of Israel.

2Ch 26:5 And he sought God in the days of Zechariah, who had understanding in the visions of God: and as long as he sought the LORD, God made him to prosper.

Jarrod


	Logged

Don't let worry kill you off - let the Church help!

marcus
Junior Member

Manna: 0

Offline

Mood:

Posts: 19

Blog entries (0)

Re: 4 Impossible questions for non-Calvinists to answer

« Reply #35 on: October 14, 2009, 12:22:33 PM »

2...

Quote

The Word of God says plainly, “There is no man that sinneth not” (1 Kings 8:46), indeed, “There is not a just man upon earth that doeth good and sinneth not” (Ecc. 7:20).

...The Lord Jesus Christ said, “I am the light of the world” (Jn. 8:12), and “I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on Me should not abide in darkness” (Jn. 12:46). There is no way to be saved apart from coming to the Light, that is, coming to the Lord Jesus Christ, because “there is no other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved” (Ac. 4:12). So, people are saved when they come to the light.

...BUT—the Word of God says very plainly: “EVERY ONE that doeth evil hateth the light, NEITHER COMETH TO THE LIGHT” (Jn. 3:20). Therefore, since all men are sinners, they all fall into the category of “every one that doeth evil”—therefore all men hate the light and do not come to it. But, if the Holy Spirit-inspired text of Scripture says, “Every one that doeth evil (every human being) hateth the light (Jesus Christ), neither cometh to the light”, then every time someone is saved, it makes God a liar because He said the only way a person can be saved is to come to Jesus Christ, the Light of the world.

...So, again, we ask—since people are being saved every day, did God lie when He stated that all human beings hate the light and none of them come to the light? Was He mistaken when He said that, or is there another possible explanation?

You use John 3v20 incorrectly. Christs whole statement(s) must be looked at, and verse 21 clearly sheds light on nverse 20. Those in verse 20 wont come to the light because of their 'deeds', and those in verse 21 will come to the light because of his deeds. There is clearly two sets of people being talked about here, and their 'deeds' are the reasons why they come to, or stay away from, the light.
Therefore, to say verse 20 says that 'no one' comes to the light, and mostly meaning because of some inherited, sinfull, wicked nature is wrong. Its all down to a persons deeds, as is plainly stated by Jesus. Again I remind you of Cain, he had the power to choose to obey God after the fall, otherwise God was lying when he said " do what is right", and " you must master sin".
Our deeds are major in our relationship with Father, the reformation in one sense, stole that message from us. Isa 58 shows this clearly, and how important right living, along with right thinking, are in Gods eyes. They sought God, verse 2, yet it was their return to helping and blessing people, verse 6-7, that brought about their healing, verse 8. I am not preaching salvation by works, salvation is not earned. But our deeds and attitudes reveal who we seek after, and to whom we belong,"In this the children of God and the children of the Devil are manifested. Whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is he who hates his brother".1st 3v10.

Marcus


	Logged

Christian Forums

Re: 4 Impossible questions for non-Calvinists to answer

« Reply #35 on: October 14, 2009, 12:22:33 PM »


	Logged

marcus
Junior Member

Manna: 0

Offline

Mood:

Posts: 19

Blog entries (0)

Re: 4 Impossible questions for non-Calvinists to answer

« Reply #36 on: October 14, 2009, 03:41:48 PM »

Quote

..We know that only the gospel is “the power of God unto salvation” (Rom. 1:16)—nobody can be saved apart from hearing and believing the gospel (Rom. 10:13-15).

...The apostle Peter wrote that evangelists “preached the gospel...WITH the Holy Spirit sent down from heaven” (1 Pet. 1:12). Therefore, the gospel can properly be described as one of “the things of the Spirit of God” (1 Cor. 2:14).

...People who are condemned are described as “them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved” (2 Thess. 2:10). So it is evident that receiving the gospel is the path to salvation, and not receiving the gospel forfeits salvation.

...BUT—the Word of God says very plainly: “The natural man RECEIVETH NOT the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them” (1 Cor. 2:14). ALL MEN are born into the world in this “natural” condition, because “that which is born of the flesh is flesh” (John 3:6). So therefore, if all men are born and live in this “natural” condition, and “the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God” and the gospel is presented by human preachers “with the Holy Spirit”, then every time someone is saved, it makes God a liar because He said the only way to be saved is to receive the gospel, and yet He also said no man receives the gospel because men are “natural” and the gospel is one of the “things of the Spirit” that they all consider foolishness and therefore reject.

...So, once again we ask—since people are receiving the gospel and being saved every day, did God lie when He said nobody receives the things of the Spirit, or was He mistaken when He made that statement, or is there another possible explanation?

Again you are not keeping things in context. From near the end of chapter 2 in 1st Cor, untill shortly after chapter 3, Paul is addressing immature Christians, or as he puts it, carnal thinking Christians! If you read three verses past your miss intereptated verse, you will see how Paul referrs to immature Christians as 'carnal', and that is because of their actions, ie, their bickering!( and not because of a depraved nature either,because they were Christians, but rather ,their actions!) The 'natural man in 2v14 is carnal acting Christians, read on and you will see he calls them brethern, babes in Christ, yet they are still carnal, natural! What he was pointing at was that they cant mature as long as they fight, because they act like natural, carnal men, and the natural man can not recieve the things from Gods Spirit to mature, hence the fact they are still on milk,3v2.


	Logged

marcus
Junior Member

Manna: 0

Offline

Mood:

Posts: 19

Blog entries (0)

Re: 4 Impossible questions for non-Calvinists to answer

« Reply #37 on: October 17, 2009, 11:05:43 AM »

Quote

All men are born in the “natural” condition and are described as being “flesh” and “in the flesh” because “that which is born of the flesh is flesh” (Jn. 3:6). Furthermore, the Word of God says, “They that are in the flesh CANNOT please God” (Rom. 8:8).

...BUT—the Lord Jesus plainly stated, “There is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth” (Luke 15:10). Surely the joy of God is what inspires the joy of the angels “who do always behold the face of My Father which is in heaven” (Mat. 18:10).

...THEREFORE—since repentance is something that pleases God, and all men are naturally “in the flesh” and in that condition they “cannot please God”, then no man is capable of repenting, which is an indispensable element of salvation, for Jesus commanded men to “Repent ye, AND believe the gospel” (Mark 1:15), and He pronounced severe judgment and condemnation on certain cities not just because they did not believe, but “because they repented not” (Mat. 11:20). Therefore, since repentance is necessary for true salvation, being a defining characteristic of true belief in Christ, and since people are repenting and being saved every day, it makes God a liar because He said those who are in the flesh cannot please Him.

...So, once again we ask—Did God lie when He said those who are “in the flesh (all men apart from salvation) cannot please God” and yet people please Him every day by repenting and getting saved? Was He merely mistaken when He made that statement, or is there another possible explanation?

The challenge is very clear: Non-Calvinists and other Arminians are left with four impossible questions to answer: How can people be seeking God and getting saved when God says nobody ever seeks Him? How can people be coming to the light and getting saved when God says nobody ever comes to the light? How can people be receiving the gospel and getting saved when God says nobody ever receives the things of His Spirit, which include the gospel? How can people be pleasing God by repenting and getting saved when God says they cannot please Him, and yet repentance does please Him?

The Calvinist has absolutely no problem answering those questions, and he can do it without distorting the meaning of ANY of the Scriptures on either side of those apparent contradictions. The Non-Calvinist, however, is forced by his unscriptural theology to conclude that God is either lying or mistaken in His statements on one side or the other of the above questions.

-----------------------

As said above, the Calvinist has an explanation (a Biblical one) about how and why people are getting saved. What is your explanation on how people are getting saved in light of the great "cannot" verses of the Bible?

You need to buy yourself a good Bible dictionary, then read up about the various applications for the meaning of the word 'flesh'. You are lumping all the various meanings of the word flesh into one meaning, therefore you are revealing your lack of understanding on that subject. Do a wee study on that word, and also what the Bible means by the statement ' in the flesh', then get back to us on that subject.
I have answered your first three questions, your forth cant be answered properly, due to your wrong application of the word 'flesh', therefore I want to ask you a simple question. I touched on it before, but you jumped on the Pelagius subject as a means of escape. Tell me..If the well learned historians, famous scholars( Calvinists included), all say that Calvinism is Augustianism, and that Augustianism was 'NOT' taught in the very early church, but was added in the 4th/5th century by a R.C. monk/gnostic, of whom you have clearly stated your affiliation to,...why do you still preach Calvinism as if it is of the faith once for all dilivered to the saints? In Galations 5, concerning the lusts of the flesh, one of these lusts is heresies, Gal 5v20. We all know it basically means a departure from the truth, a wrong choice, etc. You are clearly admitting to adhering to false teachings which was not given to the Church, are you saying your flesh is ruling your theoloical ideas? And remember, you have already told me that you are a follower of Augustine! I would not admit to that if I was smeared in dog food, and throw into the middle of pitbulls! help!

Dont be offended at my style of writing Skala, I just like to say what I mean, and mean what I say. Be blessed. Marcus


	Logged

Joel, the Son of Pethuel
Junior Member

Manna: 2

Offline

Mood:

Gender:

Posts: 24

Blog entries (0)

Re: 4 Impossible questions for non-Calvinists to answer

« Reply #38 on: November 12, 2009, 02:31:45 PM »

skala, thanks for providing the topic.

I'd like to chime in on #1, if I may.

On the "but" side of #1, you cite Romans 3:10-11 "There is none righteous, no, not one; there is none who understands; there is none who seeks after God." [as a side note, Paul quotes the LXX version of Psalm 14 (Psalm 13 in the LXX), which includes a sizeable portion that is not in the current Hebrew texts]

From the Calvinist perspective, this verse helps to demonstrate that every single person is in a state in which it is impossible to seek after God. I take issue with that due to the following:

Psalm 14(13) starts with God looking down from heaven and finding no one who understands or who seeks after Him; a world full of unrighteous people. But then in verses 4-6 David says the following,

"Do all the workers of lawlessness not know? They eat up my people as they eat bread, and they do not call upon the LORD. They were in great fear where no fear was, because God is in the righteous generation. You shamed the counsel of the poor man, because the LORD is his hope."

Although Psalm 14(13) starts with the verses that Paul quoted in Rom 3, it concludes with a distinction drawn between the wicked people in the world and God's people. Ps 14:1-3 has "the fool" as its subject, as opposed to "my people". So even in Psalm 14(13), the only doctrine that we can derive is that God's people are persecuted by those who are not God's people.

In Romans 3, Paul is making the point that Jews are not any better off than Gentiles just because they are of a particular ancestry. To make that point, Paul quotes Psalm 14(13). What Paul is saying is that there are BOTH Jews AND Gentiles who fall under the category of "the fool", and it is not limited just to Gentiles. On the flip side, from the context of Psalm 14(13), we can conclude that "my people" includes Gentiles are is not limited to Jews.

Paul's point in Romans 3 is not total depravity. David's point in Psalm 14(13) is not total depravity. Paul's point is that Jews and Gentiles are in the same boat. David's point is that "the fool" persecutes God's people.


	Logged

caldwelljr11
JC
Member

Manna: 11

Offline

Mood:

Gender:

Posts: 290

Blog entries (0)

Re: 4 Impossible questions for non-Calvinists to answer

« Reply #39 on: November 24, 2009, 03:27:13 PM »

You do not have to be a Calvinist to believe that natural man is totally depraved and incapable of faith in God.

Some non-Calvinists hold that man can not be saved apart from the guidance of the Holy Spirit, but differ with the Calvinist in that they do not hold the same view of predestination/election or that Christ died solely for the elect.

Question 1

Natural man is incapable of seeking after God. God reached out to them.

Question 2

Natural man hates the light, but through the Holy Spirit can come to the light of salvation.

Question 3

Natural man does not receive the things of the spirit. These belong to the regenerated. Several ways to answer this one. One is that the verses are taken out of context, the “things of the Spirit of God” are referring to the gifts of God to the believer, not salvation. Another is that, once again, apart from God natural man can do nothing towards redemption.

Question 4

All men are born in the “natural” condition. It is through God that they are led to repentance. Only through God can they be saved. God reaches out to them.


	Logged

Christian Forums

Re: 4 Impossible questions for non-Calvinists to answer

« Reply #39 on: November 24, 2009, 03:27:13 PM »


	Logged

segell
Hero

Manna: 236
Offline

Offline

Mood:

Gender:

Posts: 4366

segell

Blog entries (0)

Re: 4 Impossible questions for non-Calvinists to answer

« Reply #40 on: December 08, 2009, 09:33:18 AM »

I just wanted to commend Skala for his presentations. While many do not agree, I think all would applaud his manner of presentation. He certainly earned a manna from me.


	Logged

Ephesians 2:8-10 Who saves, how He saves, why He saves.

"8For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith–and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God– 9not by works, so that no one can boast. 10For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do."

caldwelljr11
JC
Member

Manna: 11

Offline

Mood:

Gender:

Posts: 290

Blog entries (0)

Re: 4 Impossible questions for non-Calvinists to answer

« Reply #41 on: December 08, 2009, 08:40:41 PM »

Quote from: segell on December 08, 2009, 09:33:18 AM

I just wanted to commend Skala for his presentations. While many do not agree, I think all would applaud his manner of presentation. He certainly earned a manna from me.

I agree. Skala presented his view well (and well organized).


	Logged

Jimmy
Legendary Member

Manna: 170
Offline

Offline

Mood:

Posts: 6041

Blog entries (0)

Re: 4 Impossible questions for non-Calvinists to answer

« Reply #42 on: December 09, 2009, 07:14:19 AM »

Quote from: caldwelljr11 on November 24, 2009, 03:27:13 PM

You do not have to be a Calvinist to believe that natural man is totally depraved and incapable of faith in God.

That is true. Believing a false doctrine such as total depravity is not limited to Calvinists.


	Logged

Christian Forums

Re: 4 Impossible questions for non-Calvinists to answer

« Reply #42 on: December 09, 2009, 07:14:19 AM »


	Logged

caldwelljr11
JC
Member

Manna: 11

Offline

Mood:

Gender:

Posts: 290

Blog entries (0)

Re: 4 Impossible questions for non-Calvinists to answer

« Reply #43 on: December 09, 2009, 08:37:37 AM »

Quote from: Jimmy on December 09, 2009, 07:14:19 AM

Quote from: caldwelljr11 on November 24, 2009, 03:27:13 PM

You do not have to be a Calvinist to believe that natural man is totally depraved and incapable of faith in God.

That is true. Believing a false doctrine such as total depravity is not limited to Calvinists.

Yep. Several views hold that man can not achieve salvation of themselves, apart from the Holy Spirit, and that doesn’t make them Calvinistic.

Of course, it also doesn’t make it false doctrine – biblically, it does only if other sources are considered authority as well (apostolic succession, for example).


	Logged

segell
Hero

Manna: 236
Offline

Offline

Mood:

Gender:

Posts: 4366

segell

Blog entries (0)

Re: 4 Impossible questions for non-Calvinists to answer

« Reply #44 on: December 09, 2009, 08:59:05 AM »

Quote from: Jimmy on December 09, 2009, 07:14:19 AM

Quote from: caldwelljr11 on November 24, 2009, 03:27:13 PM

You do not have to be a Calvinist to believe that natural man is totally depraved and incapable of faith in God.

That is true. Believing a false doctrine such as total depravity is not limited to Calvinists.

Who knows - believing total depravity is a false doctrine may be a false doctrine. It seems to me that there might be more Scriptural support for man's fallen state and therefore his utter sin than there is that man is basically good and may just sin once in a while having the power granted by God to save himself. Quite a tension found in the Scriptures to sling the term "false doctrine" about.


	Logged

4 Impossible questions for non-Calvinists to answer - Pages: 1 2 [3] 4

« previous next »

	Welcome, Guest. Login or register to use the forums. Did you miss your activation email? March 17, 2010, 10:20:00 PM