How the Gospel Works

[musterion]

It isn't that important. We disagree. So what?

You've said that before and I've said this before: IT DOES MATTER because one of us is DEAD WRONG about the very character of God Himself. Don't you dare try to brush that off as a minor disagreeable matter. It isn't and never will be.

 

[musterion]

Lon, Tam just nailed it in one post just above. A man cannot repent if God has not ordained him to repent, anymore than a man who God HAS ordained to repent can die having refused to do so.

That makes God directly responsible for whether all DO or DON'T repent, exactly as Calvin said.

No way around that.

 

[Tambora]

Yep. That's some watertight, airtight, adamantium-coated logic you got there, Tam. Completely impervious.

Thank you, Musty.

As I see it, the Calvinist creates the paradox with his doctrine.
They claim that GOD ordained and determined men to be wicked unbelievers, making it impossible for those men to make a decision of what they believe.
And then turn right around and claim that it is men that determines what they believe.

Either what men believe is determined by the conscious will of men at any given point, or what men believe is determined by the conscious will of GOD at any given point.

 

[musterion]

Thank you, Musty.

As I see it, the Calvinist creates the paradox with his doctrine.
They claim that GOD ordained and determined men to be wicked unbelievers, making it impossible for those men to make a decision of what they believe.
And then turn right around and claim that it is men that determines what they believe.

Either what men believe is determined by the conscious will of men at any given point, or what men believe is determined by the conscious will of GOD at any given point.

I can recall the first time I got into a debate with a Calvinist. It was a young guy, barely out of H.S. who was a big James White fan, a real in your face 5 pointer. Even back then I got right to the meat about what Calvinism implies about God's character, but this drone could not compute it...he kept parroting two things (1) the lost are condemned for sin and for no other reason and (2) they choose to go to the Lake of Fire (even though free will doesn't exist :think. When those two scripts are blown out of the water, they ALWAYS revert back to some form of "Who are you to answer back against what God does?" Huh? HUH!?" and then they crow victory. I've seen that final idiotic redoubt dozens of times since with many different Calvinists and it is the main reason I consider it to be cultic. It's the sure sign of a mind that has been welded shut.

 

[Tambora]

I can recall the first time I got into a debate with a Calvinist. It was a young guy, barely out of H.S. who was a big James White fan, a real in your face 5 pointer. Even back then I got right to the meat about what Calvinism implies about God's character, but this drone could not compute it...he kept parroting two things (1) the lost are condemned for sin and for no other reason and (2) they choose to go to the Lake of Fire (even though free will doesn't exist :think. When those two scripts are blown out of the water, they ALWAYS revert back to some form of "Who are you to answer back against what God does?" Huh? HUH!?" and then they crow victory. I've seen that final idiotic redoubt dozens of times since with many different Calvinists and it is the main reason I consider it to be cultic. It's the sure sign of a mind that has been welded shut.

It's bizarre!

What really gets me about Calvinism is that most will quote the story of GOD electing Jacob over Esau before either had done anything as a proof-text of salvation by election.
And then turn right around and claim that GOD's elect Israel (Jacob representing the elect nation of Israel - Gen 25:23) can fall from being elect.

 

[Nang]

I can recall the first time I got into a debate with a Calvinist. It was a young guy, barely out of H.S. who was a big James White fan, a real in your face 5 pointer. Even back then I got right to the meat about what Calvinism implies about God's character, but this drone could not compute it...he kept parroting two things (1) the lost are condemned for sin and for no other reason and (2) they choose to go to the Lake of Fire (even though free will doesn't exist :think. When those two scripts are blown out of the water, they ALWAYS revert back to some form of "Who are you to answer back against what God does?" Huh? HUH!?" and then they crow victory. I've seen that final idiotic redoubt dozens of times since with many different Calvinists and it is the main reason I consider it to be cultic. It's the sure sign of a mind that has been welded shut.

The biblical answer is found in the Federal Headship of Adam.

 

[glorydaz]

I always agree with the inspired writings of Holy Writ. I suspect your gladness belies more than that, however. Better to be up front and present the agenda you have in mind rather that attempt these sort of tactics.

Before I read the rest of what you've posted, I must address this. The "tactic" you think you see is not what you think. I was honestly glad that you weren't discounting preaching the Gospel. I figure if the Gospel is preached, there will be people that will hear.

As far as any "agenda" I may have in mind, you give me more credit than I deserve. I am a very simple person. I find it pointless to read much of these arguments about predestination. They never convince me as I see a middle ground each and every time.

I may respond negatively when I see someone being put down by those who think they know better, but that's about the extent of my "agenda". :cloud9:

 

[Nang]

It's bizarre!

What really gets me about Calvinism is that most will quote the story of GOD electing Jacob over Esau before either had done anything as a proof-text of salvation by election.
And then turn right around and claim that GOD's elect Israel (Jacob representing the elect nation of Israel - Gen 25:23) can fall from being elect.

National election is not the same redemptive election.

You are confusing the two . . .

 

[Nang]

You can plead with men to "repent" all day until you are blue in the face but that's not what God would have you to preach as the gospel by which they can be saved. So stop pretending like you care.

It is our Christian duty to declare moral human accountability before God: to believe in Him and to repent of sins.

That was the original command given to Adam, and it has never been rescinded.

The fact that Adam did not obey these commands and thereby cast all his offspring into bondage to sin and death (Romans 5:12) does not nullify human accountability and responsibility to obey God's commands.

Not knowing who God might regenerate through the hearing of this Gospel Truth, and because we do not know who God will bestow His saving grace upon, we pray for God's grace and gift of faith and repentance be provided to whom He will. An unbelieving sinner, listening to these commands today, might be indwelt with the Holy Spirit tomorrow; and thereby saved by the power of this Gospel message.

Since we do not know, we proclaim the full Gospel message to all . . .

 

[Tambora]

National election is not the same redemptive election.

You are confusing the two . . .

When it comes to election of GOD, why would national or individual election make a bit of difference?
Both would be GOD's election.
And if it is confusing the two, why does Calvinism use the national election of Israel from the womb as a proof-text for the doctrine of election?

 

[musterion]

It's bizarre!

What really gets me about Calvinism is that most will quote the story of GOD electing Jacob over Esau before either had done anything as a proof-text of salvation by election.
And then turn right around and claim that GOD's elect Israel (Jacob representing the elect nation of Israel - Gen 25:23) can fall from being elect.

Yep...but believing they ARE Israel helps them pave over the cognitive dissonance.

 

[musterion]

The biblical answer is found in the Federal Headship of Adam.

Remain silent and let me talk with your husband.

 

[Nang]

When it comes to election of GOD, why would national or individual election make a bit of difference?
Both would be GOD's election.
And if it is confusing the two, why does Calvinism use the national election of Israel from the womb as a proof-text for the doctrine of election?

The election of Jacob over Esau was individual (Romans 9:8-13), not national (as you have erroneously been taught.)

National Election of the nation of Israel, merely consisted of their handling the tabernacle/temples ordinances and laws. This was not salvific to national Israel as a whole. (God has never saved an entire nation or race.)

Individual Election is God's grace and power that raises a sinner to new spiritual and everlasting life. Jesus Christ handled, fulfilled, and performed all the necessary legal & spiritual requirement on their behalf. He is their tabernacle/temple and High Priest. Each and every individual chosen for redemption in Him, will be saved without fail regardless of nationality or race.

 

[Tambora]

It is our Christian duty to declare moral human accountability before God: to believe in Him and to repent of sins.

That was the original command given to Adam, and it has never been rescinded.

The fact that Adam did not obey these commands and thereby cast all his offspring into bondage to sin and death (Romans 5:12) does not nullify human accountability and responsibility to obey God's commands.

Not knowing who God might regenerate through the hearing of this Gospel Truth, and because we do not know who God will bestow His saving grace upon, we pray for God's grace and gift of faith and repentance be provided to whom He will. An unbelieving sinner, listening to these commands today, might be indwelt with the Holy Spirit tomorrow; and thereby saved by the power of this Gospel message.

Since we do not know, we proclaim the full Gospel message to all . . .

But according to Calvinism, the gospel message is not for all.
Every word you say or type has no bearing at all on GOD's election.
They are going to believe because GOD causes them to believe, not because of what you preach.
As soon as GOD causes them to believe the truth, they don't need any of your preaching because you are only telling them things GOD has already caused them to believe.
Your preaching has zero effect on any believer or non-believer.

 

[glorydaz]

Be reconciled. Observe that Paul is here addressing himself to believers. Paul declares, that he brings to them (believers) every day this embassy. Christ therefore, did not suffer, merely that he might once expiate our sins, nor was the gospel appointed merely with a view to the pardon of those sins which we committed previously to baptism, but that, as we daily sin, so we might, also, by a daily remission, be received by God into his favor. For this is a continued embassy, which must be with great care and perseverance sounded forth in the Church, until the end of the world; and the gospel cannot be preached, unless remission of sins is promised.


Other than the proper understanding of the passage given above that you have offered up in support of some argument contrary to what I have stated in this thread, my additional point here is that extracting a passage from its surrounding context (2 Cor. 5:18-21) and the full counsel of Scripture's teachings elsewhere in hopes of prevailing in some argument will often result in manifest error. :AMR:

AMR

I don't care about "prevailing in some argument". I'm simply here to discuss the Bible and share what I see written there. I think it's clear from this chapter that Paul is tell us that we are ambassadors...."we persuade men" by preaching the Gospel. That Christ died for all is clear.

1 Timothy 4:10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.​

2 Cor. 5:11 Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are made manifest unto God; and I trust also are made manifest in your consciences. 2 Cor. 5:15 And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.​

2 Cor. 5:18-19 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.​

 

[Nang]

But according to Calvinism, the gospel message is not for all.
Every word you say or type has no bearing at all on GOD's election.
They are going to believe because GOD causes them to believe, not because of what you preach.
As soon as GOD causes them to believe the truth, they don't need any of your preaching because you are only telling them things GOD has already caused them to believe.
Your preaching has zero effect on any believer or non-believer.

It is God's will to use the means of believers preaching the Gospel, to spread the message to His elect.

Only He knows to whom He directs the message and who He will give ears to hear.

Christians were commissioned by Jesus Christ to proclaim the Gospel. Matthew 28:18-20

 

[musterion]

Calvinism is a case of God creating the leopard as unable to change its spots, then punishing the leopard for refusing to change its spots.

It's that simple.

 

[Nang]

Remain silent and let me talk with your husband.

If you will not listen to AMR, you would not listen to my husband either.

 

[musterion]

If you will not listen to AMR, you would not listen to my husband either.

I listen to AMR when he is correct, which on a lot of things he is. I'm glad to say it. On the fundamental character of God, he's wrong. Lon's wrong. But you're even more wrong because you lie.

Now stop addressing me. Tend to your home.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Before I read the rest of what you've posted, I must address this. The "tactic" you think you see is not what you think. I was honestly glad that you weren't discounting preaching the Gospel. I figure if the Gospel is preached, there will be people that will hear.

As far as any "agenda" I may have in mind, you give me more credit than I deserve. I am a very simple person. I find it pointless to read much of these arguments about predestination. They never convince me as I see a middle ground each and every time.

I may respond negatively when I see someone being put down by those who think they know better, but that's about the extent of my "agenda". :cloud9:

Fair enough. My apologies for assuming more than what was intended.

AMR