@apollos6640 It's true, there's no good news in a gospel that can't be received, is there, save for a small group of pre-wired favorites? The gospel is good news to those who _haven't_ been regenerated; it's good news because God Himself has in Jesus done all that needs to be done to bring you to God. You have only to receive it, and he gives you the power to do that if you only will.
@apollos6640 Incredible, isn't it, that this satanic stronghold of lies could be considered good teaching, "orthodox," even necessary for salvation. Or that some people don't think it is an important issue! What could be more lukewarm than not caring whether God is like that?
@mcfirefly3 Calvinism logically says that, God Purposely Decreeds for Man to come into Existance DEAD, INVOLUNTARILY created to love SIN from the moment of conception, having NO ABILITY to repent or beg for mercy, the vast majority FATED for DAMNATION, PREDESTINED to BURN Fforever, CHOSEN for Eternal Punishment, "Before having done anything either good or bad", with a ZERO chance of Salvation, for "His good pleasure".
"O how BEAUTIFUL are the feet of those Calvinist who preach the good news!"
19And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
Since the Bible also says we _all_ do evil, "doeth truth" must mean this choice, receiving and believing the gospel.
Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Colossians 2:8
But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
This is a satanic stronghold against faith in Jesus's death for us on the cross. It does not glorify Jesus or God the Father or the Holy Spirit to say that God is so mean-spirited and stingy with His love. If they would believe the words of the Bible for what they actually say instead of imposing this "philosophy and vain deceit" on it, they would then see how much more to God's glory it is to believe His word about who He is rather than the traditions of men.
They are going to have to answer to Him for trying to destroy the faith of people who believe that God means what He says. Their kowtowing to a kind of "sovereignty" that ignores His love and His moral nature is not going to earn them any points with God, because they are scattering, not gathering. They are scattering because they are discouraging people from trusting Him, and this is supposedly to the glory of His sovereignty, but to a god like Allah, not the God of Jesus and the Bible.
This is beginning to sound just like CARM Forum, and that is not good. It is pointless to argue this issue with people who are, yes, as blinded by their dogged commitment to defend twisted interpretations as JWs.
You quote this Confession as if they had any authority, as if they were Holy Spirit Inspired Scriptures! Much like JW's quoting their NWT, or Mormons w/ their Book Of Mormons "
You quote this Confession as if they had any authority, as if they were Holy Spirit Inspired Scriptures! Much like JW's quoting their NWT, or Mormons w/ their Book Of Mormons
@apollos6640 "You quote this Confession as if they had any authority, as if they were Holy Spirit Inspired Scriptures! Much like JW's quoting their NWT, or Mormons w/ their Book Of Mormons".
What at amazingly FALSE accusation! I was simply answering someone's question (which really had no relevance to our dialogue).
You would do well to quit bearing false witness against your neighbor, as it is a breaking of the 9th commandment (Ex.20:16). You would also do well to repent of your sin.
@apollos6640 They call that being "sola scriptura." Sola scriptura, and Calvin, too, and the Synod of Dordt, and Augustine, and the Westminster Confession, and the Baptist Confession. If they ever dropped all that "sola scriptura" and looked, prayerfully, to the Holy Spirit to help them interpret the Bible by the Bible, they might be able to see how this teaching says evil things about God rather than glorifying Him. He isn't going to thank them for saying He created moral evil.
And Gen.3:8-9 is a case of Effectual Calling, and this is the first step in the 'ordo salutis'.
Rom.1:18, Paul here is speaking about "general revelation", not "special/redemptive revelation". Dr. Geisler simply makes a category error.
Lastly, Dr. Geisler takes the standard Arminian approach: "spiritual death does not mean inability, only unwillingness". Jn.6:44 refutes this, and teaches "inability".
@rkg62976 'General revelation', 'special/redemptive revelation', 'equal ultimacy', 'passive permission', 'active permission'... Mumbo Jumbo, all of it. Really, as a catholic (really liberal one, at that) I find it hilarious some calvinists are bent on demonstrating how the Catholic Church 'added' all kinds of non-scriptural poppycock into the christian theology... I mean, you guys have so many inventive buzz words to try and make Calvinism viable.
@TennesseeOwnsMyBones Concerning "general" vs. "special/redemptive" revelation: Of course, these are terms human beings use to describe clear, biblical teaching (much like the term "Trinity"). The doctrine is sound, even though the terms are not used in Scripture. But it is a far stretch to claim that Romanism's many false doctrines are contained in Scripture, than to simply say that logical concepts are deduced from them.
@rkg62976 My argument fails? Please, show me where in the bible terms as 'general' and 'special revelation' are mentioned... or Mary-worship. It's like Calvin's commentary on 2 Peter 3:9, where he actually states that god wills and wills not at the same time, and that this can be explained by his 'hidden will' and his 'revealed will'.
@TennesseeOwnsMyBones "Please, show me where in the bible terms as 'general' and 'special revelation' are mentioned"
Can "Tennessee liberal Romanists" not read? I specifically stated that the "terms" themselves are not in Scripture; the concepts most certainly are. "General Revelation": That which is revealed of God through creation itself (Rom.1:19-21). "Special/Redemptive Revelation": That which is contained in the Word of God, and illumined by the Holy Spirit working in the person.
@rkg62976 Actually I'm Dutch... the name refers to an obscure Roy Orbison song. But you're doing exactly the same as you blame catholics of doing: reading into scripture certain 'terms' and 'doctrines' that suit your own theology. Tell me, where does the Bible mention a god of 'two wills'?
@TennesseeOwnsMyBones "you're doing exactly the same as you blame catholics of doing: reading into scripture certain 'terms' and 'doctrines' that suit your own theology" I have already pointed out the error in this fallacious statement.
"where does the Bible mention a god of 'two wills'?"
Does God's will contain a prohibition against murder (Ex.20:13)?
And did God not ordain the murder of the Messiah (Acts 4:27-28)?
Two wills: 1) Preceptive (found in His Law); 2) Decreetive.
@rkg62976 God predestined the murder of the Messiah? That can only be when he also predestined the Fall to happen. Which leads us back to the end conclusion of calvinism: god as the author of sin.
@rkg62976 I have heard the usual ad hoc disclaimer of calvinists that somehow their god is NOT the author of sin... But ad hoc disclaimers make no valid argument. And yes, I have a dualistic view. Otherwise, I'd have to say things like: The Holocaust was predestined by god to happen... for some 'master plan' and his glory and stuff. Pass.
@TennesseeOwnsMyBones O.K., so you are a dualist. At least we understand each other now. I thought I was talking to a Christian. Please forgive my ignorance.
As a Christian, I must say that if one is a consistent, Bible-believing Protestant, then one will hold to what is often referred to as "Divine Determinism". That is the position I have been defending (because it is the accurate, biblical presentation of God).
@rkg62976 I see myself as a striving christian. The Cathars were christian as well, and ferociously dualist. And if 'divine determinism' somehow validates that women, children and men were gassed en masse and then incinerated, and that this was in fact part of the master plan of the 'calvinist god', then any claim on his righteousness is superfluous. But I will ask point blank: did your god predestine everything to occur before the foundation of the world?
@TennesseeOwnsMyBones I think any descent historian/biblical theologian would consider the Cathars (called "Albigensians" in southern France) an heretical sect. They were medieval gnostics.
To answer your question about God predestining everything to occur before the foundation of the world: "God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass" (Baptist Conf., ch.3, sec.1).
@rkg62976 So? Calvin called Servetus a heretic as well. Catholics call protestants heretics. Protestants call catholics heretics. That argument is null and void. As for the second part: I can take that as a 'yes'?
@TennesseeOwnsMyBones The reason Cathars were/are heretical is because they were gnostics whose doctrines were patently fallacious.
Servetus was, in fact, an heretic as well; he was a Modalist (Sabellian).
Romanists call Protestant heretics for many reasons, one of which is adhering to the biblical doctrine of Justification as a legal declaration of one's right standing before God (imputation vs. infusion).
"Null and void" arguments should be determined by biblical exegesis.
Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. (Rom 1:21).
Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;) (Rom 2:15).
Calvins god forces evil men against their will to love Him...this is not grace, this is biological programming by a god who has to force his subjects to love him.
Now, the God of the bible says, come to me, which means, we must make a choice, and when one comes to God, this is not works, this is grace when man puts His Faith in the Living Loving God!!!
@carpentersdaughter2 .. Can you please provide ANY scripture that teaches God forces people to love him? NONE EXIST. With all due respect you have clue what Calvinism teaches. The bible teaches, people are dead in sins, slaves to sin, hostile to God, cannot understand the things of God, cannot submit to the law of God, have a deceitful heart, must be born again and only God grants repentance, takes our heart of stone and gives us a heart of flesh ALL this is a gift of God.
@rbmath One has to take what Calvinist teach. That is man so evil that he wil not come to God on his own. This is true, but Calvinist don't give God the credit for free will. You see you can't have your Calvinism and not take what that means too. If man will not come to God on his own, that he is against God, then the only other alternative there is, is that God forces men to love him...
Tthe botton line is, the Calvinist god forces men who would never come to him on their own.
@rbmath So then God forces man against his will to be programmed like a computer to love him...this you call regeneration, but again, the bottom line is, man is forced to do something that he doesn't want to do.
There are conquences to this belief and this is the biggest one.
@rbmath Again, you don't like the bottom line of Calvinism and when I show you the bottom line, you tell me I don't understand Calvinism....Again, you say that man is so evil that he can't come to God, he has no free will to do anything...so, if you take that, and man is so against God...what other choice is there? There isn't any....if man is so evil he hates god and will not come to god on his own, then the only other alternative is for God to force that individual to come to Him...
@rbmath If God eternally decrees for His good pleasure that someone robs a bank, then God is forcing that person to do something, because God decided UNCONDITIONALLY from eternity past, that the robber would want to rob, and want nothing else-- and that the robber would then be eternally condemned. But unconditional election doesn't give any room for even the idea that the robber is condemned because of his robbery. The robber was elected for perdition before any act or desire at all.
@sketchbook1 you see, the Elect are saved in spite of any good or evil choice, desire or act, and the Reprobate are condemned in spite of any good or evil choice desire or act. That is exactly what Unconditional Election means. And Reprobation it isn't some sort of "passing over" of the condemned, but rather an active, eternal, unconditional choice on God's part that most people would be created as pre-damned vessels, for God's good pleasure. That is Calvinism. Or one part, at least.
@sketchbook1 ... Do you think that God owes people salvation? Do you think that people who are naturally hostile towards God, that God owes them salvation? Rom 9:18-21. God is the master and LORD, we are just clay in His Divine hands to do with as He see fit... I would think that Christians would be eternally great-full to God since He allows Christians to understand and be granted repentance... Christians should be thankful that we are NOT " vessels of wrath prepared for destruction" .....
@rbmath Why always the false dichotomies with Calvinists?! It's always "IF not one option, THEN it must be the other, necessarily...
No one said God owed man anything. And we're always accused of trying to steal glory from God, when we try to assert from Scripture that God Himself sets the conditions by which He'll get glory from our salvation, and if we follow those conditions, He is glorified...
@sketchbook1 RE: false dichotomies... Really... So you know agree that God is 100% FREE to save ANYONE He wants and leave the rest in their sins.... This goes the very heart of who you think God is and His Divine freedom...Tell me please... EXACTLY HOW in your view is God glorified. by trying His VERY VERY BEST to save people who a lot still go to hell..tell me please what's his "batting average" ...
@sketchbook1 YOUR VIEW god... "he cannot 100% save everyone he wants to, their are no guarantees with your view that everyone who know a christian will endure to the end".... Scriptures actually teach that will 100% guaranteed to save and keep His elect save to the end by His divine power and glory alone...
@sketchbook1. So you're really saying. 'Your wrong Lord it was "MY FAITH" that drew me to you. NOT what you said in your divinely inspired word. Joh 6:44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him....65.. "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father."
@shteve77 ... So your saying that God's amazing grace was NOT first working in her life..that this one verse gives you ALL of her background information. Nice way you DO eisegesis. and totally ignore clear scripture that shows GOD GRANTS REPENTANCE...
@rbmath Of course God's Spirit was at work in the woman, but His Spirit didn't force her to believe. Jesus didn't say "I have made you born again" or "My Spirit has saved you", He said "YOUR FAITH HAS SAVED YOU". He attributes the faith to the woman and says because of her faith in God, God has saved her. In Heb11:39 we read "These were all commended for THEIR FAITH...." Why commend someone for having something if it is you who gave it to them? God commended them for THEIR FAITH.
@shteve77 .RE: Of course God's Spirit was at work in the woman... So she would NOT have had faith if God's spirit was not working with her. it goes with ALL who have faith in God.. Where does Calvinism teach the "spirit forces people?." I'm sure you heard the answer before, God removes the heart of stone and give people a heart of flesh so she becomes willing herself, thanks God's grace and Spirit working in her life. But you enjoy your "works salvation"
@rbmath The Holy Spirit "convicts the WORLD of guilt in regards to sin and righteousness"Jn16.
Jesus didn't say "I have removed your heart of stone so you are saved". He said "YOUR FAITH" has saved you.
For the Calvinist, faith is Irrelivant because you believe people are born again and made alive before they believe. If God has regenerated someone and made them alive then there is no need to believe anything, yet scripture says it is when someone believes that they have life. NOT BEFORE.
@shteve77 RE: Jesus didn't say "I have removed your heart of stone so you are saved". He said "YOUR FAITH" has saved you.. So you once again deny the work of God in the life of people and clearly deny scriptures such as 1Co 2:14... YOUR VIEW = "SO very sorry Paul although your letters are divinely inspired your got this wrong, people APART FROM God's FIRST WORK in their lives CAN repent all on their own, HURRY FOR WORKS SALVATION???
@shteve77... as I said. your VERY INCONSISTENT. If God was not working FIRST in the lives of people than they would NOT HAVE FAITH... either you believe that the Holy Spirit was working in the lives of people BEFORE they believed and the Holy Spirit GAVE THEM the gift of faith, which is a fruit of the spirit. Gal 5:22-23 given to people or you continue to deny that its God who grants repentance FIRST. its GOD who works FIRST. God's saving grace comes FIRST people CANNOT repent on their own.
Dr. Norman Geisler Question: Can Jesus FAIL to do the will of God the Father. Or Can Jesus LOSE... John 6:39 "This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day.... With Dr. Norman Geisler views he forced to say "yes" Jesus can lose since their are people going to hell...
@carpentersdaughter2 .. God cannot make something that is greater than him. This rock being a material substance and God being Spirit, God would have to uphold the rocks existence Col 1:17. Its also impossible for God to lie. This shows the greatness of God's being.
@rbmath Easier answer would be God wouldn't because He's too intelligent to do such a thing. Your question can Jesus lose is based upon the teaching that if God gave free will then God fails..this has been imprinted into your mind by Calvinism, and now you hold on to this teaching like it's true.
God's Grace is shown through the Free Will that He gave to mankind. This is so evident thoughout the bible. Even a child can see this as I did when I was a very young child.
@carpentersdaughter2... libertarian free will is not taught in the bible. Sinful men who are slaves to sin have no freewill.. I suggest that you listen to audio files from the link I already sent you.
@rbmath Why, so I can become an automotaun like yourself...to become an object in the puppetmasters hands? No thanks, I will stay right where God has me and that's in His Loveing Hands, allowing me to love Him, or even stumble at times. His love is so great that when I fall, He is right there to pick me up. My God does this because free will is in the bible and if you can't see it, it's because you've been taught not to see it.
@carpentersdaughter2..RE: puppetmasters hands... And you really think you have a choice in the matter... Tell me please just HOW does your "freewill" work? After all the bile teaches. people are dead in sins, slaves to sin, hostile to God, cannot understand the things of God, cannot submit to the law of God, have a deceitful heart, must be born again and only God grants repentance, takes our heart of stone and gives us a heart of flesh.
@rbmath Yes, I know that if I go out today and rob a bank, I did so of my free will. God did not ordain me to go out and rob that bank as Calvinism would teach. I went out on my own free will to do this evil deed.
I have the ability to choose good or evil and this is why God is so great, because He has given us the ability to choose good or evil.
Even you had to say yes at one point in your life before you became engrained in this teaching.
Dr. Norman Geisler NOT ACCORDING TO what the Divinely Inspired bible says.. 1Co 2:14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised. Mr Geisler teaches works salvation...
Geisler is incorrect. Calvinism teaches that the logical order is first belief & then salvation. Apparently he thinks Calvinism teaches the opposite. Calvinism also believes that spiritually dead people do indeed clearly understand the things about God which Rom 1 speaks of, but that they willingly suppress that truth in their unrighteousness. So, Geisler has it wrong here as well.
@johncalvin44b I found Geisler making so many errors on the belief of Calvinism. Even in his book, Chosen But Free, there are errors that can be picked in every 2 page or so. I wonder if his books about Atheism are misleading as his teachings of Calvinism?
Adam ate with perfect clarity,God knowing the Lamb was slain before the foundation of the world.Could Adam not have sinned? Adam died a conditional physical death.The natural man cannot understand the things of God.According to Romans 1 they knew there was a God but listen to the scriptures they did not perceive in Romans 1 never repenting. If they understood it was all. intellectual Dead means dead Mr and dead cannot understand anything Ha! Dead does not mean dead?
He agrees with Calvinist in the ultimate sense on point 1. He says "although they can perceive the truth, they are unwilling to accept it" Awesome, we agree there. He gets to the main problem, but he never answers it. We are unwilling to accept, because we are totally depraved, dead in our sins. Now, Calvinist say that God must regenerate man so he will repsond, but the Dr did not give an answer. If man will not accept, why did he or me, or anyone? One must be smarter than others, etc etc
@acfathome Two reasons, the Fear of God, and the Gospel. When confronted by God's Law we see what we are, we are sinners, this creates Fear of God. Furthermore, God's Spirit is already convicting the world of Sin, Judgement, *& Righteousness. The Fear of God is the beginnig of Knowledge, Wisdom, and Understanding. When we Fear God & receive the Gospel, we understnad it (Mt 13:18-23), & it is the Power to save us. I believe in Total Depravity, but the bible shows how one is saved. God bless.
@SERVANTofYHVH I think it is possible that you misunderstood my point. The statement is always made on both sides that only God gets the glory, and that there is no human effort, only the grace of God. Yet, the issue is in Armenian-ism the only reason one gets saved and not the other is because it ultimately relies on the person. God gives equal effort, but the end depends on man.
@acfathome See I disagree that the end result is on man. Man has one responsiblity, acknolwedge that he can do NOTHING to save himself & cry out for mercy. We're beggars, totaly unable to save ourselves, if we reach this point then we graciously accept God's free gift when its offered. Geisler nails it, when I walk through the city & see a beggar, I flip him a coin. There's nothing the beggar did to earn it, he can't boast, he simply received my gift. It was me who made the sacrifice.
Calvinists don't deny that fallen men are able to perceive the Truth of God, but they affirm that that they will always reject the Grace of God. Romans 3:10-18.
@blainer19er I thought Calvin said we can't reject God's Grace? Also, read your reference again... verse 18. there is no Fear of God before their eyes... that is the problem. Man does not Fear God, that is why the Law is given, to stop our mouths, the Spirit of God is convicting the whole world of Sin, Judgement & Righteousness. The Fear of God is the key that unlocks knowledge wisdom, understanding and salvation, and the Gospel is the Power of God unto salvation for everyone that believe.
I'm not sure exactly what John Calvin says about such things. I've never read his "Institutes of the Christian Religion". But when people say "Irresistible Grace" and "Limited Atonement" they mean this:
Jesus' death was sufficient for all, but only applied to some: those who would have saving faith (the elect). Those who do not come to faith are still offered salvation, but they inevitably reject it. Grace is only irresistible in the sense that if God has decided to save you...
... He will bring you to saving faith via preaching, evangelism, ect. Of course, everyone gets a choice, and man is held fully responsible for his choice, but Reformed Theology teaches that man's default response to the offer of salvation is to reject it; only when God changes one's heart does a person accept salvation. Thus Grace is resistible in the sense that you can reject salvation, but irresistible in the sense that the elect always accept and the unelect always reject it.
Also, it should be a very humbling doctrine as it reveals to a person how little they really did in being saved (nothing at all) and how easily God could have chosen not to save them. The proper response to the doctrine of election is never pride or arrogance because "I'm the elect." but rather humility and thankfulness because "I did nothing to get saved and don't deserve it in the slightest." Of course, an arminian can be a christian; this post is just to explain IG.
@blainer19er If God Irresistably saves one person, then He is obligated by His nature to Irrestably save all people. Note I did not say He is obligated to man to save all... I said He is obligated to Himself! God's mercy is compared throughout the Psalms with His Truth, as great as God's Truth is, so is His Mercy. The reason not all are saved, is because God does not irresistably save anyone. His mercy is towards those who Fear Him, and even a sinner can Fear God if the Gospel is given properly.
@SERVANTofYHVH Also, please understand, that from my veiw of Salvation, man has NOTHING to be proud or boastful of. Salvation is of God, from God, by God and through God. It His grace that calls us, His Son that saves us, His Spirit that sancitfies us, we are simply beggars humbly receiving the free gift of Salvation. And as we try and live holy lives we are constantly reminded (through our failures) of how useless we are, and how much we need God's Mercy! (((Continued)))
@SERVANTofYHVH (((Continued))) There is a saying, sleep like a Calvinist. To me this is arrogant, they considerer themselves secure that they can rest peacefully, if they sin they pray a little prayer and think God smiles and brushes the dirt off them... when I sin I cry out in horror! I am grieved sorely, I am terribly convicted and reminded of my sinfulness... I pray prayers like Psalm 51, and 25, and 143! I am a beggar seeking scraps from the King's Table.
Moral inability is not equivalent to "without knowledge." Hurray! He understands one good point that Calvinists teach. If fact, it is the knowledge of the Jews (in the book of Romans) that makes them more guilty.
But then he says that Calvinists equate the two. It's just silly straw man stuff.
At 1:44 he says, "Our ability to respond to God is still there" then real fast he adds "both positively and negatively." But the scripture quoted does not show that fallen man can respond POSITIVELY to God.
Calvinists believe that fallen man cannot respond NEGATIVELY to God? To the contrary, it is all that fallen man can do.
Notice how when Dr. Geisler quotes Rom.1:19-20 he accurately states that Paul is speaking of "general revelation"? But then he implies that general revelation is synonymous with the "special", or, "redemptive revelation" contained in the Scriptures alone. This "special revelation" the carnal man (fleshly man) does NOT have.
Dr. Geisler's error is subtle, but is erroneous nonetheless.
@rkg62976 Right! Rom 1 teaches that there is enough revelation in the stars and creation to condemn a man. But you can't look up at the Big Dipper and get saved thereby.
Good point; and not just a subtle error, but a significant Humanist supposition by Geisler. He thinks that fallen man can arrive at salvation by empirical knowledge and reasoning within fallen man's darkened heart.
I love how guys with computers, who know a little theology, think they can even try to debate someone like Dr. Geisler. This just illustrates one of the problems with many extreme Calvinists: they are so bloody arrogant!
@MrHawklan I heard Islam has a theory on predestination too. Its how Allah selects who should go to heaven and if Allah has chosen you he will provide means and ways for some Muslims to remain right in he's grace at all times in other words, he keeps you clean. So not all Muslims will go to 'paradise' because even Muhammad doesn't know if he's going to 'paradise'.
Adam's relationship with God was different than all other. He walked with God. Nor was Adam conceived & born in sin. Therefore, hearing God was irrelevant only because God MADE HIMSELF KNOWN to Adam. Yet, the inability of Adam to perform righteousness is in the fact he 'hid himself'. Once again, Geisler proves himself a sophist serving only those who want their itching ears scratched. Geisler is an integral part of the dumbing down of Americans and the collapse of the U.S.
Well I'm gonna post a comment a little more on-topic for this particular segment of the video: Geisler said (on part 2) that Total Depravity means that those not elected can not understand or perceive at all the gospel message, citing Eph 2:1, 1 Cor 2, etc. His refutation is that yes, non-believers perceive the gospel, the problem is they don't receive it. I would say: that's the point! Rom 3 makes it clear that all have perceived the gospel but no one, on their own, has power to receive it!
Calvinist DON'T want the Truth about the Scriptures, they only want more Calvinism. It is a waste of Breath Dr Geisler, but i thank you for your ministry. Amen.
A snake? Have you ever heard this man speak? Have you read his many books - books that MOST Calvinists have superlatives to say about? He has a tremendous passion for the Lord and for the lost. And might I remind you that that Geisler's views on this issue are the SAME ones shared (by far) by the VAST majority of conservative, inerrancy believing, spirit-filled Christians for 2,000 years! Are you calling the many thousands of missionaries with these same views and millions of believers SNAKES?
@TheologyMatters101 - Let me get this straight - you're calling the many millions of people transformed by Christ over the last 2,000 years, "VICTIMS," as, BY FAR, the VAST MAJORITY of them were evangelized by the many thousands of missionaries and millions of other Christians who believe 2 Peter 3:9 means God calls ALL men EVERYWHERE to repentance (Acts 17:30)? Only a tiny percentage of Believers worldwide believe Reformed teachings to the contrary. God sure must have loved these "victims!"
And why do you think that reformed churches have produced so few new converts as compared to the multitudes coming through churches and missionaries believing that God desires "no one perish?" Why has God OVERWHELMINGLY used non-reformed evangelism to spread Christianity around the world? Is there a Scriptural precedence of God using a false, evil, Satanically inspired doctrine to produce transformed, spirit-filled lives of love and obedience to Him? OF COURSE NOT!!!
@philipatoz Because that's what people want to hear. Tell a sinner that all he's got to do is to confess and believe in order to be saved and he's going to like it. Tell him that his redemption is beyond negotiation of any kind and that only his deeds will prove whether he's already been called by God a long time ago, he's going to hate you for it. Calvinism only appeals to heroes.
@john42t Jesus said, "Repent, and believe the Good News!" Poor Jesus, telling sinners what they want to hear...
And BTW you say "...only his deeds will prove whether he's already been called...." shows that Perseverance of the Saints ends up meaning works-based salvation (or at least, works-based proof of salvation...)
Typical of Calvinist to assume anybody that does'nt agree with them is not a smart as them and therefore "confused" I understand excactly what Dr. Geisler is saying there's nothing confusing about it. I may not agree with all of it but confusing, no, only to someone who is either to lazy or to dogmatic to even stop honestly consider his perspective.
@rustyshadow7 agreed. the reason the american civil war is so bloody is cuz there is a bunch of idiots going around saying PAUL CONDONES SLAVERY YOU ANTICHRIST STOP FOLLOWING THE CULTURE OF DEATH! KEEP THE SLAVES IN THEIR RIGHTFU PLACE--sad; at the end of the day those who wont change are just not of Jesus I guess; because his sheep hear his voice
@shuddo Well let's see, is it really those who refuse to change, or is it those whom GOD refuses to change? We know that the entire world does not love God, but does God really love the entire world?
Do you truly believe that God allowed a deceptive, evil, heretical doctrine to teach MANY MILLIONS of people to repent love and follow Him? Why would God have chosen such a theology to save these millions - why would He not have done it through the supposed "truth" of Reformed theology? Why, historically, has there been only a TINY droplet of Believers to come to Christ via Reformed teachings, as compared to the mighty ocean of believers reached via what you say is heretical teaching?
I challenge EVERYONE - whether Five Point Calvinist OR NOT - to CAREFULLY read Norman Geisler's "Chosen But Free." This book goes into EXHAUSTIVE theological/Scriptural examination, historical church fathers' views, reformed theologians, philosophical angles, etc. of various Calvinist beliefs. In it, Geisler sees problems with both extreme Armininanism AND Five Point Calvinism. Make sure to get the latest version in which Geisler responds to James White's "The Potters Freedom."
Amen bro I like your challenge, but keep in mind that most Calvinist will not take you up on it because they have a problem with humility. But that's not their fault God just made them that way.
As for formerutuber and other Five Pointers who keep hammering away with quotes from Romans and various verses, Scripture must be looked at as a comprehensive whole. You cannot supersede the MANY verses which say in PLAIN LANGUAGE that God wishes that ALL men would believe and have faith - and countless verses make it clear that this is something ANYONE (WILLING TO BELIEVE) can do - he will then open their eyes and regenerate them. You cannot take a few less clear verses and make a doctrine!
Your definition is incorrect. That is not what theologians mean by literalism. Your definition would be "wooden literalism" which I am not.
I am a literalist in the classic sense. That being I look at the writer, the style and context and come to the text knowing what genre of writing the writer is using. There is narrative, poetic, prophetic, didactic as well as other genres that then help guide how I am to come to understand the true intent of the writer. This is a basic part of hermeneutics.
thor2me - I find his statement ("When people sin and resist His commands, it is according TO His purpose, they are doing exactly what He WILLS.") an unbelievably perverse logic, to assert that our God actually desires and directs sins for His purposes. WHAT??? You are telling me that Holy God finds good purposes in rape, murder and mayhem? Why not just say to Judas, "well done, my faithful servant!" And why warn anyone not to sin - as IF they truly have a choice with this Five Point god.
So you are saying that if a Christian Woman is raped that there is no purpose in it? Do you then want to imply that evil in the world has no purpose, that God just allows it to happen for no reason?
So you are hindered then to say to that CHRISTIAN woman:
And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.Rom 8:28
I don't see in my Greek an exclusion clause like "except rape and murder, God causes all..."
Yes, God does in fact use those who have evil intentions to achieve His greater purposes - this is Scriptural. HOWEVER, since God has perfect foreknowledge and is all-knowing, He can and does orchestrate events as to His desired outcomes, YET WITHOUT EVER CAUSING THOSE COMMITTING EVIL ACTS TO SIN - as this they do freely, of their own accord (yes, they do have an actual choice whether to sin or not). God can either thwart, limit or even allow their evil acts as His wisdom and purposes so deem.
Brian - what I am trying to say is that just because God, in his foreknowledge and wisdom, can use evil intentions and acts for His good purposes, this in NO WAY MEANS that he is EVER the cause of sin. A man can commit all kinds of sins simply because he truly believes his intentions are honorable and good, and yet God will still see such as rebellion and sin, no matter his deluded intentions.
If dead means we are unable to receive the truth of God, then isn't it a contradiction to believe sinful man can choose God. Geisler just said man is unable to receive God, but in the next breath he wants everyone to believe it is ok to believe we can choose to receive God's grace. I can't believe people can't see the contradiction.
Where does the Bible teach "faith alone?" The phrase is only used once in James 2:24 where it says that we are NOT justified by faith alone. Protestants can't agree on much of anything.
Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.
Our works is the EFFECT of salvation not the cause of it.
Note "Works of the Law", meaning the Mosaic Law, however loving our neighbor, being charitable, soft spoken, just, upright and holy, those are the "works" we are called to do, not to fulfill all several hundred Mosaic precepts. Grace, Faith, and Works are all of equal importance, not one of those by itself can save a person. To say that one is saved by one of those by itself is the same as foolishly claiming that the human body survives off of sleep alone.
Our justification is explicitly shown here using the instrumental word "by". We are justified BY faith. Paul didn't go on to say "Oh by the way we are also justified by the new testament commands that go along with the faith.
The sleep analogy is poor. We're talking about a cause effect relationship where one has been shown to be explicitly a cause (regeneration) and the other an EFFECT (good works).
It's like you are arguing a chicken/egg saying we need both. I say you "need creation".
A true saving faith is the result in a supernatural work of the Holy Spirit of giving an individual a NEW Heart in order to "trust" God and His promises. To delight in Him, to love His beauty and majesty, where before one hated the things of God.
It is "decisional" salvation that alone believes in just an "oral profession" or mental ascent to recognizing truth.
Furthermore, to state that good works are a result of regeneration has no Bilbical proof either. There are people of other religions, even atheists who are kinder, gentler, more soft spoken, just, selfless, and noble than many professing Christians. Yeah, kindess is only possibly after regeneration? Kindness is inherent in human nature, it only counts for righteousness however if it is done in the name of Jesus.
judging from your response, you either didn't understand my original post nor my reply, or you aren't interested in understanding them.
You are simply making a false dichotomy, by putting 5 points of Calvinism on one end and the 5 points of Arminianism on the other and saying, "choose".
ok. i see what you are trying to say, but i think you might be missing my point.
i think people tell you, you are an arminian because if you reject one point of calvinism or change it, you are not a calvinist but by default an arminian.
for example: Irresistible Grace is the doctrine that God's Grace cannot be resisted. if you don't believe that, you are automatically arminian and believe resistible grace.
it's not a false dichotomy, either God's grace is resistible or irresistible.
You're right on that one-- either God's grace is resistable or irresistable.
Either Atonement is Limited, or it's not...
etc...
it's too bad that we classify something as "arminian" or calvinist" when we should be scriptural.
Granted, you believe Calvinism IS the Gospel, as most do... but I can be at best a 4 point Calvinist, yet I don't believe in all five points of Arminianism.
WIth both I find direct contradictions of scripture, and the systematic theology breaks down...
yeah most people don't like this one, but I find it's the easiest to prove.
really what is limited is the effect of the atonement, not the power. if people go to hell then the sins they did were not atoned for. so the atonement of Christ is limited in that it only forgives the sins of those who it forgave.
No true Calvinist believes that the atonement is beyond saving any single person in the whole world, but that the effect of the cross does not forgive all sins, but is limited
I think you are defining Limited Atonement awfully generously.
Even Arminians have to admit that the Atonement is limited in its scope as to its effect... that is not all will be saved..
But the L in TULIP as defined by most Calvinists is that Christ died only for the elect, and no one else, and that he is the propitiation, not "for the sins of the whole world" as the Bible says, but only for those predestined unto salvation, those God loves, the elect.
i can see why you would assume that calvinists believe that kind of statement. but there are a lot of terms in there that need to be defined and context given for such a verse.
so let me ask you to affirm and define a few things before i respond, that way we are on the same page.
do you believe in, and can you define for me what the elect or who the elect are, and predestination.
if you reject these concepts then we have to start there. if you affirm them, explain please.
I think Calvinism defines Limited Atonement that way. That's where I got the definition.
Now, about Election, I believe that God is Sovereign and has every right to choose whom He will for salvation, and for damnation too.
Yet I also believe that God sovereignly decided that man's faith counts in the equation-- and that this in no way robs God of glory, as Calvinists wrongly claim.
I believe the Bible teaches election, but how that is defined is the rub...
Here are some examples of verses from Romans I believe say a lot about the paradox of Election: 9:30
...the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; but Israel, who pursued a law of righteousness, has not attained it. Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works....
John did write that, but it must be understood with the intent of what the writer has said. Parallel what John said in John 11:51-52 and Revelation 5:9.
What also must be understood in order to understand the scope of propitiation is the word itself and the effects of propitiation.
For those whom the propitiation was made he mediates Heb 9:12. It SECURES their salvation. If He propitiated for all, then all WILL be saved. Do you want to say that?
You haven't really found a way to fit in what Paul was saying there in Romans 9:30 and 11: 23, have you? Paul was trying to explain it, but Calvinists will have none, and simply ignore those parts of the very same texts which may temper Limited Atonement etc...
& you beg the question about propitiation.
Of course if you define propitiation a certain way, then you'll get certain outcomes with it regarding limited atonement...
Romans 9:30 with 11:23 is not problem, it is quite clear. If they don't continue in unbelief, (in other words if they believe) they will be saved what is so hard about that?
Jesus has a permanent priesthood. Therefore he is able to save completely because he always lives to INTERCEDE for them (Hebrews 7:24-26).He secures our redemption by his sacrifice Heb 9:12. And intercedes by HIS BLOOD And he intercedes for those whom draw near to God. (this isn't everybody, since everybody doesn't draw near) Hebrews 9:28
Wonderful! So you agree in Conditional Election? You said he intercedes for those who draw near? That's not Calvinism at all, Calvinism states that God intercedes for whoever he randomly chooses, the Bible however says that Jesus' sacrifice is only beneficial to those who respond to the grace that his sacrifice provided through faith working through love. You're no Calvinist at all...why are you defending his doctrine?
You are incorrect. Particular atonement believes that in reality Christ intercedes perfectly for those whom He died. Those who draw near are those drawn by the father and WILL come to the father. Does every individual come? No. In reality only those who Christ died for comes. Christ's death INCLUDES the believers faith. If you want to say that Christ died for everyone and fails in His intercession, you can say that, but I won't. Christ came to SAVE His sheep, not make them savable.
Jesus doesn't fail in his intercession, we as human beings fail in our response to it. He has predestined EVERYONE who has ever lived to go to heaven. When they choose the opposite, has Jesus failed? No, only the individual has. I hate to break it to you, but Jesus' will is hardly ever done, no wonder he's d
@apollos6640 It's true, there's no good news in a gospel that can't be received, is there, save for a small group of pre-wired favorites? The gospel is good news to those who _haven't_ been regenerated; it's good news because God Himself has in Jesus done all that needs to be done to bring you to God. You have only to receive it, and he gives you the power to do that if you only will.
Mcfirefly2 2 months ago
@apollos6640 Incredible, isn't it, that this satanic stronghold of lies could be considered good teaching, "orthodox," even necessary for salvation. Or that some people don't think it is an important issue! What could be more lukewarm than not caring whether God is like that?
Mcfirefly2 2 months ago
@mcfirefly3 Calvinism logically says that, God Purposely Decreeds for Man to come into Existance DEAD, INVOLUNTARILY created to love SIN from the moment of conception, having NO ABILITY to repent or beg for mercy, the vast majority FATED for DAMNATION, PREDESTINED to BURN Fforever, CHOSEN for Eternal Punishment, "Before having done anything either good or bad", with a ZERO chance of Salvation, for "His good pleasure".
"O how BEAUTIFUL are the feet of those Calvinist who preach the good news!"
apollos6640 3 months ago
@mcfirefly3 you've made some excellent observations. Fight the good fight.
apollos6640 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
19And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
Since the Bible also says we _all_ do evil, "doeth truth" must mean this choice, receiving and believing the gospel.
mcfirefly3 3 months ago
Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Colossians 2:8
But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
2 Corinthians 11:3
mcfirefly3 3 months ago
This is a satanic stronghold against faith in Jesus's death for us on the cross. It does not glorify Jesus or God the Father or the Holy Spirit to say that God is so mean-spirited and stingy with His love. If they would believe the words of the Bible for what they actually say instead of imposing this "philosophy and vain deceit" on it, they would then see how much more to God's glory it is to believe His word about who He is rather than the traditions of men.
mcfirefly3 3 months ago
They are going to have to answer to Him for trying to destroy the faith of people who believe that God means what He says. Their kowtowing to a kind of "sovereignty" that ignores His love and His moral nature is not going to earn them any points with God, because they are scattering, not gathering. They are scattering because they are discouraging people from trusting Him, and this is supposedly to the glory of His sovereignty, but to a god like Allah, not the God of Jesus and the Bible.
mcfirefly3 3 months ago
This is beginning to sound just like CARM Forum, and that is not good. It is pointless to argue this issue with people who are, yes, as blinded by their dogged commitment to defend twisted interpretations as JWs.
mcfirefly3 3 months ago
@rkg62976 There's nothing to repent of, I was stating what I was witnessing.
apollos6640 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rkg62976 (Baptist Conf., ch.3, sec.1)
You quote this Confession as if they had any authority, as if they were Holy Spirit Inspired Scriptures! Much like JW's quoting their NWT, or Mormons w/ their Book Of Mormons "
apollos6640 7 months ago
@rkg62976 (Baptist Conf., ch.3, sec.1)
You quote this Confession as if they had any authority, as if they were Holy Spirit Inspired Scriptures! Much like JW's quoting their NWT, or Mormons w/ their Book Of Mormons
apollos6640 7 months ago
@apollos6640 "You quote this Confession as if they had any authority, as if they were Holy Spirit Inspired Scriptures! Much like JW's quoting their NWT, or Mormons w/ their Book Of Mormons".
What at amazingly FALSE accusation! I was simply answering someone's question (which really had no relevance to our dialogue).
You would do well to quit bearing false witness against your neighbor, as it is a breaking of the 9th commandment (Ex.20:16). You would also do well to repent of your sin.
rkg62976 6 months ago
@apollos6640 They call that being "sola scriptura." Sola scriptura, and Calvin, too, and the Synod of Dordt, and Augustine, and the Westminster Confession, and the Baptist Confession. If they ever dropped all that "sola scriptura" and looked, prayerfully, to the Holy Spirit to help them interpret the Bible by the Bible, they might be able to see how this teaching says evil things about God rather than glorifying Him. He isn't going to thank them for saying He created moral evil.
mcfirefly3 3 months ago
Obviously death doesn't mean annhiliation because the Bible doesn't teach spiritual annhiliation. That an adventist doctrine, not a Calvinist one.
You don't get saved unless God calls you - Ephesians 4:1.
metanoeo1 7 months ago
And Gen.3:8-9 is a case of Effectual Calling, and this is the first step in the 'ordo salutis'.
Rom.1:18, Paul here is speaking about "general revelation", not "special/redemptive revelation". Dr. Geisler simply makes a category error.
Lastly, Dr. Geisler takes the standard Arminian approach: "spiritual death does not mean inability, only unwillingness". Jn.6:44 refutes this, and teaches "inability".
rkg62976 7 months ago
@rkg62976 'General revelation', 'special/redemptive revelation', 'equal ultimacy', 'passive permission', 'active permission'... Mumbo Jumbo, all of it. Really, as a catholic (really liberal one, at that) I find it hilarious some calvinists are bent on demonstrating how the Catholic Church 'added' all kinds of non-scriptural poppycock into the christian theology... I mean, you guys have so many inventive buzz words to try and make Calvinism viable.
TennesseeOwnsMyBones 7 months ago
@TennesseeOwnsMyBones Concerning "general" vs. "special/redemptive" revelation: Of course, these are terms human beings use to describe clear, biblical teaching (much like the term "Trinity"). The doctrine is sound, even though the terms are not used in Scripture. But it is a far stretch to claim that Romanism's many false doctrines are contained in Scripture, than to simply say that logical concepts are deduced from them.
So your argument fails.
Soli Deo Gloria!
rkg62976 7 months ago
@rkg62976 My argument fails? Please, show me where in the bible terms as 'general' and 'special revelation' are mentioned... or Mary-worship. It's like Calvin's commentary on 2 Peter 3:9, where he actually states that god wills and wills not at the same time, and that this can be explained by his 'hidden will' and his 'revealed will'.
The argument stands.
TennesseeOwnsMyBones 7 months ago
@TennesseeOwnsMyBones "Please, show me where in the bible terms as 'general' and 'special revelation' are mentioned"
Can "Tennessee liberal Romanists" not read? I specifically stated that the "terms" themselves are not in Scripture; the concepts most certainly are. "General Revelation": That which is revealed of God through creation itself (Rom.1:19-21). "Special/Redemptive Revelation": That which is contained in the Word of God, and illumined by the Holy Spirit working in the person.
rkg62976 7 months ago
@rkg62976 Actually I'm Dutch... the name refers to an obscure Roy Orbison song. But you're doing exactly the same as you blame catholics of doing: reading into scripture certain 'terms' and 'doctrines' that suit your own theology. Tell me, where does the Bible mention a god of 'two wills'?
TennesseeOwnsMyBones 7 months ago
@TennesseeOwnsMyBones "you're doing exactly the same as you blame catholics of doing: reading into scripture certain 'terms' and 'doctrines' that suit your own theology" I have already pointed out the error in this fallacious statement.
"where does the Bible mention a god of 'two wills'?"
Does God's will contain a prohibition against murder (Ex.20:13)?
And did God not ordain the murder of the Messiah (Acts 4:27-28)?
Two wills: 1) Preceptive (found in His Law); 2) Decreetive.
rkg62976 7 months ago
@rkg62976 God predestined the murder of the Messiah? That can only be when he also predestined the Fall to happen. Which leads us back to the end conclusion of calvinism: god as the author of sin.
TennesseeOwnsMyBones 7 months ago
@TennesseeOwnsMyBones Are you reading Acts 4:27-28?, or just commenting without any thoughtful reflection on the passage? I really have to wonder.
Calvinists have always denied that God is the "author of sin". Only secondary cause are the authors of sin ("secondary cause" means "creatures").
Either God is the Ultimate Cause (as Creator) of all events that happen in His universe, or one has a dualistic view of Good & Evil.
Christians are not dualists.
rkg62976 7 months ago
@rkg62976 I have heard the usual ad hoc disclaimer of calvinists that somehow their god is NOT the author of sin... But ad hoc disclaimers make no valid argument. And yes, I have a dualistic view. Otherwise, I'd have to say things like: The Holocaust was predestined by god to happen... for some 'master plan' and his glory and stuff. Pass.
TennesseeOwnsMyBones 7 months ago
@TennesseeOwnsMyBones O.K., so you are a dualist. At least we understand each other now. I thought I was talking to a Christian. Please forgive my ignorance.
As a Christian, I must say that if one is a consistent, Bible-believing Protestant, then one will hold to what is often referred to as "Divine Determinism". That is the position I have been defending (because it is the accurate, biblical presentation of God).
rkg62976 7 months ago
@rkg62976 I see myself as a striving christian. The Cathars were christian as well, and ferociously dualist. And if 'divine determinism' somehow validates that women, children and men were gassed en masse and then incinerated, and that this was in fact part of the master plan of the 'calvinist god', then any claim on his righteousness is superfluous. But I will ask point blank: did your god predestine everything to occur before the foundation of the world?
TennesseeOwnsMyBones 7 months ago
@TennesseeOwnsMyBones I think any descent historian/biblical theologian would consider the Cathars (called "Albigensians" in southern France) an heretical sect. They were medieval gnostics.
To answer your question about God predestining everything to occur before the foundation of the world: "God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass" (Baptist Conf., ch.3, sec.1).
rkg62976 7 months ago
@rkg62976 So? Calvin called Servetus a heretic as well. Catholics call protestants heretics. Protestants call catholics heretics. That argument is null and void. As for the second part: I can take that as a 'yes'?
TennesseeOwnsMyBones 7 months ago
@TennesseeOwnsMyBones The reason Cathars were/are heretical is because they were gnostics whose doctrines were patently fallacious.
Servetus was, in fact, an heretic as well; he was a Modalist (Sabellian).
Romanists call Protestant heretics for many reasons, one of which is adhering to the biblical doctrine of Justification as a legal declaration of one's right standing before God (imputation vs. infusion).
"Null and void" arguments should be determined by biblical exegesis.
Sola Scriptura
rkg62976 7 months ago
@rkg62976 Have you read anything by Servetus? Or are you aping calvinist propaganda?
TennesseeOwnsMyBones 7 months ago
Starting @ 1:21
Yep. It's called a conscience.
Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. (Rom 1:21).
Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;) (Rom 2:15).
skoobalon 7 months ago
@rbmath "as I said 'youre very INCONSISTENT"
Right, Speak for yourself.
HOW has Shteve77 been 'INCONSISTENT'?
Please explain.
apollos6640 7 months ago
And please READ Gen.3:9. What happened at the fall? Adam and Eve became spiritually dead.
What happens next? "God CALLED unto Adam..." This is what Reformed theology refers to as "effectual calling".
The text says nothing about Adam's ability or inability to hear, this truth is found in other texts of Scripture ('tota Scriptura').
rkg62976 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Calvinism is so Demonic.
prffsrx 1 year ago
Calvinisn is so Demonic.
prffsrx 1 year ago
Calvins god forces evil men against their will to love Him...this is not grace, this is biological programming by a god who has to force his subjects to love him.
Now, the God of the bible says, come to me, which means, we must make a choice, and when one comes to God, this is not works, this is grace when man puts His Faith in the Living Loving God!!!
carpentersdaughter2 1 year ago
@carpentersdaughter2 .. Can you please provide ANY scripture that teaches God forces people to love him? NONE EXIST. With all due respect you have clue what Calvinism teaches. The bible teaches, people are dead in sins, slaves to sin, hostile to God, cannot understand the things of God, cannot submit to the law of God, have a deceitful heart, must be born again and only God grants repentance, takes our heart of stone and gives us a heart of flesh ALL this is a gift of God.
rbmath 1 year ago
@rbmath One has to take what Calvinist teach. That is man so evil that he wil not come to God on his own. This is true, but Calvinist don't give God the credit for free will. You see you can't have your Calvinism and not take what that means too. If man will not come to God on his own, that he is against God, then the only other alternative there is, is that God forces men to love him...
Tthe botton line is, the Calvinist god forces men who would never come to him on their own.
carpentersdaughter2 1 year ago
@carpentersdaughter2 .. That's because man does NOT have libertarian free will.
rbmath 1 year ago
@rbmath So then God forces man against his will to be programmed like a computer to love him...this you call regeneration, but again, the bottom line is, man is forced to do something that he doesn't want to do.
There are conquences to this belief and this is the biggest one.
carpentersdaughter2 1 year ago
@carpentersdaughter2 ... RE: God forces... NO... As I said and you continue to show how very little you really know about Calvinism...
rbmath 1 year ago
@rbmath Again, you don't like the bottom line of Calvinism and when I show you the bottom line, you tell me I don't understand Calvinism....Again, you say that man is so evil that he can't come to God, he has no free will to do anything...so, if you take that, and man is so against God...what other choice is there? There isn't any....if man is so evil he hates god and will not come to god on his own, then the only other alternative is for God to force that individual to come to Him...
carpentersdaughter2 1 year ago
@rbmath If God eternally decrees for His good pleasure that someone robs a bank, then God is forcing that person to do something, because God decided UNCONDITIONALLY from eternity past, that the robber would want to rob, and want nothing else-- and that the robber would then be eternally condemned. But unconditional election doesn't give any room for even the idea that the robber is condemned because of his robbery. The robber was elected for perdition before any act or desire at all.
sketchbook1 7 months ago
@sketchbook1 you see, the Elect are saved in spite of any good or evil choice, desire or act, and the Reprobate are condemned in spite of any good or evil choice desire or act. That is exactly what Unconditional Election means. And Reprobation it isn't some sort of "passing over" of the condemned, but rather an active, eternal, unconditional choice on God's part that most people would be created as pre-damned vessels, for God's good pleasure. That is Calvinism. Or one part, at least.
sketchbook1 7 months ago
@sketchbook1 ... Do you think that God owes people salvation? Do you think that people who are naturally hostile towards God, that God owes them salvation? Rom 9:18-21. God is the master and LORD, we are just clay in His Divine hands to do with as He see fit... I would think that Christians would be eternally great-full to God since He allows Christians to understand and be granted repentance... Christians should be thankful that we are NOT " vessels of wrath prepared for destruction" .....
rbmath 7 months ago
@rbmath Why always the false dichotomies with Calvinists?! It's always "IF not one option, THEN it must be the other, necessarily...
No one said God owed man anything. And we're always accused of trying to steal glory from God, when we try to assert from Scripture that God Himself sets the conditions by which He'll get glory from our salvation, and if we follow those conditions, He is glorified...
sketchbook1 7 months ago
@sketchbook1 RE: false dichotomies... Really... So you know agree that God is 100% FREE to save ANYONE He wants and leave the rest in their sins.... This goes the very heart of who you think God is and His Divine freedom...Tell me please... EXACTLY HOW in your view is God glorified. by trying His VERY VERY BEST to save people who a lot still go to hell..tell me please what's his "batting average" ...
rbmath 7 months ago
@sketchbook1 YOUR VIEW god... "he cannot 100% save everyone he wants to, their are no guarantees with your view that everyone who know a christian will endure to the end".... Scriptures actually teach that will 100% guaranteed to save and keep His elect save to the end by His divine power and glory alone...
rbmath 7 months ago
@sketchbook1. So you're really saying. 'Your wrong Lord it was "MY FAITH" that drew me to you. NOT what you said in your divinely inspired word. Joh 6:44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him....65.. "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father."
rbmath 7 months ago
@rbmath Luke 7:50 "Jesus said to the woman, 'Your faith has saved you; go in peace.' "
shteve77 7 months ago
@shteve77 ... So your saying that God's amazing grace was NOT first working in her life..that this one verse gives you ALL of her background information. Nice way you DO eisegesis. and totally ignore clear scripture that shows GOD GRANTS REPENTANCE...
rbmath 7 months ago
@rbmath Of course God's Spirit was at work in the woman, but His Spirit didn't force her to believe. Jesus didn't say "I have made you born again" or "My Spirit has saved you", He said "YOUR FAITH HAS SAVED YOU". He attributes the faith to the woman and says because of her faith in God, God has saved her. In Heb11:39 we read "These were all commended for THEIR FAITH...." Why commend someone for having something if it is you who gave it to them? God commended them for THEIR FAITH.
shteve77 7 months ago
@shteve77 .RE: Of course God's Spirit was at work in the woman... So she would NOT have had faith if God's spirit was not working with her. it goes with ALL who have faith in God.. Where does Calvinism teach the "spirit forces people?." I'm sure you heard the answer before, God removes the heart of stone and give people a heart of flesh so she becomes willing herself, thanks God's grace and Spirit working in her life. But you enjoy your "works salvation"
rbmath 7 months ago
@rbmath The Holy Spirit "convicts the WORLD of guilt in regards to sin and righteousness"Jn16.
Jesus didn't say "I have removed your heart of stone so you are saved". He said "YOUR FAITH" has saved you.
For the Calvinist, faith is Irrelivant because you believe people are born again and made alive before they believe. If God has regenerated someone and made them alive then there is no need to believe anything, yet scripture says it is when someone believes that they have life. NOT BEFORE.
shteve77 7 months ago
@shteve77 RE: Jesus didn't say "I have removed your heart of stone so you are saved". He said "YOUR FAITH" has saved you.. So you once again deny the work of God in the life of people and clearly deny scriptures such as 1Co 2:14... YOUR VIEW = "SO very sorry Paul although your letters are divinely inspired your got this wrong, people APART FROM God's FIRST WORK in their lives CAN repent all on their own, HURRY FOR WORKS SALVATION???
rbmath 7 months ago
@rbmath I doi not deny the work of God's Spirit. I even quoted Jn16. The Holy Spirit convicts men.
It is you who deny what Christ taught. He said it was YOUR FAITH that saved.
shteve77 7 months ago
@shteve77... as I said. your VERY INCONSISTENT. If God was not working FIRST in the lives of people than they would NOT HAVE FAITH... either you believe that the Holy Spirit was working in the lives of people BEFORE they believed and the Holy Spirit GAVE THEM the gift of faith, which is a fruit of the spirit. Gal 5:22-23 given to people or you continue to deny that its God who grants repentance FIRST. its GOD who works FIRST. God's saving grace comes FIRST people CANNOT repent on their own.
rbmath 7 months ago
@rbmath The Holy Spirit first works in the hearts of men. His grace is NOT Irresistible.
Jesus said "You faith" has saved you.
Hebrews says that those men of faith were "commended for THEIR FAITH"
Faith is not a gift and grace is not Irresistible, as Isa5:3-4 shows. But you won't discuss it!
shteve77 7 months ago
Dr. Norman Geisler Question: Can Jesus FAIL to do the will of God the Father. Or Can Jesus LOSE... John 6:39 "This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day.... With Dr. Norman Geisler views he forced to say "yes" Jesus can lose since their are people going to hell...
rbmath 1 year ago
@rbmath Can God make a rock so big He can't lift it?
carpentersdaughter2 1 year ago
@carpentersdaughter2 .. God cannot make something that is greater than him. This rock being a material substance and God being Spirit, God would have to uphold the rocks existence Col 1:17. Its also impossible for God to lie. This shows the greatness of God's being.
rbmath 1 year ago
@rbmath Easier answer would be God wouldn't because He's too intelligent to do such a thing. Your question can Jesus lose is based upon the teaching that if God gave free will then God fails..this has been imprinted into your mind by Calvinism, and now you hold on to this teaching like it's true.
God's Grace is shown through the Free Will that He gave to mankind. This is so evident thoughout the bible. Even a child can see this as I did when I was a very young child.
Free will is a gift
carpentersdaughter2 1 year ago
@carpentersdaughter2... libertarian free will is not taught in the bible. Sinful men who are slaves to sin have no freewill.. I suggest that you listen to audio files from the link I already sent you.
rbmath 1 year ago
@rbmath Why, so I can become an automotaun like yourself...to become an object in the puppetmasters hands? No thanks, I will stay right where God has me and that's in His Loveing Hands, allowing me to love Him, or even stumble at times. His love is so great that when I fall, He is right there to pick me up. My God does this because free will is in the bible and if you can't see it, it's because you've been taught not to see it.
carpentersdaughter2 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@carpentersdaughter2..RE: puppetmasters hands... And you really think you have a choice in the matter... Tell me please just HOW does your "freewill" work? After all the bile teaches. people are dead in sins, slaves to sin, hostile to God, cannot understand the things of God, cannot submit to the law of God, have a deceitful heart, must be born again and only God grants repentance, takes our heart of stone and gives us a heart of flesh.
rbmath 1 year ago
@rbmath Yes, I know that if I go out today and rob a bank, I did so of my free will. God did not ordain me to go out and rob that bank as Calvinism would teach. I went out on my own free will to do this evil deed.
I have the ability to choose good or evil and this is why God is so great, because He has given us the ability to choose good or evil.
Even you had to say yes at one point in your life before you became engrained in this teaching.
carpentersdaughter2 1 year ago
Dr. Norman Geisler NOT ACCORDING TO what the Divinely Inspired bible says.. 1Co 2:14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised. Mr Geisler teaches works salvation...
rbmath 1 year ago
Geisler is incorrect. Calvinism teaches that the logical order is first belief & then salvation. Apparently he thinks Calvinism teaches the opposite. Calvinism also believes that spiritually dead people do indeed clearly understand the things about God which Rom 1 speaks of, but that they willingly suppress that truth in their unrighteousness. So, Geisler has it wrong here as well.
johncalvin44b 1 year ago
@johncalvin44b I found Geisler making so many errors on the belief of Calvinism. Even in his book, Chosen But Free, there are errors that can be picked in every 2 page or so. I wonder if his books about Atheism are misleading as his teachings of Calvinism?
johnpolanco18 1 year ago
@johncalvin44b Do you not believe in the doctrines of Total depravity and Irresistible grace?
rustyshadow7 1 year ago
Adam ate with perfect clarity,God knowing the Lamb was slain before the foundation of the world.Could Adam not have sinned? Adam died a conditional physical death.The natural man cannot understand the things of God.According to Romans 1 they knew there was a God but listen to the scriptures they did not perceive in Romans 1 never repenting. If they understood it was all. intellectual Dead means dead Mr and dead cannot understand anything Ha! Dead does not mean dead?
polopowers1 1 year ago
He agrees with Calvinist in the ultimate sense on point 1. He says "although they can perceive the truth, they are unwilling to accept it" Awesome, we agree there. He gets to the main problem, but he never answers it. We are unwilling to accept, because we are totally depraved, dead in our sins. Now, Calvinist say that God must regenerate man so he will repsond, but the Dr did not give an answer. If man will not accept, why did he or me, or anyone? One must be smarter than others, etc etc
acfathome 1 year ago
@acfathome Two reasons, the Fear of God, and the Gospel. When confronted by God's Law we see what we are, we are sinners, this creates Fear of God. Furthermore, God's Spirit is already convicting the world of Sin, Judgement, *& Righteousness. The Fear of God is the beginnig of Knowledge, Wisdom, and Understanding. When we Fear God & receive the Gospel, we understnad it (Mt 13:18-23), & it is the Power to save us. I believe in Total Depravity, but the bible shows how one is saved. God bless.
SERVANTofYHVH 1 year ago
@SERVANTofYHVH I think it is possible that you misunderstood my point. The statement is always made on both sides that only God gets the glory, and that there is no human effort, only the grace of God. Yet, the issue is in Armenian-ism the only reason one gets saved and not the other is because it ultimately relies on the person. God gives equal effort, but the end depends on man.
acfathome 1 year ago
@acfathome See I disagree that the end result is on man. Man has one responsiblity, acknolwedge that he can do NOTHING to save himself & cry out for mercy. We're beggars, totaly unable to save ourselves, if we reach this point then we graciously accept God's free gift when its offered. Geisler nails it, when I walk through the city & see a beggar, I flip him a coin. There's nothing the beggar did to earn it, he can't boast, he simply received my gift. It was me who made the sacrifice.
SERVANTofYHVH 1 year ago
WHOAH! When we don't believe in God we're like Adam. We hide from the Truth because we're afraid because we know we did wrong!
Lord have mercy on me, a sinner! God so loved the world that He sent His only begotten son, that whoever believes in Him will be saved!
We are made in the image of God from the start, so even in darkness we are like God because we have the power of choice!
DoctorTopper 1 year ago
In addition, check out John 8:34-47.
blainer19er 1 year ago
Calvinists don't deny that fallen men are able to perceive the Truth of God, but they affirm that that they will always reject the Grace of God. Romans 3:10-18.
blainer19er 1 year ago
@blainer19er I thought Calvin said we can't reject God's Grace? Also, read your reference again... verse 18. there is no Fear of God before their eyes... that is the problem. Man does not Fear God, that is why the Law is given, to stop our mouths, the Spirit of God is convicting the whole world of Sin, Judgement & Righteousness. The Fear of God is the key that unlocks knowledge wisdom, understanding and salvation, and the Gospel is the Power of God unto salvation for everyone that believe.
SERVANTofYHVH 1 year ago
@SERVANTofYHVH
I'm not sure exactly what John Calvin says about such things. I've never read his "Institutes of the Christian Religion". But when people say "Irresistible Grace" and "Limited Atonement" they mean this:
Jesus' death was sufficient for all, but only applied to some: those who would have saving faith (the elect). Those who do not come to faith are still offered salvation, but they inevitably reject it. Grace is only irresistible in the sense that if God has decided to save you...
blainer19er 1 year ago
@SERVANTofYHVH
... He will bring you to saving faith via preaching, evangelism, ect. Of course, everyone gets a choice, and man is held fully responsible for his choice, but Reformed Theology teaches that man's default response to the offer of salvation is to reject it; only when God changes one's heart does a person accept salvation. Thus Grace is resistible in the sense that you can reject salvation, but irresistible in the sense that the elect always accept and the unelect always reject it.
blainer19er 1 year ago
@SERVANTofYHVH
Also, it should be a very humbling doctrine as it reveals to a person how little they really did in being saved (nothing at all) and how easily God could have chosen not to save them. The proper response to the doctrine of election is never pride or arrogance because "I'm the elect." but rather humility and thankfulness because "I did nothing to get saved and don't deserve it in the slightest." Of course, an arminian can be a christian; this post is just to explain IG.
blainer19er 1 year ago
@blainer19er If God Irresistably saves one person, then He is obligated by His nature to Irrestably save all people. Note I did not say He is obligated to man to save all... I said He is obligated to Himself! God's mercy is compared throughout the Psalms with His Truth, as great as God's Truth is, so is His Mercy. The reason not all are saved, is because God does not irresistably save anyone. His mercy is towards those who Fear Him, and even a sinner can Fear God if the Gospel is given properly.
SERVANTofYHVH 1 year ago
@SERVANTofYHVH Also, please understand, that from my veiw of Salvation, man has NOTHING to be proud or boastful of. Salvation is of God, from God, by God and through God. It His grace that calls us, His Son that saves us, His Spirit that sancitfies us, we are simply beggars humbly receiving the free gift of Salvation. And as we try and live holy lives we are constantly reminded (through our failures) of how useless we are, and how much we need God's Mercy! (((Continued)))
SERVANTofYHVH 1 year ago
@SERVANTofYHVH (((Continued))) There is a saying, sleep like a Calvinist. To me this is arrogant, they considerer themselves secure that they can rest peacefully, if they sin they pray a little prayer and think God smiles and brushes the dirt off them... when I sin I cry out in horror! I am grieved sorely, I am terribly convicted and reminded of my sinfulness... I pray prayers like Psalm 51, and 25, and 143! I am a beggar seeking scraps from the King's Table.
SERVANTofYHVH 1 year ago
@SERVANTofYHVH Psalm 119:64a
The earth, O LORD, is full of thy mercy:
SERVANTofYHVH 1 year ago
@SERVANTofYHVH Psalm 145:9
The LORD is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works.
SERVANTofYHVH 1 year ago
Moral inability is not equivalent to "without knowledge." Hurray! He understands one good point that Calvinists teach. If fact, it is the knowledge of the Jews (in the book of Romans) that makes them more guilty.
But then he says that Calvinists equate the two. It's just silly straw man stuff.
This guy just does not know nor understand the T.
RomansGalatians 1 year ago
At 1:44 he says, "Our ability to respond to God is still there" then real fast he adds "both positively and negatively." But the scripture quoted does not show that fallen man can respond POSITIVELY to God.
Calvinists believe that fallen man cannot respond NEGATIVELY to God? To the contrary, it is all that fallen man can do.
RomansGalatians 1 year ago
Notice how when Dr. Geisler quotes Rom.1:19-20 he accurately states that Paul is speaking of "general revelation"? But then he implies that general revelation is synonymous with the "special", or, "redemptive revelation" contained in the Scriptures alone. This "special revelation" the carnal man (fleshly man) does NOT have.
Dr. Geisler's error is subtle, but is erroneous nonetheless.
rkg62976 1 year ago
@rkg62976 Right! Rom 1 teaches that there is enough revelation in the stars and creation to condemn a man. But you can't look up at the Big Dipper and get saved thereby.
Good point; and not just a subtle error, but a significant Humanist supposition by Geisler. He thinks that fallen man can arrive at salvation by empirical knowledge and reasoning within fallen man's darkened heart.
RomansGalatians 1 year ago
I love how guys with computers, who know a little theology, think they can even try to debate someone like Dr. Geisler. This just illustrates one of the problems with many extreme Calvinists: they are so bloody arrogant!
msb0000 1 year ago
@msb0000 Well, that's not *their* problem, is it? Maybe I ought to look into Calvinism... :-)
john42t 7 months ago
I wonder why God allows Calvanist and Armenians to argue and fight over him.
MrHawklan 1 year ago
@MrHawklan I heard Islam has a theory on predestination too. Its how Allah selects who should go to heaven and if Allah has chosen you he will provide means and ways for some Muslims to remain right in he's grace at all times in other words, he keeps you clean. So not all Muslims will go to 'paradise' because even Muhammad doesn't know if he's going to 'paradise'.
MrHawklan 1 year ago
@MrHawklan interesting
LiquidSmooth 1 year ago
Adam's relationship with God was different than all other. He walked with God. Nor was Adam conceived & born in sin. Therefore, hearing God was irrelevant only because God MADE HIMSELF KNOWN to Adam. Yet, the inability of Adam to perform righteousness is in the fact he 'hid himself'. Once again, Geisler proves himself a sophist serving only those who want their itching ears scratched. Geisler is an integral part of the dumbing down of Americans and the collapse of the U.S.
TroddinSod 1 year ago
Well I'm gonna post a comment a little more on-topic for this particular segment of the video: Geisler said (on part 2) that Total Depravity means that those not elected can not understand or perceive at all the gospel message, citing Eph 2:1, 1 Cor 2, etc. His refutation is that yes, non-believers perceive the gospel, the problem is they don't receive it. I would say: that's the point! Rom 3 makes it clear that all have perceived the gospel but no one, on their own, has power to receive it!
stevibxyz 1 year ago
what stupidity.....calling calvinist fags and stuff.......sad....I will destroy Giesler in a debate any day
manrelic 1 year ago
Geisler's discussion on "total depravity", especially by the Genesis passages, is really enlightening.
nbanuchu 1 year ago
Calvinist DON'T want the Truth about the Scriptures, they only want more Calvinism. It is a waste of Breath Dr Geisler, but i thank you for your ministry. Amen.
apollos6640 1 year ago
Chosen But Free...
SrChavez85 1 year ago
A waste of breath, "Dr"Geisler!!!!
denn034 1 year ago
This man is a snake. He is trying to weasle in the Arminian heresies through the name of "Moderate Calvinism."
This is a a shame. It is manifest that he is is unapproved by his heresies.
Thank you Lord for your word.
TheologyMatters101 1 year ago
A snake? Have you ever heard this man speak? Have you read his many books - books that MOST Calvinists have superlatives to say about? He has a tremendous passion for the Lord and for the lost. And might I remind you that that Geisler's views on this issue are the SAME ones shared (by far) by the VAST majority of conservative, inerrancy believing, spirit-filled Christians for 2,000 years! Are you calling the many thousands of missionaries with these same views and millions of believers SNAKES?
philipatoz 1 year ago
No, there are alot of Christians that are victims to his confusion.
TheologyMatters101 1 year ago
@TheologyMatters101 - Let me get this straight - you're calling the many millions of people transformed by Christ over the last 2,000 years, "VICTIMS," as, BY FAR, the VAST MAJORITY of them were evangelized by the many thousands of missionaries and millions of other Christians who believe 2 Peter 3:9 means God calls ALL men EVERYWHERE to repentance (Acts 17:30)? Only a tiny percentage of Believers worldwide believe Reformed teachings to the contrary. God sure must have loved these "victims!"
philipatoz 1 year ago
And why do you think that reformed churches have produced so few new converts as compared to the multitudes coming through churches and missionaries believing that God desires "no one perish?" Why has God OVERWHELMINGLY used non-reformed evangelism to spread Christianity around the world? Is there a Scriptural precedence of God using a false, evil, Satanically inspired doctrine to produce transformed, spirit-filled lives of love and obedience to Him? OF COURSE NOT!!!
philipatoz 1 year ago
lol.
DouglasFresh8181 1 year ago
@philipatoz Because that's what people want to hear. Tell a sinner that all he's got to do is to confess and believe in order to be saved and he's going to like it. Tell him that his redemption is beyond negotiation of any kind and that only his deeds will prove whether he's already been called by God a long time ago, he's going to hate you for it. Calvinism only appeals to heroes.
john42t 7 months ago
@john42t Jesus said, "Repent, and believe the Good News!" Poor Jesus, telling sinners what they want to hear...
And BTW you say "...only his deeds will prove whether he's already been called...." shows that Perseverance of the Saints ends up meaning works-based salvation (or at least, works-based proof of salvation...)
sketchbook1 7 months ago
Typical of Calvinist to assume anybody that does'nt agree with them is not a smart as them and therefore "confused" I understand excactly what Dr. Geisler is saying there's nothing confusing about it. I may not agree with all of it but confusing, no, only to someone who is either to lazy or to dogmatic to even stop honestly consider his perspective.
rustyshadow7 1 year ago
@rustyshadow7 agreed. the reason the american civil war is so bloody is cuz there is a bunch of idiots going around saying PAUL CONDONES SLAVERY YOU ANTICHRIST STOP FOLLOWING THE CULTURE OF DEATH! KEEP THE SLAVES IN THEIR RIGHTFU PLACE--sad; at the end of the day those who wont change are just not of Jesus I guess; because his sheep hear his voice
shuddo 1 year ago
Comment removed
rustyshadow7 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@shuddo Well let's see, is it really those who refuse to change, or is it those whom GOD refuses to change? We know that the entire world does not love God, but does God really love the entire world?
rustyshadow7 1 year ago
@philipatoz AMEN!!!!
msb0000 1 year ago
Do you truly believe that God allowed a deceptive, evil, heretical doctrine to teach MANY MILLIONS of people to repent love and follow Him? Why would God have chosen such a theology to save these millions - why would He not have done it through the supposed "truth" of Reformed theology? Why, historically, has there been only a TINY droplet of Believers to come to Christ via Reformed teachings, as compared to the mighty ocean of believers reached via what you say is heretical teaching?
philipatoz 1 year ago
Geisler represents what it means to be a quintessential sophist. Amen
TroddinSod 2 years ago
I challenge EVERYONE - whether Five Point Calvinist OR NOT - to CAREFULLY read Norman Geisler's "Chosen But Free." This book goes into EXHAUSTIVE theological/Scriptural examination, historical church fathers' views, reformed theologians, philosophical angles, etc. of various Calvinist beliefs. In it, Geisler sees problems with both extreme Armininanism AND Five Point Calvinism. Make sure to get the latest version in which Geisler responds to James White's "The Potters Freedom."
philipatoz 2 years ago
Amen bro I like your challenge, but keep in mind that most Calvinist will not take you up on it because they have a problem with humility. But that's not their fault God just made them that way.
rustyshadow7 1 year ago
As for formerutuber and other Five Pointers who keep hammering away with quotes from Romans and various verses, Scripture must be looked at as a comprehensive whole. You cannot supersede the MANY verses which say in PLAIN LANGUAGE that God wishes that ALL men would believe and have faith - and countless verses make it clear that this is something ANYONE (WILLING TO BELIEVE) can do - he will then open their eyes and regenerate them. You cannot take a few less clear verses and make a doctrine!
philipatoz 2 years ago
-Total Depravity - Genesis 6:5,Genesis 8:21
-Unconditional Election - John 15:16,Romans 9:11-13
-Limited Atonement - John 10:11,15 ; John 17:9
-Irresistable Grace Romans 9:16
-Perseverance of the Saints - Philipians 1:6
Calvinism = "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy and I will have compasion on whom I have compassion" - Romans 9:15
formerutuber 2 years ago
Thor...are you a literalist? As in...do you believe that everything in the bible is to be taken literally?
brianjrmav 2 years ago
Your definition is incorrect. That is not what theologians mean by literalism. Your definition would be "wooden literalism" which I am not.
I am a literalist in the classic sense. That being I look at the writer, the style and context and come to the text knowing what genre of writing the writer is using. There is narrative, poetic, prophetic, didactic as well as other genres that then help guide how I am to come to understand the true intent of the writer. This is a basic part of hermeneutics.
thor2me 2 years ago
thor2me - I find his statement ("When people sin and resist His commands, it is according TO His purpose, they are doing exactly what He WILLS.") an unbelievably perverse logic, to assert that our God actually desires and directs sins for His purposes. WHAT??? You are telling me that Holy God finds good purposes in rape, murder and mayhem? Why not just say to Judas, "well done, my faithful servant!" And why warn anyone not to sin - as IF they truly have a choice with this Five Point god.
philipatoz 2 years ago
So you are saying that if a Christian Woman is raped that there is no purpose in it? Do you then want to imply that evil in the world has no purpose, that God just allows it to happen for no reason?
So you are hindered then to say to that CHRISTIAN woman:
And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.Rom 8:28
I don't see in my Greek an exclusion clause like "except rape and murder, God causes all..."
thor2me 2 years ago
Judas' intentions were evil in his actions, God's intentions in Judas doing those actions were good.
What makes an act good or evil isn't the act in and of itself, but is the intention. Evil is only an adjective.
Gen 50:20
You MEANT EVIL against me...
God MEANT IT for good.
The pronoun represents the act. Yet the writer uses IT and not the word EVIL... hmmm...
God's INTENTION was GOOD even though that SAME act by the brothers was deemed evil... why? THE INENTION.
thor2me 2 years ago
Jesus wanted Judas to betray him? Scripture please...
brianjrmav 2 years ago
Yes, God does in fact use those who have evil intentions to achieve His greater purposes - this is Scriptural. HOWEVER, since God has perfect foreknowledge and is all-knowing, He can and does orchestrate events as to His desired outcomes, YET WITHOUT EVER CAUSING THOSE COMMITTING EVIL ACTS TO SIN - as this they do freely, of their own accord (yes, they do have an actual choice whether to sin or not). God can either thwart, limit or even allow their evil acts as His wisdom and purposes so deem.
philipatoz 2 years ago
Brian - what I am trying to say is that just because God, in his foreknowledge and wisdom, can use evil intentions and acts for His good purposes, this in NO WAY MEANS that he is EVER the cause of sin. A man can commit all kinds of sins simply because he truly believes his intentions are honorable and good, and yet God will still see such as rebellion and sin, no matter his deluded intentions.
philipatoz 2 years ago
If dead means we are unable to receive the truth of God, then isn't it a contradiction to believe sinful man can choose God. Geisler just said man is unable to receive God, but in the next breath he wants everyone to believe it is ok to believe we can choose to receive God's grace. I can't believe people can't see the contradiction.
masterhunter21 2 years ago
A simple question...are human beings inherently evil by nature?
brianjrmav 2 years ago
Where does the Bible teach "faith alone?" The phrase is only used once in James 2:24 where it says that we are NOT justified by faith alone. Protestants can't agree on much of anything.
doggysector 2 years ago
Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.
Our works is the EFFECT of salvation not the cause of it.
thor2me 2 years ago
Note "Works of the Law", meaning the Mosaic Law, however loving our neighbor, being charitable, soft spoken, just, upright and holy, those are the "works" we are called to do, not to fulfill all several hundred Mosaic precepts. Grace, Faith, and Works are all of equal importance, not one of those by itself can save a person. To say that one is saved by one of those by itself is the same as foolishly claiming that the human body survives off of sleep alone.
brianjrmav 2 years ago
Our justification is explicitly shown here using the instrumental word "by". We are justified BY faith. Paul didn't go on to say "Oh by the way we are also justified by the new testament commands that go along with the faith.
The sleep analogy is poor. We're talking about a cause effect relationship where one has been shown to be explicitly a cause (regeneration) and the other an EFFECT (good works).
It's like you are arguing a chicken/egg saying we need both. I say you "need creation".
thor2me 2 years ago
So faith is defined as what? An oral profession? A mental ascent to knowledge? If so...then you're no closer to Jesus than the demons.
brianjrmav 2 years ago
A true saving faith is the result in a supernatural work of the Holy Spirit of giving an individual a NEW Heart in order to "trust" God and His promises. To delight in Him, to love His beauty and majesty, where before one hated the things of God.
It is "decisional" salvation that alone believes in just an "oral profession" or mental ascent to recognizing truth.
thor2me 2 years ago
Furthermore, to state that good works are a result of regeneration has no Bilbical proof either. There are people of other religions, even atheists who are kinder, gentler, more soft spoken, just, selfless, and noble than many professing Christians. Yeah, kindess is only possibly after regeneration? Kindness is inherent in human nature, it only counts for righteousness however if it is done in the name of Jesus.
brianjrmav 2 years ago
4:41 is good
john146only 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is how it should read:
"For God so loved the Elect, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever has eternal life will believe in HIm and not perish.
For God did send His Son into the Elect subset of the world to condemn the Elect, but so that the Elect will be saved."
sketchbook1 2 years ago
I'm so tired of being told that if one doesn't believe in all parts of "Calvinism", he therefore is an "Arminian"...
The extremes of both camps tend to strain out certain scriptures in order put all of their systematic ducks in a row.
I'm neither an "Arminian" nor a "Calvinist"...
sketchbook1 2 years ago 3
Amen brother!
SERVANTofYHVH 2 years ago
biblically can you be neither? i don't think there is room for a neither position.
you either believe salvation is something that includes man's free choice, or that God causes man to desire and choose him.
if you are neither, you reject both man's free choice and God's election. please explain how you can be neither.
xunwinx 2 years ago
How ironic, given the content of my post...
and from it, I repeat:
"The extremes of both camps tend to strain out certain scriptures in order put all of their systematic ducks in a row."
sketchbook1 2 years ago
i don't think you understood what i was asking you, since you didn't answer my question.
do you reject man's free will or not?
you can't believe that God and Man are both sovereign. One must be more free than the other.
so which do you believe?
this is not a test or a trick, i am just trying to get some perspective on what you are saying.
to reject both views is strange. the five points of arminianism are the exact opposite of Calvinism. rejecting both is a strange concept.
xunwinx 2 years ago
judging from your response, you either didn't understand my original post nor my reply, or you aren't interested in understanding them.
You are simply making a false dichotomy, by putting 5 points of Calvinism on one end and the 5 points of Arminianism on the other and saying, "choose".
It's rather like putting Unitarian Monothesion
sketchbook1 2 years ago
sorry bad typing and misstroke...
Monotheism and Modalism on opposite ends and saying, "choose"...
sketchbook1 2 years ago
ok. i see what you are trying to say, but i think you might be missing my point.
i think people tell you, you are an arminian because if you reject one point of calvinism or change it, you are not a calvinist but by default an arminian.
for example: Irresistible Grace is the doctrine that God's Grace cannot be resisted. if you don't believe that, you are automatically arminian and believe resistible grace.
it's not a false dichotomy, either God's grace is resistible or irresistible.
xunwinx 2 years ago
You're right on that one-- either God's grace is resistable or irresistable.
Either Atonement is Limited, or it's not...
etc...
it's too bad that we classify something as "arminian" or calvinist" when we should be scriptural.
Granted, you believe Calvinism IS the Gospel, as most do... but I can be at best a 4 point Calvinist, yet I don't believe in all five points of Arminianism.
WIth both I find direct contradictions of scripture, and the systematic theology breaks down...
sketchbook1 2 years ago
so let me ask you, if you can mostly affirm 4 of the points, which one is the most difficult for you?
i also agree that it is sad we have to pigeon hole ourselves into a group. But we do that just calling ourselves Christians.
I agree with Calvinism not because of Calvin, but because of the bible, the very thing you claim brings contradictions to the table.
so i wonder what is the thing you cannot accept within the 5 points.
xunwinx 2 years ago
I'll give you a hint...
the world means the world,
all means all,
the whole world means the whole world...
sketchbook1 2 years ago
so the L.
yeah most people don't like this one, but I find it's the easiest to prove.
really what is limited is the effect of the atonement, not the power. if people go to hell then the sins they did were not atoned for. so the atonement of Christ is limited in that it only forgives the sins of those who it forgave.
No true Calvinist believes that the atonement is beyond saving any single person in the whole world, but that the effect of the cross does not forgive all sins, but is limited
xunwinx 2 years ago
I think you are defining Limited Atonement awfully generously.
Even Arminians have to admit that the Atonement is limited in its scope as to its effect... that is not all will be saved..
But the L in TULIP as defined by most Calvinists is that Christ died only for the elect, and no one else, and that he is the propitiation, not "for the sins of the whole world" as the Bible says, but only for those predestined unto salvation, those God loves, the elect.
sketchbook1 2 years ago
Sketchbook1,
i can see why you would assume that calvinists believe that kind of statement. but there are a lot of terms in there that need to be defined and context given for such a verse.
so let me ask you to affirm and define a few things before i respond, that way we are on the same page.
do you believe in, and can you define for me what the elect or who the elect are, and predestination.
if you reject these concepts then we have to start there. if you affirm them, explain please.
xunwinx 2 years ago
xunwinx,
I think Calvinism defines Limited Atonement that way. That's where I got the definition.
Now, about Election, I believe that God is Sovereign and has every right to choose whom He will for salvation, and for damnation too.
Yet I also believe that God sovereignly decided that man's faith counts in the equation-- and that this in no way robs God of glory, as Calvinists wrongly claim.
I believe the Bible teaches election, but how that is defined is the rub...
sketchbook1 2 years ago
Here are some examples of verses from Romans I believe say a lot about the paradox of Election: 9:30
...the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; but Israel, who pursued a law of righteousness, has not attained it. Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works....
Rom 11:23
"And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again."
sketchbook1 2 years ago
John did write that, but it must be understood with the intent of what the writer has said. Parallel what John said in John 11:51-52 and Revelation 5:9.
What also must be understood in order to understand the scope of propitiation is the word itself and the effects of propitiation.
For those whom the propitiation was made he mediates Heb 9:12. It SECURES their salvation. If He propitiated for all, then all WILL be saved. Do you want to say that?
thor2me 2 years ago
You haven't really found a way to fit in what Paul was saying there in Romans 9:30 and 11: 23, have you? Paul was trying to explain it, but Calvinists will have none, and simply ignore those parts of the very same texts which may temper Limited Atonement etc...
& you beg the question about propitiation.
Of course if you define propitiation a certain way, then you'll get certain outcomes with it regarding limited atonement...
sketchbook1 2 years ago
Romans 9:30 with 11:23 is not problem, it is quite clear. If they don't continue in unbelief, (in other words if they believe) they will be saved what is so hard about that?
thor2me 2 years ago
When you say, "For those whom the propitiation was made..." you betray a certain understanding of propitiation and how it's received/applied...
that's what I mean about you begging the question on propitiation...
sketchbook1 2 years ago
Jesus has a permanent priesthood. Therefore he is able to save completely because he always lives to INTERCEDE for them (Hebrews 7:24-26).He secures our redemption by his sacrifice Heb 9:12. And intercedes by HIS BLOOD And he intercedes for those whom draw near to God. (this isn't everybody, since everybody doesn't draw near) Hebrews 9:28
Romans 8:32-34
Hebrews 9:12
For those he intercedes, he secures their redemption and is saves completely (Heb 7:24-25) Titus 2:13-14
Leviticus 16:5-22
thor2me 2 years ago
Wonderful! So you agree in Conditional Election? You said he intercedes for those who draw near? That's not Calvinism at all, Calvinism states that God intercedes for whoever he randomly chooses, the Bible however says that Jesus' sacrifice is only beneficial to those who respond to the grace that his sacrifice provided through faith working through love. You're no Calvinist at all...why are you defending his doctrine?
brianjrmav 2 years ago
You are incorrect. Particular atonement believes that in reality Christ intercedes perfectly for those whom He died. Those who draw near are those drawn by the father and WILL come to the father. Does every individual come? No. In reality only those who Christ died for comes. Christ's death INCLUDES the believers faith. If you want to say that Christ died for everyone and fails in His intercession, you can say that, but I won't. Christ came to SAVE His sheep, not make them savable.
thor2me 2 years ago
Jesus doesn't fail in his intercession, we as human beings fail in our response to it. He has predestined EVERYONE who has ever lived to go to heaven. When they choose the opposite, has Jesus failed? No, only the individual has. I hate to break it to you, but Jesus' will is hardly ever done, no wonder he's d