Peeps around the World

Blog Stats

wordpress stat

20 Most Recent Comments Scrolling

Christian Top 1000
SA Topsites ::

The Legacy of John Calvin – Part 1

Icon Mongoose Icon75 The Legacy of John Calvin – Part 1

johncalvin1 The Legacy of John Calvin – Part 1

Introduction

John Calvin’s day of birth 500 years ago on July 10, 1509 is a red letter day on the Protestants calendar this year. While many disillusioned clergy and congregants in the emergent church, who have lost their faith in the institutionalized church, are seeking new ways of interpreting the Bible and worshiping God, Calvinism has remained robust and alive in institutionalized Protestant churches. In fact, many claim that Calvinism is experiencing an international resurgence. The most alarming fact about this resurgence is that Calvinism is finding a cozy niche in the Emerging Church, especially through its outreach to the youth, which makes it one of the vanguards in the establishment of the end-time one-world church. Michael Beck, a pastor of the Reformed Baptist Church in New Zealand says:

“There is currently a world wide resurgence of Calvinistic thought that is sure to have a growing influence upon the emerging church in New Zealand. This, in turn, is very likely to present the Reformed community with many unique ministry opportunities. So as to be ready for these, we should be both well informed and warmly engaged. ” (Read article here).

The question we should ask ourselves is: Has Calvinism saddled the Emerging Church horse with an intent to firmly take hold of the reins and steer the “horse” wherever it wills (no pun intended when you take into account that Calvinists reject the doctrine of free-will) or is it merely sitting on the “horse’s” back and allowing the “horse” to hold the reins in its mouth and allowing it to take Calvinism wherever it wills? New Calvinism of which Mark Driscoll (pastor of Mars Hill Church in Seattle) is a leading figure, is not “new” in the sense of being different or novel. The term “new” in New Calvinism refers to a new generation embracing “old” or “genuine” or “original” Calvinism. Even Rob Bell, one of the most influential pastors in the Emergent Church, urges the readers on page 182 of his book Velvet Elvis to read absolutely everything John Piper (a five-point Calvinist) has written. To entertain you with some of the things John Piper has written, allow me to draw your attention to the following brilliant contradiction.

We do not deny that all men are the intended beneficiaries of the cross in some sense . . . . . What we deny is that all men are intended as the beneficiaries of the death of Christ in the same way. All of God’s mercy toward unbelievers — from the rising sun (Matthew 5:45) to the worldwide preaching of the gospel (John 3:16) — is made possible because of the cross. . . . Every time the gospel is preached to unbelievers it is the mercy of God that gives this opportunity for salvation. (Emphasis in original) (1) Christ’s death so clearly demonstrates God’s just abhorrence of sin that he is free to treat the world with mercy without compromising his righteousness. In this sense Christ is the savior of all men. But he is especially the Savior of those who believe. He did not die for all men in the same sense . . . . The death of Christ actually saves from all evil those for whom Christ died “especially. [Emphasis in original] (2)

In some sense Calvinism may be called the IN SOME SENSE GOSPEL when the cross of Jesus Christ is applied to the reprobate and the IN THE SAME SENSE GOSPEL when it is applied to the elect. The “IN THE SOME SENSE GOSPEL” preached to the reprobate cannot possibly benefit the non-elect “IN THE SAME SENSE” it benefits the elect. Think of it: two simple little letters in the alphabet, the “o” and the “a” determine where you are going to spend eternity — heaven or hell. If you belong to the “o” category Gospel (“some sense) you are doomed to eternal destruction in hell because it can never benefit you in the same way it benefits the “a” category (same sense) elected people. If the preaching of the Gospel is to grant unbelievers in general an opportunity to be saved, how do we determine which is the “SOME SENSE GOSPEL” and which is the SAME SENSE GOSPEL” folk? It shouldn’t be to difficult. Imagine Jesus preaching to the “some sense” folk and the “same sense” folk saying: “You and you and you and yes you too (don’t walk away) and the folk who are standing over there, please move to my left because I have determined before the foundation of the earth that you will be the “some sense” beneficiaries of my death. What does that mean, you may ask. Well it simply means that you cannot benefit from my death on the cross “in the same way” my beloved chosen or elect are benefitting from it. They are the ones I will now draw in power and monergistically to my right.

Let us now take a look at the “old” Calvinism which the new generation is embracing under the tutorship of leading Calvinists. Calvin’s major contribution to the Christian church is his Institutes of the Christian Religion, first published in 1536. Though many staunch Calvinists regard him as the most ingenuous expositor and defender of the Christian faith, there are others who cannot stomach some of the means he used to defend the Christian faith, such as the murder of Servetus. Enough has been written about his dictatorial behaviour in Geneva and it is not my intention to expound on the way he governed the church. My main objective is to evaluate his sotereology (doctrine of redemption) in the light of the Word of God. It is on this particular topic, the appraisal of Calvin’s doctrine of redemption, that I want to appeal to my readers to bear with me and also to take into account that I am not focusing my discourse on individuals but merely trying to obey God’s Word by being a Berean and to see whether Calvin’s teachings and of those who follow him are in harmony with God’s Word. Our duty as Christians is to thoroughly examine any doctrine tied to the name of a man who claims to have had divine inspiration. The most hideous crime against humanity is to misrepresent the most holy Triune God and the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross; nothing equals it’s dreadfulness because it “shuts the Kingdom of heaven in men’s faces” (Matthew 23:13). No wonder the Bible warns that whosoever does not speak according to His Word is void of any light.

To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word , it is because there is no light in them. (Isaiah 8: 20-KJV)

Am I suggesting that Calvinists are not saved? No! Absolutely not. Countless individuals have been saved by the grace of God the moment they put their trust in Jesus Christ and his finished work on the cross before they embraced Calvinism. Nevertheless, the countless individuals who have been saved before they willingly inherited the legacy of John Calvin, does not sanction his core teaching that God predestined some to eternal bliss and others to eternal damnation and neither does it minimize the fact that countless individuals could have been saved had they not been shut out of the Kingdom of Heaven by a doctrine that misrepresents the God of the Bible.

Paul, unquestionably the greatest missionary of all time, never danced to the most popular heretical tunes of his time; he often wielded the Sword of the Spirit swiftly and accurately (Galatians 1:8 and 9). The slightest diversion from the Gospel of Jesus Christ wounded him deeply, even to the extent that he often wept very bitterly. His constant agony over his Jewish brethren made him express the wish to be damned in their place. In my rebuttal to Bob de Waay, who wrote an article entitled “Recovering Reformation Theology,” I responded as follows:

Moses’ and Paul’s compassion for lost souls upsets John Calvin’s doctrine of selective and predestined redemption.

Calvinists claim that the doctrine of predestination is a Pauline doctrine. I have often wondered why Paul preferred to be accursed (separated) from the eternal presence of God for the sake of his reprobate Jewish brethren (Romans 9: 1-3) whilst he should have known that they were the accursed of God (doomed to a predestined eternal suffering in hell), even before the foundation of the world —simply because it was God’s good pleasure to do so. As such Paul was in direct conflict with God’s sovereign will and decree and guilty of downright disobedience. On the other hand, it may be that he was completely ignorant of the doctrine of predestination which the Calvinists’ claim originated with him. Hadn’t he been so oblivious of God’s sovereign decree to damn all the reprobate, simply because it was His good pleasure, he would probably never have had any desire for His “reprobate” brethren to be saved and would never have expressed the desire to be damned in their behalf. We should bear in mind that Paul vigorously and single-mindedly expressed the desire to imitate His Master in all things and even once declared that he, together with all Christians throughout the ages, have the mind of Christ (1 Corinthians 2: 16). It simply means, they ought to think and act upon the same principles of love, compassion, longsuffering and graciousness Christ fostered in His own heart when He was on earth. If Paul and his brethren throughout the ages truly “have/had the mind of Christ,” they too should have taken pleasure in the autonomously decreed damnation of the reprobate and cheerfully obeyed and supported God in His divinely ordained ruling to damn all the reprobate. Was Paul disobeying God’s sovereign decree to pleasurably damn all the reprobate to hell when he expressed the profound wish to be damned himself so that, if it were possible, all his reprobate brethren could be saved? One may conclude that Paul’s was a case of the sovereignly elected who for the sake of the sovereignly non-elected passionately desired to become a sovereignly chosen non-elected so that the sovereignly decreed non-elected could be saved. In similar fashion, Moses begged God to blot his name out of his book He had written for the sake of his eternally and sovereignly decreed reprobate brethren (Exodus 31: 32). The contention, of course, may be that neither Paul nor Moses referred to the children of the flesh (unsaved or non-elect) but the children of the promise whom God had elected unto salvation before the foundation of the earth. That would turn an oxymoron into an even sillier “oxy-moronic” conclusion, for why would the elect want to be eternally accursed on behalf of the elect while they knew that the elect were sovereignly elected unto salvation before the foundation of the world, and that they would all unreservedly be saved because if they weren’t . . . God would be a dismal failure? Why would anyone want to go to hell for the sake of those who were elected to go to heaven before the foundation of the earth? Both these scenarios— to be accursed for the non-elect or the elect — are, to say the least, an absolute absurdity.

What is Calvinism?

Calvinism in a nutshell:

  • It is clear that Christ did not die to make redemption a mere possibility; He died to actually save people.
  • God’s purpose cannot fail (Job 42:2; Isaiah 46:10).
  • Therefore every single person for whom He died, shall be saved.
  • Nevertheless, not all people are saved.
  • Consequently Christ did not die for all people. If it were true that He died for all people He would have been a failure.

The abovementioned conclusions are based on the assumption that man does not have a free-will in regard to his/her salvation. Any degree of free-will on the part of mankind would, according to Calvinist thinking, thwart God’s purpose and belittle his sovereignty to choose whomsoever He wants to save and whomsoever He wants to damn. This is not only a gross misrepresentation of God’s sovereignty but also a distortion of the fact that man was created in His image. If God is the essence of love, which of course He is, and if his righteousness, justice and love are inseparably intertwined, which of course it is, then it would be unreasonable of Him to force his creatures into a relationship of love and obedience to Him. The connubial relationship between a man and a woman is singularly the best proof that man was indeed created in the image of God. It not only exemplifies the fact that love can only be defined as true love when it is expressed in a reciprocal partnership, but also the deep truth that Jesus Christ’s Bride submits to Him in love, respect, adoration and worship because she truly loves Him from a heart that chooses to love Him for who He really is. In order for his Bride to have learnt who He really is, she must have had come to a knowledge of Him and especially the knowledge of His sacrificial love as He expressed it on his cross. This is precisely why Jesus once said: “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent” (Johan 17:3). In spite of this, the Calvinists assert that God autonomously, arbitrarily and monergistically saves sinners on the basis that He chose them unto salvation before the foundation of the earth and that they have no will toward their redemption because they are dead in their sins and totally inept to understand, to know or to believe the Gospel. The relationship between Christ and all the believers are often likened to a marital relationship between a man and a woman and there is a beautiful narrative in the Old Testament which typifies this relationship. There is no need to go into all the detail but suffice is to say that when Abraham sent his bond servant to find a wife for his son Isaac, Rebecca was not forced to go with him. She was asked whether she was willing to go with him.

And her brother and her mother said, Let the damsel abide with us a few days, at the least ten; after that she shall go. And he said unto them, Hinder me not, seeing the LORD hath prospered my way; send me away that I may go to my master. And they said, We will call the damsel, and enquire at her mouth. And they called Rebecca, and said unto her, Wilt thou go with this man? And she said, I will go. (Genesis 24: 48-59). (Emphasis added).

Would or could Rebecca have become Isaac’s wife if she had not been willing to leave her family and accompany Abraham’s servant? Are you married? If so . . . did you force your wife to marry you without allowing her to exercise her own free-will, or did you marry her because she had a mutual love for you? Marriage is definitely not a one-sided arrangement. . . . or, did you first force your loved one to marry you and then irresistibly place the love you wanted her to have for you in her heart? If you should agree that she had a mutual love for you which she exercised willingly prior to your marriage, why do you expect God to do far less than you, a mere human being? Because God is the essence of love, He will never monergistically impose or force his love on anyone. It is for this reason that man was given a free-will — to either love God with all his heart, mind and strength or to reject Him with all his heart, mind and strength. Enforced love is no love at all. The notion that Christ did not die for all people but only for the elect who, by virtue of their total depravity, are completely unable to exercise. faith prior to their salvation, suggests that Christ’s crucifixion saves the elect automatically. Perhaps it would not be wrong to say that only elected automatons are  automatically saved by the crucifixion. To some this may be something of an obnoxious over simplification . . . . but is there another way of explaining the core doctrine of Calvinism? What does the Word of God say?

Heb 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please and be satisfactory to Him. For whoever would come near to God must [necessarily] believe that God exists and that He is the rewarder of those who earnestly and diligently seek Him [out]. (Emphasis added)

“It is written” and “it is also written” are perhaps two of the most important and yet eschewed phrases in Scripture, at least as far as sound discernment is concerned. The well-known saying “every heretic has his own pet Bible verse” may be true but it is equally true that the phrase “it is also written” is one of the best ways to combat heresy. The Lord Jesus Christ used it against the devil when he tempted Him in the desert and every Christian should follow his example.

Mat 4: 5-7 Then the devil took Him into the holy city and placed Him on a turret (pinnacle, gable) of the temple sanctuary.And he said to Him, If You are the Son of God, throw Yourself down; for it is written, He will give His angels charge over you, and they will bear you up on their hands, lest you strike your foot against a stone.Jesus said to him, on the other hand, it is written also, You shall not tempt, test thoroughly, or try exceedingly the Lord your God.

Many Christians are too easily convinced or bowled over by people who deftly quote Scripture without first evaluating the quoted sections with other similar passages in Scripture and to declare, as did Jesus, “it is also written.” In fact, the mark of a spiritually mature Christian is that he never takes everything for granted and always tests the things other people say, even when they back it up with Scripture.

1 Cor 2:15 But the spiritual man tries all things [he examines, investigates, inquires into, questions, and discerns all things], yet is himself to be put on trial and judged by no one [he can read the meaning of everything, but no one can properly discern or appraise or get an insight into him].

Calvinists are particularly adroit in their use of certain elected passages in Scripture to prove to you that man is unable to make the right choices in regard to his salvation. How can he when he is an automaton with no free-will of his own? One of their pet passages is Romans 3:10-12 where Paul says that no one seeks God. Yet Scripture also encourages sinners in equally important passages (Hebrews 11:6; Deuteronomy 4:2; Jeremiah 29:13) to seek God with all their hearts and that when they seek Him thus, they will find Him. It stands to reason that Paul’s reasoning in Romans 3:10 to 12 is not to convince you that man is entirely unable to seek God but that he, due to his deeply ingrained self-centeredness, has no desire to seek after God. We find the very same reasoning in Job 21.

Job 21: 7-14 Why do the wicked live, become old, and become mighty in power? Their children are established with them in their sight, and their offspring before their eyes. Their houses are safe and in peace, without fear; neither is the rod of God upon them. Their bull breeds and fails not; their cows calve and do not miscarry. They send forth their little ones like a flock, and their children skip about. They themselves lift up their voices and sing to the tambourine and the lyre and rejoice to the sound of the pipe. They spend their days in prosperity and go down to Sheol (the unseen state) in a moment and peacefully. Yet they say to God, Depart from us, for we do not desire the knowledge of Your ways. (Emphasis added).

Complacency, utter self-centeredness and smugness are the reasons for man’s rejection of God and his ways and not a complete powerlessness or an inability to seek Him. God’s warning in Deuteronomy 6 is a stern reminder of God’s divine jealousy.

Deut 6:10-12 And when the Lord your God brings you into the land which He swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give you, with great and goodly cities which you did not build, And houses full of all good things which you did not fill, and cisterns hewn out which you did not hew, and vineyards and olive trees which you did not plant, and when you eat and are full,Then beware lest you forget the Lord, Who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

If a complete inability to seek God was at the heart of man’s problems, God’s innate righteousness to judge impartially would have been at stake. Why would He encourage mankind to seek Him with all their heart when He had already decided before the foundation of the world to predestine the elect to an eternity of bliss in heaven and the non-elect to an eternity of suffering in hell? In both cases the word “seek” inevitably becomes a complete misnomer. It loses it’s meaning altogether. According to Jesus’ indictment in John 3:18 to 21 fallen man’s refusal to seek Him does not stem form an innate inability to seek Him but from a rebellious stubbornness to come to His light so that their evil ways may be exposed and reproved.

John 3:18-21 He who believes in Him [who clings to, trusts in, relies on Him] is not judged [he who trusts in Him never comes up for judgment; for him there is no rejection, no condemnation—he incurs no damnation]; but he who does not believe (cleave to, rely on, trust in Him) is judged already [he has already been convicted and has already received his sentence] because he has not believed in and trusted in the name of the only begotten Son of God. [He is condemned for refusing to let his trust rest in Christ's name.] The [basis of the] judgment (indictment, the test by which men are judged, the ground for the sentence) lies in this: the Light has come into the world, and people have loved the darkness rather than and more than the Light, for their works (deeds) were evil. For every wrongdoer hates (loathes, detests) the Light, and will not come out into the Light but shrinks from it, lest his works (his deeds, his activities, his conduct) be exposed and reproved. But he who practices truth [who does what is right] comes out into the Light; so that his works may be plainly shown to be what they are–wrought with God [divinely prompted, done with God's help, in dependence upon Him]. (Emphasis added).

The above serious indictment certainly proves that man is not impervious to the fact that he desperately needs to seek God; indeed, he refuses to seek God because he hates the light. He lives and operates in the dominion of the kingdom of darkness (this present world system) of which Satan is presently the god and has no desire to seek out God’s light so that his evil deeds may be seen for what they really are. They shun God’s global invitation to come to Him so that their sins may be dealt with according to His divine requirements, and rather tells Him “Depart from us, for we do not desire the knowledge of Your ways.” Salvation begins in a heart that contritely and humbly bows to the requirements of God’s Word which may be summed up in these words — willingness, acknowledgment, confession and whole-hearted responsiveness. Jesus once said that only those who know and acknowledge they are “sick” will acknowledge that they need a physician (Mark 2:17). The sad irony is that everyone is desperately sick (Romans 3:23) but most people refuse to acknowledge that they need a physician. The Holy Spirit is ceaselessly working to convince the entire world of sin, righteousness and judgment (John 16:8) but the majority deliberately shut Him out or seek other ways to enter into God’s presence. In spite of man’s ability to understand and believe the Gospel but callously refuses to respond in faith to God’s global invitation to repent and believe the Gospel (Mark 1:15), Calvinism insists that man is totally depraved (dead in sin and trespasses) and consequently powerless to respond in faith to the requirements of the Gospel. The only alternative, therefore (an alternative that does not jeopardize God’s sovereignty, they say) is to quicken only the elect arbitrarily and autonomously without them having to have faith in the Gospel and subsequently (after their regeneration) to be given faith as a gift. Below is a presentation of the Calvinists’ view of redemption and the biblical rendition thereof.

CALVINISM

WORD OF GOD

Total Depravity: Dead in sin and trespasses. Unable to understand and respond to the Gospel Dead in sin and trespasses. Listens and hears the Gospel
God intervenes autonomously in the life of the elect without conviction of sin, righteousness and judgment. Holy Spirit convicts of sin righteousness and judgment
Autonomous (monergistic) regeneration of the elect by a sovereign intervention of God (Faith not involved) Convicted sinner responds in faith to the Gospel, comes to the Light of the world (Jesus Christ) and confesses his/her sins and lostness
God autonomously grants the elect the gift of faith subsequent to their autonomous or monergistic regeneration. Repentant sinner receives forgiveness for his/her sins and is cleansed by the blood of Christ
The elect begin to believe the Gospel Holy Spirit indwells repentant sinner. Thanksgiving and rejoicing
Sanctification(Perseverance of the saint)

Sanctification(Life-long work of the Spirit together with the saint’s obedience to God and his Word)

Is John Calvin’s ‘Calvinism’ a vile doctrine?

England’s King James who was by no means an Arminian expressed his repugnance of the doctrine of  predestination as follows:

This doctrine is so horrible, that I am persuaded, if there were a council of unclean spiritsmichaelservetus The Legacy of John Calvin – Part 1 assembled in hell, and their prince the devil were to [ask] their opinion about the most likely means of stirring up the hatred of men against God their Maker; nothing could be invented by them that would be more efficacious for this purpose, or that could put a greater affront upon God’s love for mankind than that infamous decree of the late Synod . . . .  (Read here)

John Wesley said:

The doctrine of predestination as maintained by rigid Calvinists is very shocking, and ought utterly to be abhorred, because it changes the most holy God with being the author of sin. (Read here).

Make your own assessment of Calvinism when we are going to evaluate its doctrines in the light of Scripture in the next few commentaries. Meanwhile, you may be interested to read the following article on Calvin and his horrendous murder of Servetus here .


(1) John Piper and Pastoral Staff, :Tulip”: What we believe about the Five Points of Calvinism: Position Paper of the Pastoral Staff” (Desiring God Ministries, 1998), 14 (2) Op Cit, 14-15

———————-

pixel The Legacy of John Calvin – Part 1

115 comments to The Legacy of John Calvin – Part 1

  • Rev. Daniel A Ndongboi

    I leant about your conference late, but I Will like to be a part of any of your up coming conference in the feature.Looking forward to response
    thanks

  • Elmarie A

    Rev. Daniel A Ndongboi

    I leant about your conference late, but I Will like to be a part of any of your up coming conference in the feature.Looking forward to response
    thanks

    Sorry but what conference are you talking about Rev. Daniel? Are you sure this is the correct place for your comment?

  • Robert Dabney

    For an article that purports to be about Calvin, you have very few quotes or references to Calvin’s own writing. There are several places you attribute views to Calvin that Calvin himself repudiates in his writings. For example, the statement “God intervenes autonomously in the life of the elect without conviction of sin, righteousness and judgment” is attributed to Calvinism and contrasted with the statement “Holy Spirit convicts of sin righteousness and judgment” which is presented as being Biblical.
    Speaking of the Holy Spirit, Calvin writes in Bk3, Ch 1, Sec 4, “4. But as faith is his principal work, all those passages which express his power and operations are, in a great measure, referred to it, as it is, only by faith that he brings us to the light of the Gospel, as John teaches, that to those who believe in Christ is given the privilege “to become the sons of God, even to them that believe in his name, which were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God” (Joh_1:12). Opposing God to flesh and blood, he declares it to be a supernatural gift, that those who would otherwise remain in unbelief, receive Christ by faith. Similar to this is our Savior’s reply to Peter, “Flesh and blood has not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven” (Mat_16:17). These things I now briefly advert to, as I have fully considered them elsewhere. To the same effect Paul says to the Ephesians, “Ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise” (Eph_1:13); thus showing that he is the internal teacher, by whose agency the promise of salvation, which would otherwise only strike the air or our ears, penetrates into our minds. In like manner, he says to the Thessalonians, “God has from the beginning chosen you to salvation, through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth” (2Th_2:13); by this passage briefly reminding us, that faith itself is produced only by the Spirit. This John explains more distinctly, “We know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he has given us;” again, “Hereby know we that we dwell in him and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit” (1Jo_3:24; 1Jo_4:13). Accordingly to make his disciples capable of heavenly wisdom, Christ promised them “the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive” (Joh_14:17). And he assigns it to him, as his proper office, to bring to remembrance the things which he had verbally taught; for in vain were light offered to the blind, did not that Spirit of understanding open the intellectual eye; so that he himself may be properly termed the key by which the treasures of the heavenly kingdom are unlocked, and his illumination, the eye of the mind by which we are enabled to see: hence Paul so highly commends the ministry of the Spirit (2Co_3:6), since teachers would cry aloud to no purpose, did not Christ, the internal teacher, by means of his Spirit, draw to himself those who are given him of the Father. Therefore, as we have said that salvation is perfected in the person of Christ, so, in order to make us partakers of it, he baptizes us “with the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Luk_3:16), enlightening us into the faith of his Gospel, and so regenerating us to be new creatures. Thus cleansed from all pollution, he dedicates us as holy temples to the Lord.”

    Calvin may be wrong, but you should use his writing to show that he is, not strawman positions.

  • sylesa

    Not all calvinist agree with Calvin on his 5 points either. I for one , do not. However am of the calvinist persuasion. The truth has been in the Word of God and others have believed and understood it long before calvin came on the scene.

    http://www.reformationtheology.com/2009/04/five_big_myths_about_calvinism.php

    I do not believe that God predestinates anybody for hell. God did not make hell for man.It was made for Satan and his fallen angels. I do believe that God loves everybody and is not willing that any should perish. However , people will.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    sylesa

    >> Not all calvinist agree with Calvin on his 5 points either. I for one , do not. However am of the calvinist persuasion

    I thought you were a Christian? No where do I see the word Calvinist in the bible ;))

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    sylesa

    >> The truth has been in the Word of God and others have believed and understood it long before calvin came on the scene

    Exactly

    >> I do not believe that God predestinates anybody for hell.

    So why do you believe John Calvin when he TWISTS SCRIPTURE that God predestines people to heaven?

  • sylesa

    Deborah,
    I am a Christian. Calvins name is not in scripture any more than Arminius, I only use it because people recognize the belief in election by association is all. However, because i don’t hold to all his beliefs, i guess that i don;t really need to use his name. I mostly did in responce to the persons post who was speaking of Calvin.

    I know that we disagree with one another on this topic. Thats okay. I know that you are a Christian and sincere in your convictions and I also am a Christian and sincere in my convictions , we agree on all the essentials.

  • Burning Lamp

    Sylesa, dear cyber friend, if you believe ANY one of the TULIP you are trampling on the essentials of the truths of the Bible.

    Even the “P” is based on a false premise. TULIP is not a flower, it is a stink weed. Sorry my dear – I say this with tons of love – you are a sweetie and you are a blessing, but I will never cede an inch of ground on this because it goes entirely against the Word and the Gospel.

    Being a Calvinist is like being pregnant – either you are or you aren’t. No matter whether you call it “Calvinist” or “Reformed” it doesn’t matter. They say Calvin didn’t even subscribe to the 5 points. I really don’t know and don’t care to get into it because it really doesn’t matter. Error is error and truth is truth and there ain’t no gray areas there.

    I suggest you read Dave Hunt’s book “What Love Is This?” – you can get it at http://www.thebereancall.org.

  • Burning Lamp

    Sylesa, I see you say you are of the “Calvinist persuasion”. Exactly what does that mean? Like I said, there are no 3 or 4 or 5 pointers – the petals of TULIP all hinge on each other.

  • Burning Lamp

    Sylesa, sorry for the multiple posts – please consider them as one.

    I would be interested in seeing you list all the beliefs of TULIP and then say which ones you support and which ones you do not support. Then we can better dialog about this. Ummmmmmmmka?

  • sylesa

    Burning Lamp,
    i will do that, have to get ready to go to church right now. And to be equal, you as well need to exegete many scripture that i will post and tell me what you do with them, ok?
    Anyways, have to go, am running late because of being on my computer to long, lol!

  • sylesa

    Hello Burning Lamp,
    Had a busy day at church. Mens chorus from 5 other churches came to our church today. I am part of the kitchen help and just got home a short bit ago.

    Burning Lamp, I do not Ever speak of TULIP, you do. You have not seen me speak at any time of TULIP.

    Very simply, as i stated before, I believe that two paralell truths exist. Our free will and Gods soveriegnty. The Word of the Gospel goes out to ALL. Men reject it because they love their sin and do not want to come to the light. Agree? The bible says that this is so.

    Also, Jesus Said that no man can come to Him unless he is drawn by the Father. This is only one of MANY instances of Gods initiating salvation and Gods soveriegnty.

    As to getting into a long drawn out theological debate(i will if that is what you are seeking to do), i think that that would not be productive. Also, i would like to say, I will not allow you to put me on the defensive. You are the one challenging me, so i think that you ought to post your own exegesis of scripture on this debate and prove your point and your position from scripture. And let me ask you questions about many scriptures and how you would exegete them and being that all of scripture is of one cloth, it would all need to fit together. Your telling me that i’m wrong is not good enough , and I mean that respectfully. Point, counterpoint, scripture, not accusations that i am trampling scripture. I do not appreciate that comment at all because it is not true. But that is your stuff , not mine. I know me and you do not.

    Are you for real accusing me of trampling the Gospel??? Wow. That is between you and God, I will not respond to that.

    YOu prove your point, I will question you. You are the one challenging me so it behooves you to at least prove your point and it ought to withstand my questions. And it ought to all hold together as one piece with scripture. If you are not willing to do that , then do not presume what i am doing or what i believe, i do not feel that i need to defend myself to you or anybody else for that matter and will not allow you to put me on the defensive as i stated before.

    As for books, i can tell you some books to read as well, but at the end of the day, what say the scriptures? Thats what matters.

    Again, don’t put tulip on me or John Calvin , i believe the Bible and it says that we reject God of our own choice and it also says that only Gods mercy and grace is able to break thru that antipithy that we have towards God and put within our hearts a desire to seek Him. That is Grace.

  • sylesa

    Burning Lamp,
    As to the book, apparently Dave Hunt has included some misinformation. This link will take you to an OPEN letter from somebody that Dave Hunt took the libety to misquote along with some other error. I doubt that you will read it fairly , but if you want to read the book, maybe you ought to see the open letter written to Dave Hunt who has not apparently set it right yet

    http://vintage.aomin.org/DHOpenLetter.html

  • sylesa

    Burning Lamp,
    Dave Hunt apparently did not want to debate back and forth with the man he misquoted he wanted to put it in a book, hmm. Where is the book where he goes head to head with the man .I would be interested to read it but need to research if it has actually been written.Unless you know of the book and can post the link where i may find it.

  • Burning Lamp

    Sylesa, are you referring to James White? If so, don’t waste your time. Dave Hunt is a man of integrity and he doesn’t put out false information.

    James white on the other hand is a hard core Calvinist and next to impossible to even reason with. You have to decide who you would rather believe, Hunt or White. I have followed Hunt’s ministry for many years and have found him trustworthy and sound doctrinally. He is a very humble man – I have met him in person. On the other hand, White comes across as caustic and arrogant.

    Dave is now very elderly and in fragile health – he doesn’t do speaking engagements any longer. But T.A. MacMahon does representing The Berean Call. I suggest you subscribe to their free newsletter and see the heart of that ministry.

    IMHO it is a waste of time to nitpick about Dave’s book, What Love Is This? It contains more than ample info and correct doctrine to refute Calvinist/Reformed teachings.

  • Burning Lamp

    Sylesa, I can tell I have hit a nerve with you. You have put yourself on the defensive and with good intentions, I am sure, are making a very simple topic complicated.

    Sylesa, you must address the 5 points of Calvinism/Reformed doctrine if you wish to get to the truth. You cannot avoid it. It is a fact. It is the only way to discuss the matter. It is what C/R believe. You can’t have it both ways my dear. I have mentioned “Calvinism” because that is how the belief is identified. I am not bringing Calvin as a person into the picture. He may or may not have been the source of TULIP. Don’t care – doesn’t matter.

    If you are not willing to discuss the 5 points of Reformed theology, then there is no basis for a discussion. I am happy to take each point and we can examine it in the light of the Word. Fair enough?

    How about starting with Total Depravity?

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Yes, lets start with Total Depravity :)

  • sylesa

    24 March, 2011 at 6:55 pm
    Sylesa, dear cyber friend, if you believe ANY one of the TULIP you are trampling on the essentials of the truths of the Bible

    Burning Lamp,
    for starters , are you aware that Mr Hunt believes in the P of the tulip?

    The nerve that you hit is this—–you come off as VERY ungracious and a bit arrogant. That is the nerve that you hit.

  • sylesa

    I will compile a list of scriptures as to why i do believe the total depravity part of tulip. Will get to that later.

    Am i going to defend tulip and John Calvin , no. As i said before, you have NEVER seen me speaking of tulip, so why are you still asking me to defend it? I said that i was of the calvinist persuasion, and i said why. Because i believe that salvation is so totally of the Lord that we would not have a desire to seek Him unless God first moved upon our hearts to do so. Calvin believed this. I also believe in the perserverance of the saints.The p. Calvin believed this as well.

    The chart that Tom Lessing has posted is not at all accurate of Calvins beliefs. I am in agreement with the gentleman that called it a straw man argument because Tom Lessing is either very misinformed about what calvinism really is or he is deliberatly lying in his post. I believe the benefit of the doubt is warranted.I believe that we ought to make every effort to aquire corrrect information before judging another persons beliefs. I will post a link that you may go to and listen to the 75 part syllubus messages that really do go into what Calvinism really is and how that those who came AFTER him changed what his systemetized beliefs were, and who Arminius was and how those who came AFTER him changed what he believed . It is very interesting if for nothing else, people will understand and will recognize a straw man when they see one such as what Tom Lessing came up with on this post. Because wether you agree with Calvin or you don’t agree with Calvin, i think that you will agree that it is a lie and a sin to misrepresent another person. As to John Calvin, you have just recieved my only defense of him that you are going to get, lol

    http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/histtheocalvin.html

    this will show Burning Lamp the differences in the camp.

    Also, i would like to say, that if you go back thru the threads, you will read that i do not believe that God predestines anybody for hell( this is called double predestination), I have not claimed the tulip to be what i hold as a total belief system. And because i DO believe in the total depravity and the perseverance of the saints, DOES NOT MEAN THAT I MUST BELIEVE THE REST OF TULIP!! I was offended by your saying so. I am not at this point sure what i believe as to predestination, to be honest, i am on the fence until i study it more and see how it is arrived at as a doctrine in light of scripture being of one cloth. It is such a hot debate because both sides have scriptural support. However, both can’t be right.

    You are ungracious to say that if a person holds to a single belief of the tulip that they are trampling the Gospel. You are putting yourself in Gods seat when you say those sort of things, thats what offended me and that is why i pointed out to you that Dave Hunt who you want me to read, believes the P, and i wonder if you would accuse him of “trampling the Gospel”

    Anyways, i will most definatly be happy to defend my belief in total depravity and in the perseverance of the saints, the things that i DO believe.

    Also, here is a more accurate chart than the one that Tom Lessing posted

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/23473871/Theodore-Beza-Chart

  • sylesa

    Burning Lamp, you have said,

    Sylesa, you must address the 5 points of Calvinism/Reformed doctrine if you wish to get to the truth. You cannot avoid it. It is a fact. It is the only way to discuss the matter

    My question is ‘says who? of what authority are you on this matter? I mean this respectfully. I am not ignorant of the scriptures and neither are you and yet far better minds and hearts than our own have struggled with these theological issues , based on scripture, and so unless you are very and i mean VERY learned of BOTH Arminius and Calvin and how they both arrived at their points of view(you will not find this volume in Hunts book) and VERY learned of the scripture and therefore are yourself able to settle a dispute that has been hundreds maybe more dividing the church, how can you dictate how a matter is to be discussed??? Who are you to say that one can’t believe in Gods soveriegnty differently than yourself without “trampling ” the Word of God??? I’m sorry to post on this again , but i can’t get over seeing some pride in your judgements. I also need to keep myself in check here , i am aware, my flesh is rising also and i pray that the Lord helps me with that because it is ugly to be proud. I know you mean well.

  • sylesa

    Burning Lamp,
    Proverbs 18:17 NIV
    New International Version
    The first to present his case seems right, till another comes forward and questions him……

    With all due respect Burning Lamp, i find it interesting that you so quickly shut down when the man you closely follow is called into question! So because you say so , Dave Hunt does not need to be questioned ? Really?
    The book where the debate takes place is called “Debating Calvinism 5 Points Two Views”

    This review is from: Debating Calvinism: Five Points, Two Views (Paperback)
    White offers a narrow but deep argument for his position and careful rebuttle of select points. Hunt offers a more shallow argument but in doing so touches on many points. It’s my opinion that Hunt entered into this debate with a preconception of Calvinism which is inaccurate and as a result spends much of his time striking at charictatures. White draws attention to this but time and again the Arminian perspective attacks points that never emerge from the Calvinist camp.
    Regardless, Hunt and White have produced a work that is entertaining and yet informative. Hunt’s view on freewill is interesting though he does not, in my opinion make a very strong case for it. White presents the classical Calvinist doctrins with equal zeal.

    Unintended is that this book gives you a debate to study. Argumentation developes, is struck down, rebuilt and the reader appealed to directly to consider the argumentation methods of the opponent. This synergy of the two authors gives this book unique appeal in my eyes.

    Of course, everyone want’s to know “who won,” to which I believe it is White. I think that Hunt’s breadth of argumentation robbed him of any depth and so if there was a solid argument to be established, it was never realized. While Hunt’s rehtoric might be more appealing it does not contain White who repeatedly topples core arguments of his opponent and is allowed to retain most/all of his own core arguments. This is the review of those that liked the book.

    This is the review of those that did not like the book.

    This review is from: Debating Calvinism: Five Points, Two Views (Paperback)
    Here is what you’ll get, if you purchase this book:
    James White writes a concise, clear summarization of Calvinism, with very little of his usual condescension or sarcasm. He provides small, digestible slices of Greek hermeneutics, grammar analysis, and history. This is a better book than “The Potter’s Freedom” to give to a newcomer on the Calvinism/Arminianism debate, because it is not as technical or philosophically heavy.

    Dave Hunt’s chapters will give you a definite feeling for the typical argument of non-Methodist Arminians.

    However, here is why it’s also a poor book: Dave Hunt is so illogical, so non-linear, and so invincibly stubborn, that he is just a poor opponant for White. Even after writing his pro-Arminian book “What Love Is This?”, Hunt still shows that he has no concept of what Calvinism actually teaches.

    In his first positive chapter, meant to affirm what he believes, he chooses to spend the entire chapter smearing John Calvin, still playing the guilt-by-association game by making Calvin out to have been a closet Roman Catholic. It never occurs to Dave Hunt that this book was supposed to be about the generally-Reformed doctrine of salvation, not the Presbyterian view of church and the sacraments. But Hunt’s goal is to make you just hate Calvin as a person so much that you will automatically reject Calvin’s ideas. The principle that an idea can be true standing on its own, and isn’t proven by whether one of its advocates was a nice guy, never seems to occur to Hunt.

    Hunt wastes all kinds of time kvetching about Calvin’s views of the sacraments. But since James White is a Baptist and not a Presbyterian, AND because this book is supposed to be about the Christian doctrine of salvation (not the Christian doctrine of the sacraments, or church-state relations), Hunt’s incessant complaints against Calvin are totally irrelevant.

    White repeatedly and correctly points this out in his after-chapter responses, but Hunt never acknowledges it. Hunt never analyzes texts, barely responds to White’s actual points, and fills up his responses with wild claims that White “in his chapter didn’t produced even one verse that shows…” whatever it is they’re debating at that point in the book, while you (the reader) know that the only thing White did was cite and analyze verses.

    The issue is, what those verses mean? Hunt never shows that he knows how to do Bible interpretation. So as the book moves forward Hunt comes across as so knee-jerk and stubborn as to have lost his senses.

    So from that standpoint, you’ll wish the publishers had found some competent student of Scripture to debate James White. Even if it had been someone that no one ever heard of, any professional Arminian theologian from a conservative seminary or Bible college would have been better. One of my former systematic-theology professors from Columbia could have done a bang-up job.

    So here’s what you get: (a) A nice, concise summary of Calvinism from White, useful for people who want to know what calvinism teaches (b) a nice, concise summary of Calvinism’s critiques of Arminianism, for those who want to think critically, and (c) a pretty good feel for the typical, popular-level, Baptist-type anti-Calvinism you might run into anywhere, from Dave Hunt.

    But what you won’t get is an intellectually respectable defense of Arminianism. Hunt’s material is so loaded with guilt-by-association, slander, emotionalism, preachiness, unresponsiveness to White’s actual claims, and an “all-over-the-place” ramblingness, that you will wish that Multnomah Publishing had gotten someone else to represent the Arminian viewpoint.

    I will buy Dave Hunts book , and this one as well.Of course i lean to Calvinism but i will read both. And of course all the while , i will have my Bible.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    sylesa

    Dave Hunt does NOT believe in the P of Tulip. The Bible is VERY CLEAR that ones salvation is SEALED. There is a BIG difference between the Calvanist twisted version of ‘Once Saved, Always Saved’ vs the Biblical version. The Calvinist version is based on the fact that God CHOSE the believer to SALVATION, hense once CHOSEN always CHOSEN! The Biblical version is that the Holy Spirit comes to ABIDE in the born again believer and remains there, no matter what – even through the most toughest times – and the Holy Spirit will ALWAYS convict and bring to remembrance who Jesus IS to the person He abides in. We as humans DO NOT KNOW who is GENUINELY saved vs those who only have a form of godliness, I tell you there are some who pull off a great masquerade to convince you they are so close to being saved (YET ARE NOT). Having said that, yes there are some who DO LOSE their salvation I believe as well (blaspheming the Holy Spirit) and the Bible is clear on this as well!

    Now, the FACT IS ALL LETTERS OF TULIP ARE BASED ON THE PREMISE OF BEING CHOSEN which I gather you believe you are and this is wrong.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    sylesa

    Again you say you do not believe that God predestines anyone to Hell, (but that is not the important part Sylesa), the important part is that Calvinists believe God predestines people to be saved and THIS IS THE CRUX OF TULIP and CALVINISM.

    Do you believe you are CHOSEN, YES or NO ?

  • sylesa

    Deborah,
    i am not sure exactly what label that you want to put on it, but i do believe that the only reason that i came to Christ and the only reason that i seek God is because God graciously has moved on my heart to do so . I believe that this is the teaching of scripture.Apart from Calvin or anybody else. The reason that i said that the truth was here long before Calvin is because we had the Bible before Calvin. The only thing that Calvin did was systemize the beliefs of the church at that time.The Bible has not changed since then and it will not change from here to and thru eternity.

    Give me some time to compose my response, a few days maybe. I have to work for this and look up scripture ect:)I was really wanting Burning Lamp to post her refutation and i could ask her questions since she opened this can of worms but thats ok,just give a few days, this is a bit daunting:)I will post my position and the scriptural support for holding my position.

    You do not have to agree with me .I do not have to agree with you.This is not an issue to call one another heretics over, only if you have preconcieved notions of what i or other people with “Calvinist” leanings believe. Thats why i would encourage you and Burning Lamp to make it your business to at least understand the beliefs so as to rightly argue them , you don’t have to agree with them.I do not at all agree with Dave Hunt but i will read his book to see his position.And in learning the belief you will see that there are 4 point and 5 point and high and low ect., contrary to BL assertion that it is all or nothing. Calvin does not define the Bible , he merely systemetized some teachings as i stated before.

    The soveriegnty of God is the foundationof “Calvinism”, i say of the Bible.To have a very high belief in Gods soveriegnty does not make me a heratic. “Trampling the Gospel and Gods Word”. I’m not rattling my cage anymore:), but that was very unwarranted .

    This is s segment that says that Dave Hunt has stated that he believes in the perserverance of the saints

    - Dave Hunt was born in 1926. His church background is Plymouth Brethren. He has a degree in mathematics and a career as a CPA/management consultant, during which time he became involved in numerous campus ministries, with a special outreach to foreign students. Beginning in 1973, Hunt went into ministry full-time. He has authored or co-authored more than 30 books dealing with the incursion into Western culture, religion, and the church itself, of Eastern as well as psychological and selfist philosophies, New Age thinking, ecumenism between Catholics and Protestants, and other heretical teachings. More than three million copies of Hunt’s books have been sold, and have been translated into many languages. Hunt fills numerous speaking engagements in many countries, is a frequent radio and TV talk-show guest (as well as co-hosting his own radio show), and has engaged in many debates with Catholic apologists. Hunt’s organization publishes a free monthly newsletter, The Berean Call, which has a mailing list of more than 25,000.

    - Dave Hunt is not a “five-point” Arminian (he says he believes in the Perseverance of the Saints), but he is clearly Arminian with respect to man’s role in salvation. In Whatever Happened to Heaven? (Harvest House:1988), Hunt goes so far as to say that anyone who denies man’s free will in salvation blasphemes God’s character. Bottom line for Hunt, if you’re not an Arminian, you are a blasphemer! (In late 2002, Hunt published another pro-Arminian book, What Love Is This?: Calvinism’s Misrepresentation of God, and is labeled by Hunt as a “defense of God’s character.”) — Hunt has kinder words for false teachers such as Billy Graham and Bill Bright than for those whom affirm the sovereignty of God in salvation! [Hunt reiterates his "blasphemes" and/or "maligns" God's character claim in the Q&A sections of both the 5/02 and 9/05 issues of TBC, and again in What Love Is This?. Moreover, in the Q&A section of the 9/05 TBC, Hunt declares that those disagreeing with his Arminian theology are reprobate!]

    God says that He is able to preserve the saints, what difference does it make if He is preserving you who are saved or john smith who believes in the soveriegnty of God as to how he came to the Lord? God saved both, God keeps both.So wether you believe that you came to the Lord to forgive your sins and to put your trust in Christ completely on your own, or john smith believes that he came to Christ for forgiveness and to put his trust in Christ only because God moved on his heart to do so and he could not have done so apart from that moving on his heart, what is the problem to you? Both recognize Christ as the only hope and means of salvation.God keeps both.Calvinist do believe in the ABSOLUTE necessity of faith and repentance, they just believe that Gods moving on their hearts is what enabled them to do so, they do not believe that they have any inate goodness that would cause them to seek God without God first opening their hearts and eyes. If you want to call that chosen then call it chosen. At the end of the day, you think you came to God on your own, i think you came to God because He moved your heart to do so. You think i came to God on my own, i think i came to God because he moved my heart to do so.I believe that my position is scriptural.You do not believe my position is scriptural:)How in the world does this constitute Trampling the gospel????I fail to make the connection.
    I would like to be shown this one by the Word of God.

    Anyways, give me a few days, have other engagements and need to take time to put together the reason for my belief.

    How was your curried chicken:)

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Sylesa

    >> i do believe that the only reason that i came to Christ and the only reason that i seek God is because God graciously has moved on my heart to do so

    Ahhh haaa, so Jesus only died for certain people and NOT the whole world? Do you not believe that God speaks to EVERY single individual in some way or another? You said in another comment under another article that you agree that Jesus died for the whole world, yet here you are saying that He didn’t, he only died for you and others who are lucky enough to have God CHOOSE them. Sylesa, come now.

    Sylesa… sylesa… sylesa… I am not Arminian, NEVER ONCE on this blog or anywhere in any discussion with anyone have I ever stated this and I never will. When I was saved, I picked up my bible over the last few years and have studied by my own (not reading others stuff) and come to learn all things from the Holy Spirit ONLY. Never, until recently had I heard of Arminianism (I kid you not) so don’t even try bring this into the discussion. It’s not about Arminianism vs Calvinism its about what is CORRECT DOCTRINE vs Calvinism.

    I could not care quite frankly what Dave Hunt has said or written. I care what the Bible says and the Bible is very clear on the matter.

    My chicken curry is FANTASTIC! My husband had to wipe the sweat from his forehead ahaha. I have a whole pot of it *drooling – yum yum yum*

  • Burning Lamp

    Sylesa, you are the one who keeps slapping labels on people. I am not Arminian and do not have a label except for “sinner saved by grace”.

    You don’t need days to prepare. Just please go through the TULIP with me one “petal” at a time. I asked you a very simple question that requires a simple answer. We don’t need a dissertation or exegesis. The Gospel is very simple – yes, Bible study is important, but what I have noticed about those in your camp is the tendency to razzle dazzle with Bible knowledge. But really, the truth of the matter boils down to TULIP and it is very SIMPLE.

    Frankly, I don’t want a litany of your beliefs, for starters what you believe ONLY about about “T”. If you have to research and research what you believe, you are not clear on it. I may have to look up scriptures, but I have a clear concept of what I believe and where to find it. I am convinced in my mind and heart after years of walking with the Lord and searching His Word.

    Regarding Dave Hunt – you are just regurgitating what James White and other Calvinists have said about him because they are offended that he would dare to challenge them and they are what the Bible calls “blind guides”.

    And Sylesa, it DOES make a BIG difference – Calvinism/Reformed GUTS the Gospel of Jesus Christ. That is pretty doggone serious!!

    Please lets take this ONE step at a time – again, let’s talk about Total Depravity. My take on T is very simple. It is based on the Word of God all the way through. Yes, man is depraved, but not to the point where he cannot make a decision. Good grief, all through the Bible man makes decisions, some good, some bad. Yes, the natural man cannot understand the spiritual, but that does not mean that he is not capable to respond to the call of God and the Holy Spirit when he is presented with the Gospel. Verse after verse calls man to make the right choices.
    The overall theme of the Bible is hope for mankind. Reformed theology says that God has to regenerate a person before they can accept Christ. That is a lie from the very pit of hell. Once we “talk” about that, then we can move on to Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace and Perseverance of the Saints.

    BTW on Perseverance of the Saints, of course Hunt and I believe in this. BUT it is based on a MUCH different basis. Reformed believe what God has chosen He will preserve, after all, He controls it all and He handpicked His elect. NOT! I believe that after I have chosen to receive Jesus as my Savior that I am sealed by His Holy Spirit unto redemption. HUGE difference.

    This is wordier than I wanted, but from here on out my answers will be short and sweet and I hope you will do the same. I mean this in gentleness and humility, but at the same time, the faith must be defended.

  • sylesa

    Deborah, i did not say that i believe in limited atonement. I belive that Christ died for the whole world. I am not a 5 pointer. i said that before. You wrongly believe that to believe some aspects of what Calvin(bible) taught is to believe everything that calvin taught. This is simply not true. You have a misunderstanding there.

    For me to say that i believe that God is soveriegn and that it is He who moved me (and you, and all who call on Him from a sincere heart) to seek Him, does not mean that i believe that He only died for the “chosen”. I cannot believe that. I believe that He died for the whole world, but not all will be willing to come to him. I believe that the call is out to all.I believe that all who are not saved will be because they chose to love the darkness. There is more to it tho and i will post on it in a few days.

    Give me time to pull it together in a post.Haven’t got to it yet but i will.

    It’s kind of like saying(not sure if this is a good analogy),that if you are in a charasmatic church , you automatically believe in being slain in the Spirit(or spirits, lol!), but that would be a wrong assumption. Actually , not everybody under the charasmatic umbrella even agrees on what gifts are still in operation,let alone being slain in the Spirit! Which is not a gift, don’t even know what it is!You cannot lump people like that.

    >>>Ahhh haaa, so Jesus only died for certain people and NOT the whole world?

    lol! i feel like i got caught with my hand in the cookie jar!!:)

    LOL! why do i feel like I’M going to hate John Calvin eventually! Like maybe curse the day i heard his name!!Lol

    Arminius was himself a 5 point Calvinist at one time, then he began to call into guestion some of the widely held beliefs of the church that calvin systemetized, he did not invent them. Arminius aquired some followers and the church has been split down the middle pretty much on these issues for hundreds of years. So if you are not 100% Arminiun are you alittle Calvin:) LOL!Oh boy, i think that maybe we can get to hate Jocobus Arminius as well!

    Anyways, glad your curried chicken was yummy! If you made alot, you might have some good leftovers today and not have to cook!
    I hope you feel well today also.

  • Burning Lamp

    Sylesa, I just noticed that you questioned my “defense” of Hunt. Dave does not need defending, but the Word of God does. Dave has exposed Billy Graham in no uncertain terms many times over the years.

    I am well familiar with BOTH White and Hunt. They are as different as day and night. White demeanor is arrogant and prideful in his “knowledge” and he can be brash and rude. Dave is humble in spirit and gentle and gracious. Apparently you view this as a weakness.

    I have followed The Berean Call ministry for over 20 years and have found it to be scripturally and doctrinally sound.

    It has come out – you have been listening to the wrong voices. You have been brainwashed by James White. As I said, I am well familiar with his Alpha & Omega ministry and have read his stuff and
    listened to his debates. He loves a good argument and is very contentious. He likes to flaunt his knowledge of the Bible. This smacks of pride. I have heard him insult Dave Hunt on his radio program and speak disparagingly of him. I have never heard Dave do this. This is not what love is.

    Dave is not the best speaker and verbal communicator. He has been of advanced age for some time. His real talent is in writing and he has written many fine books that have been a blessing to the Body of Christ. He writes to prepare the Church for the coming of Christ and educates on prophesy and expose false teaching.

    Here are a couple of links that might be helpful – Scriptures are used.

    Hunt does not pride himself on credentials given by man, but by humbly and faithful rightly dividing the Word of God. He is not perfect and he would be the first to admit that. He defends the TRUE Gospel because He cares about those who have fallen into error.

    I didn’t mean this to turn into a defense of Hunt, but since you brought that to the forefront, it needed to be said.

    I am glad that you are going to at least read “What Love Is This?” I pray God will open your eyes. Dear sister, you are on dangerous ground. I mean that out of a heart of love and concern.

    I recommend the following links:

    Norm Geisler: http://server.firefighters.org/catalog/2003/17032.mp3
    David Cloud:

  • sylesa

    Burning Lamp,you said

    >>>>Sylesa, you are the one who keeps slapping labels on people. I am not Arminian and do not have a label except for “sinner saved by grace”.

    KEEPS slapping labels on people? Really? where? because i pointed out that there are two mcamps of doctrine and named the men behind them? AFTER the name Calvin has been drug up one side and down the other!Lol! Just thought that i would be fair and throw his apponent in the ring! But i do not recall “keepingslapping labels on people” Maybe you can show me where i did that?

    And Sylesa, it DOES make a BIG difference – Calvinism/Reformed GUTS the Gospel of Jesus Christ. That is pretty doggone serious!!

    IT does , how? You really should back your hurled words with scripture.And explain precisely how this is so.

    >>>Frankly, I don’t want a litany of your beliefs, for starters what you believe ONLY about about “T”. If you have to research and research what you believe, you are not clear on it. I may have to look up scriptures, but I have a clear concept of what I believe and where to find it. I am convinced in my mind and heart after years of walking with the Lord and searching His Word.

    Did not say that i needed to research and research what i believed. Easy for you to misrepresent me that way, but maybe find where i said that also, ok?

    >>>>> Verse after verse calls man to make the right choices.
    The overall theme of the Bible is hope for mankind. Reformed theology says that God has to regenerate a person before they can accept Christ. That is a lie from the very pit of hell. Once we “talk” about that, then we can move on to Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace and Perseverance of the Saints

    Verse after verse Burning Lamp??????????? With all due respect , you are not using ANY scripture. The reason that i need to take a few days is because i have some things going on and i need to take the time to put my thoughts inorder and the scriptures to soundly show why i believe what i believe. What could be wrong with that?I want to avoid what you just did on this post, hurling words in your pride (I’m wondering if this really has to do with Gods honor and Truth)and you have NOT used Gods Word at all! You say verse after verse….. Hm. I don’t care to do it that way Burning Lamp. And wanting to take time to think it thru in light of scripture is a good thing to do , but somehow you have managed to represent it as something suspect.Hm.

    Regarding Dave Hunt – you are just regurgitating what James White and other Calvinists have said about him because they are offended that he would dare to challenge them and they are what the Bible calls “blind guides

    This was Amazons review ,compiled from all the people that read the book, this is what people said that both liked it and disliked it. Amazon compile a review of their books.Sorry, but it is not regurgitated material from those upset at his “nerve”. It sounds as if he was quite outdone because he could not support his position from scripture. You know, what i posted earlier, a man seems right until he is questioned? ProverbsI might add, since you represented it as “regurgitating” what is it that you are doing when you put up posts on others? Such as the one you posted on Andrew Wommack today??? Hm.

    http://www.amazon.com/Debating-Calvinism-Points-Views-ebook/dp/B001PSEQO2/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1301578827&sr=1-2-catcorr

    , but what I have noticed about those in your camp is the tendency to razzle dazzle with Bible knowledge. But really, the truth of the matter boils down to TULIP and it is very SIMPLE

    Razzle dazzle??? Hm.
    Do you mean use scripture? something that you have not done in this post?
    Again, isn’t your interest in defending the scripture? But you haven’t used any and you are seeking to represent me as WRONG for wanting to think this thru and look up the scriptures before i post.

    I must not be as smart as you because they don’t all all the time spring to mind as easily as it does for you. But… you haven’t used the scriptures and are finding fault with me, so hey, i;m not following the logic and can only conclude you have a leg up on me!!1

    I really do not want to contine any rapport with you. I will post to Deborah until she boots me off the post.

    Sorry Burning Lamp that this has been turned into something so ugly.

    Please do not post to me , i will not reply or acknowledge you for obvious reasons. This is not good for either of us or anybody else.

  • sylesa

    burning Lamp, sorry one other thing i forgot to point out

    >>>Frankly, I don’t want a litany of your beliefs, for starters what you believe ONLY about about “T”.

    I’m sorry, you really need to learn respect, I am not on trial with you and you as judge questioning me!!! This is a blog!

    you really should ask yourself if this is really about Gods honor when you are so arrogant and downright disrespectful. You make the claim that it is for God but you are of a wrong spirit.That’s all that i will ever say to you.Sorry to post again

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Each Letter is connected – mutually inclusive if you will. You can’t believe in TOTAL DEPRAVITY without believing you are ELECT. You can’t believe you are ELECT without believing in TOTAL DEPRAVITY. You can’t believe you are ELECT without believing in LIMITED ATONEMENT, and you can’t believe in LIMITED ATONEMENT without believing your are TOTALLY DEPRAVED. You can’t believe in IRRESISTIBLE GRACE without believing in LIMITED ATONEMENT, and you can’t believe in IRRESISTIBLE GRACE without believing you are ELECT, or TOTALLY DEPRAVED. You can’t believe in PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS if you don’t believe you are ELECT, hence you are TOTALLY DEPRAVED, believe in LIMITED ATONEMENT, IRRESISTIBLE GRACE, etc. No matter which way you look at it, no matter which PETAL of the TULIP you pick, you have to believe the others. Get the picture?

    HERE IS AN EXCELLENT SUMMARY OF THE TULIP, notice how they are ALL INTERLINKED.

    Total Depravity – Total depravity claims that man is too dead in sin to consider the things of God or believe the gospel unaided by God’s grace. He is said to be so completely dead in sin that He cannot come to faith through his own reasoning. It is thought that spiritual death because of Adam’s sin prevents mankind from thinking through the claims of the gospel. Therefore, total depravity is interpreted to mean total inability to believe.

    Unconditional Election – Since man is said to be totally unable to believe the gospel, God must intervene by electing some for salvation. Otherwise, no man could be saved. According to His mysterious and unknowable purposes, God purportedly chooses and enables only the elect to be saved while others, not enabled, are left to chose against God and be condemned. Election is unconditional, meaning God’s election is not conditioned on faith. He indiscriminately chooses some to be saved according to His sovereign will for undisclosed reasons. Those whom God unconditionally elects are guaranteed to be saved.

    Limited Atonement – Since God has unconditionally elected some for salvation, Jesus’ death was intended to procure only their salvation. The Calvinist reasons that all for whom Christ died will be saved because the blood of Christ is applied to the elect apart from and before believing faith. Therefore, the five point Calvinist will say the elect are regenerated (born again) before belief.

    Irresistible Grace – Irresistible grace does several things to enable the elect’s salvation. First it applies the atoning blood of Christ to the elect before hearing the gospel, causing the elect to be born again before belief. It also bestows the gift of faith so the elect, who have been born again before belief, can place gifted faith in the gospel when it is heard. Personal faith from the human heart is considered a human work. Since the elect are born again before belief, the placing of gifted faith in the gospel doesn’t bring regeneration. The purpose of gifted faith is to enable a response to the gospel for acquiring the righteousness of Christ for justification. At this point, the elect are said to be totally saved. Salvation is kind of a two step process. Regeneration occurs before belief (at conception or baptism) and separated, perhaps by many years, from justification occurring after belief. The nature of righteousness, received for justification, is said to be Christ’s law-keeping righteousness which enables the elect to obey the moral vestiges of the Mosaic Law, which the Reformed claim is still in effect for the church today.

    Perseverance of the Saints – While many think perseverance means persevering in lifelong faith and trust in Jesus, the Calvinist eventually understands perseverance to mean persevering in faithful obedience. The elect, upon believing the gospel through gifted faith, receive the law-keeping righteousness of Christ which enables their perseverance in moral law-keeping and service. Obedience proves one’s election because only they receive the grace to truly obey. If one can’t obey, then salvation is called into question and may easily be judged as false faith. Hence, the Calvinist begins to fear he’s not truly elected and therefore not saved if he sins grievously.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Sylesa

    Unfortunately Calvinism rips out the heart of Salvation, it turns what Jesus did for EVERYONE on the cross into a mockery. This is why I take the stand I do against Calvinism.

    Biblical salvation is simple, yet Calvinism’s version is long winded, brings confusion, brings pride (to those who think they are ELECT) and ultimately becomes a MAN CENTERED gospel.

    Did you know that John Mac Arthur does not believe that after one is saved (ELECT) that we still have the flesh? He believes that we are totally new, no leftovers. So, what is the man saying…

    This wonderful joke of a doctrine is called:

    “One Naturism” and this teaching (to my best understanding) is that upon “coming to the knowledge of Christ” (whatever that might mean to some) the old sin nature is eradicated or destroyed thus leaving nothing remaining but the new nature provided by Christ which WILL automatically produce good works — or you are not “saved.” —http://expreacherman.wordpress.com/2011/02/21/lordship-salvation-calvanism-and-one-naturism/#comments

    And in the world of Calvinism this would make perfect sense and ties in with Perseverance of the Saints above…

    I have NO idea Sylesa why you are so intent of following Calvinism with ALL it’s horrendous teachings.

  • Burning Lamp

    Thank you Debs. That makes it very clear.
    As you can check, I did offer to engage Sylesa in a reasonable discussion of the TULIP one step at a time and I planned to use Scripture. People use scripture all the time and use it falsely to prove their point. If that is Sylesa’s main gripe with me, that is really too bad.

    You are correct to point out that the tenets of the TULIP all hinge upon each other and you can’t believe in one without the other.

    If Sylesa wants to believe in Reformed theology, she will have to believe that God regenerated her spirit BEFORE she made a profession for Christ and that she had NO choice in the matter, not that she heard the Word and then the Holy Spirit convicted her and she responded. That goes totally against scripture. The Bible clearly states that salvation comes through the hearing of the Word of God.

    It is clear that dialoging with her further is not fruitful – she asked me a bunch of questions, but then left me no recourse to answer. But even if I did I don’t think it would make a difference no matter how many verses I quoted – she would only quote others that Reformed hang their hat on, just as all false belief systems to.

    I don’t consider an honest discussion on doctrine as ugly – if I was unkind, I apologize, but as I said the discussion with Sylesa is closed as far as I am concerned and in accordance with her wishes. I hope she doesn’t post elsewhere giving the impression she is discerning because she defends false teachers and puts down solid teachers like Dave Hunt based on the opinions of others.

    I honestly do wish her well and hope she comes to the knowledge of the truth.

  • sylesa

    Hi Deborah,
    I guess they call 4 point calvinism amyraldism because they do not believe in limited atonement. I guess that if you had to label me or peg me , i guess that i fit into this mold.I do not at all believe in limited atonement. I do however believe the other points
    I have never heard of James White until i looked into the above mentioned book, his name was connected because of the controversy.

    >>>>Did you know that John Mac Arthur does not believe that after one is saved (ELECT) that we still have the flesh? He believes that we are totally new, no leftovers. So, what is the man saying

    Deborah, this is not so, i can post you some teachings of his where he acknowledges the struggle with the sin nature that we all have.I will post at the end of this response.

    >>>>Biblical salvation is simple, yet Calvinism’s version is long winded, brings confusion, brings pride (to those who think they are ELECT) and ultimately becomes a MAN CENTERED gospel.

    This is not so, he teaches the simple gospel. Going into all the doctrine and controversy within the church is not preaching the gospel and that is not what JM typically talks about. When he is asked doctrinal questions, he answers them to the best of his ability, but he has spent years just going thru the book of Luke in his expositional style of teaching/preaching. His MAIN topic has ALWAYS been Christ and HIM crucified. You cannot go to his website without being very struck by that!

    I have no doubt that when he is preaching the gospel to lost souls he is not giving them long drawn out theological debates on these issues, no more than an Arminian goes into the long drawn out debate with calvinism when leading souls to Christ.These are not relevent to know, all that a person NEEDS to know for sure is this —- that he is a sinner and in need of grace and forgiveness from the only God and Jesus Christ who died on the cross to be the propiciation for his sins. He needs to know that there is NOTHING that he can commend himself to God with and NOTHING that he can do to earn his salvation.He needs to know that God is willing to save him , not because he is good but because God is good, God is merciful and most of all because God sent His Son to die and rise again to secuere his salvation for him. If this message touches his heart at any time , it will be because God moved his heart and whosoever will may come… he that comes to me i will in no wise cast out… this is the gospel and this is what is preached.And NOBODY needs to worry about wether they are elect if it is ther hearts desire to be saved and to come into the gospel of Gods Grace. God who cannot lie , will do what He said he would do. I’m sorry, but John Macarthur DOES teach these things. Because when a person calls on the Lord from a sincere heart, God will keep HIS Word wether that person knows thes other truths and doctrines or not. The Bible says that we grow in knowledge and grace. These are not issues relevent to preaching the Gospel and i know that JM does not make them an issue of knowing or understanding in order to be saved! That would be ludicrous! Kinda like my son was my son when he was born but he was no less my son for not understanding how he came to be my son:)))Who could bear to hear these things when coming to God.? Yet at the same time there are very hard passages in the Bible, that are hard to be understood and hard to accept, but God did not have us tear them out of our bibles because they might upset a new christian. It behooves the church and all of us as to how we build up new Christians and are considerate to their state. I think that when theologians go into those things , they are not speaking to babies and to those who may not be in a place as yet to be able to bear it. Who hasn’t been there? I have. I do understand what you are saying, but i believe that you are misapplying because that is not how calvinist(not JM and i hope nobody) preaches the Gospel.But you bdo have a point in what you are saying.

    >>>>>obey

    Perseverance of the Saints – While many think perseverance means persevering in lifelong faith and trust in Jesus, the Calvinist eventually understands perseverance to mean persevering in faithful obedience. The elect, upon believing the gospel through gifted faith, receive the law-keeping righteousness of Christ which enables their perseverance in moral law-keeping and service. Obedience proves one’s election because only they receive the grace to truly obey. If one can’t obey, then salvation is called into question and may easily be judged as false faith. Hence, the Calvinist begins to fear he’s not truly elected and therefore not saved if he sins grievously

    Now this is a point that i can say that i honestly struggled with because this is how I THOUGHT it was also. But I have come to understand that this is not at all what is meant. People who believe in calvinism sin and fail just like those who do not believe in calvinism.The fact is , whichever one you call yourself, we should both have this in common —- we no longer WANT to give ourselves over to sin, we hate our sin and repent of it as God shows us in His Word what His will is. Not with a works motive that says “oh my word, i haven’t been doing well lately and God is going to give me up and i won’t be saved.”” No. If somebody has this attitude( i once struggled with this as i stated) they are in bondage to a perverse gospel that is no gospel at all. The attitude ought to be—– God saved me and I love Him , i want to do right. When i fail , i ask Him to forgive me and i get up and go on because i am not working my way to salvation. I CAN”T no matter how hard i tried anyways!!I seek to obey Him BECAUSE i trust Him not so that He will accept me. There is a HUGE difference in motive. But at the same time , if i don’t care about turning from sin in my life, then how can i say i believe? Didn’t jesus come to deliver us from sin? Don’t we want to be free? Hasn’t God given us those new desires? I say yes, He has. The scriptures say that if we walk in darkness and sin we don’t know Him no matter what we claim. God says that as you already know.We are not turning from sin to be saved but because we are saved and God has opened our eyes and our hearts and we over time think differently than we did before.This is normal. We just have to be careful not to get caught up in the trap of trying to be good for Gods acceptance. This can never happen and will only lead to misery.The letter kills, it accuses but can’t help us to do right and in it’s tyrany it weakens us to even more sin because we just can’t be good enough. Ask me how i know, lol! except it was not funny at all when i struggled with it. I THOUGHT that this was what Jm was saying, now i know that this is not what he was saying. God is setting me free from many things and has set me free from many things.It is surly His grace because as i said before, I am a very great sinner.

    >>>>>Irresistible Grace – Irresistible grace does several things to enable the elect’s salvation. First it applies the atoning blood of Christ to the elect before hearing the gospel

    Lord have mercy , this is not true! Deborah, you have some of these things so wrong!I’m not blaming you , it’s because there is so much misinformation out there. If you have time and can endure the dryness, listen to that syllybus on calvinism that i sent a link for.

    >>>>Biblical salvation is simple, yet Calvinism’s version is long winded, brings confusion, brings pride (to those who think they are ELECT) and ultimately becomes a MAN CENTERED gospel

    It should exclude ALLLLLL pride when rightly understood. So completly Gods Grace thru faith and that not of yourselves!God made sure that there was no room for boasting! Not to say that there are not those in BOTH camps who IMAGINE that they have reason to boast.

    >>>>> Election is unconditional, meaning God’s election is not conditioned on faith. He indiscriminately chooses some to be saved according to His sovereign will for undisclosed reasons. Those whom God unconditionally elects are guaranteed to be saved.

    Not so, it is always grace thru faith. Calvinist believe in repentance and faith toward God just as you do, the only difference is you believe that you one day just came tou call on Him because you chose Him when in fact the reason that you repented and put your trust in Him is because He chose you. This is truly humbling, not reason for any pride, because we are no less sinners than anybody ekse and some of us worse siners than others. The cause is not found in us but in Him and His great mercy.

    >>>>> Therefore, total depravity is interpreted to mean total inability to believe

    you do rightly understand this part and it is not in any way misrepresented. I do believe this Deborah.Unless a man is born from above … is one of many scriptures that i will post later.Everyone that learns from the Father comes to Christ, salvation is of the Lord.

    >>>>>>>and prideful in his “knowledge” and he can be brash and rude. Dave is humble in spirit and gentle and gracious. Apparently you view this as a weakness

    I am not going to spend all my time defending myself to somebody that continuously seems to want so BADLY to MISREPRESENT ME !! And to ASSUME what i may consider weakness??!! Must not have read the post correctly because it is not based on style or humbleness or personality that the book that he wrote got such bad reviews , it was based SOLEY on the fact that he could not back it with scripture!! These are ordinary people reviewing the book at Amazon, not our favorite pet teachers! I simply posted it and it … Never mind>>> Listen, if i do not defend myself anymore to her AND I WON”T it is because i can no longer take her seriously, and thru these repeated insults i have lost all respect and do not care what she chooses to post any longer ,this is a discernment blog after all and i would hope that it would be ubundantly clear when these unwarranted personal judgements are taking place… Please find somebody else to take Gods “LOVE” to !!

    [REMOVED links: This is not a 'grace to you' portal]

    Deborah, those links are just a few, he has to many to post on the topic of our struggle with sin, but if you type in key words i am sure that you will bring up many and get a pretty good knowledge of how Jm sees sin in the life of the believer.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Sylesa

    >>Irresistible Grace – Irresistible grace does several things to enable the elect’s salvation. First it applies the atoning blood of Christ to the elect before hearing the gospel

    Lord have mercy , this is not true! Deborah, you have some of these things so wrong!I’m not blaming you , it’s because there is so much misinformation out there. If you have time and can endure the dryness, listen to that syllybus on calvinism that i sent a link for.

    Haha no no, you don’t understand the horrible doctrine you follow Sylesa. Open your eyes!! We are trying to show you the truth here and you refuse to see it.

    Reformed “Covenant theology” (RCT) is called so because it claims three extra covenants are part of the Bible, though not explicitly (literally) found in scripture with chapter and verse. These three extra covenants are implicitly inferred from the Bible, meaning that certain scant verses are interpreted to carry inferences to these extra covenants. The scriptures teach six major covenants that can be literally and explicitly identified on the pages of scripture. The six major explicit covenants are the Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, Land, Davidic and New Covenants. The three inferred covenants of RCT are called the Covenant of Redemption (before time began), the Covenant of Works (pre-fall) and the Covenant of Grace (at the fall).

    The most important of these three extra covenants is the Covenant of Redemption which is said to be an inter-Trinitarian covenant within the Godhead where God the Father chose the elect, Jesus the Son agreed to die for the elect, and the Holy Spirit agreed to enable the elect for salvation. The Covenant of Works was said to be made with Adam when God promised him life for obedience and death for disobedience. The moral part of the Mosaic Law is considered to be a vestige of this pre-fall covenant today. The Covenant of Grace teaches that Christ became the obedience for the elect. His obedience is divided into His passive obedience on the cross and His active obedience in keeping the Law. Eternal blessings are promised to those who believe that the succession of both the implicit and explicit covenants is God’s grace toward mankind. —-http://www.carylmatrisciana.com/site/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=68:calvinism-spiritual-fusion-article-3-of-11&catid=39&Itemid=58

  • sylesa

    Deborah, that is not the teaching of any calvinism that i have EVER heard and is not what i believe. What is the sourse where you are getting this information and to what teacher are you ascribing it to?

    Have you listened to the syllubus that i posted a link to? The very first teaching goes into calvinism and the different varieties. Go to the sourse and hear what is being said.

    You are tantamount to by implication saying to me that if i was in the charasmatic movement and believed in the gift of tongues, then you would point out all the abberent weird groups and subgroups and ascribe all that they have ever taught onto me by association, that is not fair minded at all Deborah.

    even calvinists say that abberant groups(JUST AS IN ANY OTHER DENOMINATION) have risen annd taught heresies and they dismiss them as heretics just as one might do within any other denomination. And as i have made as plain as i can make it, i do not believe everything taught in calvinism! Why won’t you hear that??? I can’t keep repeating it

  • sylesa

    Deborah, you can point out all day long all the abberant beliefs of ANY group , including Calvinism and if i don’t hold those beliefs myself, what is your point? Respectfully:)

  • sylesa

    you are not Catholic, so that means that you are Protesant, and do you know how MANY false (yes you do, your a discernment blog)teachings there are out ther under being Protesant? But that is not on you because you are not yourself embracing them so , well—-see my point? It is not relevant to me how many or of what variety of heresies there are in calvinism or any other theology, i do not embrace it so there is no point in hashing it with me because i don’t believe the heresy anyways! I will only defend what i ACTUALLY DO believe, I am sure that you can continue to gather all sorts of negative doctrines that have benn wrongly ascribed to calvinism and that have been rightly ascribed to calvinism. It all makes no difference to be because i will only defend what i believe and not what i don’t believe. Fair enough:)

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    sylesa

    >> even calvinists say that abberant groups(JUST AS IN ANY OTHER DENOMINATION) have risen annd taught heresies and they dismiss them as heretics just as one might do within any other denomination. And as i have made as plain as i can make it, i do not believe everything taught in calvinism! Why won’t you hear that??? I can’t keep repeating it

    JMA is what you would call a ‘moderate’ Calvinist (in disguise) and his aim is to preach the moderate version or crowd pleasing version of Calvinism to people, whereas others like Paul Washer and all other REFORMED THEOLOGIANS believe this. Just because you have never head of this before does not make it true. Wake up Sylesa.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Sylesa

    >> you are not Catholic, so that means that you are Protestant

    No Sylesa, I am a born again Christian.

    >> It is not relevant to me how many or of what variety of heresies there are in calvinism or any other theology, i do not embrace it so there is no point in hashing it with me because i don’t believe the heresy anyways! I will only defend what i ACTUALLY DO believe

    Oh but Sylesa, why then do you embrace men (JMA) who are full on into the heresies you disagree with? You see you contract yourself. For instance JMA believes that Jesus did not die for the WHOLE WORLD (heresy) – you don’t believe this (thank goodness), yet you will stand up for JMA a man who preaches heresy to others and traps them. Again, (JMA) denies the blood of Jesus (I have proven this to you in previous articles, comments) and still you continue to want to follow after JMA. So it makes me wonder…

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Sylesa

    >> I guess they call 4 point calvinism amyraldism because they do not believe in limited atonement

    Hmmm… that makes no sense.

    As a REMINDER this is what Irresistable Grace stands for – When God calls his ELECT into salvation, they cannot resist. And you believe in Irresistible Grace….

    Now regarding LIMITED ATONEMENT which you say you don’t believe in: You are then dropping limited atonement in favor of UNLIMITED ATONEMENT saying that God has provided Christ’s atonement for all mankind, but seeing that none would believe on their own (T,U and I) he then elects those whom he will bring to faith in Christ, thereby preserving the Calvinist doctrine of unconditional election.

    Apparently then you also believes this:

    UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION: This asserts that God’s choice from eternity of those whom he will bring to himself is not based on foreseen virtue, merit, or faith in those people. Rather, it is unconditionally grounded in God’s mercy alone. Conversely, God has also chosen from eternity to withhold himself from the unelect, and condemn them to face his wrath (these people are given free will to choose damnation)

    So as you can see Sylesa, you might as well believe in LIMITED ATONEMENT because it is SUPPORTED by the ALL THE OTHER PETALS on the TULIP.

    You can’t be a 3 pointer or 4 pointer or 2 pointer.

  • sylesa

    Good Morning Deborah,

    >>>>>>YOU SAID
    JMA is what you would call a ‘moderate’ Calvinist (in disguise) and his aim is to preach the moderate version or crowd pleasing version of Calvinism to people, whereas others like Paul Washer and all other REFORMED THEOLOGIANS believe this. Just because you have never head of this before does not make it true. Wake up Sylesa.

    Deborah, with all respect, you know the point that i am making!
    And yes i absolutly embrace JM because he teaches the scriptures! And i can say that in spite of wether i agree with him on limited or unlimited atonement. Because it does not matter to salvation! When he teaches that all may come to Christ and whosoever calls on the name of the Lord ect, he is doing his part! The other side of the issue and the outcome of of it belongs to the Lord! You cannot say that JM has helped you in times past and now he is a “danger” to everybody else!!You stopped listening to him when tou learned that he was calvinist, but that did not prevent him from being a blessing to you b4 you learned that!!!! And why is that Deborah??
    Because you have a preconcieved notion of it , some personal issues with it and now you seek to malign him!When he spoke the Word of God it made it’s impact on your heart! And Jm would say that it made that impact on your heart because GOD opened your heart to it! You would say NO>>>> >> you are not Catholic, so that means that you are Protestant

    No Sylesa, I am a born again Christian

    Deborah, of course you are a born again christian! This was not the point i was making i think you know.
    If you were in a room and people were asked to raise their hands as to wether you were Catholic, Protestant, Muslim , Buddha ect, you would be raising your hand under Protestant! That is Christian with many subgroups and denominations. It is NOT making a distinction between Christian and non Christian! That would be if you were in a room and you were asked to raise your hand if you were a christian or a muslim!The point that i was making is this—– no matter what camp you fall into in the spectrum of Christianity, there are differences in the camps! Some are worth fighting for as they are central to the Gospel, and others are simply differences that are secondary and not central to the Gospel.The Gospel is preached but there ase other varying differences such as i mentioned b4 speaking in tongues. Do i believe in tongues for today? No. Do i contend with those that do because i don’t believe in it under “contending for the faith” No.
    Because altho i don’t personally believe it, i recognize it as not affecting the true preaching of the gospel and therefore is a secondary issue.I can any day of the week fellowship with those that do believe in tongues for that reason. And many of my friends are in the charismatic movement and i am not.But if you want to take every point of difference between everybody, there would be no one standing except those who are proud and proclaim ALL knowledge of which i am not prepared to say i have and i don’t think that you are saying that either. If you posted what church you go to and every belief of that denomination, i wonder — would you have identical beliefs in all points? I can promise you that whatever church or denomination you choose, there can be critisism leveled against it!! But i am equally sure that such a church does not exist where either you or i would be 100% in agreement with every word out of the mouth of all teachers under that denomination! But what shall we do? Nobody is left standing! And yes we do have our bibles and yes the scriptures are of no private interpretation, but are you prepared to say that you personally have ALL AND COMPLETE KNOWLEDGE OF THE WORD SUCH AS YOU CAN NO LONGER LEARN?
    I know the scriptures fairly well but am NOT prepared to make such a claim!!

    Please don’t take offense to this post. I believe that there is so much slandering and personal attack(not from you) and opinions that are not backed up with scripture. BL claims that she was GOING to use scripture, I was wondering WHY she didn’t? She said that i left her no room to answer, But she was at that moment posting a complaint of this and yet STILL not answering! When there is truly grounds for belief(I promise you will recieve mine) it seems that there should be no need to become personal and attack people by attributing to them beliefs that they do not hold.And why don’t you and BL start posting a true exegesis of scripture refuting the doctrine that you are against instead of talking down the people behind the teachings? Wouldn’t that be more profitable to all? Not throwing out a scripture here or there, but prove your points! Focusing on people is easy to do and shields you from this. You are both fighting me and throwing out accusions but are not seeking to disprove me . I am willing to post first , however it is very telling that neither of you have been willing to exegete scripture to prove your position. You are waiting for me to do so(and i will)so that you may simply claim that i am misusing scripture and pick it apart when you could just post your own exegesis now.Are you both not willing to take the time to do that? I know that Burning Lamp has said that she can do it easily after all her years of folling the Lord! Well , i ask her to do so now! If she is not willing , well then i will post first and watch her say that I AM THE ONE misusing scripture!

    Anyways Deborah, I hope that all is well with you. This is not personal to you in any way, you are seeking to help people and that is to always be commended.
    Have a good day.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Sylesa

    >> When he teaches that all may come to Christ and whosoever calls on the name of the Lord ect, he is doing his part! The other side of the issue and the outcome of of it belongs to the Lord! You cannot say that JM has helped you in times past and now he is a “danger” to everybody else!!You stopped listening to him when tou learned that he was calvinist, but that did not prevent him from being a blessing to you b4 you learned that!!!! And why is that Deborah??

    Heresy does not matter to salvation? You kidding? So in effect you have no right to point fingers at any other person Sylesa who preaches FALSE TEACHING because you my dear EMBRACE false teaching and it’s teacher JMA.

    I read one of his books, ‘Charismatic Chaos’ and that was it. And I did not stop listening to JMA because he is a Calvinist Sylesa, I stopped because 1) He denies the blood of Jesus 2) He believes that Jesus only died for the ELECT 3) Denying the blood of Jesus stems from the fact that he is a Calvanist, Calvinism destroys the gospel message of SALVATION!

    A MAN can not bless people Sylesa, where do you get that nonsense from! JMA never blessed me, ever. No man ever blesses me. Jesus Christ on the other hand blesses me.

    >> If you were in a room and people were asked to raise their hands as to wether you were Catholic, Protestant, Muslim , Buddha ect, you would be raising your hand under Protestant!

    No I would not raise my hand, because I am not Protestant. I am a bible believing Christian. What part of this are you not getting?

    I don’t take offense to anything you say.

    You have contradicted yourself so many times all because you refuse to just come out and say in less than 3000 words that you believe you are CHOSEN / ELECT. You keep trying to refer me back to John MacArthur’s articles of misleading information hoping that I will somehow agree with you, but it ain’t gonna happen. I understand the doctrine of Calvinism right down too it’s last tangly root.

    I pray that your eyes are opened to the truth of the matter of the things you have said here on this blog and you can escape from this Calvinist hold that is over you, that gives you the right to think you are more special than others.

    God LOVES EVERYONE Sylesa, not just you.

  • sylesa

    Also Debs,
    Burning Lamp started this with me and called me out as being wrong. She said that she wants to “discuss” the points. She says that it is “real simple”. I am saying that it is not quite that simple in a few lines and a big BOOK like the Bible to defend something in a few lines! LOL

    But i am asking Burning Lamp to go all out and since it is simple and she has walked with the Lord for years and is of such authority and has great and easy recall of scripture, to right now post her vast knowledge and refutation BY SCRIPTURE on this topic! If she is more confortable hiding behind throwing out accusations and is not willing to , i woiuld wonder why??? Is she truly not willing to prove herself , but rather prime the pump by saying that i will be misusing scripture? What is so hard about Burning Lamp right now posting her own exegesis on this topic??? Words from her own mouth is that it is simple and she knows the word! She does not need to “discuss ” this with me! Simply post your proof! You are “defending” Gods Word and maybe it would be helpful to others reading this post! If she won’t do it , i can only wonder why not??? You ought always to be able to back up what you say and you do not need to engage with me to do it! After all, when i post my position , i am simply posting my position not “discussing ” it with her! POst Burning Lamp, I anxiously await to see your claims of truth. Am i asking anything unreasonable? Unless you are afraid to! Then i guess it will be up to me to post first while you take the easy road and slander me as misusing scripture!!!

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Sylesa

    I don’t think BL is going to comment because you told her you would not reply to her comments.

  • sylesa

    Deborah,
    you do not understand calvinism down to its very last root, neither do i .
    I am not talking Calvinism, i am talking Bible. I believe the Bible.
    I have never said AT ANY TIME that God does not love everybody, much less that He only loves me!!!!
    These are the sort of back and forths that are not productive because you are yourself so focused on JM. I believe JM as far as he believes the bible, i believe calvinism as far as it is in agreement with scripture! How about we drop all names and labels and talk only scripture!
    You keep accusing Jm of things that i know are not true, so i posted links to his teachings that PROVE that what you said about him was not true ,——-then you delete the links and say that i am making it a gty portal!!!
    When in fact i was only trying to show you that you were putting out false information! I could care less if you like JM !! Why would I care about that? I don’t know you personsally and it is neither here nor there for me if you like JM! It wouldn’t even mean anything to me if my personal friends liked him! Some of them don’t , lol! Because he teaches against alot of the abuses in the charismatic movement and some of my friends are in it! Deborah, i am not defending JM so that you will like him, i am pointing out some misinformation that you have put out on him.At least let it be for true reasons that you don’t like him!!

    You refuse to see his position on the blood, it is clear that no amount of correction is going to change your mind and at this point , i am done trying to tell you that he has been misrepresented on that. Bob Jones who put the critisism out there has retracted it and yet you hold onto it. Fred Butler tried to correct you , who knows the man personally , yet you will not recieve it. John Macarthur has put out a open letter on the topic , yet you still want to believe evil. You should look to your own heart Deborah. You are seeming like a very ungracious person who refuses to be corrected— the very thing that you seek to point out in others.This is not a godly quality, and you cannot hide behind defending Gods Word because this is a personal attack on a man who has denied what he was accused of and sought to set it straight in the public domain.This is personal to you and i believe that you are unable at this time to make that seperation.

    >>>You have contradicted yourself so many times all because you refuse to just come out and say in less than 3000 words that you believe you are CHOSEN / ELECT. You keep trying to refer me back to John MacArthur’s articles of misleading information hoping that I will somehow agree with you, but it ain’t gonna happen. I understand the doctrine of Calvinism right down too it’s last tangly root.

    Deborah, i am not hoping that you will agree with me. That also is neither here nor there for me. There are differences between people and i accept that. The only thing that i object to is slander , misinformation , and putting alot of stuff out based on opinion and not backed by sripture. With all due respect, you are doing the same thing, you are saying alot but not taking apart the things you say are heresy with scripture!This in effect is you claiming to be the Authority! And Burning Lamp as well.

    You also can post your scriptural exegesis of this topic to prove to all on this blog that i lack discernment as BL has accused me of and you can also at the same time BACK UP thru scripture that i am embracing heresy! Otherwise , it is so easy to throw out insults and accusations at people! That is the low road. Post, i will answer to it when i post!

    I , after i post/answer to my belief based on scripture,I think that I will be moving on from this blog. I still nevertheless commend you for your ministry and what you are attempting to do.At the same time, i feel that you are not teachable yourself. And anybody that examines others ought to examine themselves as well. Me included.

  • sylesa

    Deborah, BL does notneed to comment TO ME, simply back up her claims that she has ALREADY put out therE. Also, that has not stopped her from commenting anyways, with all due respect. And , i might add, IF this REALLY is about defending the Truth , then i think that she owes it to others on this blog. And i would also like to add that i asked her to do that before i made the comment of not posting to me. I am asking her to post an exegesis of scripture on this topic for the sake of defending Truth, just as i will be doing.

    Is she afraid to? I will be doing so! She is the one who said that i am wrong?!!!! Shouldn’t she have right away proved it all from scripture?????
    I mean , she said how simple it was, so why is she not doing it?? She does not need to engage WITH me in any way to post an exegesis on this topic!!!!

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Sylesa

    It appears you choose JMA and his heresies over JESUS CHRIST. How silly of you to follow a man the way you do instead of just picking up your bible and studying it with the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Your guide is JMA. Who is your Lord and Saviour Sylesa? Who blesses you Sylesa, JMA or Jesus Christ?? Wake up Sylesa. If JMA denies the blood of Jesus and views it at SYMBOLISM only and you agree with him, the you too deny Jesus Christ! Wake UP Sylesa!

    All the scripture you need regarding Calvinism has been supplied to you on this website under other articles, you have read it already and ignored it.

    This is the end of the discussion Sylesa. Go follow John MacArthur and everything he spoon feeds you.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Sylesa

    >> I have never said AT ANY TIME that God does not love everybody, much less that He only loves me!!!!

    Yes you have, you stated you are a 4 point calvanist, you believe in Irresistable Grace which is: When God calls his ELECT into salvation, they cannot resist. You then drop limited atonement in favor of UNLIMITED ATONEMENT saying that God has provided Christ’s atonement for all mankind, but seeing that none would believe on their own (PETALS: T,U and I) he then elects those whom he will bring to faith in Christ, thereby preserving the Calvinist doctrine of unconditional election.

    This is the CRUX of Calvinism, that God CHOOSES some people and others he leaves for destruction. Seeing that you believe you are CHOSEN, what makes you think you are so special that God would choose you and others not. The TRUTH IS: God loves EVERYONE and EVERYONE has been given the choice to follow His Son Jesus Christ or not.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Of for crying out loud…

  • Burning Lamp

    Debs, you have cut to the quick on the devious doctrine of shall we call it “perverted predestination” leaving off all labels. You have given more than ample scripture on your site addressing this topic. You could not have made it clearer when you explained why someone can’t be a 4 pointer. If Sylesa cannot understand that, further discussion is fruitless.

    If I have slandered her or anyone else, please tell me. That was certainly not my intention. I am passionate about exposing this wicked, insidious doctrine. It damages the Body of Christ and is an affront to the Gospel and the sacrifice of Lord and Savior. I am not an expert and I hardly know what exegesis is, but I do understand simple truths of the Word of God.

    I simply asked Sylesa to discuss the TULIP one-by-one, step by step and to keep it short and simple. She cannot accept that.

    You have given her a simple answer that doesn’t require a degree from a seminary. I admire those who do deeper studies into the Word – that is not my calling. I don’t think God requires it. The Holy Spirit is our teacher. I have always loved this verse: But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things which are mighty;1 Corinthians 1:27.

    As I said, I wish Sylesa well, sorry to upset her, and I hope that she takes a break from JMA for awhile as we had discussed on another thread some time ago and she agreed was best. Even putting the blood issue aside, there are enough other concerns about his teaching and those in his camp that should cause her to question.

  • sylesa

    Burning Lamp, with all respect we are ALL called to give a defense, we are ALL called to study to show ourselves approved!! You do not need to discuss anything with me, you called me wrong, and i am simply stating —–PROVE IT FROM SCRIPTURE!!! Isn’t that what you SAID that you were going to do in “discussion ” with me??? And in spite of all the “many scriptures on this site? Then if you are now claiming that you are unable to post your exegesis of scripture PROVING me the heretic , ummm, lol! how can you say what is right or wrong if you are NOT ABLE TO POST AN EXEGESIS OF SCRIPTURE PROVING YOUR POINT!!! Instead of claiming that there is so much on this site, WHICH THERE IS NOT, why don’t you humor me??? After all , you are so fervent for the Word and it comes so easily to you after all these years ect ect…….!

    1st Corinthians 1:27 is a great scripture, however it is not meant to be used against somebody who knows the Word just because you are unable to post a exegesis on your position!! IT doesn’t have to be some great massive work, just prove your point! And you ought to be able to withstand questions! And if you do not know the answers BY THE WORD OF GOD, then why attack somebody??? Why proclaim yourself as the holder of all Truth if you can’t back yourself up with scripture??

    You don’t know the Word well enough to do that BL but you will claim to know it well enough to attack what i will later post??? LOL11 thats a joke with all due respect. I am anticipating your making mighty claims to “knowing” the Word when i post, and I’m anticipating you making claims that i am misusing scripture, so thats why i am asking you now, IF YOU KNOW THESE ISSUES SO WELL

    >>>>As I said, I wish Sylesa well, sorry to upset her, and I hope that she takes a break from JMA for awhile as we had discussed on another thread some time ago and she agreed was best. Even putting the blood issue aside, there are enough other concerns about his teaching and those in his camp that should cause her to question

    Again , just ugly accusations that are unable to prove from scripture.
    I would like you to know that my answers will be from the Word, not JM! You will not hear “JM SAID”! I just wish that you could do the same!

    >>You have given her a simple answer that doesn’t require a degree from a seminary. I admire those who do deeper studies into the Word – that is not my calling. I don’t think God requires it. The Holy Spirit is our teacher

    >>> Excuse me Burning Lamp, the Holy Spirit is your teacher, but the Written Word is the instrument!!And yes , you are required to study to show yourself approved! And at a minimum, on a discernment blog to which you like to present yourself as a holder of all truth , you OF ALL PEOPLE BETTER BE ABLE to prove yourself from scripture and don’t hide behind “thats not my calling” rubbish. You ought to be able to answer ANYTHING THAT YOU TAKE ISSUE WITH! Otherwise , on what basis do you take issue?? uhh, mmmm, i dont like that teaching! Not good enough Burning Lamp!
    If it’s not your calling to know the Word better than you are able to get what you give , then maybe you ought to at least have the wisdom to not open your mouth(fingers) UNTIL you are able!!

    And don’t MISUSE a scripture against somebody who knows the Word better than you just because you are not able to answer me! Have more respect for the Word than that.

  • sylesa

    A little irony that you should use that scripture whaile claiming not to know the Word well enough to post what i have asked for, hmm, perhaps it is hidden from you Burning Lamp? Just a thought.

  • sylesa

    DEBORAH, YOU HAVE SAID,

    How silly of you to follow a man the way you do instead of just picking up your bible and studying it with the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Your guide is JMA. Who is your Lord and Saviour Sylesa? Who blesses you Sylesa, JMA or Jesus Christ?? Wake up Syles

    That is unkind of you to make that judgement, you do not even know me to assume that i do not pick up my bible and study it . I have spent mucm, much time in the Word of God! I still do, i even hate for days to go by when i don’t do so! I always get back on track though.
    You should not say things that are not true.

    Anyways, hope you are well.Take care.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Sylesa

    How unkind of me to say such a thing? But Sylesa you are the one voting for JMA like America voted for Obama. You refuse to take your eyes off him and his TEACHINGS, put them aside and go to prayer instead with the guidance of the HOLY SPIRIT ONLY.

    Each time I show you heresies of JMA you push them aside over Jesus’ commandments to love HIM more than men.

    I AM TRYING TO HELP YOU SYLESA. You bring tears to my eyes when I read your comments, but there is nothing I can do but make you angry in the hopes that I try shock you awake. You are caught up in a false doctrine Sylesa and I pray with all my heart that your eyes are opened to the truth.

    The end!

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    sylesa

    >> A little irony that you should use that scripture whaile claiming not to know the Word well enough to post what i have asked for, hmm, perhaps it is hidden from you Burning Lamp? Just a thought.

    You speak about me being unkind, I must say your comments are getting downright nasty.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    I am really beginning to hate the word exegesis. What’s wrong with the word summary? It’s simple, easy to understand!

  • sylesa

    Deborah,
    I like you and i support you having a discernment ministry. I at the same time believe that you are being unteachable and are not proving your point.

    You are not looking at the scriptures in ther context.You are blindly holding to your position.

    Burning Lamp is the nasty one Deborah. But you have not told her so simply because she is “on your side”. She started this whole thing. Look back thru the threads and see how that , while i was holding my ground, i was also attempting to soften the attitudes,(when i made the remark that i was no longer rattling my cage, lol) for starters. I was am am going to hold my ground and post my scriptures, but i was trying to change the spirit of strife on the blog at the same time. Then Burning Lamp comes at me again! PLEEEAAASSSEEE don’t tell me that YOU don’t see the spirit that she has to people!! She is not an asset to you even tho she defends you.

    Please don’t tell me that she was not seeking to insult me by using the scripture from 1 cor!! Misusing the scripture to another believer because she has no other way to answer me!!! All i asked for was for her to post an exegesis of her position and that it ought to be able to withstand questions and she is not willing!! She says that she knows the simple truths of the Word,she says that i should not need time to think about my position , she says that it comes easily to her, she has SAID many things ! I have asked her to post it. She will not do so, Why? She has claimed that she does not think that God requires her to be in the Word in a deep way, that that is not her calling! But she says that God teaches her, how apart from the Word??? Osmosis? Does she get the understanding apart from the study of the Word ? Then why does God tell us to study? And on one hand she is saying that she is not “deep” in the Word , but lets see how and what she claims when i post my response! You honestly think that she is making an honest argument? There is no way to take issue with another perso unless you can answer WHY THRU SCRIPTURE you take issue.Hers , and mine , and yours and everybodies only sourse of knowledge , true knowledge , is the scriptures! On the one hand she claims not to know them (so as to not answer me) and on the other hand claims her ignorance a virtue in a catty and snide way wth posting the scripture from 1Cor, when in fact the trult wise are only those whos wisdom comes from God , the WORD ! Which she does not know well enough to answer me !You don’t find any obvious ironies here?

    >>>>You speak about me being unkind, I must say your comments are getting downright nasty.

    Deborah,
    you are right, my tone is not good and i am acutely aware of that. I am sorry.
    You also need to check yourself and put BL arrogance in check once you get your own under control and maybe we can have a reasonabe conversation.

    Deborah, i am sad about how this has turned out.

  • sylesa

    Deborah, i didn’t vote for Obama:) We are in agreement ! i won’t vote for him if he runs again either:)

  • Burning Lamp

    Debs, I will be complying with Sylesa’s demands that I quote chapter and verse so I hope she will stick around long enough to receive that. I am going to look past her rants and demands for “exegesis” which by the way consists of different forms and types. She insinuates that I present myself as a Bible scholar or authority, and I have tried to make it clear that I have not done so. I have just visited and revisited this issue over the years and have settled it in my mind long ago along with other basics of the faith according to God’s Word and the principles contained therein. This issue has more to do with SALVATION and therefore I am going to take the time to gather the pertinent Scriptures not only for Sylesa’s benefit but for any others who might be lurking and taking in this controversy.

    So I am giving notice that I am putting this together and will have it available either later today or tomorrow and depending upon when your schedule permits moderation.

    Stay tuned……………………..

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    sylesa

    I am not conversing with you on this subject. She has already apologised, why won’t you accept it, but no, you carry on and on and on.

    The entire issue is about DOCTRINE. And BL is not going to budge and ‘see’ your point of view on anything calvinistic and their am I.

    You keep asking for scripture, again I tell you that there is an entire article full of scripture EXPLAINING why Calvinism is WRONG – you have read it and ignored it – what more must we pull out of our hats for you? You are dead set on following a doctrine that sets YOU ABOVE others. Well, go for it girl. I am tired of trying to explain it to.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    BL

    I wish you the best of luck :)

  • sylesa

    [EDITED by DTW: This is just a note to let you know that if you don't keep your comments to the topic from now on with scripture to back up your arguments I will delete your comments.]

  • Burning Lamp

    Debs, you are right, you have posted much scripture and that is one reason I didn’t see the need to take the time to repeat as I didn’t think it would do any good. But for the Lord’s sake I am willing to try and maybe, just maybe something will ring a bell and the Holy Spirit will enlighten. But then again, there has to be an open mind.

    I am sorry that Seleysa has such a distorted picture of me – she thought the verse I quoted from 1 Corinthians was wrong? I have always taken that verse to apply to myself that I qualify as a weak vessel but thankfully God can use even me.

    Also, I never said that we are not to study the Bible!! Of course we are. But there are those who are scholars who examine every jot and tittle and that is not the average person. Even simple folks can understand the Word because the Holy Spirit is the teacher and will meet us where we are. Of course I love to study the Word!!

    That is exactly what I will be taking time out of my schedule to do so and I am doing it out of love for the Word and love for His truth. Not trying to pat myself on the back – better make that clear! Seems everything I say only makes things worse.

    Better get back at it………………

  • sylesa

    Deborah,
    This may be a 2 part post, not sure.
    First of all i think that basic to the belief in election is the belief in the sovereignty of God. This world is the work of His Hands and all that goes on in this world is all within the divine councel of God. There are things that belong to us to understand , and there are things that belong to God that He has not revealed to us,

    [EDITED by DTW: Deleted X number of verses. We know all the verses in the bible pointing to the Sovereignty of God Sylesa, you don't have to list all the verses for us. We believe HE IS SOVEREIGN, in fact (because you agree with Jeff) we believe HE IS MORE SOVEREIGN than you do. Regarding John 6, I have already given you the answer to the question, I wont repeat myself.

    An extract from Jeff's comment that you have already read: http://www.discerningtheworld.com/2010/10/13/unconditional-election-and-total-depravity-are-gnostic-teachings/#comment-127906

    Jeff

    1 – Is God Sovereign? DTW: YES
    2 – If so…How Sovereign is He? DTW: Sovereign enough to give mankind FREE WILL :)

    9 – What, in light of your insistence that we choose God (as opposed to the reverse), do you do with John 6, when Christ says to the 12 after His teachings have caused many of His “disciples” to reject Him, “And He said, “Therefore I have said to you that NO ONE can come to me unless it is granted to him by the Father”?

    DTW: Look up the word “draw” here in verse 44 in the original language, you might find it shocking–it means literally to drag.

    Joh 6:43 Jesus therefore answered and said unto them, Murmur not among yourselves.
    Joh 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
    Joh 6:45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.

    Isn’t it just kosher for the Calvinists to hone in onto their own pet verses to substantiate their views while they conveniently disregard other verses from Scripture? The above Scripture simply means that there is none other than the Father who can draw sinners to Christ because there is no other way than through HIS cross that He CAN do it. And that is precisely why Jesus said:

    John 12:32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.

    Are the “all men” in this verse only the elect? Does “all” mean that every single person will be saved? No. It simply means that no man will ever be able to circumvent His cross. However, to some it is the power and wisdom of God unto eternal bliss in heaven and to others it is mere foolishness unto eternal damnation in hell. Are the latter the reprobate who had been elected unto eternal damnation before the foundation of the earth? No! certainly not; they will be cast into hell because they willfully reject the cross as God’s power and wisdom.

    ]

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    BL

    I do understand totally. If anything, maybe there is someone else out there reading (and believe me there are many) who will benefit!

  • Burning Lamp

    I will take each section separately starting with Total Depravity. This is by no means an exhaustive study of the topic, but there should be ample references and some many very well overlap with those you have previously posted. Unconditional Election will follow in a day or so.

    Total Depravity

    There is no question but that the Bible teaches we are totally depraved, but it does not teach total inability to make moral and spiritual choices.

    There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 This man came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all through him might believe. 8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. 9 That was the true Light which gives light to EVERY MAN COMING INTO THE WORLD. John 1:6-9 In John 1:9 we are told about Jesus, “That was the true Light, which lighteth EVERY MAN that cometh into the world.”

    So as you can see John was a light, but not THAT Light, and EVERY MAN in the world has light from God and from Christ, and so could be saved.

    We are born totally depraved, but the Lord Jesus gives ENOUGH LIGHT TO EVERY MAN to make him responsible to hear and to reject or accept the Gospel of the Son of God.

    So that little spark called conscience proves God gives inward light so one can choose right on issues of moral and spiritual duty. Men are not so predestined that they must sin or must reject Christ. God has given light to all men and seeks to draw all men to Himself: Gen. 6:3; Ps. 79:7-3; Ps. 98:2-3; Prov. 1:22-23; John 1:9; John 12:32; John 16:8; Rom. 1:18-25; Titus 2:11; 1 Tim. 2:3-6

    He gives light through conscience. Look at Romans 2:11-16: FOR THERE IS NO PARTIALITY WITH GOD.
    12 For as many as have sinned without law will also perish without law, and as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law 13 (for not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be justified; 14 for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, 15 who show the work of the law written in their hearts, THEIR CONSCIENCE ALSO BEARING WITNESS, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them) 16 in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel.

    For every idle word men shall come to judgment, Jesus said (Matt 12:36). And Revelation 20:12 tells us that the unsaved dead will be judged ACCORDING TO THEIR WORKS” which are meticulously recorded. Does not that prove that in moral matters man is accountable and must choose?

    In John 12:32 did the Lord Jesus say, “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw a FEW men unto Me”? NO, HE DIDN’T SAY THAT. Instead, He said, “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw ALL men unto me.”

    Notice John 5:40. Does this verse say,”And you will not come to Me, because you are not one of the elect”? HE DIDN’T SAY THAT. Rather He said, “But you are NOT WILLING to come to Me that you may have life. ” It is not that they were not elected; it was that they WOULD NOT COME.

    “God… now commandeth ALL men every where to repent” (Acts 17:30). Can anyone accuse God of commanding people to do what He has made it impossible for them to do?

    Romans 2:11-16 says: FOR THERE IS NO RESPECTER OF PERSONS WITH GOD. For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: 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,) In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.”

    Does that not mean that EVERY person in the world is warned from God, either by the Word or by God speaking through the law He has written in their hearts, that is, their CONSCIENCES?

    All who seek more light find enough light even as Cornelius did in Acts 10.

    The Bible pictures man as a free moral agent capable of choice, he is morally responsible as Psalm 19:1-4 tells us:

    1 The heavens declare the glory of God;
    And the firmament shows His handiwork.
    2 Day unto day utters speech,
    And night unto night reveals knowledge.
    3 There is no speech nor language
    Where their voice is not heard.
    4 Their line[a] has gone out through all the earth,
    And their words to the end of the world.

    So there is a speech in nature to turn men to seek God. It speaks in all the world and EVERY MAN is therefore accountable to God for it.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    BL

    That is brilliant, thank you. That little thing called a CONSCIENCE!

  • sylesa

    Deborah and burning lamp<
    YOU JUST DELETED MY ENTIRE POST TO PROVE MY POINT AND POSTED BURNING LAMPS????? sO IN OTHER WORDS , YOU KNOW THAT I AM RIGHT AND THAT IS WHY YOU DELETED MY ENTIRE POST?????
    I WILL POST WHAT I PUT UP ON ANOTHER BLOG FOR ALL TO SEE WHAT YOU DELETED

  • sylesa

    [EDITED by DTW: DELETED]

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Sylesa

    You do that, because all you did was list a whole bunch of verses on the Sovereignty of God. That’s not an Exegesis. You were asked to explain TOTAL DEPRAVITY. And your comment was BEFORE Burning Lamps, therefore it was not an answer to her comment on TOTAL DEPRAVITY. I had not approved her comment, so there was no ways you could have known what she was going to say.

    And I did not delete you comment because I think you are right, I deleted it because it was a waste of space and you are insulting my intelligence by listing verses explaining the sovereignty of God when you know fully well I believe He is. You also agreed with Jeff’s comment that MY GOD IS SMALL in comparison to his. In other words you have CLEARLY drawn the line that we believe two different faiths, two different gods. (http://www.discerningtheworld.com/2010/10/13/unconditional-election-and-total-depravity-are-gnostic-teachings/#comment-127906)

    Make sure when you comment on the other blogs that you place links back to this blog mkay? And make sure you tell the truth, God is watching to see the CHOICES you make.

  • sylesa

    [EDITED by DTW: Deleting your comments does not mean I am afraid of something, it means I am tired of reading the same nonsense over and over again and it's a waste of time of energy. This blog is here is speak the TRUTH, not here for people to spread their lies because they don't understand scripture and when shown the truth even then refuse to listen. Come up with a REAL exegesis Sylesa, not a list of verses and I will post it. You were the one who wanted the exegesis, well do one.]

  • sylesa

    [EDITED by DTW: Get to it Sylesa, shouting at me is not making things better]

  • sylesa

    BY THE WAY —- YOUR COMPLETE REJECTION OF THE WORD OF GOD IS MAKING A PRETTY GOOD POINT FOR DEPRAVITY, BECAUSE ONLY GOD CAN OPEN YOUR HEART TO RECIEVE THE WORDS THAT YOU ARE UNABLE TO RECIEVE AND YOU ARE AFRAID FOR OTHERS TO READ WHAT I POSTED! IF BURNING LAMP AND YOU ARE SO RIGHT , WHY NOT LET ALL THE BLOGGERS READ BOTH OF OUR POINTS AND SEE FOR THEMSELVES???

    [Edited by DTW: Yes, they are reading it]

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Sylesa

    In fact I dunno why I should even allow an unbeliever to post an twisted version of scripture on my blog. You agreed with Jeff that your god is different to mine remember. And seeing that I have mentioned this to you a few times in the hopes that I would get a response, at least a sorry or something, it’s dawned on me that you do indeed feel this way.

    I think you should go away now. Bye bye. You have been blocked from commenting]

  • Robbie

    I always knew a band aide does not help for cancer…

  • Burning Lamp

    IRRESISTIBLE GRACE

    The fourth part of the doctrine of Calvinism, represented by the letter “I” in TULIP, is “Irresistible Grace,” which means that ALL WHO ARE ELECTED to be saved will be saved, that they CANNOT RESIST this special grace LIMITED TO THEM. This dovetails with the doctrine of Unconditional Election. It seems to me that they are “evil twins”. It would necessarily follow, first, that those NOT elected are irresistibly damned. And of course, the logical conclusion is that since Christians cannot affect the salvation or damnation of sinners they will feel no responsibility or burden about it or quite frankly, have any interest in the matter. No doubt Satan delightfully uses this doctrine of “Irresistible Grace” to lull Christians to disobedience and lack of compassion and burden to share the Gospel obey the admonition, the command given to the Church in the Great Commission to reach the lost.

    Consider these Scriptures which prove sinners CAN AND DO RESIST God’s grace.

    First, in II Peter 3:9 we read, “The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, NOT WILLING THAT ANY SHOULD PERISH, BUT THAT ALL SHOULD COME TO REPENTANCE” God desires ALL men to be saved. Obviously, not all people will welcome His grace, but will choose wrongly.

    Next in 1 Timothy 2:1 it says we are to pray for “ALL MEN,” and verses 3 and 4 tell us, “For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour, Who will have ALL MEN to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.” We should pray for ALL MEN because God our Saviour “will have ALL MEN to be saved.” So God would have ALL saved, but some will not be saved. So God’s grace can be resisted.

    In Matthew 23:37, we are told that Jesus wept over Jerusalem at the sadness of His heart that His love and grace were refused. “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and YE WOULD NOT! Jesus said, “I would,” and YE WOULD NOT.” So His grace was rejected. Obviously a choice was made and God’s offer of grace was spurned.

    In Proverbs 1:24,25, there is a clear statement that God calls and men refuse. That Scripture says, “Because I have called and you refused, I have stretched out my hand and no one regarded,; Because you disdained all my counsel, And would have none of my rebuke,” The context plainly teaches that the refusal is final and those who refused God, “did not choose the fear of the Lord” went to destruction. Surely, then, people DO reject the call of God and RESIST HIS GRACE.

    Paul says in Galatians 2:21, “I do not frustrate the grace of God?” That clearly shows that those Galatians teachers who falsely taught salvation by the law did “frustrate the grace of God.”
    How many have heard the Gospel several times before they received Christ? Only very few were saved the first time they heard the Gospel at the first conviction of sin they felt! Testimony after testimony tells how God’s gift of salvation was at first rejected, but later accepted.

    Think about it – if grace was irresistible, there would be no such thing as the unpardonable sin.

    Also, those who were not included in the “elect” would could not be held accountable as according to TULIP, the lost are just that; lost, no matter what they do, there is no point in judging them. If one rejects Christ, one’s end is certain and rightly so, but if one has no chance of partaking of the divine gift of salvation, one cannot be born-again and can’t be held responsible!!

    The following passages clearly indicate that God allows men to resist Him and His grace: Prov. 1:22-23; Matt. 23:37; Acts 7:51; Acts 9:5; Israel in the Old Testament; etc.

  • Burning Lamp

    Unconditional Election

    The Lord Jesus says in Matthew 11:28, “Come unto Me, ALL ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” He does NOT say “Come unto Me, only those I have chosen…….”If we could not respond to this compassionate invitation, would this not be cruel? Our Lord loves the lost and those who are under the burden of sin – He welcomes ALL who will come to Him humbly to receive Him.

    Look at Matthew 23:37, and consider the TULIP version. To say it in that interpretation: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, BUT YOU ARE UNCONDITIONALLY ELECTED, therefore you will have to go to Hell. There is no hope for you.” What He said is this:”. . . how often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you WOULD NOT! This is clear evidence of a CHOICE.

    Consider John 3:16, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son…” TULIP proponents have unwittingly split the world asunder. They are saying John 3:16 does not mean the whole world but the world of the elect. “For God so loved the world [EVERYBODY], that he gave his only begotten Son, that WHOSOEVER believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”

    In Mark 10:21 we have the story of the rich young ruler, a lost man who came to Jesus to inquire about eternal life. “ Then Jesus, looking at him, loved him, and said to him, ‘One thing you lack: Go your way, sell whatever you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, take up the cross, and follow Me.’ ” Jesus gave this man a CHOICE. As we know, the rich man made the WRONG choice, not WILLING to put Jesus over his possessions!

    What about Jacob and Esau in Romans 9:13? ‘it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.’ God is NOT saying, “I am damning Esau and sending him to Hell – this is not about salvation! That is false exegesis, wrongly dividing of God’s precious Word. For one thing, the word “hate” here is the same word the Lord Jesus used when He said, “If you are going to be My disciples, you will have to HATE your father and mother and your brother and sister and your wife and your children.” WHAT IT MEANS IS “TO PREFER”. Jesus would never tell anyone to despise or hate any person. He even showed love to those who tortured and crucified Him and set a powerful example for us.

    God chose Jacob to head a nation for Him, and rejected Esau. That was predestined before they were born (Rom. 9:11-13).

    In Genesis 25:23 God says,
    “Two nations are in your womb,
    Two peoples shall be separated from your body;
    One people shall be stronger than the other,
    And the older shall serve the younger.” NKJV

    This put forth the birthright regarding heading up the nation and was not about Esau’s eternal salvation. It is also important to point out the words within the verse , “AS IT IS WRITTEN, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated” was stated in Malachi 1:1-3 some 1500 years after Esau had chosen to go the wrong way. This Is evidence of God’s FOREKNOWLEDGE as to who was qualified to be the leader.

    The burden[a] of the word of the LORD to Israel by Malachi.

    2 “ I have loved you,” says the LORD.
    “Yet you say, ‘In what way have You loved us?’
    Was not Esau Jacob’s brother?”
    Says the LORD.
    “ Yet Jacob I have loved;
    3 But Esau I have hated,
    And laid waste his mountains and his heritage
    For the jackals of the wilderness.” NKJV

    Consider Ephesians 1:4, “According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love.” This is NOT referring to eternal destiny. It is talking about God choosing born-again believers to “be holy and without blame before him in love.”

    What about John 15:16? :You did not choose Me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit, and that your fruit should remain, that whatever you ask the Father in My name He may give you.” NKJV Again, this is not saying the Lord chooses some for Heaven and some for Hell. This is saying the Lord ordained that born-again believers should bring forth fruit to the glory of God. It has nothing to do with individual salvation.

    Consider Romans 8: 28,29 “And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to His purpose. For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.” NKJV This is NOT saying that God unconditionally elected only some to Heaven. This is saying that God’s will that every born-again believer should be made to conform to the image of the Lord Jesus Christ.

    God gives the order of things in Romans 8:28,29. First, His foreknowledge (He is SOVEREIGN), then predestination, then calling, then saving. To disregard the inspired, divine order is false doctrine. Again, I Peter 1:2 says that the saints addressed were “Elect according to the FOREKNOWLEDGE of God the Father.” That absolutely exposes “unconditional election.” as false. Election is based on God’s FOREKNOWLEDGE of who will trust Christ. This establishes the SOVEREIGNTY of God but at the same time He in His SOVEREIGNTY CHOOSES to allow man free will to either receive or reject His gift of salvation.

    In John 12:32, Jesus said, “And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw ALL peoples to Myself.” NKJV When Jesus draws “ALL PEOPLES” to Himself, He is offering Himself and His salvation to ALL.

    It is true the saved are God’s elect, “chosen… in Him before the foundation of the world,” as Ephesians 1:4 tells us. But it is wrong to attribute this election to God’s sovereignty whereby He saves some, forces them to be saved, (as in Irresistible Grace) and damns some whom He has decided He does not wish to save. No, election is not “unconditional.” It is simply that God knows who will trust Him when they hear the Gospel.

    Why did God allow Adam and Eve to fall, and so bring a curse on the whole human race? Man (and woman) were created with the will to choose. He did not create programmed robots. He fully knew that man would make wrong choices. That is why God planned with His Son BEFORE THE WORLD BEGAN to offer an atonement for wrong choices His creation would make! So Christ is “the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.” Revelation 13:8 This is difficult for us as humans to comprehend, but the Bible tells us it is so. God in His SOVEREIGNTY COULD have made us without the capacity to sin, but He CHOSE not to do that. He wants us to come to Him WILLINGLY and to serve Him out of a heart of love for Him and out of gratitude for what He has done for us. He knew full well that Satan would come to tempt the new couple even in Eden. He created the tree of knowledge and set it in the garden, thereby giving Adam and Eve a CHOICE.

    Mark 19:13-15 and Luke 18:15-17 gives the account of Jesus welcoming the little children. He offered His blessing to ALL of them. Can you imagine our Lord saying to ANY of those precious children, “Sorry, you can’t come to Me and I can’t bless you because I did not choose you?” OF COURSE NOT!! To even insinuate such a thing is blasphemous and yet the doctrine of Unconditional Election would say this very thing.

    God seeks to draw all men to Himself (John 16:6-11; Prov. 1:22-23). Examples of choosing God can be found in the following Scriptures that I don’t want to take up space quoting. Exodus 32:26; Deut. 30:19; Josh. 24:15:25; 1 Kings 18:21: Proverbs 1:22/23; Luke 14:16-35; John 1:40-45; John 6:66-68; Acts 8; Acts 10; Acts 17:27:34; Eph. 1:13. In the following verses, God says that He wants “ALL” to be redeemed: Ezek. 33:11; 1 Tim. 2:4; 2 Pet. 3:9; Acts 17:30; Matt. 18:14. Therefore, if God FORCES Himself (as in Irresistible Grace) on those He wants saved APART FROM THEIR CHOOSING, all would be saved and this would be universalism and a preposterous conclusion.

    Next will be Irresistible Grace. We will skip Limited Atonement for now as Sylesa has said that she does not believe in that. However, in pointing out the specifics of the doctrine of Unconditional Election, as you have pointed out Deborah, if you believe in one you have to believe in the other. The principles of TULIP all hinge upon one another and one cannot truly separate them.

    May God be glorified and His Word go forth in Spirit and in Truth. Please understand that I do this as a service to Him and not to in any way promote myself. I pray that I hold no animosity toward those who disagree. By “revisiting” this topic again and again, it reaffirms my belief that TULIP is false doctrine and I hurt for those who are misled by it. That is why I do this, because I believe with my whole heart that what is put forth here is truth. I leave the results in His hands. I am merely a servant and a sinner saved by grace.

    ==============================================

    Perseverance of the Saints

    Paul the apostle, in 2 Timothy 1:12 , inspired by the Holy Spirit says”… for I KNOW whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto Him against that day”.

    The Bible says that we can KNOW we are saved: 1 John 5:13; John 3:16; etc. It says that we do not keep ourselves saved, BUT THE LORD KEEPS US! Heb. 13:5; John 10:27.
    These seems an honest question: Are we saved because of the perseverance of the saints, or because of the perseverance of THE SAVIOR?

    Look at Jude:1: “Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and PRESERVED in Jesus Christ.” Their perseverance? NO! ” PRESERVED IN JESUS CHRIST.” Notice is says PRESERVED, NOT PERSEVERED

    Consider 1 Peter, chapter 1, verses 4 and 5. He says we are saved “to an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you, Who are kept by the power of … “–the perseverance of the saints? NO! We are “Kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.”

    The believer’s salvation is not kept because we were among some hand-picked chosen group, it is because we as born-again believers responded to His call and ACCEPTED His gift of salvation. Those who have received Him as Savior have His promise never to leave or forsake. THAT is the promise the redeemed cling to and that is the Blessed Hope, that the Bridegroom is coming for His own.

    NONE of us deserves His gift of eternal life – but He generously and mercifully grants it to every humble heart who comes to Him in their realization that they are a sinner in need of a Savior and know they have nothing to offer Him except a repentant heart. There is nothing we can do to earn His wondrous gift and nothing we can do to preserve it. We are sealed unto redemption by the Holy Spirit. He is the One Who keeps us and we should love Him out of gratitude and love to serve Him with all our hearts.

    THAT is the truth and TULIP is a lie.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Robbie

    Shocking isn’t it.

  • Dominik

    [deleted - we don't tolerate insults]

  • chrishow

    Hi I have looked into Calvinism and think it totally distorts Gods Character.
    When I was saved and started to read the Bible, I believed what God says, that All means All, Whosoever means Whosoever, and when I was introduced to Calvinism I rejected it because God tells me to reject false teachings/doctrine.

    What is confusing me is that I have been reading a few books, and listening to old tapes of Corrie Ten Boom. God greatly used her to reach many many people with the Gospel and Salvation. She could quite clearly hear God, so why did He not show her that what she had been taught (Dutch Reformed)as a child was wrong? I can’t find any documentation that says she addressed this issue, which I think is very serious error. I have seen a local church split over Calvinism, and a young man who’s Faith was nearly shipwrecked over it.

    Can anyone understand why God would use someone and not show them the error of Calvinism?

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Chrishow

    I don’t know who Corrie Ten Boom is so I can’t say. But let me tell you this, 50 years ago you could sit in a Word of Faith church and still be saved, today if you are sitting in a Word of Faith church and agreeing with the stuff they preach there is a serious problem because what they preached 50 years ago was different to what they preached today (they preached more ‘truth’) so to say and were less brazen to expose themselves with their heresies – also the internet was not around and people did not have the tools to research religions to see exactly what they entail. The prophet Daniel prophesied that in the last days knowledge would increase. As time has gone by and the end to the last days draws closer so Revelation 18:4 applies more and more; “Then I heard another voice from heaven say: “Come out of her, my people, so that you will not share in her sins, so that you will not receive any of her plagues;” – Right now in this day, the Holy Spirit is calling out people OUT OF false churches, the remnant are finding themselves outside of ROME.

  • Werner

    Chrishow, I also don’t know Corrie Ten Boom, but what I do know is this; if your doctrine on eschatology and ecclesiology are wrong, most of not in all the cases the rest of your doctrine is wrong also.

    She apparently did not believe in the Pre-Trib rapture, a common error amongst calvinists. I dont know, but can only guess, that she also believed that the church has replaced Israel, these two usually goes hand in hand for calvinists. http://endtimepilgrim.org/corrie.htm

    Like the dutch reformed system today, they are completely ignorant to the truths of the Bible. They don’t even know the difference between right and wrong, i.e. recent litigation of homosexuals and lesbians, how can they know anything then about God’s Word.

    You have to remember that Jesus said “You will know them by their fruits” Mt 7:16. The more than two hundred burned at the stake in Calvin’s Geneva, and the legacies of Apartheid and slavery (of which some SA Dutch churches still holds to), can hardly be considered “the fruit of the Spirit” Gal 5:22-23.

    The Apostels taught the fruit of the Spirit; the Calvinists taught the TULIP.

    The same mindset is found in Jehovah Witnesses, Mormons, Islam, Catholics etc, they worship the system, or the church, priests of their system, not the God of the Bible, the King of old, The Messiah…

    So do not be suprised, …in the latter times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, I Tim4:1.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Right on Werner…

  • Paul

    What part of John 3:16 do Calvinists don’t understand? Does that single verse rightly divided not dismantle the whole TULIP abomination?
    I read the discussion and couldn’t help but cry (and chuckle occasionaly).
    I can see that the apostasy in the church is desperately widespread. I wonder what will be the size of the remnant of those living that will be raptured to join those who have fallen asleep in meeting our Lord Jesus Christ in the air.
    I really wonder, because Jesus said it shall be as it was in the days of Noah, and remember only 8 made it. With each passing day, I am more and more convinced that I will be raptured alive, if not then my children’s generation will.
    Please Lord Jesus Christ save us and come quickly before faith is nowhere to be found on earth!

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Hi Paul

    Thanks for your comment, and noting that only 8 people made it onto the Noah’s boat! How small the remnant will be and YES JESUS IS COMING SOON! :)

  • chrishow

    Thank you for the responses to my question, they have been very helpful to me :)

  • Paul (Continue in His Word)

    I am very troubled by the following statement by the author of this article:

    Am I suggesting that Calvinists are not saved? No! Absolutely not. Countless individuals have been saved by the grace of God the moment they put their trust in Jesus Christ and his finished work on the cross before they embraced Calvinism. Nevertheless, the countless individuals who have been saved before they willingly inherited the legacy of John Calvin, does not sanction his core teaching that God predestined some to eternal bliss and others to eternal damnation and neither does it minimize the fact that countless individuals could have been saved had they not been shut out of the Kingdom of Heaven by a doctrine that misrepresents the God of the Bible.

    Can someone explain that to me?
    How can one reconcile the following verses with that statement: verses like John 16:13, John 8:31-32, John 10:5, John 10:27, John 7:17, Isa 8:20, 2 John 9?
    Can the author insert “were led by the Holy Spirit to” in the the bolded statement in the following manner: “…before they [were led by the Holy Spirit to] embrace Calvinism”?

    Can we replace “before they embraced Calvinism” with “before they embraced Roman Catholicism”? What is the difference between Calvinism and Roman Catholicism? are they not both satanic doctrines/cults?
    Can we replace “Calvinism” in the statement “before they embraced Calvinism” by any other false “Christian” cult out there?

    This leaves me very puzzled indeed, and raises so many questions in my poor mind.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Paul

    As I said on another topic, if someone was genuinely saved, and they got trapped in the doctrine of Calvinism for a while then yes (that is a different story) but to say one is supposedly genuinely saved and then becomes a PERMANENT Calvinist is saved?? That is not right. I don’t think the person was saved to start off with if they remain in the doctrine of Calvinism and won’t budge right to the very end – where is the Holy Spirit in their life leading them into ALL TRUTH?

    So based on quotes you mentioned on another article Paul, the same thing applies….

    Could someone who believes this false gospel of Calvinism be truly saved? Fortunately, many Calvinists (you among them) were saved before becoming Calvinists. They now malign God by saying that He is pleased to damn multitudes though He could save all—and that He predestines multitudes to the Lake of Fire before they are even born. But having believed the gospel before becoming Calvinists, they “shall not come into condemnation, but [have] passed from death unto life” (Jn:5:24). Those who only know the false gospel of Calvinism are not saved, while those who are saved and ought to know better but teach these heresies will be judged for doing so.
    (http://www.thebereancall.org/content/september-2005-q-and-a-2. please read all Dave’s answer to get the context)

    and

    The original question was, “Is it possible for someone who believes only in the soteriology of Calvin to be saved?” As I said in my response, there are many Calvinists who were saved before they became Calvinists or who have believed the true gospel in spite of their Calvinism—but “those who know only the false gospel of Calvinism are not saved.”
    (http://www.thebereancall.org/content/december-2005-q-and-a-1. please read all Dave’s answer to get the context)

    Is this not what David Hunt is saying, that people who are genuinely saved and get trapped in Calvinism, will sooner or later leave it because they are saved?

    Hmmmmmm….I went to read here http://www.thebereancall.org/content/december-2005-q-and-a-1 and at the bottom it states,

    “That a person may believe the true gospel and thus be truly saved in spite of believing the false gospel of Calvinism may be possible. But I don’t see how one could sort out the fact that contradictory beliefs were being held. What does one really believe?”

    Basically Dave is not willing to damn every Calvinist to hell in case they were saved BEFORE they got trapped in in Calvinism (which means the Holy Spirit WILL lead them out of it), however those who get ‘Elected’ in Calvinism are caught up in a cult unlike any other believing TULIP from the word go have little chance of ever getting saved. There are some who make it out, but not many.

  • Redeemed

    I have found that most believers I have met took some kind of detour in their walk that took them into some kind of abberrent teaching. But they came to realize that they had taken a wrong turn.

    This can happen at vulnerable times when one is not staying close to the Lord and are neglecting to stay in the Word. However, if the Holy Spirit is present He will convict and bring them out.

    I even know a person who turned to Judaism for a period of time of bitterness, but after a period of time came back to the truth and loved the Lord and His Word. Believers never stopped praying for her and didn’t give up on her.

    I can identify with those who make missteps in their Christian walk as I have had my share, but God always drew me back to the truth because I was His child. We are to display the fruit of the Holy Spirit of love, joy, peace, longsuffering, etc. while never tolerating false teaching.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Indeed Redeemed, indeed!

  • Paul (Continue in His Word)

    My question here was related to the article by Thomas Lessing, not Hunt.

    You said (and Redeemed echoed the same thing):

    if someone was genuinely saved, and they got trapped in the doctrine of Calvinism for a while (which means the Holy Spirit WILL lead them out of it)

    I agree with that 100%.

    But that is NOT what Thomas is saying. Absolutely not.
    He is saying that someone got saved, later became a permanent Calvinist and went about spreading the damnable heresy of Calvinism.

    To me, what you said (that I quoted above) doesn’t seem to be what Dave Hunt said neither. Even the additional quote from the end of Hunt’s Q&A does not say that “a person can get saved, then become a Calvinist FOR A WHILE (which means the Holy Spirit WILL lead him out of it sooner or later)”

    You asked:

    Is this not what David Hunt is saying, that people who are genuinely saved and get trapped in Calvinism, will sooner or later leave it because they are saved?

    My honest answer is: NO, it is not what Dave is saying. Except I do not understand English anymore.

  • Truthful Conversation

    Are you guys serious? You have never heard of Corrie Ten Boom? Here is a little info on Corrie:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corrie_ten_Boom
    http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Corrie_ten_Boom
    http://aboutcorrietenboom.wordpress.com/2010/07/17/about-corrie-ten-boom/

    Anyway, she was anti-pretrib. I think my parents had one of her books when I was a child.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Paul

    Paul, I am thinking about this LOGICALLY and reading the sentence logically. If someone was GENUINELY SAVED before they got trapped in Calvinism, then the person will REMAIN SAVED because they have the Holy Spirit abiding in them – it’s LOGICAL. This is how I read that sentence and this is how that sentence should be read.

    I have contacted Tom Lessing and asked him to come and explain what he means.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Paul

    Here is a reply from Tom Lessing and it’s just like I said…and the same applies to Dave Hunt’s quotes. If the person is genuinely saved and they land up in Calvinism the Holy Spirit abiding in them will lead them out – BECAUSE they ARE saved.

    —————-
    From: Tom Lessing
    Sent: 06 March 2013 11:09 AM
    To: Discerning the World
    Subject: Re: A commenter said this…

    What we ought to bear in mind are Jesus’ words in Matthew 24:4 “Take heed that no man deceive you.” Here He was speaking to his disciples. And when we look at Peter, the apostle to whom He gave the keys of heaven, it is evident that even the most illustrious can be deceived. “But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation. But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?” (Gal 2:11-14).

    Here we have two beautiful children of God, Peter and Barnabas, who were led astray by the wiles of the devil. What we fail to see is that Peter was actually returning to a kind of Jewish Calvinism, if you will, that believed they (the Jews) were the chosen ones whilst the Gentiles were the reprobates. So, to them it was an abomination to even eat with the uncircumcized Gentiles. I don’t know whether you’ve followed my discussion with some of the most ardent Calvinists on Facebook? Eventually they too cut me off, cut me away and separated them from me and finally blocked me on their Facebook Walls because I have the spirit of Lucifer, I am the Antichrist, a moron and an evil man beyond evil (a reprobate). Although brother Peter did not call the Gentiles all those names, he too was guilty of cutting the Gentiles off, cutting them away and avoiding the so-called reprobates. This is a most astonnishing thing. Think of it. Here’s a man who knew the voice of his shephard and whom Jesus promised: “the Spirit of truth, will guide you into all truth” and yet he made a booboo of everything. Why was it such a terrfible thing Peter had done? He was actually denying the fundamental prerequisite for salvation for all of mankind – FAITH AND FAITH ALONE. And yet he thought he could add something to it and that “it” was to separate himself from the Gentiles (unclean animals). Duh!!!

    There are many tender children of God who’ve been led astray by false teachers simply because they haven’t been grounded in the truth. But doesn’t the Holy Spirit guide them in all truth? Yes, in Peter’s case it was Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit and grounded in his truth, that stopped Peter in his tracks to fall even deeper into apostasy. Perhaps we should find more Pauls in our day and age to help those poor little lambs who have been led astray. But what about the silent inner warnings of the Holy Spirit? Isn’t his deep inner warnings sufficient to keep his children on track? My wife, for instance, says that she’s been made aware of things by experiencing an uneasy feeling in her heart when attendeding meetings with her freinds. She cannot pinpoint it but then she usually comes to me and by the grace of God I am able to help her and warn her against those errors. Unfortunately not all of God’s children have husbands or wives who can help them in this way. The result is that they, by the cunning of these false apostles, are easily led astray. If it could heppen to Peter, it can happen to anyone.

    There are countless children of God out there who have fallen prey to the charisma and oratory flair of false teachers. Are they to blame for there own falling away into the hands of false teachers? Of course they are. BUT, I am confident that those who have been saved before they became involved in Calvinism or any other false teaching WILL eventually be led out by the Holy Spirit into the glorious light of his Gospel. Our duty is to warn, in the love of the Lord, those who have fallen prey to these false teachers and to be in tears before the Lord, night and day, so that God may snatch them from the clutches of these wolves in sheep’s clothing. You may be interested to the follwoing testimony:

    http://www.carylmatrisciana.com/site/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=67:brendas..

    I am a little pressed for time at the moment. I have to prepare something for our little Bible study group today. If there is anything you do not agree with me, say so and we will discuss it further.

    God bless
    Tom

    ———————-

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Thomas

    Nope, it’s a perfect comment and EXACTLY what I thought you meant! :)

  • Redeemed

    Tom, your comment reflects your heart for God’s precious people and it should be the cry of our hearts as well. Indeed you are spot on that we so need more Paul types and other heroes of the faith to labor in the fields not only to take the pure Gospel to the lost but to disciple and ground the converted in the faith and to guard against false teaching.

    There are so many voices drowning out the still small voice of the Holy Spirit and the sensitivity that we as believers need to stay on track. The result is disastrous.

    Thank you so much for taking the time to respond and the efforts you are making to defend the faith and stand for truth.

  • Paul (Continue in His Word)

    Tom Lessing wrote:

    BUT, I am confident that those who have been saved before they became involved in Calvinism or any other false teaching WILL eventually be led out by the Holy Spirit into the glorious light of his Gospel. Our duty is to warn, in the love of the Lord, those who have fallen prey to these false teachers and to be in tears before the Lord, night and day, so that God may snatch them from the clutches of these wolves in sheep’s clothing.

    I say a resounding Amen to that! Since I was snatched from the clutches of Charismania-Tongues-Dominionism-Pentecostalism, that is what I have been doing, with little or zero success so far.

    You would have done a great service to add that “BUT” to the paragraph of the article I quoted in #89, and I would recommend you do so.
    If not, that paragraph can (and will) be misunderstood and misinterpreted. Indeed, the whole article does not convey what you have just stated so clearly. Does it?

    Another thing is that we are living in the Great Apostasy now, and it is difficult to discern these “countless(?) children of God out there who have fallen prey to the charisma and oratory flair of false teachers”, from the multitudes to whom God has sent strong delusion that they may believe the lie (ie embrace the countless false “christs” and false “spirits” who are out there) because they loved not the truth to be saved.
    I personally believe there are not “countless”, but instead a “few” remnant.
    Maybe at you level you are seeing “countless” people turning from deception to the glorious light of the Gospel. From my perspective I am seeing the contrary.

    In Christ.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Paul

    ‘Countless’is an ‘untold number’ It could mean any number, from a few (but still countless number of people) to many. Tom knows its a FEW. Again, please APPLY LOGIC when reading.

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Paul

    >> that is what I have been doing, with little or zero success so far.

    Your little jabs at me are really beginning to irritate me. I am not willing to run head on into ‘all your information’ without thorough investigation from my side, and I take my time and I look at everything from all angles. I am allowing you to comment, I call that a success. Soon you might find yourself commenting elsewhere…

  • Paul (Continue in His Word)

    Debs,
    You misunderstand my statement completely in implying that I am referring to you or anyone else on this blog.
    The “that is what I have been doing, with little or zero success so far” obviously refer to the people I have left in the Charismania-Tongues-Dominionism-Pentecostalism movements I was part of.

    For the “countless” and “untold number” qualifications, my understanding is that those expressions are generally used in reference to a very large amount of people. But I will rest it there.

    Can you point to me my “little jabs” at you? It is normal that we disagree on some points. I do not agree on everything you’ve posted on this blog, but that does not make us enemies, or we cease to be brothers and sisters in Christ.

  • Redeemed

    Now Paul adds Thomas Lessing to his hit list. And again, he is straining at gnats and splitting hairs and devouring instead of discerning.

    The more Paul speaks the clearer his modus operandi becomes and his critical spirit rears its ugly head. I can only hope and pray that He takes some time out to go to his prayer closet and listen to the still small voice of the Holy Spirit. And that doesn’t mean contemplative prayer or mystical activity. Thought had better state that or would get accused of promoting error.

    It pains me to rebuke a brother in Christ, but Paul gives us no choice and it is meant for his own edification. If any enemy of the cross should get the wrong impression after reading this, they should know that Christian love is not always warm and fuzzy. Just because we issue a rebuke does not mean that we do not love this brother, but we love our Lord more.

  • Carolyn

    Debs. LOL…keep your left up…

    Running a discernment web like you do, is certainly not for the faint of heart. I really appreciate how you’ve handled the whole situation. There’s been a few buttons pushed and attention to logic is most essential to prevent chaos and confusion. Slow and steady progress toward the finish line. Truth will win…it’s just a matter of time.

  • Carolyn

    Tom…the link to Brenda’s deliverance from Calvinism is just another confirmation of truth. Thanks for posting. I noted what she said in her conclusions about the lie of unconditional election:

    Quote: “Once the stronghold of unconditional election was broken, I was finally able to comprehend what I had been involved with. I’ve spent a great deal of effort since that time educating myself about what Reformed theology is all about. I found that unconditional election is the entry point into this system of theology through Calvinism. Since Calvinism describes the way a person is saved, it becomes the gospel and foundation for Reformed theology.

    Reformed theology is more properly known as Covenant theology, which postulates God made three other major covenants (in addition to the six He made with Israel) that can’t be found in the Bible with chapter and verse. These additional inferred covenants define how God elected some for salvation while letting the rest go to hell (Covenant of Redemption), how God promises salvation for obedience (Covenant of Works), and how since man can’t obey, God through Christ provided obedience actively in His life and passively through His death for salvation (Covenant of Grace). Both His life and death are said to contribute to salvation. The Bible teaches that Christ’s one act of obedience on the cross provided atonement for sins. These postulated covenants lay the groundwork for salvation through election and law keeping righteousness. In essence, these three additional covenants skew God’s plan for mankind to the point where Reformed theology can justify not only Calvinistic election and reprobation (not choosing to save some), but also for replacement theology where the church replaces Israel, the tribulation happening in 70 A.D. and the kingdom promises occurring for the church today. This complicated theology cannot be defended if Calvinistic election is false.

    Unconditional election has been brought forward to our day from the 16th century reformation of Catholicism. The reformers learned it from Augustine who very likely learned election and predestination from the Manichean cult he was involved in prior to converting to Roman Catholicism. These concepts of election and predestination are not new, but very old being found in antiquity as enlightenment, elitism and fate. Augustine, who blended Christianity with neo Platonist philosophies, is not only responsible for many of the errors of Roman Catholicism, but also for many of the teachings found in its reformation. Sadly, much of Catholicism was retained, only redefined, in the Protestant Reformation so that many of its denominations today are merely degrees of separation from the Roman church. The despair of Lordship salvation yeilds the same hopelessness Roman Catholics experience if they take their doctrine seriously.

    Thankfully, the Lord has delivered me and revealed to me the true face of Calvinism. Today, I’m at rest in the love of Christ when I fail. I sleep well at night and no longer fear condemnation. Christ’s blood, shed for all men, completely cleanses my conscience of guilt by faith. The pure truth of His Word gives me great joy, assurance and life. Having been humbled, I am better able to give love and show mercy to others who sin. Suffering teaches me lessons about the deep and abiding love Christ has for all His children. I thank the Lord often for His goodness in forgiving and delivering me from entangling deception.”

  • Paul (Continue in His Word)

    Correction:
    In my previous comment I meant to write:
    For the “countless” qualification, my understanding is that it is generally used in reference to a very large number of people, because that it what seems to be the definition of the word: “Too many to be counted; very many”

  • Deborah (Discerning the World)

    Paul

    Oh, sorry I do apologise! Sorry.

  • Carolyn

    I know Calvinists define the Christian faith. But what defines the Calvinist? If it is not love, then their definition of the Christian faith is meaningless.

    Same goes for any Professing Christian…if the fruit of the Spirit is not evident, they are not filled with the Spirit, therefore they are not Christians.

    Any other questions?

  • Redeemed

    Re: Caolyn’s 107

    Thanks for bringing this out as it is important to see the testimony of one who has come out of this horrible deceitful doctrine. I sure don’t see any testimonies from people who say they have been delivered from the works of Dave Hunt.
    His critics are those who say he is a false teacher because he believes in eternal security of the believer or other points of doctrine that are biblical truth. What does that tell us?

    You are right and Dave is right. Where is the love? There is no love in TULIP. There was no love in Calvin. It is a false Gospel, plain and simple, concocted by Satan, twisting Scriptures the better to deceive. These are the TRUE deceivers.

  • Paul (Continue in His Word)

    Redeemed wrote:

    Now Paul adds Thomas Lessing to his hit list. And again, he is straining at gnats and splitting hairs and devouring instead of discerning.

    The more Paul speaks the clearer his modus operandi becomes and his critical spirit rears its ugly head…

    I would be curious to see if Thomas Lessing would share your sentiment towards me if ever he read my inquiry about his article. I actually first tried to post my question on his blog directly, but comments were closed, therefore I posted it here.

    @Thomas, if you echo what Redeemed wrote in #105, then I sincerely apologize. It was not my intention to “pick you apart” or put you in an imaginary “hit list” or “devour” you as alleged by Redeemed. I asked a sincere question, and thanks to Debs for forwarding my inquiry to Thomas, and I am very pleased that Thomas answered me and didn’t judge my motives.

    This is too sad, as I don’t expect such an attitude from a person who otherwise is very gracious.

  • Redeemed

    Paul, I didn’t mean to judge your heart or motives because that is usurping what belongs only to God.

    However, there is a pattern of behavior here that just looks for things to pick at instead of looking at the bigger picture. I would equate it to an art critic examining a painting. The picture viewed as a whole is a quality work of art. But if one takes out a magnifying glass and finds a flaw here and a flaw there and points it out and dwells on it, he fails to appreciate the work as a whole.

    To quibble over a word is just plain silly. There are so few who stand for truth in this apostasy and we need to not go looking for flaws. We all have them. But unless they can cause someone to stumble, why not show love and not make an issue of it?

    Making mountains out of molehills is not helpful or edifying for the Body of Christ. It can discourage someone who is seeking to serve the Lord.

    Tom has written an edifying article here and it serves no purpose to pick out what one perceives to be a flaw and is distracting from the important work needed to expose an evil doctrine that is doing great damage.

    I am not saying you are deliberately trying to do this, and that is exactly why I suggested you back off and make an effort to make truly constructive contributions to the discussion. I am sure you have much to say that would be helpful to us. That is what is needed Paul.

    I have appreciated especially what Caroyn has brought to the discussion. She seems to try and look at the conversation objectively.

    Again, I am not judging you brother, but I did issue a rebuke because I thought it was appropriate and necessary. Not because I am more spiritual, because I would shrink from even implying that. We are here to help one another and support those who are telling the truth and expose those who are not. Engaging in “friendly fire” is destructive rather than constructive.

    I admit I tend to speak with uncontrolled zeal at times, but I am making an effort here to carefully state what is driving my comments.

  • Carolyn

    @ Redeemed – “I have appreciated especially what Caroyn has brought to the discussion. She seems to try and look at the conversation objectively.”

    Thanks for that. Once upon a time, some wise person taught me to keep my emotions out of it. That is not so easy for the female gender, but definitely possible. One thing I remember, is that the offence is to the gospel, not to me personally. I don’t hate people, I hate lies and deception. If we can hear what the Spirit has to say through his word, instead of our opinions, it helps to keep us on track. We don’t get side lined into politics, office or otherwise. Also, close to my remembrance are all my own mistakes and I’m so thankful for the way God has loved me in spite of my failures. Keeps me humble (sort of). We’re all learning as we go. I still have a long way to go before I reach perfection….

    Jude 1:22-24 NIV
    22 Be merciful to those who doubt; 23 save others by snatching them from the fire; to others show mercy, mixed with fear—hating even the clothing stained by corrupted flesh.

  • Sharon

    Who did God choose? He chose those who received His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ as their savior. That is who God chooses. His being the supreme Sovereign is not threatened by our Free Will since it was God that gave us our free will. Those in hell are in hell for one reason and that being their rejecting Jesus Christ. The Atonement was NOT limited. Jesus did not fail. We who have received Him will be with him forever. Those who do not receive Him as Savior will be “without excuse” because their sin was atoned for. How sad to go to hell and the price of your salvation was already paid.

    Deborah (Discerning the World) wrote:

    sylesa

    Again you say you do not believe that God predestines anyone to Hell, (but that is not the important part Sylesa), the important part is that Calvinists believe God predestines people to be saved and THIS IS THE CRUX OF TULIP and CALVINISM.

    Do you believe you are CHOSEN, YES or NO ?

  • Sharon

    Perhaps this is already listed by someone so please forgive if it has been.

    Read below and see if this is a biblical confession of a persons salvation experience and profession.

    The Salvation Professions of John Calvin:

    God by a sudden conversion subdued and brought my mind to a teachable frame, which was more hardened in such matters than might have been expected from one at my early period of life. Having thus received some taste and knowledge of true godliness, I was immediately inflamed with so intense a desire to make progress therein, that although I did not altogether leave off other studies, yet I pursued them with less ardor.

    As with Augustine there is no mention of Jesus Christ. No mention of repentance or sorrow over sin.

    In his second account he speaks of a long process of inner turmoil, followed by spiritual and psychological anguish.

    Being exceedingly alarmed at the misery into which I had fallen, and much more at that which threatened me in view of eternal death, I, duty bound, made it my first business to betake myself to your way, condemning my past life, not without groans and tears. And now, O Lord, what remains to a wretch like me, but instead of defense, earnestly to supplicate you not to judge that fearful abandonment of your Word according to its deserts, from which in your wondrous goodness you have at last delivered me.

    Here we go again. No mention of Jesus Christ. No repentance of sin just his groaning over it. His duty to take himself to your way.

    I would never say that he had not been saved. But it is interesting to read.

  • The Legacy of John Calvin – Part 2

    [...] News Desk by Bobs Your-Anchor: August 2010    The Legacy of John Calvin – Part 1 [...]

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>