The Theology in Calvinism

atpollard said:

Actually, NOBODY ever said that the Titanic was unsinkable.​

(Go ahead, identify the source of a quote stating the Titanic is unsinkable from before it sank.)
Something to think about if one wanted to compare the analogy ... to this discussion on the Doctrines of Grace. :cool:
Click to expand...
Probably people that said it was unsinkable most likely would acknowledge it was sinkable but it depends on what you mean. If you're meaning in the normal way ships function they were right to consider it probably wasn't sinkable, in the sense that they had what we call a fail safe system. It had compartments and it had doors which would separate them if they sprung a leak. If you asked the same people though yah but what if you had a 300 foot gouge along the side of the ship I suppose they would conclude well sure I guess it would sink. If you google fail safe systems on Wikipedia it will give you examples. One is an elevator,
  • An elevator has brakes that are held off brake pads by the tension of the elevator cable. If the cable breaks, tension is lost and the brakes latch on the rails in the shaft, so that the elevator cabin does not fall.
So is it infallible? Perhaps how we normally think of it yes but what about a devastating earthquake, or a tornado big enough to cause a catastrophe ? And that's what happened to the Titanic the fail safe system got torn apart. So back to Calvinism. One can't use the analogy? I would say one can. When they put together that big ship of doctrines not enough time and thought was put in to how it's parts were assembled.
 
civic said:
We are debating our beliefs nothing more nothing less. Maybe debating non calvinists is something you should reconsider. Just my 2 cents fwiw. You are making things personal when there is no need to make them personal. I love calvinists and I have family and many friends who are calvinists. So that is your caricature that you have painted which is not true..

hope this helps !!!
Click to expand...

Arial said:
And before it took off the owner shook his fist at God declaring nothing could sink his ship. Just like people shake their fist at God and cry, "That is not fair!! You cannot do it!" And they can't worship Him if He is who He Himself says He is and so they just change who He is in their own minds. They know who can be trusted to apply salvation to themselves. They can.

But you all can carry on among yourselves, pat one another another on the back, say you won if we leave. You don't fool me. You do fool yourselves. You don't fool God.

I too have had enough of the maniacal building of walls within the community of Christ by those who can only do so with the insulation of a forum format where they can just ignore it when there theology falls short of an answer. And are shown in what way it does. And it does. In a thousand places. None I have ever encountered on a forum could actually win a debate with a well grounded Calvinist in person, with a genuine debate format and debate rules which always have the burden of supporting statements made and arguments made against it. No ignoring allowed. Where logical fallacies don't count and their opponents are skilled in the art of critical thinking and can spot those fallacies a mile away---won't be fooled by them or let them slide. Where one person announces the belief in Calvinism ( and folks it is in all of true Christianity so where does that leave you) of penal substitution, and says it all wrong; is shown what it really is form a Calvinistic site, and the answer to that is "Nobody on the forum quotes from that site as reliable." And considers that to be the final authority on the matter. And continues with his false statements. Would that pass muster as a debate point anywhere with anyone? But all that is irrelevant. The point is to kill Calvinism once and for all. Who cares about the people.

The glee you guys take in castigating beliefs you don't like is deplorable.

You all say you want to debate the issue? And then don't debate, only degrade. All you want is a platform from which you can wreck havoc and create destruction. And like a jihadist no doubt tell yourselves you are serving God. So it's been a blast and so long. @civic @atpollard @dizerner
@Theophilus I only directed this through your post because of the Titanic remark. I haven't really seen you in these debates.
Click to expand...
Once again Arial, put your "money" where your mouth is, call Steve Gregg at 844-484-5737 weekdays from 3 p.m. to 4 p.m. (call early to get on his radio show, like around 2:55 p.m., and tell him you would like to set up a public debate with him. He has debated Calvinists at churches, on the radio, and on campus', etc. many times. He oftentimes will come to an agreed-upon public place near you to debate you. The debate would be video-taped, so later any and all people can see how truthful or not Calvinism is. Are you afraid that you might not be able to defend Calvinism against a skilled debater, who also happens to be one of the most knowledgeable persons I know about Calvinism? But don't let that stop you, since you think you are defending the truth. I already challenged you to do this once, but apparently you aren't up for it, or chose to ignore it.

I notice that you are not immune from spewing out disrespectful remarks toward doctrinal opponents, accusing us of hypocrisy, but then you turn around and do the same yourself. We take "glee in castigating beliefs we don't like, which is deplorable."? I haven't seen "glee" expressed here, when we call Calvinism what it is - a false teaching. Maybe you could point out the "glee" that you are referring to. All we "want is a platform from which we can wreak havoc and create destruction - like a jihadist."? Very untrue and disrespectful.

You truly seem to be a very angry person, which is not a good advertisement for what seems to be your pet doctrine.
 
atpollard said:
because of this … (color coded for easy reference)





(Scripture in RED)
(My words in BLUE)
(Your accusation in GREEN)

So was your ACCUSATION against MY WORDS or SCRIPTURE in the provided quotes from the start of our conversation? [answer = Scripture]. That is why I “claim you don’t believe John 6:44”.
Click to expand...
Why are you dishonestly leaving out my Calvinism reference in your response? Those are dishonest weasel words from you. What I said was in context of what Calvinism claims. We all know what is claimed. Just more circular logic from you.

Also, why are retreating from a line for line response?
 
Rockson said:
Probably people that said it was unsinkable most likely would acknowledge it was sinkable but it depends on what you mean. If you're meaning in the normal way ships function they were right to consider it probably wasn't sinkable, in the sense that they had what we call a fail safe system. It had compartments and it had doors which would separate them if they sprung a leak. If you asked the same people though yah but what if you had a 300 foot gouge along the side of the ship I suppose they would conclude well sure I guess it would sink. If you google fail safe systems on Wikipedia it will give you examples. One is an elevator,
  • An elevator has brakes that are held off brake pads by the tension of the elevator cable. If the cable breaks, tension is lost and the brakes latch on the rails in the shaft, so that the elevator cabin does not fall.
So is it infallible? Perhaps how we normally think of it yes but what about a devastating earthquake, or a tornado big enough to cause a catastrophe ? And that's what happened to the Titanic the fail safe system got torn apart. So back to Calvinism. One can't use the analogy? I would say one can. When they put together that big ship of doctrines not enough time and thought was put in to how it's parts were assembled.
Click to expand...
A titanic size ship of doctrines that sank. They do not float when scrutinized with scripture but they sink. A cistern that holds no water.
 
praise_yeshua said:
Also, why are retreating from a line for line response?
Click to expand...
I never volunterered for a "line for line response". You merely claimed that I was obligated to participate because you wanted one. I have (wait for it, YOU will love this part) ... FREE WILL to refuse your demand and (you will probably launch into another anti-Biblical tirade over this) FALLEN NATURE to be drawn into this unprofitable bunny trail with you.
 
atpollard said:
I never volunterered for a "line for line response". You merely claimed that I was obligated to participate because you wanted one. I have (wait for it, YOU will love this part) ... FREE WILL to refuse your demand and (you will probably launch into another anti-Biblical tirade over this) FALLEN NATURE to be drawn into this unprofitable bunny trail with you.
Click to expand...

That you do. Never said otherwise.
 
civic said:
A titanic size ship of doctrines that sank. They do not float when scrutinized with scripture but they sink. A cistern that holds no water.
Click to expand...
like this? ...

John 6:44: "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up on the last day."
  • "No one can come to me"= [Total Inability]
    • no one who understands; there is no one who seeks God [Romans 3:11]
  • "unless the Father who sent me"= [Unconditional Election]
    • it does not depend on human will or effort but on God who shows mercy [Romans 9:16]
  • "draws him,"= [Irresistible Grace]
    • those he predestined, he also called; and those he called, he also justified; and those he justified, he also glorified. [Romans 8:30]
  • "and I will raise him up on the last day." = [Preservation of the Saints]
    • "I give them eternal life, and they will never perish. No one will snatch them out of my hand." [John 10:28]
RED = Jesus
BLUE = Scripture
BLACK = Reference
 
atpollard said:
like this? ...

John 6:44: "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up on the last day."
  • "No one can come to me"= [Total Inability]
    • no one who understands; there is no one who seeks God [Romans 3:11]
  • "unless the Father who sent me"= [Unconditional Election]
    • it does not depend on human will or effort but on God who shows mercy [Romans 9:16]
  • "draws him,"= [Irresistible Grace]
    • those he predestined, he also called; and those he called, he also justified; and those he justified, he also glorified. [Romans 8:30]
  • "and I will raise him up on the last day." = [Preservation of the Saints]
    • "I give them eternal life, and they will never perish. No one will snatch them out of my hand." [John 10:28]
RED = Jesus
BLUE = Scripture
BLACK = Reference
Click to expand...

Where is the means of "drawing" in your references?
 
atpollard said:
like this? ...

John 6:44: "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up on the last day."
  • "No one can come to me"= [Total Inability]
    • no one who understands; there is no one who seeks God [Romans 3:11]
  • "unless the Father who sent me"= [Unconditional Election]
    • it does not depend on human will or effort but on God who shows mercy [Romans 9:16]
  • "draws him,"= [Irresistible Grace]
    • those he predestined, he also called; and those he called, he also justified; and those he justified, he also glorified. [Romans 8:30]
  • "and I will raise him up on the last day." = [Preservation of the Saints]
    • "I give them eternal life, and they will never perish. No one will snatch them out of my hand." [John 10:28]
RED = Jesus
BLUE = Scripture
BLACK = Reference
Click to expand...
Yes like this John 12:32 - its the same exact word draw in your verse.

" And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw everyone to Myself.”

And this ?

John 3:14-18
Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up,[f] 15 that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him.”

16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.
 
atpollard said:
like this? ...

RED = Jesus
BLUE = Scripture
BLACK = Reference
Click to expand...

Noticing this.... this brings up a very valid issue in these types of discussions.

I've said this for decades. What matters is if something is true or not. It doesn't matter the source.

Are you trying to rank truth here?
 
atpollard said:
Even lowly WIKIPEDIA covers the truth with links to supporting sources.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legends_and_myths_regarding_the_Titanic
Click to expand...

You recognize the inferior nature of wikipedia..... yet assert its relevance here?

In all seriousness, this is an issue here with your lack of "critical thinking".

As I said earlier, we quoted a reference that claimed it was "unsinkable" when they did not know it had already sank. "Critical thinking" would take this into consideration and not "latch on" to a "self described" "lowly" source solely to self serve your position.
 
civic said:
Yes the faith factor is left out with them and when they do the take away the human element of our wills, our faith , our obedience, our repentance which God Tess’s man is his responsibility. It’s synergistic. God saves when we believe.
Click to expand...

I largely agree. I do "believe" :)

There is some confusion about belief. There are varying qualities to belief. Some believe the record God gave of His Son. However, the "belief" necessary is to have enough faith to say "This is for me".
 
praise_yeshua said:
You recognize the inferior nature of wikipedia..... yet assert its relevance here?

In all seriousness, this is an issue here with your lack of "critical thinking".

As I said earlier, we quoted a reference that claimed it was "unsinkable" when they did not know it had already sank. "Critical thinking" would take this into consideration and not "latch on" to a "self described" "lowly" source solely to self serve your position.
Click to expand...
I had a calvinist here attempting to debate me using wiki as a primary source. I told her to quote a Calvinist source that contradicts what I said ( I quoted a dozen different Calvinist theologians and the WCF ) that agreed with me and I get wiki in return. Then I get the old I don't believe that you are misrepresenting me. I said no I'm teaching you what the doctrines of Calvinism actually declare about God and salvation for the elect and damnation of the wicked. Some cannot handle/swallow their own beliefs when confronted with them from their own scholars.
 
civic said:
Yes like this John 12:32 - its the same exact word draw in your verse.

" And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw everyone to Myself.”

And this ?

John 3:14-18
Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up,[f] 15 that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him.”

16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you could explain something to me.

In John 6:44 the Apostle wrote that Jesus said: "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up on the last day."

Yet, from your 'Calvinism got everything wrong' counter-verses, the TRUTH is "Everyone (all men without exception) MUST and WILL come to me, of their own FREE WILL, and those that choose to persevere in their (man-made) faith will be saved on the Last Day"

So did Jesus mis-speak or did John just get it THAT wrong when he wrote it down? How can Jesus words in John 6:44 and the TRUTH be so diametrically opposed that when I believe the words from Jesus lips I am 100% wrong and when you believe the other words from apostolic pens you are 100% correct and the messages are 100% the opposite of each other?

How did John 6:44 (and John 6:65) get something so fundamental, so wrong?​

 
Last edited:
civic said:
you do know in theological circles wiki is not a source that people use a reference to support them since anyone like you or I can edit them on wiki.
Click to expand...
Can you edit the sources they linked to that included the original press releases from before it sailed? My only point was that even going to WIKI would have gotten anyone interested to the truth of pre-sinking quotes (via links, not via WIKI as the source).

People believe the "unsinkable" story because they WANT to believe that everyone claimed the Titanic was unsinkable and don't WANT to look for the truth.

"FREE WILL" and "a God that saves EVERYBODY" is the same way ... people start out WANTING to believe it and reject any verses or secondary sources that contradict their pre-chosen narrative.
 
atpollard said:
Perhaps you could explain something to me.

In John 6:44 the Apostle wrote that Jesus said: "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up on the last day."

Yet, from your 'Calvinism got everything wrong' counter-verses, the TRUTH is "Everyone (all men without exception) MUST and WILL come to me, of their own FREE WILL, and those that choose to persevere in their (man-made) faith will be saved on the Last Day"

So did Jesus mis-speak or did John just get it THAT wrong when he wrote it down? How can Jesus words in John 6:44 and the TRUTH be so diametrically opposed that when I believe the words from Jesus lips I am 100% wrong and when you believe the other words from apostolic pens you are 100% correct and the messages are 100% the opposite of each other?

How did John 6:44 (and John 6:65) get something so fundamental, so wrong?​

Click to expand...
Those that come to Christ in faith have been drawn to Him by the Father. But we cannot isolate a single verse without the rest of Scripture to form a doctrine. You cannot make a verse say more than it says. It does not say all who are drawn come, or all who are drawn will be raised up. Drawing is necessary to be “able” to come. But the “him” that is raised up is not logically connected to just being drawn or just to being “able” to come, but to the one who actually comes. So according to context, what are some of the prerequisites for being raised up at the last day?

Seeing the Son,
Believing in Him,
Having everlasting life,
Being drawn by the Father,
Being able to come to Christ,
Eating Christ’s flesh,
Drinking His blood,

hope this helps !!!
 

Similar threads

civic
Vocabulary and calvinism
Replies
5
Views
60
civic
civic
civic
God is Love- Theology 101
Replies
8
Views
183
Affinity
Affinity
Rockson
Good Samaritan Disproves Calvinism.
Replies
0
Views
60
Rockson
Rockson
civic
Why are Calvinists so mean ?
26 27 28
Replies
556
Views
2K
atpollard
atpollard
Toby
  • Locked
National Bash Calvinism Day
Replies
15
Views
182
Administrator
Administrator
Back
Top Bottom