"Works Salvation"

[atpollard]

yes he is a good egg.

I have my moments … BOTH ways.

but I think he prefers being called a baptist right @atpollard

“Calvinist” is such a sloppy term (meaning so many different things to different people) that I am occasionally forced to point out that I am a Particular Baptist … so I am pro-TULIP, 100% Sola Scriptura, but just shrug at the writings of John Calvin and the Westminster Confession of Faith … ‘cause we came along in the late 1600’s from people reading the Bible in English and choosing to DO what it SAID. [no baptizin’ ‘dem babies].

 

[atpollard]

atpollard !!
Where you been?
I miss my favorite calvinist !
GG

I need a long break from Christans from time to time.
The arguments never really change and are often less than edifying.
Some sites are more “heretic central” than others, but honest “conversations” are few and far between.
(Just an Internet thing.)

[They probably welcome a break from me, too.]

 

[atpollard]

or let a former calvinist post about calvinism. . wink wink

That is a tough needle to thread honestly.

I was trained in Wesleyan Holiness theology when I converted from atheism. I occasionally try to state what they believe on Calvinist-centric sites when no Arminian will and the Calvinists are mis-stating what I was taught and they believed. However, I am careful to avoid the trap of “they say X, but what they really believe is Y”. If they say X, then we owe them the respect to believe they mean X and allow THEM to clarify X if we have questions about what they meant. Confessions of Faith are good for this since it can be quoted as saying what it says and is more than the opinion of one man.

For “Calvinism”, I am not sure how one could even define one homogeneous thing called Calvinism? Presbyterians and Baptists are worlds apart on so many issues. There is no Church of Calvin to define Calvinism.
[Classic Arminianism vs Wesleyan Arminianism share the same issue on the other side of the debate].

 

[GodsGrace]

I need a long break from Christans from time to time.

Pretty funny A....you're one!
But I know what you mean.

The arguments never really change and are often less than edifying.
Some sites are more “heretic central” than others, but honest “conversations” are few and far between.
(Just an Internet thing.)

[They probably welcome a break from me, too.]

Well A....so far I've never needed a break from you...
but from other Calvinists....
oh yeah!!!

I guess we're all just trying our best....
I've been using the word HERETICAL when it comes to the reformed faith.
Some get bent out of shape.
Do we know what heretical means???
It just means believing in doctrine that no other denomination believes in...
simple.

That's it for now before you need a break from me...
Blessings

 

[GodsGrace]

yes he is a good egg. but I think he prefers being called a baptist right @atpollard

I think Independent Baptist if I remember right.
He uses the 1689 Confession, if I remember.
He's a good guy to spar with...he's never insulted me...
so far!

 

[civic]

I think Independent Baptist if I remember right.
He uses the 1689 Confession, if I remember.
He's a good guy to spar with...he's never insulted me...
so far!

We do a little jib jab once in a while but we keep it respectful

 

[civic]

Pretty funny A....you're one!
But I know what you mean.


Well A....so far I've never needed a break from you...
but from other Calvinists....
oh yeah!!!

I guess we're all just trying our best....
I've been using the word HERETICAL when it comes to the reformed faith.
Some get bent out of shape.
Do we know what heretical means???
It just means believing in doctrine that no other denomination believes in...
simple.

That's it for now before you need a break from me...
Blessings

I'm a former calvinist end left it a few years ago after being one for over 40 years.

 

[GodsGrace]

I'm a former calvinist end left it a few years ago after being one for over 40 years.

This is pretty incredible Civic....I mean about the 40 years.
I just don't understand how anyone could read the NT and come away believing reformed theology....
I believe the theology must be brought to the NT...IOW, eisegesis....
But, alas, we see through what we believe - and so it goes.
Unfortunately I do believe that Calvinism leads some to leave the faith altogether,
so praise God that you came to believe in Him as loving, merciful and just !

 

[civic]

This is pretty incredible Civic....I mean about the 40 years.
I just don't understand how anyone could read the NT and come away believing reformed theology....
I believe the theology must be brought to the NT...IOW, eisegesis....
But, alas, we see through what we believe - and so it goes.
Unfortunately I do believe that Calvinism leads some to leave the faith altogether,
so praise God that you came to believe in Him as loving, merciful and just !

There is a story to all of this and leaving Calvinism was a huge motivator in the Berean forum coming into existence. Several people online from other forums encouraged me to start one. So the @Administrator and I worked together and this is the result. And honestly whether we have 30 members , 300, 3,000 or 30,000 or more we will stay true to our purpose of having a safe place where people of different faiths can talk about their beliefs, defend them without repercussion or intimidation.

 

[Ahar]

This is pretty incredible Civic....I mean about the 40 years.
I just don't understand how anyone could read the NT and come away believing reformed theology....
I believe the theology must be brought to the NT...IOW, eisegesis....
But, alas, we see through what we believe - and so it goes.
Unfortunately I do believe that Calvinism leads some to leave the faith altogether,
so praise God that you came to believe in Him as loving, merciful and just !

Thread 'Where is the love in Calvinism?'

Jul 13, 2023

This is a thread from the old forum. I was told by the administrator that unfortunately they're not able to migrate the old form into the new something about copyright infringement. So I'll just do a workaround and throw the link up here back to that thread. I believe there was some really good posts on it.

In Calvinism... where is the love? | Berean-Apologetics

Unfortunately, Calvinists sometimes seem to have a blind spot for the love of God. Consider this question from The Shorter Catechism, which is an abbreviated version of The Westminster Confession of

berean-apologetics.boards.net

Also Civic posted A thread entitled "Does God love everyone?" It is very good.

Does God love everyone ? | Berean-Apologetics

I was looking at an old thread on another forum I started about love that had over a 1000 responses and I was leaving Calvinism at the time and being attacked by them like a pack of wolves discus

berean-apologetics.boards.net

• Theophilus
• Replies: 39
• Forum: Calvinism vs. Arminianism

 

[atpollard]

I just don't understand how anyone could read the NT and come away believing reformed theology....

We discover that our Bibles have a Book called ROMANS and another called EPHESIANS that talk all about how People choose SIN and God chooses people … and we believed the Word of God.

[Now, if you are talking about the whole baptizing babies … I don’t get that either! ]

 

[Titus]

We discover that our Bibles have a Book called ROMANS and another called EPHESIANS that talk all about how People choose SIN and God chooses people … and we believed the Word of God.

Plenty of examples in the Bible of men that did far more Good than evil.
Where is their inherited sin nature?
Cant be possible if we are born totally wicked

 

[atpollard]

Do we know what heretical means???

There are actually three words that have useful meanings that often get misused as weapons to mean “agree with me” or “disagree with me” rather than their true definitions.

“Orthodox” means “conforming to the traditional beliefs of the Church” [typically meaning that it is a belief not contradicting the early church creeds - Nicene and Athanasian].

“Heterodox” means a belief not found in the early creeds, but not directly contradicted by scripture.

“Heretical” means a belief that contradicts Scripture [typically things like Jesus isn’t really God but is an Angel or a man, or the miracles never really happened.]

Neither CALVINISM nor ARMINIANISM are Heretical (as proven by all the verses shared by both sides). The JW and MORMONS are Heretical teachings since Scripture can be shown to directly contradict them. Paedobaptism (baptizing babies) is actually “Orthodox” (the traditional, historic belief of the church) while Credobaptism (baptizing only professing believers) is actually “Heterodox” (you cannot find a SCRIPTURE that refutes it, even if the early church believed different).

 

[atpollard]

Plenty of examples in the Bible of men that did far more Good than evil.
Where is their inherited sin nature?
Cant be possible if we are born totally wicked

Non sequitur.
The question was “how can anyone read the NT and come away believing reformed theology?”
Nothing you posted refutes my explanation of how someone can read the NT and come away believing reformed theology (Particular Baptist in my specific case).

Does the Bible contain ROMANS? Yes.
Does the Bible contain EPHESIANS? Yes.
Do ROMANS and EPHESIANS teach that people choose sin? Yes.
Do ROMANS and EPHESIANS teach that God chooses people? Yes.

Since the answer to all of those questions is “YES”, my explanation stands.

All you have provided is a reason why someone COULD read the NT and come away believing Arminian theology.
(Which I never argued was impossible).
You simple had to ignore the teachings of ROMANS and EPHESIANS to do so.

 

[Titus]

Does the Bible contain ROMANS? Yes.
Does the Bible contain EPHESIANS? Yes.
Do ROMANS and EPHESIANS teach that people choose sin? Yes.
Do ROMANS and EPHESIANS teach that God chooses people? Yes

Please quote the verses to back up your claim, thanks

 

[Titus]

Non sequitur.
The question was “how can anyone read the NT and come away believing reformed theology?”
Nothing you posted refutes my explanation of how someone can read the NT and come away believing reformed theology (Particular Baptist in my specific case).

Does the Bible contain ROMANS? Yes.
Does the Bible contain EPHESIANS? Yes.
Do ROMANS and EPHESIANS teach that people choose sin? Yes.
Do ROMANS and EPHESIANS teach that God chooses people? Yes.

Since the answer to all of those questions is “YES”, my explanation stands.

All you have provided is a reason why someone COULD read the NT and come away believing Arminian theology.
(Which I never argued was impossible).
You simple had to ignore the teachings of ROMANS and EPHESIANS to do so.

Non sequitur.
The question was “how can anyone read the NT and come away believing reformed theology?”
Nothing you posted refutes my explanation of how someone can read the NT and come away believing reformed theology (Particular Baptist in my specific case).

Does the Bible contain ROMANS? Yes.
Does the Bible contain EPHESIANS? Yes.
Do ROMANS and EPHESIANS teach that people choose sin? Yes.
Do ROMANS and EPHESIANS teach that God chooses people? Yes.

Since the answer to all of those questions is “YES”, my explanation stands.

All you have provided is a reason why someone COULD read the NT and come away believing Arminian theology.
(Which I never argued was impossible).
You simple had to ignore the teachings of ROMANS and EPHESIANS to do so.

Choosing to sin is not the same as being born with a nature that only desires sin.
Since there are Bible examples of people who chose to do more good than evil.
Totally depraved nature cannot be true.

 

[Dizerner]

Choosing to sin is not the same as being born with a nature that only desires sin.
Since there are Bible examples of people who chose to do more good than evil.
Totally depraved nature cannot be true.

The righteousness of the saints in Scripture was a gift through faith in grace, not inherent self-merit.

Their deeds were sanctified by faith in the Blood of Jesus, and thus righteousness was imputed rather than earned.

Please read through this full and complete defense of original sin:

Thread 'FOUR reasons I believe in the sinful nature. (original sin/ancestral sin/total depravity)'

Aug 17, 2023

PREFACE.

For those whom I have come across, who deny that humans have a sinful nature, that is a nature that is incapable of performing a righteously meritorious thought or action without supernatural undeserved grace from God, it all seems to stem back to the idea that, if God allows such a thing, it makes people victims instead of criminals, since no one can help sinning. And underneath that is the appeal to the idea that we can improve ourselves and polish up our genuinely good and pure nature underneath, a kind of self-esteem and self-improvement program to discover the...

• Dizerner
• Replies: 60
• Forum: Original Sin

 

[Titus]

The righteousness of the saints in Scripture was a gift through faith in grace, not inherent self-merit.

Their deeds were sanctified by faith in the Blood of Jesus, and thus righteousness was imputed rather than earned.

Please read through this full and complete defense of original sin

Good, we agree nothing can be merited/earned.
You applied the wrong belief system to me.

We are born sinless and upright just like Adam.

We sin just t like Adam.

What kind of nature did Adam have when he sinned against God in the garden of eden?

 

[Dizerner]

Good, we agree nothing can be merited/earned.

Okay, that's good, because if you believe man is born sinless, by definition, you believe he can merit salvation. That's just definitional there.

You seem to have some kind of disconnect in your thinking holding two contradictory positions.

You applied the wrong belief system to me.

I didn't apply anything to you, I stated a fact that applies to me, you, and every person that ever lives.

We are born sinless and upright just like Adam.

We sin just t like Adam.

What kind of nature did Adam have when he sinned against God in the garden of eden?

Scripture says we were in Adam when he sinned, and that is why all die in Adam, because all derive from his fallen nature after sinning.

Before their first sin, you will have billions of sinless people meriting heaven under this system, and yet you claimed that could not be "applied" to you—which seems strange and inconsistent.

What Adam had is not what I have at all—the glory, the beauty, the perfection, I was not born into that, so why compare us.

 

[Jim]

The righteousness of the saints in Scripture was a gift through faith in grace, not inherent self-merit.

Their deeds were sanctified by faith in the Blood of Jesus, and thus righteousness was imputed rather than earned.

Please read through this full and complete defense of original sin:

Thread 'FOUR reasons I believe in the sinful nature. (original sin/ancestral sin/total depravity)'

Aug 17, 2023

PREFACE.

For those whom I have come across, who deny that humans have a sinful nature, that is a nature that is incapable of performing a righteously meritorious thought or action without supernatural undeserved grace from God, it all seems to stem back to the idea that, if God allows such a thing, it makes people victims instead of criminals, since no one can help sinning. And underneath that is the appeal to the idea that we can improve ourselves and polish up our genuinely good and pure nature underneath, a kind of self-esteem and self-improvement program to discover the...

• Dizerner
• Replies: 60
• Forum: Original Sin

That entire post was largely absent of any real scriptural references and support. I didn't get much passed the Preface. It is based almost entirely on some false ideas and beliefs. One is your definition of "sinful nature" which you stated as "a nature that is incapable of performing a righteously meritorious thought or action without supernatural undeserved grace from God". First, the phrase "sinful nature" is not found in scripture. Second, whether the concept of "sinful nature" even exists in scripture is debatable. Third, the idea that the human being is incapable of performing any righteously meritorious thought or action without the supernatural underserved grace from God is absolutely absurd. There is no doubt that no one, except Jesus Christ, has lived a life in which absolutely every thought and action was righteously meritorious. But that does not mean that every thought and action of every other human being was not righteously meritorious. The truth is that even if one had lived an entire life in which every thought and action, except one, was righteously meritorious he would have failed to meet God's requirement for receiving an eternal life with Him in heaven. And that is why it was necessary for God's underserved grace given through the sacrificial death of Jesus on the cross.

And that has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that Adam disobeyed God and ate the forbidden fruit from tree of the knowledge of good and evil. It only has to do with the fact that each and every human being has disobeyed God and has eaten of his own "forbidden fruit" in life.