Calvinist Kitchen...stirring the pot
- Thread starter GraceAndTruth
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
- Status
Just realized that the Trinity might have been a better example to use than the rapture in my response to Chester.
Modalism denies the trinity, and instead says that God is one person who takes on three different roles. So, that when He's the Father, there is no Son, or Holy Spirit, at that time. When He's the Son, there is no Father or Holy Spirit at that time, etc.
Modalism denies the trinity, and instead says that God is one person who takes on three different roles. So, that when He's the Father, there is no Son, or Holy Spirit, at that time. When He's the Son, there is no Father or Holy Spirit at that time, etc.
Just look carefully at what Scripture does say about predestination and you will find a beautiful truth!
If it were left up to us to choose God, we'd all go to hell. Apart from unconditional election and irresistible grace, we'd have no hope. If grace could be resisted - we'd resist it.
Romans 3:10 -18
as it is written:
“None is righteous, no, not one;
no one understands;
no one seeks for God.
All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
no one does good,
not even one.”
“Their throat is an open grave;
they use their tongues to deceive.”
“The venom of asps is under their lips.”
“Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness.”
“Their feet are swift to shed blood;
in their paths are ruin and misery,
and the way of peace they have not known.”
“There is no fear of God before their eyes.”
Romans 3:10 -18
as it is written:
“None is righteous, no, not one;
no one understands;
no one seeks for God.
All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
no one does good,
not even one.”
“Their throat is an open grave;
they use their tongues to deceive.”
“The venom of asps is under their lips.”
“Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness.”
“Their feet are swift to shed blood;
in their paths are ruin and misery,
and the way of peace they have not known.”
“There is no fear of God before their eyes.”
I chose to surrender to the love of Jesus and to be cleansed by His blood. That is why I have a home in Heaven.
Wonderful grace of Jesus. Isn't it glorious to think of our eternal home in the presence of our King? Oh, to see King Jesus!
Amen. All have sinned and come short of the glory of God. That is why Jesus came down and died on the Cross. He died for all. Now all have a choice.
Yep - all have a choice - and except for the grace of God, we still choose to reject Him. Nothing about the natural state of man apart from God has changed after the cross. Just as they would not choose Him before the cross, they will not choose Him now, except that God first calls them to life through faith in the finished work Jesus.
It is my understanding from Scripture that this is only what those "who were born...of God" would do, John 1:12-13, and all this is only due to him and his glory, not mans will from which it did not stem.
Yeah, of course you are right - so I did make a doctrinal statement - OK - now what? LOL!
On the "rapture": everything you say I agree with - My opinion leans toward a rapture, but I do not begin with that or state it as something I believe. The Scriptures need to be our starting point - not a statement like: "I believe in a midtrib rapture, etc."
You mention the "Trinity" doctrine later here: I have no squabbles with the "doctrine of the Trinity" - but I do not post it on my door or quote it when I preach. If I want to speak about the Godhead, I will use the Bible and not church doctrine.
On the 5 Solas - Of course you won't find the list in Scripture - and your question "or that they have no support in the Scriptures"? I won't even go there because the approach is backward. The question assumes starting with the 5 solas and finding evidence for them. Of course you will find "evidence" for them and you will argue it. I much prefer to discuss the Scripture verses instead of trying to defend a doctrinal statement!.
If you write out for me what the 5 solas mean to you, I will likely agree with most of it. But I will likely respond by saying that it is missing key thoughts of Scripture. Our starting point must be the Scriptural text.
The "faith alone" statement is a classic example of this quandary. At its core the emphasis is that we are saved by faith, and not by works. 100% true and I agree. But we are not saved by "faith alone" - in fact a faith alone is a dead faith according to James. Hence I start with Scripture . . . (My view of course!)
LOL! With the "faith alone" I have thrown the baby out with the bath water - and I am not bringing either back in - LOL!
In some settings and places for some people, maybe using that phrase is helpful: but for me where I am it has been detrimental and devastating!
It is an accepted practice and often helpful to do as you did. But don't pick a quote from someone apart to make it say what they did not intend - that will get you in hot water on CC very quickly. I don't know that you have omitted anything: and the "normal" here on CC is that you do not have to and are not necessarily expected to respond to every detail someone might ask. You can just politely respond with an overall response to a longer text. We all know we have other things other than CC in our lives! (except for a few folks around here . . .
) And with that I am out until at least Monday . . .
Really? Apart from the doctrine of "unconditional election" and "irresistable grace" we would have no hope? Pity the people who lived before Calvin came up with those words!
I would say it more like: Apart from God, we have no hope. But better than that - What does the Bible say? (and I know - LOL - "What does the Bible say? is a doctrinal statement!)
But you may keep your TULIP as your starting point. I will start with Scripture!
(not trying to be sarcastic or mean - just trying to get you to see how I think)
Who is now trying to stir the pot by resurrecting this ancient thread? TULIP is what Paul calls "another gospel". BEWARE OF ALL OTHER GOSPELS.
Well PTL! I didn't know that TULIP allowed for that. So it all boils down to God's omniscience and looking ahead into the future to see who will have chosen Him. I am comfortable with that.
I don't like TULIP and I think the results of this doctrinal teaching have been devastating to this country - but I don't think it is another "gospel". It affirms the core belief that salvation is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, and is not of works.
Oyster 67 - When 5 point Calvinism is explained well by a Calvinist it turns out to not be that far from what you and I believe - sad part is it only gets one side of the story -
The real problem is that if you start with the doctrinal statement and follow them to their logical human conclusion it is a real mess!
You can't have it both ways. TULIP is either the true Gospel or it is indeed "another gospel". There cannot be two true Gospels.
Galatians 1:6,7: I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another (Greek - heteros) gospel: Which is not another (Greek - allos); but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
The Galatians had gone to a heteros gospel (another of a different kind). It was not an allos gospel (another of the same kind).
I think TULIP is an allos gospel, not a heteros gospel.
And for myself, I will rejoice over Christ being preached and proclaimed, even if it is with a different slant than I think is best. But if Christ is not preached, then you have a heteros gospel.
I wish we could just drop all these labels and phrases and ask;
"Do All Have A Choice"?
- Status