Posts by Deputy Dog

774

Freedom to Choose God

by UnDisfellowshipped in

come to the wedding.

' for i say to you that god is able to raise up children to abraham from these stones.

Deputy Dog

LT

Would "anti-grace" be better know as condemnation or God's wrath?

D Dog

774

Freedom to Choose God

by UnDisfellowshipped in

come to the wedding.

' for i say to you that god is able to raise up children to abraham from these stones.

Regarding "common grace" I hope you define it the same way I do. I see it as the blessings common to unbelievers and believers alike. I think this would make for a great thread sometime. Common grace vs uncommon grace

D Dog

774

Freedom to Choose God

by UnDisfellowshipped in

come to the wedding.

' for i say to you that god is able to raise up children to abraham from these stones.

Deputy Dog

LT First let me say thank you for the time and effort you have put into this discussion. I just wish you had done this earlier! This thread has caused me to think through my position on these issues, much more than I was prepared to at its start. Let me give you some of my background for this discussion. Until just a few years ago, I held the "four point position". Probably because it was the only one I was exposed to. As I began to share my faith, I found it very hard to defend. This, along with a "Calvinist" friend, helped me to rethink some of these issues. I was then exposed to a debate between Dr. Norman Geisler and Dr. James White. Dr. Geisler, who holds to what he calls (in his book Chosen But Free) "moderate Calvinism" which is more commonly known as "four point Calvinism". The problem, is not so much that he holds a different position, but the way the book characterizes the Reformed Faith as "extreme Calvinism". He goes so far as implying that John Calvin did not teach "Limited Atonement" as we know it. James R. White on the other hand, IMHO, sets the record straight, in his book The Potter's Freedom (A Defense of the Reformation and a Rebuttal of Norman Geisler's Chosen But Free) I say all this because your posts are redefining terms for me which may be leading to some of my confusion. For example: "Hyper Calvinist" to me this is describing something Calvin didn't teach. I know, these labels can be helpful, but, they can complicate things as well. I have to say I don't feel comfortable with the label "Calvinist" let alone what type. I do however believe all five points of Calvinism or TULIP. As far as Infralapsarianism and Supralapsarianism I see good and bad on both sides, so lets leave the doors open for now. One thing I will say, it seems to me that Supralapsarians focus on the Elect, while the Infras focus on man in general. As for the Romans 9 passage

Has it escaped your notice that we were ALL vessels of clay fitted for destruction?

I don't see that in this text.

The analogy of the vessels is to declare the rightness of God's actions, not to make a distinction about the reprobate.

I think this is demonstrated by the fact that we came from the same lump of clay. tolerated with much long-suffering vessels of wrath made fit for destruction I see this as referring to God's common grace being extended to " vessels of wrath" It says the "vessels of mercy", ... "he prepared beforehand". in Christ. Does that make me a Supralapsarian D Dog

774

Freedom to Choose God

by UnDisfellowshipped in

come to the wedding.

' for i say to you that god is able to raise up children to abraham from these stones.

Deputy Dog

LT

This is why we disagree, because it leaves the question open to unbiblical teaching. Like, how the atonement just makes men savable.

This statement is directed more at Undis than yourself D Dog

774

Freedom to Choose God

by UnDisfellowshipped in

come to the wedding.

' for i say to you that god is able to raise up children to abraham from these stones.

Deputy Dog

LT

You are mixing up sublaparianism with Intralaparianism.

Sorry! I think you moved the target

Sublapsarian would be closer to Arminianlapsarian, IMHO
But in all honesty they are four point Calvinists, or Amyraldists.

I'm glad you cleared that up. My next question was going to be: Can I call myself a Calvinist if I just believe 1,2,3 points of TULIP

The bible has far more points than that. Lets not lose sight of the fact that the five points of Calvinism were an apologetic against the five points of Arminius. There are MANY more points, in addition, upoin which Arminians and Calvinists agree.

Agreed

Your partial quoting of that chapter does you no credit

Sorry! My goal was not to gain credit. But,I'm still not sure I see the relevance.

Further, you will find no place in the bible where it is declared that the reprobate are predestined.

Maybe not those words, but, I think these verses carry the same meaning

Romans 9:22 ... vessels of wrath fitted to destruction

John 3:18 ... but he that believeth not is condemned already,

You'll see the phrase "pass over" very clearly in paragraph seven .

If we are " chosen us in him before the foundation of the world" the fact of, the human races condition, must have been determined before the foundation of the world as well. Hence my point about "How God knows the future". I think the phrase "pass over" deals with this question.

More positive for who? The reprobate or the Elect?
Neither. More positive concerning the justice/grace of God.

I thought we agreed that this was never in question and where we should remain silent.

Rom 9:14

What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.

20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it , Why hast thou made me thus? 21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour

D Dog

774

Freedom to Choose God

by UnDisfellowshipped in

come to the wedding.

' for i say to you that god is able to raise up children to abraham from these stones.

Deputy Dog

LT

But in all honesty they are four point Calvinists, or Amyraldists.

The problem is that Calvin (like the bible) teaches 5 points Did you "Infralapsarians" cut these verses out of your bibles or what?

ROM 9:22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: 23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory. EPH 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, 6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved. PRO 16:4 The Lord hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.

For the sake of this discussion it's the difference between stating the God predestined some to reprobation vs staying on equally solid ground, yet more positive, by concentrating on the Predestination of the Elect and "passing over" others.

More positive for who? The reprobate or the Elect?

Personally I think the Westminster Divines were very canny. They neatly sidestepped the issue by clever use of language, yielding place to charity, which is probably what we should do (not that I'm adverse to discussing the subject)

Good lets discuss. IMHO four point Calvinism ("moderate Calvinism") is not Calvinism at all, because it teaches something(Arminianism) Calvin didn't teach. This is why we disagree, because it leaves the question open to unbiblical teaching. Like, how the atonement just makes men savable. It also leaves open the question of how God knows the future. Does God know the future because He predicts it, or because He decrees it? If He predicts it, He has no control over it, but, if He decrees it, He is sovereign over it. D Dog

774

Freedom to Choose God

by UnDisfellowshipped in

come to the wedding.

' for i say to you that god is able to raise up children to abraham from these stones.

Deputy Dog

Infralapsarian Is that like Arminianlapsarian?

774

Freedom to Choose God

by UnDisfellowshipped in

come to the wedding.

' for i say to you that god is able to raise up children to abraham from these stones.

Deputy Dog

LT

Why do you think the confession is worded like that, boys?

To make it more readable?

774

Freedom to Choose God

by UnDisfellowshipped in

come to the wedding.

' for i say to you that god is able to raise up children to abraham from these stones.

Deputy Dog

LT

I'd say that I'm nearer the Infralapsarian perspective than any other.

So your point is... "lapsarian controversy" Could you please elaborate for us (supralapsarian) less educated? D Dog

774

Freedom to Choose God

by UnDisfellowshipped in

come to the wedding.

' for i say to you that god is able to raise up children to abraham from these stones.

Deputy Dog

Fore ordain
FORE ORDA'IN , v.t To ordain or appoint before; to preordain; to predestinate; to predetermine.