Spaghetti on the Wall

[Theo1689]

??"Countin' spaghetti on the wall,
that don't bother me at all.
Apologetics until dawn,
with a list of 101..."??

Someone recently posted a list of "100 verses which contradict Calvinism". Of course, there aren't any, and it's so insulting for anti-Calvinists to ASSUME that we've never read the Bible, and that we aren't aware of these verses. But I'm well aware of the tactic.

Anti-Calvinists want to "poison the well" to prevent people from embracing Calvinism. So they post "100 verses". Many won't even bother to go through them, they'll just assume they're valid, and conclude, "Well, if there's so many problems, I guess I shouldn't believe Calvinism". And then it's supposed to dissuade Calvinists from responding to them, out of sheer number. And even if we address 10 or 20, or 50, the response is always going to be, "but you didn't address them ALL, and the rest of them refute Calvinism".

It's like throwing spaghetti at the wall, hoping in vain that something will stick.
But it never does.

I had a similar experience with atheists when I first became a Christian 30 years ago. They would take lists of alleged "Bible Contradictions" from sources such as Gleason Archer's book of Bible "difficulties" and their reconciliations. But no matter how many you reconciled, they didn't care, they'd simply throw more "contradictions" at us. Like anti-Calvinists, atheists weren't interested in truth. And like anti-Calvinists, they took the "lazy" route of copying-and-pasting lists and lists, taking them a few seconds, but demanding Christians invest SIGNIFICANT amounts of time to respond, only to have their responses ignored.

I've skimmed through the list of alleged "refutations of Calvinism", and many of them are passages which have been addressed and refuted here already, many times (Matt. 23:37, 2 Pet. 3:9, etc.), and others are arguments so weak they can be summarily dismissed on their face.

And a more HONEST presentation would be, "A list of verses which our Arminian interpretation contradicts the Calvinist inerpretation". But as usual, Arminians generally assume they have perfect understanding of Scripture, and that Scripture can't mean anything other than THEIR personal interpretation.

Here we begin the "100 Reasons":

1 in John 15:25, Jesus said they hated me without a cause. If calvinism is true, that God created some men in order to damn them to hell and he didn’t die for them, and he delights in sending them to hell and he hates them. And then it seems like they do have a cause for hating God.Indeed, it would not make sense if they did not hate him.

His only argument is, "it would not make sense" to him.
That's an opinion, not an "argument".

2. in Luke 10:25-37, Jesus told the story of the Good Samaritan, the priest and the Levi in that story passed by a man who had been beaten and left half dead. The purpose of Jesus’ story was to show that their reaction or their response, was wrong, and the Samaritans response was right in that he had compassion on the man and he helped him. If calvinism is true, then God is best represented in Jesus’ parable by the priest and the Levi, for he also has passed by billions of people that he could help.

In this parable, there is no type of Christ except for perhaps the innkeeper. The purpose of the parable is not to tell us about God, it's to tell us how sinners are to love our neighbour. To identify Christ with the Priest or the Levite is completely inappropriate, and frankly childish. God is perfectly just in "passing over" sinners, since He is their Creator. We are not just in passing by those in need, as we were commanded to care for each other.

3, the Bible teaches that even a lost man has a God given conscience. There is, in some sense a law written upon the heart of man. If God predestined some men to hell without giving them a chance to get saved, even a lost man’s conscience, recoils and horror at the unfairness. And lack of compassion of God.

This is nothing but assumption and rationalization (as demonstrated by the lack of Scripture citations). God doesn't "owe" ANYONE a "chance" to get saved. Where does the Bible teach, "recoils and [sic] horror"? The poster is simply (and fallaciously) projecting his OWN view of God onto the Bible, and saying that his OWN view contradicts Calvinism. So what?

4, 2 Peter 3:9 says that God is not willing, that any should perish. If calvinism is true, then God is willing for many to perish and he is actually desirous for them to do so.

This has been addressed MANY times in this forum. 2 Pet. 3 is not a "universal" context, v.9 is referring to the SPECIFIC group of "beloved" (v.8) and "us-ward" (v.9, KJV).

5, Paul said in 1 Corinthians 9:16 woe is under me. If I preach not the gospel. If calvinism is true, then all preaching in essence is in vain. It wouldn’t make any difference whether or not he preached the Gospel.

This criticism is non-sensical. God commands us to preach the gospel, and so Calvinists preach the gospel. God doesn't need us to preach the gospel, if we don't, then He will ensure the elect hear the gospel from someone else. But that doesn't give us any "right" to disobey God's commands. And we DELIGHT in preaching the gospel, since it glorifies God.

6 Romans 9:3, Paul said, for I could wish that myself were a cursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen, according to the flesh, Romans 10:1, he said, brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is that they might be saved. Well, if calvinism is true, than Paul was working against God’s will and desiring something that was against God’s will.

Yeah? So?
What's your point?
Are you familiar with Jesus' prayer, "Yet not my will, but thy will be done"?

7, the terms total depravity, unconditional election limited atonement, irresistible grace and perseverance of the saints are not found anywhere in the Bible.

<Chuckle>
Neither is the term, "Trinity".
Oops!
Next!

8, Romans 2:11 says, there is no respect of persons with God.If calvinism is true, then there is an incredible respect of persons with God. Acts 10:34,35 Peter opened his mouth and said of a truth, I perceive that God is no respecter of persons, but in every nation, he that feareth him and work with righteousness is accepted with him. What greater respect a persons could there be then for God to choose as some men to go to heaven and some men to go to hell.

God being a "respecter of persons" means that He chooses people "with respect to" something they are, or something they've done. Like someone wanting to date the mayor's daughter, or someone having a penchant for red-heads, or choosing based on men having "faith".

Since God chose the elect from before the foundation of the world, not based on anything they'd done, good or bad, Calvinism does not have a God who is "a respecter of persons".

9, if calvinism is true, Paul didn’t need to persuade men, nor could he have if he had wanted to. 2 Corinthians 5:11, Paul said, knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men Acts 19:4, we read this, and he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks. Acts 19:8 says, for him mightily convinced the Jews and that publicly showing by the scriptures that Jesus was Christ.

I guess you're not aware of the teaching of 1 Cor. 3:

"I planted,
Apollos watered,
But God gives the growth."

Our job is to preach the gospel to everyone.
God's job is to regenerate His elect.

Our job is to spread the seed to all the soils.
God's job is to prepare the good soil so that the seed will fluorish.

10, if faith is a gift as calvinism teaches, then why did Jesus respond as he did to faith or to lack of faith? Luke 7:9, and responds to the Centurion says, when Jesus heard these things, he marveled at him and turned about and said unto the people that followed him. I say unto you, I have not found so great faith. No, not in Israel. Mark 6:6, Jesus was in Nazareth. It says that he marveled because of their unbelief. What if faith comes from Jesus, comes from the Lord to begin with. Why would he marveled by anybody’s faith or lack of faith? Ephesians 2:8 is teaching that salvation is a gift, not that faith is a gift.

Faith IS a gift as the BIBLE teaches (Eph. 2:8, Phil. 1:29, Rom. 12:3, 2 Pet. 1:1, 1 Cor. 4:7, etc. etc.)

 

[Theo1689]

11, if calvinism is true, seemingly clear, straightforward passages have to be completely reworked with added words, phrases, and meanings in order to make the doctrine fit.

John 3:16, for God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life. The meaning of that seems clear. Romans 10,:13, for whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved, the meaning of that seems clear, Romans 5:6, for when we were yet without strength in due time, Christ died for the ungodly. The meaning of that seems clear. Calvinism has to add phrases and change the meaning of a clear path of clear passages of scripture.

Regular posters know that "world" and "all men" have been debate to death. "World" NEVER means "every single individual" without exception. We will seemingly never agree, but Calvinists have no problem with John 3:16, or any other verse in Scripture.

Again, Calvinism is not in conflict with the Bible itself, it is only in conflict with some men's INTERPRETATION of the Bible.

Not sure what the problem is with Rom. 10:13, Calvinists don't have a problem with it.

As for Rom. 5:6, we agree that Christ died for the ungodly. What the verse DOESN'T say is that Christ died for "all" of the ungodly.

12, if calvinism is true than soul winning accomplishes nothing. Proverbs 11:30 says, the fruit of the righteous is the tree of life and he that when his souls is wise, why? What difference could it possibly make? Then Proverbs 12:3, and they’d be wise shine as the brightness of the firmament and they the turn. Many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever. That’s not possible if Calvin, it’s not possible to do. If calvinism is correct.

Simply making an unsubstantiated claim is not a valid argument.

13, Luke 15:10, Jesus said, likewise. I say, do. There is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repented. Why would that be? It’s all predestined anyway. Besides, if God gets just as much glory and just as much pleasure in sending men to hell as in having people go to heaven, then really there’s nothing to rejoice about.

These opinions are nonsensical and baseless, and none of them address the actual DOCTRINES of Calvinism, nor do they refute the scores of passages in the Bible which form the BASIS for Calvinism.

14, someone 45:9, it says, the Lord is good to all and his tender mercies are overall his works. How can he be good and bestowing tender mercies on people that he doesn’t want to save and that he didn’t die for and that he desires to send a hell.

No valid citation.
Stupid question.
Salvation is not the only "tender mercy" God bestows.
So this criticism is bankrupt as well.

15, Matthew 25:41 tells us that a place of everlasting fire was prepared for the devil and his angels God created hell for the devil and his angels and he takes no pleasure in casting man in there. If calvinism is correct, then God created man for Hell and created hell for man and eagerly awaits the chance to cast many.

I'm sure judges take no pleasure in giving murderers the death penalty.
They don't do it for "pleasure".
They do it for JUSTICE.
Same with God.

16, if calvinism is true and everything was predestined in eternity past, then all of light is an essence of a puppet show and we are forced to act out the script. There’s nothing you can do about it. There’s no way you can change it.

Nothing Biblical about this "criticism", only an opinion that the poster doesn't like what the Bible teaches.

17, first John 4:16 says that God is love. If calvinism is true, then that verse is not true in in regards to the majority of the world, if calvinism is true than man is more loving than God.

False on many counts.
God does show love to everyone (sending rain on the just and unjust).
He just doesn't give Salvific love to everyone, nor is He obligated to.
As for God's love, I would argue that the DEPTH of God's love for only ONE redeemed sinner is INFINITELY greater than man's imperfect and deficient love for all mankind.

18, the foundation of the doctrine of calvinism was set out, was set by a Catholic.

I wasn't aware that Jesus and Paul were "Catholic".
Because THEY are the "foundation of the doctrine of [C]alvinism".

That Catholic was Augustine.Laurance Vance rights concern Augustine.

Laurence Vance, huh?
So you're simply regurgitating worthless talking points from other anti-Calvinists?

He believed in Napa, systolic succession from Peter as one of the marks of the true church. Taught that Mary was sinless, promoted her worship. He was the first who defined the so called sacraments as a visible sign of invisible grace. The memorial of the Lord’s supper became that of the spiritual presence of Christ, body and blood to August, and the only true church was the Catholic church right in against the Dionysus. He said, the Catholic Church alone is the body of Christ outside this body, the Holy Spirit given life to no one. He is not a partaker of divine love. Who is the enemy of humanity. Therefore, they have not the holy ghost who are outside the church. Augustine said, the only way he could know the truth was what the Catholic church proclaimed to him.

Yes, Augustine was Catholic. So what?
You really didn't know that?
This is the logical fallacy of "guilt by association".

19, the doctrine of calvinism was eventually firmly established by the man whose, whose name it bears, John Calvin.Calvin was a heretic and a man who persecuted and killed those who dared to disagree with him again. Lawrence Vance, a talks about much of his teaching being recognized today in Roman Catholicism as Calvin writes this in his institutes, I believe in the holy Catholic Church, winds flow perpetual remission of sins and full restoration to eternal life, but as it is now our purpose to discourse of the visible church, let us learn from her single title of mother how useful Ne, how necessary the knowledge of her is, since there is no other means of entering into life unless she conceive us in the womb and give us birth, unless she nervous us at her breasts and in short keep us under her charge and government until divested a mortal flesh. We become like the angels. Moreover, beyond the Pale of the church, no forgiveness of sins, no salvation can be hoped for.

As Isaiah and Joel testify, hence the abandonment of the church is always fatal. That’s what Calvin wrote in his institutes. Now when he refers to the holy Catholic church, he does not mean the Roman Catholic Church. There he’s referring to the church universal. The word Catholic conveyed that idea, but nowhere in the scriptures is the church called the mother church or credited with giving us a birth that in eternal life she’s not the means of us enter into life or the means of forgiveness of sins. John Calvin has just simply reflecting the the Catholic doctrine that he was raised with, and even after he left the church, he still embraced many of those doctrines and he persecuted those that stood against him even believing it was okay to sentence them to death. He believed that it was okay to take their lives because they disagreed with him.

Blah blah blah blah blah...
Nothing here refutes Calvinism.

20, if calvinism is true, then there would be no point in God hardening any man’s heart in this world. All men’s hearts are already hopelessly hard, and yet we read in the Bible where God hardened many men’s hearts,

And we read many anti-Calvinists DENY that God hardened any hearts, and that man instead used his imaginary "free will" to harden their OWN hearts.

Why do you ASSUME that man's heart was not hardened by God in the first place?
Sheesh.

 

[Theo1689]

21, Acts 17:30. The Bible says, God commandeth all men everywhere to repent. If calvinism is true, then God is commanding all men everywhere to do something that he is deliberately keeping them from being able to do. And by the way, all men, everywhere means all men everywhere. That’s pretty clear.

It is agreed that everyone is commanded to repent.
That is a moral obligation, for all have sinned.
Whether they are capable of doing so or not is completely IRRELEVANT to their moral obligation.

That's like saying to a pyromaniac, "You can't help yourself, so it's okay for you to keep setting fires."
Ridiculous.

22, Psalm 10:4, the wicked through the pride of his countenance will not seek after God. God is not in all his thoughts. The Bible says, man won’t come to God because he doesn’t want to. Calvinism says it’s because he is not one of the elect and he is unable to.

The two reasons are NOT mutually exclusive.
Calvinism AGREES that man doesn't want to.
No problem there.

23. Calvinism teaches that man does not have a will.

This is completely false.
Calvinism most certainly teaches that man DOES have a will.
But it is enslaved in sin (John 8:34, Rom. 6:16-18).

The Bible clearly teaches that man does have a whale.

Well, that's not fair!
I don't have a whale!
Where do I sign up to get one?

All through the pages of scripture we read that man has a will in Acts 3:23, we read these words and it’s come to pass that every soul which will not hear, that shall be destroyed from among the people. Every soul which will not here will not cannot back one five. Behold he among the heathen in regard and wonder marvelously for I will work a work in your days which he will not believe, though it be told, do not that they cannot. They will not. The Lord established freewill offerings that were to be offered according to each man’s will. The Bible teaches that man has the will and throughout his life he exercises in the book of proverbs is an entire book dealing with the choices a man makes with the will that he has.

This entire rant was based on the false claim that Calvinism teaches that man doesn't have a will.
Of course, you never quoted any Calvinist denying man has a will, because that is NOT what we believe or teach.

24 calvinism teaches that God created sin and that God causes mankind to sin. James1:13, let no man say, when he is tempted, I am tempted of God. For God cannot be tempted with evil. Neither the at handyman, but every man is tempted when he is drawn away of his own lust and enticed. God is not the cause of our sin. We are so a Psalm 81:12, so I gave them up unto their own hearts less and they walk in their own counsels.

None of this shows Calvinism false.
We agree that God doesn't tempt anyone.
He has no NEED to.
Once again, Calvinists believe EVERY verse of Scripture, so there is no "gotcha!" verse that is going to magically cause Calvinism to come crumbling down.

25, the Bible teaches that sin is rebellion against God. If calvinism is correct, that God predestined or fore ordained sin that it could not be rebellion against God. Rather it is the fulfilling of his will. Sin would not be as turning to our own ways. Rather it would be us following the way that God ordained and we’re one fourth of the way through.

That is not a valid conclusion. It is still rebellion against God.
When Joseph's brothers were selling him into slavery, they weren't thinking, "Yay! We're doing God's work!" When the Jews and Romans were crucifying Jesus, they weren't thinking, "Yay! We're doing God's work".

26 Ezekial 33:8 When I say unto the wicked, oh wicked men now, that does not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity, but his blood will I require at dine hand. If calvinism is true, then it doesn’t make any difference whether you say anything or not.

And?
I'm still waiting for a valid criticism...

27 is eco 33, 11, slander them as I live, says the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live turn you, turn you from evil ways for why will you die if calvinism is true than this verse is not, and God takes great pleasure in the death of the wicked.

Sorry, but you simply don't understand Calvinism.
Calvinism does NOT teach that God "takes pleasure" in the death of the wicked.

28 of calvinism is true and then you’ll learn, excuse me, Jonah did not understand it or he would have known that it didn’t make any difference whether or not he went to Nineveh.Instead, we read that he didn’t want to go. He didn’t want the ninevites to hear the message that he was required to give. He didn’t want them to respond to the message and be forgiven. Jonah 4:2 , he prayed unto the Lord and said, I praise thee. O Lord was not this my sane when I was yet in my country. Therefore, I fled before and to tarshish for I knew that thou art a gracious God and merciful, slow to anger and of great kindness and repented of the evil Jonah did not want to go to Nineveh. He did not want them to hear the message because he knew if they heard the message, they might respond to the message and God would forgive them. If it’s all preordained and everybody that’s the elect will go to heaven and everybody non-elected will go to hell.It didn’t make any difference whether Jonah went. There were not a reason.

Over and over again, you're bankrupt criticisms are based on nothing but your worthless opinion that "if everything is already determined, and we can't change it, then nothing makes sense".

Well, I'm sorry if YOU don't understand it, but that doesn't make Calvinism false.
Calvinism is not to be tested by YOUR personal opinion.
It is to be tested by SCRIPTURE.
And it passes with flying colours.

29, Psalm 33:5 tells us the earth is full of the goodness of the Lord. And Psalm 1:45, verse 21 says, let all flesh bless his holy name for ever and ever. Why should they? If God wants to send them to hell.

We should bless his Holy name for ever because He is our Creator, and selfishness and narcissism are not Christian virtues.

30, God created man for his glory and for his fellowship as John Cross rights. Suppose you met someone who showed real love for you going out of his way to do special things for you, telling you that they loved you and then you found out that they had no choice. They were programmed to quote unquote be loving well, it would be a terrible disappointment if it all seems so artificial, so meaningless, so empty, and it would be man was given a choice. Having this choice defined man as a human being to eat or to not to eat, to disobey or or, or to not disobey, to love or not love men was not a robot. Man was able to love by his own free choice, without which love is not love.

Calvinism doesn't teach that we are "robots".
How about addressing what we ACTUALLY believe?

 

[Theo1689]

31, Luke 5:31-32 Jesus answering said unto them, they that are whole need not a physician, but they that are sick. I came not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance. Jesus is saying that sick people need a physician. Jesus is saying that sinners need a savior. If calvinism is true, then Jesus was acknowledging what centers need even while being unwilling to meet that need.

You didn't even offer a criticism here. But I'll try to help you out. Jesus is saying that in order be saved, you need to REALIZE that you're a sinner. You have to ADMIT that you're a sinner. The Pharisees were sinners, but they weren't willing to admit it. They considered themselves "righteous". And if you think you're righteous, then you don't think you need a Saviour.

32 John 5:39-40 Jesus said, search the scriptures for in them you think that you have eternal life and they are they which testify of me and you will not come to me that you might have life. Calvinism says they can not come. Jesus says they will not come.

Well, guess what, Sherlock?
If you cannot come, then by necessity you WILL not come.
So no "contradiction" here.

33, Hebrews 11:7.By faith Noah being warned of God of things not seen as yet moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house by the which he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith. How could Noah’s faith have condemned the world, condemned those who did not have faith if they could not have faith as calvinism claims, and now we’re one third way through.

Again, your criticism makes absolutely no sense. But one can't have faith, then by necessity they WILL NOT have faith.
So no "contradiction" here.

34, Acts 1:8, but you shall receive power after the Holy Ghost has come upon you and ye shall be witnesses unto me, both in Jerusalem and in all Judea and in Sumeria and under the outermost part of the earth. In Luke Twenty four, Jesus tells them to wait for that power before going forth to witness. If grace is irresistible as calvinism claims, then this would be unnecessary.

Again, your "criticism" makes absolutely no sense.

35. 1 Corinthians 15:34, the Bible says, awake to righteousness and sin, not for some have not the knowledge of God.I speak this to your shame. What difference does it make if the elect will make it and the non elect won’t

I'm not sure why you think, "what difference does it make?" is a valid criticism.
It's not.

36, 1 Corinthians 9:22 Paul said to the week became as weak that I might gain the week I am made all things to all men that I might by all means save some.1Corinthians 10:33, he said, even as I please all men and all things not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many that they may be saved. If calvinism is true, then Paul was wasting his time and his efforts were pointless.

Simply CLAIMING that "Paul was wasting his time and his efforts were pointless" doesn't make it so. It only shows that you value your opinion more than Scripture.

37, Predestination is never mentioned in connection with eternal damnation or with salvation. It is in regards to being conformed to the image of Christ and it is never causative.

A bunch of unsubstantiated claims.
I would direct you to Rom. 9.
You have now been refuted.
Have a nice day!

38 in reference to the time of tribulation and those who have rejected the gospel.2 Thessalonians 2:11 says, for this cause God, will send them a strong delusion that they should believe ally, that they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. This is totally unnecessary of tulip is so there are their minds are already blinded and they don’t. Uh, they couldn’t have responded anyway.

Another bankrupt argument.
Whether or not you personally think TULIP is "unnecessary", the Bible still teaches it, so we will still believe it.

39. Isaiah 53:6 says all we like sheep have gone astray. We have turned everyone to his own way and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all. If limited atonement is true, then we find that the first all means all, but the second all doesn’t mean all. That’s the only way we can make the doctrine fit.

Nope.
This passage is about "we" and "us" (that would be the elect.
The reason "all" is there is because it is "all" of "us", "us all".
You can't simply look at "all", and then IGNORE the "we", to try to make it universal when it's not.

40, Matthew 23:37, Jesus said, oh, Jerusalem, Jerusalem you that kills the prophets and stone is sandwiches send under the.How often would I have gathered the children together even as a hen gathers her chickens under her wings? And he would not. If calvinism is true, then Jesus can’t really mean this.

Jesus was trying to gather the Jews ("thy children"), but the PHARISEES "would not". One group was interfering with Jesus gathering a DIFFERENT group.

 

[Theo1689]

41, if calvinism is true, then the Bible is filled with portrayals of God that really only pretending to care. Romans 10:21, but to Israell is safe all day long, I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people. God was stretching forth his hands with no desire that they come to him. If calvinism is true.

"Pretending to care"?
You offer no evidence for this accusation.

42, if calvinism is true, then why didn’t Jeremiah weep? It was all God’s perfect will and for his pleasure and glory. One way.

Are you asking why Jeremiah DID weep?
I'm sure there are plenty of reasons.
Bad things happen to us.
It makes us weep.

43 if calvinism is true than in Isaiah 1:18. God is asking men to do what he cannot do. Come now and let us reason together says the Lord, though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow.Though they be red like Crimson, they shall be as wool. Number

Why is that a problem?
God asked Israel to do what THEY could not do, namely obey the Mosaic Law (Rom. 3:19-20).

Besides, where does it say that they "can't reason together"?

44, as calvinism is true, then God commands us to love our neighbor, but he doesn’t.

Well.. Two points.
First of all, God DOES love everyone. He simply doesn't save everyone.
Second of all, God is not a man, and is not obligated to the same rules you are.
Just like when parents put their kid to bed at 8:00, they aren't obligated to the same bedtime.

45, Jude 1:22, and of some have compassion making a difference. If calvinism is true, nothing you do makes a difference. It’s all been prearranged.

Your criticism is again nonsensical.
Just because you PERSONALLY don't like the idea that everything is "prearranged", doesn't make it false.

46. If calvinism is true, then there’s no sense in praying. Listen to these calvinists, JamesPiper. We know that God has predestinated all things that happen. He worked with all things after the counsel of his own will. It is difficult to reconcile prayer and the unchanging will of God. David West prayer does not change things, nor does prayer change God or his mind, Joseph Wilson. No Man can believe in the glory of biblical doctrine of absolute predestination and believe that prayer changes things. The two are incompatible. They do not go together if one is true, the other is false. Since since predestination is true, it follows as night follows day that prayer does not change things well. That’s a blessed way to live.

Who said prayer is to "change things"?
Do you think God is simply our slave, and that we can "control" what He does, by Him working things according to "majority prayer"?

Frankly, if Calvinism is FALSE, then there's no sense in praying. Why pray for God to save "Fred", if God won't interfere with Fred's "free will"?

47. If calvinism is true, then Jesus was wasting his breath in Gesemane and an all the other occasions that he prayed, unless he needed change for Dan Phillips tells us another calvinists what God has predestinated to be always will come to pass us. He has purposed and all the praying. One can muster will not change that. No prayer does not change things, however, it does change us.So Jesus must’ve needed changed.

Yeah, you already used the "prayer is pointless" argument. Are you running out of arguments?

48, the apostles and the others told people that Christ died for them. If calvinism is true, they couldn’t honestly say that for they wouldn’t know for sure.

Nope. They never told unbelievers that Christ died for them. I guess that's why you failed to provide any citations, right?

49, Hebrews 2:15 tells us that Jesus came to deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. Well, if calvinism is true, then you can’t know until and unless you persevere until the end. And so we must still fear death because we don’t know what awaits us on the other side, we don’t know whether we’re going to go to heaven or hell.

I'm not sure why you think this is a valid criticism.
Non-Calvinists would have the same issue.
Besides, we are told to make our calling and election sure, and the Holy Spirit has been given to us as a guarantee.

50, Luke 2:10-11, we read the Angel said unto them, under the shepherds, fear not for behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people for unto you is born this day in the city of David, a savior, which is Christ the Lord. Well, if calvinism is true, then that’s good tidings for some people. But some very bad news for most, it was not good tidings of great joy to all people.

"All people" here doesn't mean "all individuals", it means "all nations".
Salvation is not limited to the nation of Israel, it will be that people from ALL nations, not just Jews, will be saved.

 

[Theo1689]

51. If calvinism is true, why does Jesus instructed us to pray that God’s will would be done on earth as it is in heaven that couldn’t possibly make any difference?

To conform our will to His own.

52, if calvinism is true than God doesn’t need to blind man’s eyes.2Corinthians 4:4, in whom the God of this world has blinded the minds of them which believe not less, the light of the Glorious Gospel of Christ who is the image of God should shine unto them. Satan doesn’t need to do that.

Well, for starters, there's no mention of "Satan" in 2 Cor. 4:4.
And God is the CAUSE of our eyes being blinded.
And truth be told, this is the same lame criticism as the "hardened heart" criticism.
You're on reruns.
Do better.

53 of the second chapter of the Bible, God has given man a choice in the last chapter of the Bible, God has given man a choice all in between the second chapter and the last chapter. God does the same. What sense does that make if man does not have the ability to choose?

Calvinism doesn't teach that don't have the ability to choose.

54, James 1:21. Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness. Receive with meekness the engrafted word which is able to save your souls. Man is incapable of doing that. If calvinism is true.

You haven't demonstrated that.

55, and Jesus finished up a parable in Luke 14 by saying this, the servant said, Lord, it has done is now as commanded, and yet there is room. The Lord said Unto The servant, go out into the highways and hedges and compel them to come in that my house may be filled for I say unto you that none of those which were bidden, she’ll taste of my supper. This cow. This parable makes no sense if calvinism is true.

It makes perfect sense.
But since you refuse to elaborate, I guess we'll have to leave it there.

56, and the first part of the parable, we find many rejecting the invitation, rejecting the gracious offer extended to them. They were invited. The host wanted them there. They resisted his grace and they went against his will against this.Again, this makes no sense if calvinism is true.

There is no mention of "invitation" or "gracious offer".
I believe the KJV uses the term "bidden".
The underlying Greek is "kaleo", which means "call".

When you playing in the street, and your mom "called" you to come in for dinner, was that an "invitation", or were you expect to obey?

57. Matthew 9:36, but when he that is Jesus saw the multitudes. He was moved with compassion on them because they fainted and were scattered abroad as sheep. Having no shepherd then set the end to his disciples. The harvest truly is plenteous, but the laborers are few. Pray Ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he will send forth laborers into his harvest. Jesus was moved with compassion and yet he desires to damn most of them doesn’t make sense, and also why pray for more laborers. If the elect or elect is the non elect

Again, your criticism doesn't make any sense, and seems to be nothing but a variation of "prayer is pointless".
You're in reruns again.
Do better.

58, Mark 4:15. These are they which are sown by the wayside where the word is sown and these are they by the wayside where the word is sown, but when they have heard, Satan Cometh immediately and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts.If calvinism is true, than Satan doesn’t need to do that.

Maybe Calvinism PROVIDED that to happen.

59 is if calvinism is proved then all of God’s commands are pointless.

60 of calvinism is true. Then all of God’s promises, are pointless.

61. If calvinism is true, then all of God’s pleadings are pointless.

62. If calvinism is true, then all of God’s warnings are pointless.

These are nothing but baseless claims, without any evidence whatsoever.

 

[Theo1689]

63, Psalm 78:41 we read, Yay. They, in reference to the children of Israel. They turned back and tempted God and limited the holy one of Israel. How could they do that? If everything is forordained, how could they have limited what God did in their midst and besides if God predetermines everything, wouldn’t be God limiting himself.

God is not His creation.

64, Jeremiah 18:7-8, and what incident isol speak concerning a nation and concerning, a kingdom to pluck up and to pull down and does this, to destroy it. If that nation against whom I have pronounced do turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them. God says that when man changes how he acts, then he’ll change how he responds. If it’s all been predestined, this passage makes no sense. Besides if God causes everything, then in essence he’s saying, if I change, then I’ll change in response to my own change.

It makes perfect sense to me.

65. Micah 6:8, he has showed to the man, what is good and what does the Lord require of Thee, but to do justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with God. Micah 7:18, it says that God retained it’s not as anger forever because he delighted us in mercy.God requires of us that we love mercy and he claims to delight in mercy himself, and yet calvinism claims that he delights in sending men to hell.

Nope.
Calvinism NEVER teaches that God "delights in sending men to hell".

66, Romans 10 :13-14, for whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed, and how so they believe in him, of whom they have not heard, and how shall they hear without a preacher? If calvinism is true, the elect are going to make it, the non elect cant, and none of this matters.

And your criticism is ........... ?

67. If God is the cause of all sin, then when he resists the proud, he’s resisting himself

You are ignoring the role of man.

68 in the parable of the sower and the seed Jesus didn’t teach that a man didn’t respond to the Gospel because he was not elect, but rather because of the cares of this world, the deceitfulness of riches and the less of other things.

Both are true.
One is God's perspective.
The other is man's perspective.

69. Mark 3:5 and when he looked round about on them with anger being grieved for the hardness of their hearts, he saith to the man stretch forth mine hand and he stretched it out and his hand was restored, hole as the other. How could Jesus be grieved for the hardness of their hearts? How could he be angry in regards to the hardness of their hearts if he’s the one that caused it all by giving them hard hearts according to his own will in eternity past.

Why do you get to tell Jesus when He can be angry or grieved?
Who do you think you are?

70, Isaiah 45:22, Jesus said, look under me and be saved all the ends of the earth. And 1 Timothy 2:4-5, we read this who will have all men to be saved and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. Verse 6 who gave himself a ransom for all to be testified in due time.All doesn’t mean all if calvinism is true.

The issue is not the meaning of "all".
The issue is the meaning of "men".

"All men" does NOT mean "all individuals".
"All men" means "all NATIONS".

71, Hebrews 2:9, but we see Jesus who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honor that he, by the grace of God, should taste death for every man. Every doesn’t mean every if calvinism is true.

The term "man" does not occur in the Greek. The Greek says, "should taste death for every". Here "every" is acting as a substantive, with an implied object. However, the CONTEXT is found in the next verse, referring to "sons". This is the danger in ripping a proof-text out of its "context".

72 1 Timothy 1:15. This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners of whom I am. Chief Romans 5:6 for when we were yet without strength in due time, Christ died for the ungodly. If Calvinism is true. He’s only willing to save some preselected people and some predestined, ungodly. The clear normal, plain interpretation of these verses must be thrown out in order to make calvinism fit.

Yes, He's only going to save the elect.
But guess what? The elect are "sinners'.
So Calvinists have no problem with these passages.

And FYI, you already used Rom. 5:6, so you're back in reruns.
Do better.

73. 1 Timothy 4:10, we read therefore we both labor and suffer reproach because we trust in the living God who is the savior of all men.Specially of those that believe 1 John 2:1-2, my little children, these things write I into to you that you sin not, and if any man sin, we have an advocate with the father, Jesus Christ, the righteous, and he is the propitiation for our sins and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world. 2 Peter 2:1, but there were false prophets also among the people even as there shall be false teachers among you who privileged to bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them and bring upon themselves swift destruction. Here we clearly see that Jesus died to redeem everybody, that he paid the price for every man’s sins, that he purchased their redemption with his blood on calvary if they would avail themselves of it, but some will not believe.

1 Tim. 4:10 is teaching that God is the Saviour of believers ("especially those that believe") from among all men. Sounds like election to me! Also compare with Rev. 5:9.

1 John 2:1-2, we need to discuss the meaning of "the whole world". You seem to ASSUME it refers to "every single individual". It doesn't.

And 2 Pet. 2:1 isn't about atonement. There is no mention of "Jesus", "Christ", "cross", "blood", "redeem", "atone", etc. etc. And the term translated "Lord" in your translation is "despotes" ("Master"), not "kurios" ("Lord"), the standard title used of Jesus. Peter NEVER referred to Jesus as "despotes".

74. 2 Corinthians 5:14, Paul says this, for the love of Christ constrains us because we thus judge that if one died for all, then we’re all dead and that he died for all the same. All that are dead are the same. All that Christ died for.

You keep ignoring the pronouns "us" and "we", which LIMIT the passage to referring to the ELECT. This is not a "universal" passage.

75. Roman 1:1-32 clearly shows that because some men rejected God, then as a result of that, then God gave them up, gave them over to a reprobate mind because they will in turn from the truth.whereforee, because of that God also gave them up. Verse 26 for this cause God gave them up. Verse 28, even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind.

This doesn't refute election in any way.

76 Romans 1:20 tells us that these that had rejected God. We’re without excuse. If they weren’t elect and couldn’t get saved even if they wanted to, then they actually had plenty of good excuses.

No, not being elected is NOT an excuse.
They are condemned because they SINNED, and they have no excuse for their sinning.

77, Jesus loved the rich young ruler who rejected the gospel of Mark 101- If calvinism is true, then he should have hated him.

Calvinism doesn't teach anything of the sort.

78. Matthew 12:50. Jesus said, for whosoever so do the will of my father, which is in heaven, the same as my brother and sister and mother. If calvinism is true, than everyone is in Jesus’ family, for there is no such thing to them as freewill. Everyone has to do God’s will.

Nope.
Sinners are not doing God's will.

79. Matthew 12:24-26, but when the Pharisees heard it, they said, this fellow does not cast out devils, but by bls above the Prince of the devils and Jesus knew their thoughts and set onto them.Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand. And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then shall his kingdom stand? Does that not apply to Calvin system? That God that has God responsible for all the sin and the evil in the world. Reason number

Sorry, I can't make heads or tails of this "criticism".
Editting your content might be a wise idea.

80, second peter three verses three through five. Knowing this first that they’re succumbing the last days, scoffers walking after their own lusts and saying, where is the promise of his coming for? Since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. For this, they willingly are ignorant of how can anyone be willingly ignorant if he doesn’t have a well?

You're in reruns again.
You've already falsely claimed that Calvinists allegedly teach "men don't have a will".
We don't teach that.

Man certainly DOES have a will.
We're not "robots".

 

[Kampioen]

You're in reruns again.
You've already falsely claimed that Calvinists allegedly teach "men don't have a will".
We don't teach that.

Man certainly DOES have a will.
We're not "robots".

You do teach that God scripted both sides of your argument. So you are really not arguing against your opponent but being puppeteered by God, will and all. So in predeterminism you only think you're not robotic but you are.

 

[Theo1689]

81, when Peter Preached The Gospel in Acts 2:1-, he told them that the promise was to them and to their children and do all that are a far off.How could he know that they were all elect and how could he know that all of their children were elected? And what about all that are a far off?

The promise is that those who BELIEVE will be saved.
This is true for EVERYONE.

82 election if it is truly unconditional. How come children of believers are more likely to get saved? Then children of atheists.

First of all, you haven't demonstrated this to be the case. It may well be that they are false converts, who never had eternal life.
But if it does end up being true, then it's probably because God designed it that way.

83, James 2:14. What does it profit my brethren, though a man say he has faith and have not works, can faith save him? If a brother or sister be naked and destitute of daily food and one of you saying to them, depart in peace, be warmed and filled, not with and you give them not those things which are needful to the body, what does it profit even so faith if it has not worked, is dead being alone. He said, if you have respect to persons, you commit sin and are convinced of the law as transgressors.

Thank you for the Scripture.
But how does this allegedly refute Calvinism?

1 John 3: 17-18, who so half this world’s good. See us, his brother have need. Shout up his bowels of compassion from him. How dwelleth the love of God in him? My little children. Let us not love in word neither in tongue but in deed and in truth. If God withholds salvation from those that needed, he’s not willing for them to get saved. If well, and what do you do with withholding food and clothing from the needy has caused for asking, how dwelleth the love of God in that person? I’ll dwell with the love of God in the person who’s unwilling to meet the need of somebody else to give them food and shelter and how dwelleth the love of God in a God who is unwilling to give something far more necessary eternal life.

Again, I'm not understanding the criticism.

84 John 4:10, Jesus answered and said unto her, if Thou knewest the gift of God and who it is that say it, they give me to drink that was asked of him and he would have given the living water. Jesus said, if you ask, I’ll give you. It wasn’t irresistibly forced on her because she was elected. She asked than Jesus would give it to her.

You seem to be making a lot of unwarranted and self-serving assumptions.

85, Matthew 23:13-15, but woe unto you scribes and pharisees, hypocrites for you to shut up the Kingdom of heaven against men. For you neither go in yourselves. Neither suffer you them that are in three to go in, woe unto you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites for you compass, sea and land to make one slight. And when he has made you make him twofold, more the child of hell than yourselves. How can that be if everyone is already elect or not? Unelect

Another nonsensical question.

86, even to the very last chapter of the Bible, God is calling upon man to come. Is it a sincere offer? Revelation 22:7 and the spirit and the bride say, come and let him then here say, come and then him.That is the thirst come and whosoever will let him take the water of life freely.

Of course it's a sincere offer.

87. Matthew 7:24-26 therefore, who saw heareth these sayings of mine and do with them, I will liken him unto a wise man, verse 26, every one that here at these sayings of mine do with them not to be likened unto a foolish man if everyone is predestined and preprogrammed. How can you call anyone foolish or wise? Are they not merrily, fortunate or unfortunate depending on whether they were elect or non elect.

Because when you disobey God, you're being foolish.

88. Calvinism teaches that a man must be born again in order to be able to believe the gospel, but the Bible teaches that a man must believe the gospel in order to be born again. 1 Peter 1:23 being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible by the word of God which lives within abideth forever, and this is the word which by the Gospel is preached unto you, James 1:18 of his own will be, yet he us with the word of truth.

Nope, the BIBLE teaches that a man must be born again in order to be able to believe (1 John 5:1).
No, the Bible does NOT teach one must first believe in order to be born again.

1 Pet. 1:23 is teaching that one is born of God "of incorruptible seed". It says nothing about "believing".
Again, James 1:18 doesn't say anything about "born again by believing".

89, the good news of the Gospel is actually bad news and eternal death sentence to any of the non elect that here it.

Not at all.
First, they don't know that they're "non elect".
And secondly, they aren't saddened by the news, they reject the gospel, and generally reject God.

90, calvinism has to grossly twist Romans 9:1- in order to make it fit their doctrinal system.

A baseless, uncharitable, insulting, and unsubstantiated claim.
You must be getting tired at this point, and frustrated that you're trying to grasp at straws.

 

[Theo1689]

91, Israel was quote unquote elect, but not all is real. Believed election is not causative unto salvation.

Israel was a type of the elect.
They were God's physically chosen people.
The elect are God's spirtually chosen people.

92 James Chapter 5:20, let him know that he was converted the sinner from the error of his ways, so save a soul from death and so hide a multitude of sins, but actually he hasn’t made any difference at all since the elect have to get saved if calvinism is true.

But that's HOW the elect get saved.
The elect don't get saved while still in their sins.
That's why they're regenerated, and given a new heart of flesh that loves God and hates sin.

93, Titus 2:11. For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. If grace is irresistible than shouldn’t, all men can be saved or else this has to be another verse where all doesn’t mean all.

Or, "all men" means "all nations", rather than your ASSUMPTION that it means, "all individuals".

94 John 12:46-48 I am come a light into the world that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness. Verse Forty Eight, he that rejected me and receive with not my words, half one that judge with him, the word that I have spoken the same, so judge him in the last day. Jesus who was full of grace according to John 1- was resisted and rejected. Acts 7:51 and Steven says, you stiff necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears. You always resist the Holy Ghost as your fathers did so do you see the Holy Spirit was sent to draw them in to Jesus and can be resisted. There is not a single verse in the entire word of God that says that grace is irresistible.

Resisting the Holy Ghost is not the same as resisting grace.
Do you deny that Arminian "prevenient grace" is resistible as well?

95. James 4:2. You have not because you ask not Matthew Chapter 7:7, ask and it shall be given you. Seek and Ye shall find, knock, and it shall be opened unto you. Calvinism teaches prayer, doesn’t do anything contrary to calvinism. Prayer does change things and we’re not robots merely acting out a script that was written in eternity past.

You made some baseless assertions based on nothing but your hatred for Calvinism.

96. 1 Corinthians 4:15, Paul said, for though you have 10,000 instructors in Christ, yet have you not many fathers for in Christ Jesus, I have been gotten you through the Gospel. They were not be gotten because they were one of the elect and thus divinely regenerated without responding to the Gospel, but they were bigger than because they responded to the Gospel and it was as a result of Paul giving them the Gospel.

What is your evidence for "They were not begotten because they were one of the elect"?
And what do you do with all the passages which SPEAK of the elect?
Simply ignore them?

97. Galatians 2:18, for if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor according to calvinism.God does it. Yet, Paul believed that he was entirely responsible.

Correct. Man is entirely responsible.
Calvinism doesn't deny that.

98 John 3:14. Jesus said, as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the son of man be lifted up, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have eternal life. In Numbers 21- the offer was extended to every one bit by a serpent. The picture and the application is obvious as Jesus uses the story here, calvinism loses the whole type.

A baseless assertion without any evidence.

99, the Passover was effective for everyone who would apply the blood. The Manna was for everyone who is in need. The water of the rock was for all who are thirsty. All of these were types that were fulfilled in the Lord Jesus Christ and every other type from the Old Testament fulfilled in Jesus Christ is lost in calvinism.

The passover was ONLY effective for the Jews.
The manna was ONLY effective for the Jews.
The atonement is ONLY effective for the elect.

100 John 3:16. For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God sent not his son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved for who’s he. The believers on him is not condemned, but he that believeth not is condemned already because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. If calvinism is true than God and not the sinner is to blame for the sinners, rejection of the Gospel and yet God and then God then takes the center and cast them into hell because that’s what he wanted to do with him all along. No, the Bible says he’s condemned because he believes no, he does not respond to. He will not believe. He will not obey the gospel.

No, the sinner is DEFINITELY to blame for the sins he WILLINGLY committed.

 

[Reformedguy]

You do teach that God scripted both sides of your argument. So you are really not arguing against your opponent but being puppeteered by God, will and all. So in predeterminism you only think you're not robotic but you are.

How so??

 

[fltom]

Faith IS a gift as the BIBLE teaches (Eph. 2:8, Phil. 1:29, Rom. 12:3, 2 Pet. 1:1, 1 Cor. 4:7, etc. etc.)

You unexegeted references have been refuted many times

Do you insult Arminians and provisionist by thinking they are unaware of those verses

God grants faith he does not irresistible infuse it anyone

Why have you never addressed these

Men needed to be hardened so they could not believe

John 12:40 —KJV
“He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.”

had men not hardened themselves they could have believed

Acts 28:27 —KJV
“For the heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.”

Jesus spoke to men in parables to prevent their understanding

Matt. 13:10–14 —KJV
“And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?
He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.
Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:”

those ake no sense in your theology

also how could anything interfere with one believing if faith was a gift

Matthew 13:18–22 (KJV 1900) — 18 Hear ye therefore the parable of the sower. 19 When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side. 20 But he that received the seed into stony places, the same is he that heareth the word, and anon with joy receiveth it; 21 Yet hath he not root in himself, but dureth for a while: for when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word, by and by he is offended. 22 He also that received seed among the thorns is he that heareth the word; and the care of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful.

also how is it some believe temporarily

 

[Beloved Daughter]

You unexegeted references have been refuted many times

Do you insult Arminians and provisionist by thinking they are unaware of those verses

God grants faith he does not irresistible infuse it anyone

Why have you never addressed these

Men needed to be hardened so they could not believe

John 12:40 —KJV
“He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.”

had men not hardened themselves they could have believed

Acts 28:27 —KJV
“For the heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.”

Jesus spoke to men in parables to prevent their understanding

Matt. 13:10–14 —KJV
“And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?
He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.
Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:”

those ake no sense in your theology

also how could anything interfere with one believing if faith was a gift

Matthew 13:18–22 (KJV 1900) — 18 Hear ye therefore the parable of the sower. 19 When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side. 20 But he that received the seed into stony places, the same is he that heareth the word, and anon with joy receiveth it; 21 Yet hath he not root in himself, but dureth for a while: for when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word, by and by he is offended. 22 He also that received seed among the thorns is he that heareth the word; and the care of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful.

also how is it some believe temporarily

You have been refuted over and over.

Check your motives. Are you also contributing to gross tactics?

 

[Reformedguy]

You unexegeted references have been refuted many times

Do you insult Arminians and provisionist by thinking they are unaware of those verses

God grants faith he does not irresistible infuse it anyone

Why have you never addressed these

Men needed to be hardened so they could not believe

John 12:40 —KJV
“He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.”

had men not hardened themselves they could have believed

Acts 28:27 —KJV
“For the heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.”

Jesus spoke to men in parables to prevent their understanding

Matt. 13:10–14 —KJV
“And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?
He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.
Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:”

those ake no sense in your theology

also how could anything interfere with one believing if faith was a gift

Matthew 13:18–22 (KJV 1900) — 18 Hear ye therefore the parable of the sower. 19 When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side. 20 But he that received the seed into stony places, the same is he that heareth the word, and anon with joy receiveth it; 21 Yet hath he not root in himself, but dureth for a while: for when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word, by and by he is offended. 22 He also that received seed among the thorns is he that heareth the word; and the care of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful.

also how is it some believe temporarily

Question begging

Who says God infuses anyone?

Some believe temporarily? Were they saved why they believed temporarily? So much for OSAS eh?

 

[SovereignGrace]

Yes you have easily refuted them with all of those passages . You are right unless God hardened a person they can believe in Him .

So, man in his open rebellion, in a state of enmity(having an ill will towards), can believe in Him? The Bible openly refutes that ideology my friend.

 

[SovereignGrace]

You are right unless God hardened a person they can believe in Him .

And right here ??????? is what’s wrong with our churches. They preach a “Bob the Builder” doctrine of “Can we do it? Yes we can!!” The bible says “No you can’t!!!”

 

[SovereignGrace]

You are right unless God hardened a person they can believe in Him .

"If you are clear in your theology and in your doctrine you will know that no natural man can believe the gospel... So if you expect a natural man to believe the gospel simply because you are putting it to him, you are denying the gospel; you have not understood it yourself." - D Martyn Lloyd-Jones

 

[SovereignGrace]

The Bible offers to come and drink freely .

Rev 22
Come; and he who is thirsting -- let him come; and he who is willing -- let him take the water of life freely.

Why are some thirsty and some are not?

 

[Reformedguy]

Yes you have easily refuted them with all of those passages . You are right unless God hardened a person they can believe in Him .

It does not say unless God hardened a person they can believe.

 

[Reformedguy]

Why are some thirsty and some are not?

Why are some thirsty and some are not?

Excellent question