Why Do Calvinists Think They Have Superior Theology?

ALAYMAN said:
My guess (charitably speaking 😋) is that he just likes dropping a few bombs to cloud the air, stirring and spicing up the FFF pot if you will. 😁
Click to expand...
Very possibly so! I hope that's what he's doing. I would hate to think he's truly that mentally webbed up.
 
AverageJoe said:
So, let me see, YOU being a Calvinist are saying God can't allow free will and still be SOVEREIGN...correct?
Click to expand...
"Free will" is not found in the Bible.
God does not depend on man's choice.

Its a funny thing. I bet you believe in eternal security and believe God will not let you go... however, when it comes to salvation, you believe it depends on you.

God does as He wills. THAT is Bible.
 
ALAYMAN said:
My guess (charitably speaking 😋) is that he just likes dropping a few bombs to cloud the air, stirring and spicing up the FFF pot if you will. 😁
Click to expand...
Or.... I am so busy that I will find some moments to check in... and I find ridiculous statements like "God limits His Sovereignty" to accomodate man's "free will" and a few IFBs think that is proper theology and then someone says read all lf these commentaries (not realizing the commentaries dont even support this)...

... and we all wait for you guys to stop the nonsense... well that is the FFF!

The FFF, illustrating why "Calvinists have the Superior Theology" and why "SemiPelagianists Cant Read."
 
"Young man, sit down! You are an enthusiast. When God pleases to convert the heathen, he'll do it without consulting you or me."

Maybe your form of Calvinism and understanding of sovereignty just isn’t “ultimate” enough after all.😎
 
FSSL said:
Or.... I am so busy that I will find some moments to check in... and I find ridiculous statements like "God limits His Sovereignty" to accomodate man's "free will" and a few IFBs think that is proper theology and then someone says read all lf these commentaries (not realizing the commentaries dont even support this)...

... and we all wait for you guys to stop the nonsense... well that is the FFF!

The FFF, illustrating why "Calvinists have the Superior Theology" and why "SemiPelagianists Cant Read."
Click to expand...

By the way, your veiled attempt at discrediting my rebuttal (citing commentaries, many of which were Calvinists who stated it meant the very thing that I claimed it meant) to your eisegesis of Colossians 1:17 is further proof of you misunderstanding or intentionally obfuscating basic principles of argumentation. I asked for support of your opinion, based upon the passage you cited, and you fled to a different passage.
 
ALAYMAN said:
By the way, your veiled attempt at discrediting my rebuttal (citing commentaries, many of which were Calvinists who stated it meant the very thing that I claimed it meant) to your eisegesis of Colossians 1:17 is further proof of you misunderstanding or intentionally obfuscating basic principles of argumentation. I asked for support of your opinion, based upon the passage you cited, and he and youhe’s further proof of you, misunderstanding, basic principles of argumentation. I asked for support of your opinion based upon the passage you cited, and rather than provide evidence and exegetical work, you fled to a different passage.
Click to expand...
Eisegesis? I just posted Scripture. You wont even admnit that the passage presents God as Sovereign and that the mind is hostile to God.

So much for the nonBible phrase "free will"
 
FSSL said:
Eisegesis? I just posted Scripture. You wont even admnit that the passage presents God as Sovereign and that the mind is hostile to God.

So much for the nonBible phrase "free will"
Click to expand...
That is actually another factually incorrect statement. I did not anywhere dispute that God is sovereign. However, there is clearly equivocation between what you perceive the meaning of sovereignty to be, at least as presented by those who oppose your definition.
 
You de
ALAYMAN said:
That is actually another factually incorrect statement. I did not anywhere dispute that God is sovereign. However, there is clearly equivocation between what you perceive the meaning of sovereignty to be, at least as presented by those who oppose your definition.
Click to expand...
I am on the side that believes God is 100% Sovereign all of the time. He does not give up a part of His Sovereignty to accomodate man.

You defend the others and you cannot understand the phrase "Ultimate Sovereign."

Its not a problem on my side as to the confusion.
 
FSSL said:
You de

I am on the side that believes God is 100% Sovereign all of the time. He does not give up a part of His Sovereignty to accomodate man.

You defend the others and you cannot understand the phrase "Ultimate Sovereign."

Its not a problem on my side as to the confusion.
Click to expand...
OK, let’s ratchet the condescension and snark down a bit, teach me. I’m willing to learn, that’s a large part of why I am still here. I quoted a hyper Calvinist just a moment ago who clearly believed that God is sovereign to the extent that man does not need to do anything and God is more than able to save without human intervention of any kind. That seems like a much stronger position of protecting God’s sovereignty. After all, God, in that scheme of determinism and ultimate sovereignty would not be dependent upon man at all, in any sense. I’m sure he justified his opinion based upon scriptures. Why are you more accurate in your definition of God’s “ultimate”sovereignty than that fellow?
 
He isn't dependent on man. If He was, man's hostility would NEVER choose to submit to Him. Which is why I dont need a stronger passage than Colossians.

That is what I am thankful for His effectual calling. I am thankful He removed the hostility. He made me, a dead man, alive and I obeyed and submitted to Him and received His salvation through the faith He gave.

THAT is orthodoxy... NOT the belief that God relinquished some of His Sovereignty.

I don't understand why gospel-believers think they had a "free will" that was not hostile and miraculously removed by Gods gift of faith.
 
FSSL said:
He isn't dependent on man. If He was, man's hostility would NEVER choose to submit to Him. Which is why I dont need a stronger passage than Colossians.

That is what I am thankful for His effectual calling. I am thankful He removed the hostility. He made me, a dead man, alive and I obeyed and submitted to Him and received His salvation through the faith He gave.

THAT is orthodoxy... NOT the belief that God relinquished some of His Sovereignty.

I don't understand why gospel-believers think they had a "free will" that was not hostile and miraculously removed by Gods gift of faith.
Click to expand...

I could affirm (at least in some form of reasoned understanding) much of what you just wrote, but with all due respect, you didn't even come close to answering my question. If you truly want to persuade me of your convictionally held core truth about the person of God and you are educated in the art of teaching others the Bible (FSSL, ministry trained, former pastor, etc) then at least attempt to deal with the substance of my concern/challenge. Why is Carey's challenger, the minister of the above illustration, not more accurately representing the "ultimate sovereignty" of God?
 
Why is this wrong? "Young man, sit down! You are an enthusiast. When God pleases to convert the heathen, he'll do it without consulting you or me."

He's right God will save people without you or me. You stumble over this?

He's wrong in that we have a responsibility to share Gods Word with others. The Holy Spirit uses His Word to bring understanding and when that is achieved, the Holy Spirit raises the dead and the dead person miraculously understands the significance of the Word.

How will they hear the Word if we dont share it? It has nothing to do with the unbiblical so-called mans free will.
 
FSSL said:
Why is this wrong? "Young man, sit down! You are an enthusiast. When God pleases to convert the heathen, he'll do it without consulting you or me."

He's right God will save people without you or me. You stumble over this?

He's wrong in that we have a responsibility to share Gods Word with others. The Holy Spirit uses His Word to bring understanding and when that is achieved, the Holy Spirit raises the dead and the dead person miraculously understands the significance of the Word.

How will they hear the Word if we dont share it? It has nothing to do with the unbiblical so-called mans free will.
Click to expand...

It is wrong in the sense that hyper-calvinists define God's sovereignty (per their own Biblical mandates and interpretations) to exclude man from any sense of responsibility to preach the gospel (among other deviations from 5-point calvinism, and more technically put they think it wrong for you or me to make a "free offer of the gospel"). That mentality or interpretive framework for understanding the Bible is rooted in the notion of (differently defined as you define it) "ultimate sovereignty" of God. So, their definition is one that upholds the notion in a stronger sense than you, that God will act as He pleases without regard to the will of man one iota (that's an objectively stronger notion of "ultimate sovereignty" than you pose). You just happen to believe that your interpretation of sovereignty is more in line with Scriptures than both the hyper-calvinist and "the arminian" (which of course is a term that I object to, but for the sake of brevity will use here).
 
You dont understand the difference between people sharing the Gospel and someone' inability to accept the Gospel?

He is correct that God saves people.

God is Absolutely Sovereign. Scripture is clear that salvation does not come by the will of man, but by Gods pleasure
 
FSSL said:
You dont understand the difference between people sharing the Gospel and someone' inability to accept the Gospel?

He is correct that God saves people.

God is Absolutely Sovereign. Scripture is clear that salvation does not come by the will of man, but by Gods pleasure
Click to expand...

Are you a hyper calvinist?
 
No. I share the gospel with other people. I know that it's going to be gods work in a persons life. I can't change your mind. I cannot remove hostility. There is nothing I can say that will save another person. All I can do is share the word of God and pray that God works in that person's life.

when you pray for another person to be saved, how do you ask God? You asked God to give that person free will to accept him? Or do you pray asking God to remove the hostility and raise the dead so that God can save him? I do the latter.

Everyone prays like a Calvinist. No one prays like an Arminian.
 
Last edited:
FSSL said:
No. I share the gospel with other people. I know that it's going to be gods work in a persons life. I can't change your mind. I cannot remove hostility. There is nothing I can say that will save another person. All I can do is share the word of God and pray that God works in that person's life.

when you pray for another person to be saved, how do you ask God? You asked God to give that person free will to accept him? Or do you pray asking God to remove the hostility and raise the dead so that God can save him? I do the latter.
Click to expand...

If you are not a hyper Calvinist, and you understand man’s responsibility then I don’t see why you can’t compare the logical inferences and comparisons to the way you arrive at your conclusions. The Carey illustration demonstrates that there are people that understand sovereignty in a way that leads them to believe that God does whatever he wants. You on the other hand as a five point Calvinist understand that God uses means. The degree or extent of sovereignty is objectively different, in coming to those two differing conclusions/definitions, just as it is different in the extent to which a “Biblicist” would define sovereignty as God allowing for, and causing the ability to make a free choice, and that free choice not being in anyway meritorious or a work.

When I pray for a person, I pray that the Lord’s will be done and that He save them from their sin. I don’t get overly caught up in analyzing things that are nearly incomprehensible, and have been argued about for thousands of years.😊
 
So, you pray exactly like a Calvinist would. God's will be done. You never pray for God to limit his sovereignty so that man's free will can have some access to salvation do you?
 
FSSL said:
So, you pray exactly like a Calvinist would. God's will be done. You never pray for God to limit his sovereignty so that man's free will can have some access to salvation do you?
Click to expand...
Yes, jokingly here, I am fairly Calvinistic, lol😉
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top