Why John MacArthur became a Calvinist.

[DrHuk&Duck]

So believing in demonic doctrines isn't so bad?

I guess you would have to backpedal on that, once you realize the implications for your own doctrine relative to mine.



Was selling Joseph into slavery evil? God planned that (Genesis 50:20).

Was crucifying Jesus evil? God planned that (Acts 4:27-28).



When the Israelite priests burned the sacrifices brought to them, were they intended to cover the sins of everybody, or just the persons who brought their offering?

On the Day of Atonement, did the high priest make atonement for the Philistines and Amalekites, or just the Israelites?

Jesus is our high priest. Does he make intercession for his own people, the church, or for everyone, inside the faith or out? Did he present himself as an atoning sacrifice for all the pagans only for the Father to tell him it wasn't acceptable?

Put another way: does your church warn unbelievers to pass the Communion elements by? Why? If Christ's body was broken and his blood shed for them just as it was for the church, then every person, faithful or not, partakes in the New Covenant, no?

Put yet another way, every priest intercedes for some men, not all men.

A plethora of what-if questions. We could daily play that game until the end decade with room to spare.

To answer your ending question, my church request that only believers participate in communion, whether church member or visitor.

This isn’t complicated: when the Bible uses the word all, it means every person, otherwise it would use the word some.

 

[Bob Jones VI]

Honestly, it doesn’t bother me if you believe that. I don’t believe in the doctrine of limited atonement. I believe that Calvinism is demonic in the sense that it is a perversion of Scriptures. I’m sure you and the others are genuine Christians who are being influenced by a false teaching. That doesn’t mean you are hell bound. I never said anyone on here is unsaved or going to hell.

I don’t believe that the darkness here should be interpreted as evil. We see in 1 Timothy 2:1-4:

1. I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;

2. For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.

3. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;

4. Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

When I read this, the idea of Jesus dying on the cross for some men doesn’t come to mind. The idea is for all men. Now, if man rejects the “knowledge of the truth,” then that is not by God’s doing.

If you believe Calvinism is demonic and false doctrine, then you are an Arminian who believes he has a part in his salvation. And that is demonic and false doctrine. Sorry to say it goes both ways.

 

[DrHuk&Duck]

then you are an Arminian who believes he has a part in his salvation

I don’t accept the label, but of course I play a part in my salvation. After all, I have to be willing to have faith and repent of my sins.

 

[abcaines]

Question:

What difference is there between, "I am of Paul and I am of Apollos..."

and

"I am of Calvin and I am of Wesley..."

 

[Ransom]

A plethora of what-if questions.

In fact, none of those questions were what-ifs.

To answer your ending question, my church request that only believers participate in communion, whether church member or visitor.

Again, though: why? If Christ's death was for every single human being without exception, then why warn the nonbelievers away from the elements? Surely they would be entitled to celebrate Christ's body and blood, given for them as much as it was for us.

"All" is an adjective. When you read it, you're perfectly justified in asking, "All of what?" or "All of whom?" The scope is qualified by the context. For example, in 1 Tim. 2:4, Paul is saying to pray for kings and people in authority because God desires their salvation as well, not just the ordinary working stiffs. The "all" there suggests all classes of people, because God isn't playing favourites with the rich and powerful or poor and weak.

Or consider 2 Peter 3:9. God is patient "toward us." Who are "us"? Christians. He is not willing that any [of us] should perish, but that all [of us] will come to repentance. It's an answer to the scoffers asking why Christ hasn't returned; and Peter is saying some of God's people are still out there in the world, and he's waiting to gather them in. If we read all as "all people everywhere without exception," it's a non-answer to the challenge he's supposed to be refuting.

 

[Ransom]

Question:
What difference is there between, "I am of Paul and I am of Apollos..."
and
"I am of Calvin and I am of Wesley..."

The distinction is that in Corinthians, there were various factions following this disciple or that, whereas "Calvinism" is convenient shorthand for a certain soteriology, not adherence to everything taught by John Calvin, nor devotion to Calvin himself, whom very few so-called Calvinists have actually read substantially. (I include myself in that.) Heck, Calvin didn't even systematize Calvinism; that came a generation later.

To loosely paraphrase something Charles Spurgeon once said, it's unfortunate that the doctrines of saving grace have become labelled with Calvin's name, but that's the label we got, so he went with it.

 

[Bob Jones VI]

I don’t accept the label, but of course I play a part in my salvation. After all, I have to be willing to have faith and repent of my sins.

So, why is it that you are willing and my brother is not? Is your will superior to his?

 

[DrHuk&Duck]

"All" is an adjective. When you read it, you're perfectly justified in asking, "All of what?" or "All of whom?" The scope is qualified by the context. For example, in 1 Tim. 2:4, Paul is saying to pray for kings and people in authority because God desires their salvation as well, not just the ordinary working stiffs. The "all" there suggests all classes of people, because God isn't playing favourites with the rich and powerful or poor and weak.

I’m not convinced that “all” refers to classes or kinds of people. Let’s put aside the word “all” for a moment. Do you believe God loves everyone?

 

[DrHuk&Duck]

So, why is it that you are willing and my brother is not? Is your will superior to his?

Maybe because your brother hasn’t been willing or has chosen to reject. I can’t say since I don’t know, just speculation. But he has the same option as everyone on earth.

 

[aleshanee]

I’ll take it one step further and call Calvinism demonic. To believe in Calvinism and predestination is to assert that God planned both good and bad events, and furthermore, that God allowed people to be born destined for hell. People go to hell for rejecting God, not because God rejected them. To say otherwise is a perversion of the Bible.

no.... it;s not demonic... that;s very different than saying it;s just a matter of personality quirks or differences.... or even personality defects.. .. which we all have in one way or another or to some degree... ..... .... there are people of both calvinist and non-calvinist beliefs that are still devout christians and serving God in great way..... ... rmember most are all going to the same churches together.... . . we just see things differently.... and often for very different reasons.... ..

 

[Ransom]

I’m not convinced that “all” refers to classes or kinds of people. Let’s put aside the word “all” for a moment. Do you believe God loves everyone?

Sure. That seems to be the most natural reading of John 3:16, for example.

But does God love everyone in the same way, and without distinction? No.

 

[Bob Jones VI]

Maybe because your brother hasn’t been willing or has chosen to reject. I can’t say since I don’t know, just speculation. But he has the same option as everyone on earth.

You're not answering the question. You answered the question of why my brother is not willing with "maybe your brother hasn't been willing." There is something prior to willing and underneath it. I say that it is that God has elected certain people, and then gives them the gift of faith. You say that it is within every person to choose. But why do you choose and he does not?

What makes you a better chooser than my brother?

 

[Ekklesian]

I don’t believe in the doctrine of limited atonement.

Unless you're a Universalist, you do. The only thing you disagree with is the Limiter. Is the Limiter God or man?

 

[Ekklesian]

When I read this, the idea of Jesus dying on the cross for some men doesn’t come to mind. The idea is for all men.

Show me Egypt's stone on the breastplate of the High Priest.

 

[Ekklesian]

What makes you a better chooser than my brother?

He's a better man than your brother, obviously.

 

[Ekklesian]

Or consider 2 Peter 3:9. God is patient "toward us." Who are "us"? Christians. He is not willing that any [of us] should perish, but that all [of us] will come to repentance. It's an answer to the scoffers asking why Christ hasn't returned; and Peter is saying some of God's people are still out there in the world, and he's waiting to gather them in. If we read all as "all people everywhere without exception," it's a non-answer to the challenge he's supposed to be refuting.

As it was in the days of Noe. Once the last of the elect have entered the Ark, that is, Christ; the Door will be shut and judgment poured out.

 

[Ekklesian]

you are right... it;s a very dark and twisted view of God and the scriptures... . . rooted in the belief that arrogant men can force an omnipotent and eternal God into the confines of human logic... their personal logic... and strutting around with their noses in the air as if they have successfully done it - thus having God completely figured out.....

but ask them to explain what they believe and they can;t.... .they will twist and turn like they are playing an elaborate shell game while telling you the reason you can;t understand calvinism is simply that you are not smart enough.. ... i rmember seeing calvinism described by a calvinist on one of the older versions of the fff as "christianity for intelligent christians".... ...and yet when we point out the pride and arrogance evident in statements like that they will turn it around and call us proud and arrogant..... then they get totally bent out of shape claiming we have misrepresented their calvinst beliefs - the very same beliefs they have never been able to successfully explain..... ....

what is really bad is when some of them claim that if we can;t understand calvinism then it indicates something much worse than we are simply not intelligent... . to them it means we are also not saved.... . not elect.. .... they claim anyone who is truly elect and saved will have a complete understanding of calvinism... and also full acceptance of it.. .. ..not quite an attitude reflective of being "the salt of the earth" Jesus spoke of.... leaves a sour taste in the mouths of most people they interact with....

 

[Ekklesian]

So believing in demonic doctrines isn't so bad?

I guess you would have to backpedal on that, once you realize the implications for your own doctrine relative to mine.



Was selling Joseph into slavery evil? God planned that (Genesis 50:20).

Was crucifying Jesus evil? God planned that (Acts 4:27-28).



When the Israelite priests burned the sacrifices brought to them, were they intended to cover the sins of everybody, or just the persons who brought their offering?

On the Day of Atonement, did the high priest make atonement for the Philistines and Amalekites, or just the Israelites?

Jesus is our high priest. Does he make intercession for his own people, the church, or for everyone, inside the faith or out? Did he present himself as an atoning sacrifice for all the pagans only for the Father to tell him it wasn't acceptable?

Put another way: does your church warn unbelievers to pass the Communion elements by? Why? If Christ's body was broken and his blood shed for them just as it was for the church, then every person, faithful or not, partakes in the New Covenant, no?

Put yet another way, every priest intercedes for some men, not all men.

 

[Ekklesian]

I don’t accept the label, but of course I play a part in my salvation. After all, I have to be willing to have faith and repent of my sins.

Which makes you a better person by nature than the one who isn't.

 

[aleshanee]

View attachment 6793

finally a portrait of yourself that reveals your true nature...... the real you ...... nothing but a dead mans bones - and not even the facade of a whited sepulchure to contain them ....... (hows that for an appeal to scripture?)..... ... but what;s the point anyway?. .... ... ..you wouldn;t accept a more direct appeal to scripture or even consider one on this subect - the narcissist inside you that convinced you calvinism was the way, won;t let you........ so why should i waste my time?.

.......fact is i have never seen an argument concerning calvinism change anyones mind one way or the other on these forums,
in all the years i have been here.... .. although i did see a few outspoken adherents to both calvinism and arminianism
turn apostate over the years... .some have left for a while and come back after having flipped from one belief system to the other..... but none of those credited an argument on the forums as having been the reason.......