3-Point Calvinism

Exploring the details of Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
McCulloch
Site Supporter
Posts: 24063
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 9:10 pm
Location: Toronto, ON, CA
Been thanked: 3 times

3-Point Calvinism

Post #1

Post by McCulloch »

Petrameansrock wrote:as far as Calvinism goes I am 3-point (Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, and Perseverance of the Saints).
Can this be done consistently?
If humans are totally depraved then how can grace not be irresistible? Total depravity means that we cannot do anything good by our own will, if we have a choice between good and evil, we will choose evil. Therefore, if God wants us to do or choose good, He must compell us. Irresistible Grace.
If Jesus died for every sinner and salvation only comes by God's election, then all sinners should be saved. Therefore, if there are any not saved, then Jesus died only for the elect. Limited Atonement.
Examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.
First Epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians
The truth will make you free.
Gospel of John

User avatar
ttruscott
Site Supporter
Posts: 11064
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 5:09 pm
Location: West Coast of Canada
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: 3-Point Calvinism

Post #21

Post by ttruscott »

Petrameansrock wrote: [Replying to post 17 by ttruscott]

Your view is extra-Biblical, and therefore invalid.
My view is extra-orthodox and is valid to the scripture...
You can't use the Bible to support your viewpoints sometimes and then reject it when you don't think it fits. You have to believe all or none. And you can't add things that aren't there.
I reject the thinking of men about what they deem the words to mean even though it infers the destruction of the idea that GOD is Love and righteous in HIS holiness. Please name any (not even all) the scriptures you think I reject - it is impossible as I reject none of them. Have you mistaken me for JP or Claire? If you can't point to any, please rescind this public castigation of me as untrue. Public accusations must be publicly rescinded if proof is not offered.

Perhaps you have come face to face with a claim to Literalism that cannot be upheld...

Why castigate me for my thoughts when the scriptures I use are on display and the only way to convince we is to deal with them. IOW, make it about the Bible, not me...
PCE Theology as I see it...

We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.

This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.

User avatar
Clownboat
Savant
Posts: 10260
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:42 pm
Has thanked: 1452 times
Been thanked: 1757 times

Re: 3-Point Calvinism

Post #22

Post by Clownboat »

2timothy316 wrote: [Replying to post 14 by Clownboat]

If you don't understand what I'm talking about, a daily study of the Bible and prayer will help. My posts alone will never give you the answers you seek. The simple fact that you don't understand what the Bible means by 'the heart' tells me that you're woefully under-educated when it comes to the Bible. So again, I'd recommend a daily study in the Bible and seek knowledge from God and not from a message board. Then perhaps you can discuss God more effectively? Have a good day!
Please don't give me this condescending non answer.
I was a born again, spirit filled, drunk in the Holy Ghost street evangelizing Christian for 2 decades. I convinced myself that I had a relationship with a god, but my actual heart does not and never has done any feeling. This tells me that when people say 'heart' they mean something else or are confused.

If you don't know that the heart pumps blood, and if you cannot relay what you mean when you say 'in the heart', the problem does not lie with myself.

Perhaps you should just admit that they are words used in church that sound good but don't reflect reality? When preaching to the choir, conveying meanings is not so important because the recipients are already on board and don't want to sound silly by pointing out nonsensical phrases like 'feeling in the heart' doesn't make much sense. From my experience, they say something like 'Amen' instead.

You also failed to defend the scriptures you supplied. I'll assume they just sounded good 'in your heart' and thus you thought they were relevant.

My heart is left confused. :tongue:

I would imagine it will help more than just myself if you used the English language a bit more accurately.
"The Bible says that it will be by the heart a person will be judged."
Why is the Bible and now yourself not able to use accurate words? You failed to address how the Egyptians were confused about the brain and how possibly the Jews were confused about the heart. If the Egyptians thought that the brain was booger factory, then perhaps the Jews were also confused about the heart and associated things like increased heart beat in response to certain emotions with the heart being the actual cause when it is not.

Be well.
You can give a man a fish and he will be fed for a day, or you can teach a man to pray for fish and he will starve to death.

I blame man for codifying those rules into a book which allowed superstitious people to perpetuate a barbaric practice. Rules that must be followed or face an invisible beings wrath. - KenRU

It is sad that in an age of freedom some people are enslaved by the nomads of old. - Marco

If you are unable to demonstrate that what you believe is true and you absolve yourself of the burden of proof, then what is the purpose of your arguments? - brunumb

User avatar
Petrameansrock
Student
Posts: 80
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 3:43 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: 3-Point Calvinism

Post #23

Post by Petrameansrock »

[Replying to post 21 by ttruscott]

Fine. Let's do this. Psalm 51:5 says we were conceived in inquity. Isaiah 53:5 says that Jesus was crushed for our inquity. To not believe in original sin, aka iniquity, cheapens Jesus's sacrifice. Also, while your view on us being in Sheol before is not directly contradicted by scripture, it is also not supported by scripture. I could say pink is actually purple, and say that the Bible doesn't contradict that, and I would be correct. But it certainly doesn't support it. In order to dodge a tenant you do not like, iniquity, you have created your own belief.
Acts 2:38 - Repent, and be Baptized in the NAME OF JESUS CHRIST for the forgiveness of your sins, and you WILL RECEIVE the gift of the Holy Spirit.

User avatar
ttruscott
Site Supporter
Posts: 11064
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 5:09 pm
Location: West Coast of Canada
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: 3-Point Calvinism

Post #24

Post by ttruscott »

Petrameansrock wrote: [Replying to post 21 by ttruscott]

Fine. Let's do this. Psalm 51:5 says we were conceived in inquity. Isaiah 53:5 says that Jesus was crushed for our inquity. To not believe in original sin, aka iniquity, cheapens Jesus's sacrifice.
As I have said, I contend that only (and all) SINNERS are sown into the earth as humans...and are sinners AT their conception as humans. You seem to be conflating conception with creation, a common misconception fostered by orthodoxy.

Being a sinner at conception by an act of creation IS NOT the only way for us to be sinners at conception and the supposition that we chose by our free will to be sinful in HIS sight before our conception does not in the least diminish Christ's sacrifice.
Also, while your view on us being in Sheol before is not directly contradicted by scripture, it is also not supported by scripture. I could say pink is actually purple, and say that the Bible doesn't contradict that, and I would be correct. But it certainly doesn't support it.
The Bible does indeed support our being in Sheol pre-earth:

Job 1:21 And Job said, Naked came I out of my mother's womb and naked shall I return thither. Where did Job expect to go? According to orthodoxy, he is either really going back to the womb, which is ludicrous, or he is going back to annihilation, the state he was in before he was created. Only PCE theology contends for the straightforward and realistic interpretation that he expected to go back to Sheol at his death, that part of Sheol called Paradise, the home of GOD.

I know this is not a proof verse but it certainly is a support verse in light of
Psalm 9:17 The wicked shall RETURN to Sheol... (Kiel - Delitzsch(#16)): Yea, back to Hades must the wicked RETURN... No one can return to where they have never been. Any ordinary person reading this verse would interpret it at face value as meaning they came from there and they will go back there, since return means: to go or come back; revert; bring, give, send, hit, put, or pay back; a going or coming back, a happening again. Only the theology of our being created on earth at conception or at birth contends against that.

Even Ecclesiastes 12:7 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto GOD who gave it. can be read to lend a soupon of support to our pre-existence in Sheol because our supposed creation on earth as evil in Adam created us "not in or with GOD" but outside of HIM so, as on earth and sinful we were never with GOD to be able to return to HIM.

1 Peter 2:25 For ye were as sheep going astray: but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls. To go astray means to leave the flock. Since Christ did not lose us through inattention or carelessness, then our going astray had to have some idea of rebellion on our part. Apart from denying that we were therefore NOT created astray (in Adam's sin) this leads to the question: When did we become part of His flock if we are already astray at conception? The idea we join His flock at our conversion to Him as our saviour is denied by this verse that clearly says we are returned to His flock and under His care by our conversion! Oh, time for poetry to save us from literalism!
In order to dodge a tenant you do not like, iniquity, you have created your own belief.
Excuse me, but I do not dodge iniquity in anyway and for you to think that is my meaning says something about your orthodox iconicism.

I deny only that we are CREATED as sinners by being made human inheriting Adam's sin in our conception and claim that our sinfulness IS OUR OWN RESPONSIBILITY ONLY by our free will and do not put it off onto Adam or GOD as orthodoxy does.

I contend that each person and them alone are responsible for the sin and suffering and death in their life, not Adam and not GOD by making them human in Adam, which HE did not have to do having already proven HE could make people as 'innocent' individuals. Some dodge, eh?

I will add some more here because of your hint of scorn that I would make up a theology without any Biblical suport. It seems like the Holy Spirit would have us believe that all of the Church has personally apostatised from Christ prior to their conversion in this life as per 1 Peter 2:25. I think that Peter bore added witness to this fact in
1 Peter 1 1:3 Blessed be the GOD and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ ...which ...hath BEGOTTEN US AGAIN unto a lively hope...

Just when was the first time you were begotten by GOD? And when did you get unbegotten? Well, unless you are one of those earthly backsliden types, the only time such an unbegetting or rebellion could have taken place is prior to your conception. And since Peter is writing to the whole Church rather than to just the backsliden types, he must be referring to a pre-conception rebellion and the straying of HIS elect since that time, which straying or rebellion ends only upon conversion to obedience unto holiness to that Shepherd, that is, upon being born in Christ (begotten) again.

Revelation 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of My GOD, and he shall go no more out. NIV: Never again shall he leave it.

So, all these overcomers had left GOD's temple, which I presume is the one in Paradise. You know, the one Moses copied, as per Acts 7:44 Our fathers had the tabernacle of witness in the wilderness, as HE had appointed, speaking unto Moses, that he should make it according to the fashion that he had seen., and Hebrews 8:5 Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of GOD when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith He, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.

So when were these overcomers in the Temple in heaven to which they will return and then never leave? Well, you should know my explanation for when and how they left by now. What's yours?

So not one verse contrary to PCE and these and many other corollary verses that can be read to support logically our Pre-Conception Existence... Your dismay at me making up Bible support is empty.
PCE Theology as I see it...

We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.

This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.

User avatar
ttruscott
Site Supporter
Posts: 11064
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 5:09 pm
Location: West Coast of Canada
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: 3-Point Calvinism

Post #25

Post by ttruscott »

Petrameansrock wrote:Acts 2:38 - Repent, and be Baptized in the NAME OF JESUS CHRIST for the forgiveness of your sins, and you WILL RECEIVE the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Isn't it interesting that we are told that John the baptizer was filled with the Holy Spirit from conception? Luke 1:15... and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit even before he is born. even though he was never baptized in anyone's name?

Was he baptised previous to his conception as human or at least while in the womb? Or...?

So we have a foetus in the Spirit of Christ ie, redeemed, and we have murderous evil foetus, Jacob and Esau. Very interesting, eh? How does a straightforward interpretation affect the theological face value of these verses?
PCE Theology as I see it...

We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.

This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.

User avatar
Petrameansrock
Student
Posts: 80
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 3:43 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: 3-Point Calvinism

Post #26

Post by Petrameansrock »

[Replying to post 25 by ttruscott]

My head is spinning and I am not afraid to admit it lol. I am interested and sorry if I came off a little harsh. Could you help me understand it a little better, maybe tell me how you came to believe this or formulate this theory?
Acts 2:38 - Repent, and be Baptized in the NAME OF JESUS CHRIST for the forgiveness of your sins, and you WILL RECEIVE the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Post Reply