In Reply to: Re: The Bible, Luther, Calvin, etc posted by mir on May 19, 2010 at 09:54:43:
Farmer (& mir):
I really don't mean to insult anybody's intelligence, or labaorious search of Scripture, or anything.
My experience is simple. It happened. I knew ALL of the "Calvinist view" verses (favoring & promoting Berg's liscentiousness/perversions), and MOST of the POSSIBLE arguments (I READ all the others from RC Sproul and other Reformists post-TF).
God Himself changed my mind. Yes, I AM claiming that; with no apologies.
If viewed in the way that God can "interrupt" what we concieve of as His "soverignty" anytime, then the idea of the "elect" as a literal number of people God will choose to save, where "many are called and few are chosen", more Scripture makes sense (after the fact for me; yes).
To me, Calvinism is a pre-conceived "brainlock" of a circular argumentation using a "false premise" definition of God's soveriegnty in the first place, and then proceeding to argue circularly, in the face of Scripture disproving that POV.
I notice that "you" is not included in the things, listed in Romans 8, that cannot take a saved person out of the Father's hand. I believe that "you" can--1 Cor 6, Gal 5, Rev 2, and 2 Pe2--"better to NOT have know the truth", etc.
But all one has to do is REPENT; for crying out loud--what's so hard about THAT? Even for Jezebel (Rev 2) Christ promised "space to repent", before they had to DIE.
I believe someone's somewhat suspect spiritually if their real argument is repenting of those things listed in those passages, mentioned above. Seriously. Isn't that the real question; so we don't grieve God's heart over our sin?
Respectfully,
OT2
PS I really don't want to get into "Scripture Ping-Pong" here; though. Please believe that I already know all the arguments. Thanks.