10 questions the anti-Calvinist can't answer
Aug 4, 2017 8:55:01 GMT
Post by Colossians on Aug 4, 2017 8:55:01 GMT
This material is for the teaching of the Body of Christ, however the author reserves copyright over it.
______________________________________________
10 QUESTIONS THE ANTI-CALVINIST CAN’T ANSWER
1. Bill’s free will results in a choice for God, and so Bill receives the eternal benefit of residency in heaven. Fred’s free will results in a choice against God, and so Fred receives the eternal disbenefit of eternity in hell.
The question:
Given that, from God’s viewpoint, Bill made the better choice, and given that God’s viewpoint is the correct viewpoint, what is the reason for Bill’s superior decision?
NOTES
The question is not asking you to consider each of the two decisions in isolation, but why it is that Bill made the better choice than Fred: the question is a comparative one.
So we don't want to know why Bill (considered in isolation) made the choice he made, and why Fred (considered in isolation) made the choice he made, but what the fundamental characteristic was that was present in Bill, but absent in Fred, that provided for Bill to make the better decision than Fred - why it was that Bill was able to obtain a result infinitely superior to that of Fred's.
Included in this, you need to avoid begging the question; for example, you should avoid telling us that Bill had a more contrite heart than Fred, for we will then simply ask you why this was the case. So you need to give us not secondary causes, but the primary cause for the disparity.
And of course the challenge is to provide an answer which does not invoke any personal merit on the part of Bill.
2. You agree with Rom 1:20 that the witness of creation renders man without excuse with regard to believing in God.
The question:
Given that God has given man sufficient reason to believe, and given that, according to you, man can come to God at will and that no man is gifted in this regard more than any other man, why doesn’t the ratio of [those who choose against God] vs [those who choose for God] pan out at around 50/50 over an extended period of time? Why is it more like 999/1? What is the reason for the strong negative bias no matter how long a period we consider?
3. You believe that the ‘free gift’ of salvation from God, does not incorporate the accepting of itself: the accepting of the gift and the gift itself, you believe, are separate.
The question:
Given that a gift is only considered to be a gift if it is understood to have positive value, how can salvation be indeed a gift, without its incorporating the perception that it has positive value (thereby resulting in the natural receiving of it by the one who so perceives it)?
4. We are told in scripture that hell is not so much a geographical place, as the experience of the non-believer standing in the presence of a Holy God without the advocacy of Christ (see Rev 14:10, Heb 12:29, Dan 10:17-19).
Heaven is of course the opposite: standing in the presence of a Holy God, with the advocacy of Christ.
The question:
How would one who, because of his intuitive awareness of his sinfulness, subconsciously feels that being in God’s presence would indeed be hell, know that the way to avoid being in that hell would be to (counter-intuitively) choose to be in God’s presence?
5. The question:
Was your belief in Christ preceded by a choice to believe in Christ?
If you answer “yes”, then given that any choice one makes is based on what one believes, explain how the belief you held which made you choose to believe in Christ, was not the same belief as your (resulting) belief in Christ.
If you answer “no”, then explain why you say you had a hand in your believing.
6. You believe that at the exact precise moment that one chooses for God, he is the old man, and that his choice then transforms him into the new man.
The question:
Is a choice for righteousness, a righteous choice?
If you say “yes”, then given that your doctrine entails the old man’s making a choice for righteousness, and given that the new man is characterised as he who makes righteous choices, explain how your old man is not in fact your new man.
If you say “no”, explain why a choice for righteousness is not a righteous choice.
7. The question:
What is the purpose of Christ’s atonement for our sin of unbelief, given that we are only forgiven for our sin of unbelief once we believe, at which point we are acceptable to God anyway?
8. You agree with James 1:18 that God begat us of his own will, and understand this to be speaking of regeneration. However you believe it means that God begat us after we came to Him by faith.
The question:
Given that the character of God necessitates that it is not possible for Him to reject someone who comes to Him by faith, how can it be that He begat us of His own will, when He had no choice in the matter once we came to Him by faith anyway?
9. You have told us that it is possible that a born-again believer might, in the end, reject God and thus lose his salvation. And because you are a believer just like any other believer, you do not exclude yourself from this possibility.
The question:
Given that you should tell God what you tell His people, if you went to God right now in prayer and told Him directly with the same degree of conviction with which you tell His people, that it is certainly possible you might one day reject Him, would He regard you as someone who loves Him?
NOTES
To assist you in answering this question, you might like to consider the analogous situation of just how a husband would respond to his wife’s telling him that, although she certainly loves him now, she cannot absolutely guarantee that she will stay with him forever.
10. The question:
Given that you declare that free will is an eternal property of man, one which he, if he is saved, will take with him into heaven, what absolute guarantee can you offer that he will not once again use his free will to rebel against God some time after he has entered heaven (just like Lucifer), and so set the whole problem off all over again?
______________________________________________
10 QUESTIONS THE ANTI-CALVINIST CAN’T ANSWER
1. Bill’s free will results in a choice for God, and so Bill receives the eternal benefit of residency in heaven. Fred’s free will results in a choice against God, and so Fred receives the eternal disbenefit of eternity in hell.
The question:
Given that, from God’s viewpoint, Bill made the better choice, and given that God’s viewpoint is the correct viewpoint, what is the reason for Bill’s superior decision?
NOTES
The question is not asking you to consider each of the two decisions in isolation, but why it is that Bill made the better choice than Fred: the question is a comparative one.
So we don't want to know why Bill (considered in isolation) made the choice he made, and why Fred (considered in isolation) made the choice he made, but what the fundamental characteristic was that was present in Bill, but absent in Fred, that provided for Bill to make the better decision than Fred - why it was that Bill was able to obtain a result infinitely superior to that of Fred's.
Included in this, you need to avoid begging the question; for example, you should avoid telling us that Bill had a more contrite heart than Fred, for we will then simply ask you why this was the case. So you need to give us not secondary causes, but the primary cause for the disparity.
And of course the challenge is to provide an answer which does not invoke any personal merit on the part of Bill.
2. You agree with Rom 1:20 that the witness of creation renders man without excuse with regard to believing in God.
The question:
Given that God has given man sufficient reason to believe, and given that, according to you, man can come to God at will and that no man is gifted in this regard more than any other man, why doesn’t the ratio of [those who choose against God] vs [those who choose for God] pan out at around 50/50 over an extended period of time? Why is it more like 999/1? What is the reason for the strong negative bias no matter how long a period we consider?
3. You believe that the ‘free gift’ of salvation from God, does not incorporate the accepting of itself: the accepting of the gift and the gift itself, you believe, are separate.
The question:
Given that a gift is only considered to be a gift if it is understood to have positive value, how can salvation be indeed a gift, without its incorporating the perception that it has positive value (thereby resulting in the natural receiving of it by the one who so perceives it)?
4. We are told in scripture that hell is not so much a geographical place, as the experience of the non-believer standing in the presence of a Holy God without the advocacy of Christ (see Rev 14:10, Heb 12:29, Dan 10:17-19).
Heaven is of course the opposite: standing in the presence of a Holy God, with the advocacy of Christ.
The question:
How would one who, because of his intuitive awareness of his sinfulness, subconsciously feels that being in God’s presence would indeed be hell, know that the way to avoid being in that hell would be to (counter-intuitively) choose to be in God’s presence?
5. The question:
Was your belief in Christ preceded by a choice to believe in Christ?
If you answer “yes”, then given that any choice one makes is based on what one believes, explain how the belief you held which made you choose to believe in Christ, was not the same belief as your (resulting) belief in Christ.
If you answer “no”, then explain why you say you had a hand in your believing.
6. You believe that at the exact precise moment that one chooses for God, he is the old man, and that his choice then transforms him into the new man.
The question:
Is a choice for righteousness, a righteous choice?
If you say “yes”, then given that your doctrine entails the old man’s making a choice for righteousness, and given that the new man is characterised as he who makes righteous choices, explain how your old man is not in fact your new man.
If you say “no”, explain why a choice for righteousness is not a righteous choice.
7. The question:
What is the purpose of Christ’s atonement for our sin of unbelief, given that we are only forgiven for our sin of unbelief once we believe, at which point we are acceptable to God anyway?
8. You agree with James 1:18 that God begat us of his own will, and understand this to be speaking of regeneration. However you believe it means that God begat us after we came to Him by faith.
The question:
Given that the character of God necessitates that it is not possible for Him to reject someone who comes to Him by faith, how can it be that He begat us of His own will, when He had no choice in the matter once we came to Him by faith anyway?
9. You have told us that it is possible that a born-again believer might, in the end, reject God and thus lose his salvation. And because you are a believer just like any other believer, you do not exclude yourself from this possibility.
The question:
Given that you should tell God what you tell His people, if you went to God right now in prayer and told Him directly with the same degree of conviction with which you tell His people, that it is certainly possible you might one day reject Him, would He regard you as someone who loves Him?
NOTES
To assist you in answering this question, you might like to consider the analogous situation of just how a husband would respond to his wife’s telling him that, although she certainly loves him now, she cannot absolutely guarantee that she will stay with him forever.
10. The question:
Given that you declare that free will is an eternal property of man, one which he, if he is saved, will take with him into heaven, what absolute guarantee can you offer that he will not once again use his free will to rebel against God some time after he has entered heaven (just like Lucifer), and so set the whole problem off all over again?