And to add to that:

Ro 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

What does this tell you about the sequence of events? And do you note the phrase "they knew God?" How do you explain this away? Clearly these (given over to a reprobate mind) where not God's Elect in the Calvinist sense. So how is it that Paul says they "knew God," since only "the elect" know God?

This is another example of the Bible making plain man's responsibility and evident ability to respond to God's callings.

Tit 2:11 ¶ For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,

So with your reasoning the demons here were elect too..

acts 19:

15And the evil spirit answered and said, Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are ye?

please give me a break..

man has a instinctive nature to know about a god a higher being..thats all romans 2 is saying man..

This is another example of your poor teaching skills, for here in this verse grace brings salvation not offer it..

It brings it with power , for grace is Gods power it reigns..

rom 5:

21That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

paul teaches this about grace 1 cor 15:

10But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.

Grace is Gods effectual spiritual power eph 3:

7Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power.

Now you explain these verses as I explained your misquote of the titus passage..

No. The problem for you is that Romans makes it clear that God reveals himself to everyone, not to just the elect.

I'm tired of your personal snipes at everyone who doesn't agree with your devotion to Calvinism. It is obnoxious. I already warned you about making your responses silly and personal. Please go away from the forum for a week. I will help with a temporary suspension of your account just in case you are tempted to return too quickly.

....Brethren, is this debate achieving anything? Is doctrine being corrected, causing people to fast and pray over this issue, or are we bickering? When I started this thread, I knew there would be fierce debate, but I did not image it would rise to this level, and drag on for so long (foolish me).

I haven't posted much because I am a young Christian trying to make up my mind, in hopes of following God's teaching, but is progress being made here?

Not really. I think a good discussion of these matters can be very edifying. As I have already said, I used to be a Calvinist, and being corrected by elder brethren led me to study the issue more thoroughly. When I read The Other Side of Calvinism the matter was finally settled for me.

Telling someone they are not a child of God because they do not accept the tenets of Calvinism (or any other "ism" theology, for that matter) is certainly not conducive to constructive debate.

Anyway, I believe that both sides of the issue have been covered pretty well in these threads -- enough so that some amount of edification can be gleaned from them. Whether or not further debate will produce any new information of use is a question to which I have no answer but presume in the negative.

Calvinism is very well represented (defended) in the majority of Bible commentaries available. But the best book on the subject, and I can not stress this enough, is The Other Side of Calvinism and if you are earnestly seeking a clear rebuttal to Calvinism for consideration, you owe it to yourself to read it.

Thank you, Brandon. I agree that I think both cases have been made here, and I think it wouldn't hurt for us all to stop the Calvinism debate (as all edifying has already been done).
Thank you for helping me with my confusion, and Brandon, I'll read it, and I pray that that will settle it in my heart.

I started the thread because I could not accept Calvinism, but so many of my "more doctrinally sound" friends were Calvinists (Oh, how I hate intimidation!).

I see no prgress in further debate.

Calvinism is vain philosophy, and not biblical, despite having mixed truth in it. Arminianism is even worse than calvinism (loss of salvation, Lordship salvation).

The only truth is the Bible.

In some regards, the Bible is clear that it is God who calls and chooses, and yet, at the same time, the Bible is clear that man has a choice to reject or recieve the gift of God. The Bible is the truth, not the philosophies of men.

you misunderstand romans because God reveals himself to a selected people..

matt 11:

25At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.

27All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.


These statements by jesus would be meaningless with your understanding..

God does not reveal himself to everyone..

Just the general notion men have that their is a man upstairs is not Having God revealed to you , thats basically what the context of romans 2 is saying.

You have a lot to learn bud..

its a shame, but this was predicted long ago..

2 pet 2:

And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.

The doctrines of grace the acromyn Tulip are foundational for the gospel of Jesus christ..No tulip truth, no gospel sorry..

Not in my Bible. Nice try though...