Warning: Undefined variable $ub in /mnt/web005/e2/75/53977675/htdocs/pages/classes/User.php on line 239 Warning: Undefined variable $ub in /mnt/web005/e2/75/53977675/htdocs/pages/classes/User.php on line 251 Deprecated: strripos(): Passing null to parameter #2 ($needle) of type string is deprecated in /mnt/web005/e2/75/53977675/htdocs/pages/classes/User.php on line 251 Bible - Search - The Staunch Calvinist Warning: Undefined variable $ub in /mnt/web005/e2/75/53977675/htdocs/pages/classes/User.php on line 239 Warning: Undefined variable $ub in /mnt/web005/e2/75/53977675/htdocs/pages/classes/User.php on line 251 Deprecated: strripos(): Passing null to parameter #2 ($needle) of type string is deprecated in /mnt/web005/e2/75/53977675/htdocs/pages/classes/User.php on line 251
The Staunch Calvinist

"Absolute sovereignty is what I love to ascribe to God." - Jonathan Edwards

Search

You searched for 'Bible'

I've found 67 results!


A Review of Perspectives on the Doctrine of God
Simon Wartanian | 1,883 views | 2,894 words | 0:14:58 hours | 14 May 2022 21:35
Theology Proper Arminianism Calvinism Open Theism Review
...s Olson often uses in his response to the Calvinist side, “the author of sin and evil”). But what if humans did not possess libertarian free will? Then “God would be virtually indistinguishable from the devil” (p. 154). Thus, the only way that God can remain good and show His loving-kindness is to give humans libertarian free will. This is problematic in my opinion to subject God to our standards and to judge Him as if He is a creature. Here, I worry, as does Dr. Ware, “deeply for Olson and others who think the way that they do when it well may be the case that the view of God they find indistinguishable from Satan turns out to be the true and living God of the Bible” (p. 195).

Throughout the chapter, Dr. Olson also uses the fact that God created people Whom He could save but does not and who will spend an eternity in hell as if it is only an argument against Calvinism (e.g., pp. 154, 160-161; on p. 161, he even compares hell to a concentration camp!). This is an object against any self-respecting Christian theist position which does not deny God’s comprehensive foreknowledge. If God doesn’t want them to go to hell, then He could have struck down their parents or not bring them into being better than allowing them to be born, trying to save them and ultimately being eternally disappointed. I’m sure anyone in hell would have preferred to not exist rather than having their free will “violated.” The Calvinist is satisfied in his conviction that nothing happens outside or without God’s will and those who are in hell, God wanted them to be there because of their sin and He will be glorified in their damnation. This is indeed a horrible decree, but it is nonetheless for the glory of the triune God. Either God had a purpose in their destruction and brought them into being or He did not. Dr. Olson’s answer is “People determine themselves for hell by their free choices and especially by their rejection of God’s offer of salvation (whether through the explicit preaching of the gospel or through the light of God present in every culture and in conscience)” (p. 161). There is no offer of salvation in natural revelation, but his theology has ventured off so far based on his conception of goodness and love that he would perhaps be an inclusivist? The gospel comes to us by special divine revelation (e.g., Rom. 10:14-17).

Another point which Dr. Olson mentions is that “God limits his power in relation to creation and especially in relation to human persons” (p. 155). One should not wander that Calvinists have often accused of Arminians of not being as God-centered as Calvinists when such statements are made. God is adjusting Himself just to make room for His creatures. God does not need to restrict Himself or His power in order for His creatures to be responsible. He also says that “For free will theses, God’s glory is not might but goodness” (p. 155). Why such a dichotomy? As if His power is contrary to His grace and mercy. This is in nowise the case.

According to Olson, libertarian free will is simply presupposed in the Bible (p. 159). It is “the Hebraic view of persons as possessing free will” (p. 159). I’m not sure if we can paint with such a broad brush. There are interesting indications about the Essenes and divine determinism. In the rest of the chapter, he goes on to substantiate more claims about libertarian free will and some tenants of Arminianism like prevenient grace. All in all, a fine but an unconvincing case for classical...

A Review of Jeffrey D. Johnson's The Fatal Flaw
Simon Wartanian | 10,247 views | 4,031 words | 0:20:42 hours | 27 November 2015 22:25
Reformed Baptist Covenant Theology 1689 Federalism Westminster Baptism Infant Baptism Book Review Jeffrey Johnson The Fatal Flaw
...Theology which supports the practice of infant baptism, forgetting that there is a difference between Baptist and Presbyterian Covenant Theology. If you would like to learn more about 1689 Baptist Covenant Theology, which is called 1689 Federalism see my attempt to make a case for it when expositing the 7th chapter of the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith here.

The Westminster Position

The author spends some time first to explain the Presbyterian/Westminster. The basis of the Westminster position is continuity between the covenants of the Bible.

They understand that the Lord established a covenant of works in the Garden with Adam as the representative of the human race which he broke. Then the Lord established the Covenant of Grace in Genesis 3:15 and onward. This was Covenant of Grace was differently administered under Noah, Abraham, Moses, David and Jesus. But the essence of these covenants was the same.

The logic is understandable. If infants were admitted into the covenant under Moses and Abraham and the New Covenant is basically and essentially the same, then infants should also be admitted into the New Covenant. The question is, whether if these covenants truly were administrations of the one Covenant of Grace.

The Westminster says the following of the Covenant of Grace in chapter 7 –

Man, by his fall, having made himself incapable of life by that covenant, the Lord was pleased to make a second, commonly called the covenant of grace; wherein He freely offers unto sinners life and salvation by Jesus Christ; requiring of them faith in Him, that they may be saved, and promising to give unto all those that are ordained unto eternal life His Holy Spirit, to make them willing, and able to believe. (paragraph 3)

As Calvinists, our Presbyterian brethren along with us believe in salvation by grace and in Christ throughout the ages. This is what is here conveyed in the Confession. The essence of the Covenant of Grace is faith and salvation in Christ, although that had different outer form under the various covenants. Abraham did not have as much clarity about the Messiah as we now by the grace of God have. This is expressed in the fifth paragraph –

This covenant was differently administered in the time of the law, and in the time of the Gospel: under the law it was administered by promises, prophecies, sacrifices, circumcision, the paschal lamb, and other types and ordinances delivered to the people of the Jews, all foresignifying Christ to come; which were, for that time, sufficient and efficacious, through the operation of the Spirit, to instruct and build up the elect in faith in the promised Messiah, by whom they had full remission of sins, and eternal salvation; and is called the Old Testament.

Under the law, by that meaning the whole period of the Old Testament, the Covenant of Grace was seen in the shadows and prophecies (See certain shadows in the Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic and Davidic covenants). But under the New Testament dispensation we have a fuller revelation of God’s purposes and the Covenant of Grace which was fully revealed in the New Covenant.

The Westminister position is summed up in the last sentence in paragraph 6 –

…There are not therefore two covenants of grace, differing in substance, but one and the same, under various dispensations.

As Pascal Denault puts it: one covenant, two administrations.

Sign of the Covenant

Our Presbyterian brethren argue that ...

Limited Atonement, Definite Redemption - Scripture List & Case
Simon Wartanian | 7,773 views | 6,400 words | 0:32:47 hours | 23 March 2014 20:51
Calvinism Election Predestination Mercy Sovereignty Verse List God Is In Control Unconditional Election Sovereign Grace
... come to the waters” (55:1). The idea that the gospel is offered to all; therefore, God is trying to save all; or therefore, Christ died for all is an assumption. The gospel is to be preached to “all nations” (Mt. 28:19) and “to every creature” (Mk. 16:15) because God has His elect in every nation (Rev. 5:9). No one knows who is elect and who isn’t; the gospel must be offered to all without exception. Jesus said, “many are called but few are chosen” (Mt. 22:14). Christ encouraged Paul to preach the gospel in Corinth; “for I have many people in this city” (Ac. 18:10). It is true that whoever believes in Christ will be saved, but the Bible teaches that some believe and others do not believe because of the electing choice of the Father and the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit. God makes those dead in sins and unable, alive and able (Eph. 2:1). The unwilling are made willing. “No one can come to Me, unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day” (Jn. 6:44).[11]

John Owen’s case for Limited Atonement[12]

The Father imposed His wrath due unto, and the Son underwent punishment for, either:

  1. All the sins of all men.
  2. All the sins of some men, or
  3. Some of the sins of all men.

In which case it may be said:

  1. That if the last be true, all men have some sins to answer for, and so, none are saved.
  2. That if the second be true, then Christ, in their stead suffered for all the sins of all the elect in the whole world, and this is the truth.
  3. But if the first be the case, why are not all men free from the punishment due unto their sins?

You answer, “Because of unbelief.”

  • I ask, Is this unbelief a sin, or is it not? If it be, then Christ suffered the punishment due unto it, or He did not. If He did, why must that hinder them more than their other sins for which He died? If He did not, He did not die for all their sins!”

Usage of the word “all”, usually indicates all of a set or many depending on the context

Mt 2:3-4 When Herod the king heard this, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him; and assembling all the chief priests and scribes of the people, he inquired of them where the Christ was to be born.

Mt 3:5 Then Jerusalem and all Judea and all the region about the Jordan were going out to him,

Mt 5:11 “Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of[13] evil against you falsely on my account.

Mt 10:21-22 Brother will deliver brother over to death, and the father his child, and children will rise against parents and have them put to death, 22 and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved.

Mk 1:5 And all the country of Judea and all Jerusalem were going out to him and were being baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins. (Lk 7:30)

Lk 3:21 Now when all the people were baptized, and when Jesus also had been baptized and was praying, the heavens were opened,

Jn 4:29 “Come, see a man who told me all that I ever did. Can this be the Christ?”

Jn 8:2 Early in the morning he came again to the temple. All the people came to him, and he sat down and taught them.

Acts 2:17 “‘And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams;

Acts 10:12 In it were all kinds of animals and repti...

Colossians 1:19-20, 'reconcile to himself all things'
Simon Wartanian | 7,242 views | 2,057 words | 0:11:03 hours | 26 April 2014 22:29
Unconditional Election Limited Atonement Reconciliation Cross Predestination Calvinism
...span class="greek"ἀποκαταλλάσσω

- Transliteration: Apokatallasso

- Phonetic: ap-ok-at-al-las’-so

- Definition:

  1. to reconcile completely
  2. to reconcile back again
  3. bring back a former state of harmony

- Origin: from G575 and G2644

- TDNT entry: 05:18,4

- Part(s) of speech: Verb[1]

Since the word is unique being used only by Paul and it is not even used outside the Bible, then we should proceed with caution when we assign a meaning to it. The meaning should be gleaned from the present context where the word is used.

I believe the sense of reconciliation that is being spoken of Paul here, is twofold. First up is, the salvation of believers and second is the subjection of all things under Him.

Salvation

The first sense is seen when Paul speaks that God reconciled the “you” of the believers in verses 21-22. It is directly and explicitly they, who are reconciled in His body by His death. Meaning, that His death was the cause or the means of their reconciliation back to God. It was the means that they have peace with God. Moreover, it is they, i.e. the believer who were reconciled “in his body of flesh by his death” who will be holy and blameless. It does not speak of everything and everyone without exception being reconciled back to a loving and peaceful relationship with God as Universalists would desire the text to mean. Those who will be holy and blameless, were the ones in the past “alienated and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds” (Col 1:21), but now have faith (Col 1:23). It is not they who still do evil deeds, but will eventually or directly enter into God’s loving presence. See also Eph 1:4; 5:25-26 for “holy and blameless” being limited to the elect.

Notice also, in verse 23 where Paul warns the believers to continue steadfast in the faith. This also would be useless, if Paul is actually speaking of the salvation of all the human race, including maybe the angels, then this verse is meaningless. Because whether they believe or not, is irrelevant, according to Universalism, since they eventually or directly will enter into God’s loving presence.

Subjection

The second sense of reconciliation is that, all things will be brought under His visible subjection. Notice the use of visible. All things now are under the subjection of Christ, but that is not visible to us. When we look at the world it seems to us, from a sinful perspective, that Christ is actually not reigning supreme. But the Bible actually does say that Christ the Lord possess all rule and authority (e.g. Matt 28:18; Col 2:10).

All things, even the evil powers, are being held together by Him (Col 1:17) and are under His authority and exist for His purpose (Col 1:15). Even in the present. But in the eternal state, He will reign over them in a visible and absolute manner that no one will be able to say anything but that God reigns supreme. 

I believe that Hebrews 2 speaks of the Lord Jesus (Heb 2:9) exactly in this sense. 

Heb 2:7-8 You made him for a little while lower than the angels; you have crowned him with glory and honor, 8 putting everything in subjection under his feet.” Now in putting everything in subjection to him, he left nothing outside his control. At present, we do not yet see everything in subjection to him. 

Notice that the Holy Spirit is saying that nothing is outside of Christ control. Everything is under His holy feet already. At the present, we do not see that reality. The Author is not ...

A Review of RC Sproul's Willing to Believe & Thoughts on Free Will
Simon Wartanian | 9,141 views | 3,709 words | 0:19:03 hours | 22 February 2015 00:23
RC Sproul Willing To Believe The Controversy Over Free Will Free Will Predestination Election Sovereignty Compatibilism Calvinism Arminianism Pelagianism Semi-Pelagianism Augustine Martin Luther John Calvin Jonathan Edwards Book Review
...

He taught that the nature of man was basically good and that sinning didn’t effect that basic goodness of man.

Man has a free will to do good or evil and to obey God in all things.

Jesus’ death was not substitionary, but it was as an example for us.

People can live sinless lives, and in fact some have lived sinless lives.

The grace of God is important, but not essential. What I mean is that it would be awesome if one uses the grace of God for obedience, it will make things much easier, but it is even possible to obey without the grace of God.

This among other things are the things that he believed. I think, for any serious Bible student, they must conclude that this places him outside of Christian orthodoxy. Pelagius and his teachings were condemned in 418 and you would think that it will be the last thing heard of Pelagius, but then arises Charles Finney many centuries later in America.

Charles Finney

Charles Finney taught things very similar to Pelagius. In fact, he was more Pelagian than Pelagius.

He rejected the doctrine of justification by faith alone, which is the heart of the Gospel message.

He rejected the penal substitionary atonement of Christ in place of the believers. He posed the Governmental and Moral Influence theories of the atonement. He taught that all that was needed for conversion was good argumentation and persuasion. His influence is seen in the decisional evangelism/regeneration of our day, when people are told to make a “choice” for Christ. Or to make to choose Christ to be born again.

It is interesting to observe that this is the vision of the secular culture. That man is able to do anything possible. We think we are not bound by nature to anything. We think that we are the gods of our destinies.

The Semi-Pelagians/Arminians

After Augustine’s sharp critique of Pelagius the church did not stay on the Augustinian position, it’s not surprising seeing that man hates the fact that he’s dependent on God for the good that he does and is unable to do that which he ought to do.

There came a position which was somewhere between Augustinianism and Pelagianism. Which rejected the Pelagian heresy, and out of concern for man’s personal responsibility tried to elevate the freedom of the human will in the matter of salvation. They believed that man was badly wounded by the fall. Death is the punishment of the fall. Man’s dispositions are inclined to evil. But there still is in man the ability to resist the grace of God. Although man is dead in sins and is a slave of sin, yet he is still able to resist the effective grace of God and thereby frustrate the plans of God.

Here RC introduces the difference between mongergism and synergism. Monergism is the teaching that there is One Power which is in work in us when regeneration happens, in that we are passive. Synergism on the other hand teaches that man and God cooperate to bring the salvation of man. Arminians may not like the word synergism, but it describes what they believe. They believe that God does everything that He can to bring men to Himself, and He wants all men to come, but yet some refuse to come. Therefore, the will of man is that which effectuates salvation. The Augustinians disagreed.

Jacob Arminius

Later in the 16th century came Jacob Arminius who studied in Geneva (Calvin’s city) and was a Calvinist, but later came to doubt his Calvinism. He agreed with Calvinism about Total Depravity, but where he differed...

A Short Review of Sam Waldron's Modern Exposition of 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith
Simon Wartanian | 6,308 views | 606 words | 0:03:08 hours | 23 February 2015 19:14
Review Book Review Sam Waldron Modern Exposition Of 1689 Baptist Confession Of Faith 1689 Reformed Baptist
...baptism. So on 14-06-2013[1] I was baptized after a profession of faith. At that time I was in the process of studying the Doctrines of Grace. Sometime later, by the grace of God I came to embrace and glory in them.

The Confession

The first and foremost thing that I love about this Confession is it's high, high, high view of God's sovereign freedom. I love it and that is exactly how I believe that God is, the Sovereign King over every molecule. 
I love the fact of the Baptists' deep commitment to the truth and the sole authority of the Bible and their appeal to the Bible. I could not really find any disagreements with the Confession, so I feel home in it and I'm not ashamed to identify myself as a Reformed Baptist.

What I loved about Dr Waldron's work is his way of explaining the Confession and going through the biblical evidence (as I have been reading Grudem, I would have loved it if Dr Waldron would cite portions of the passages that he was using as proof, rather most of the time, only references were given).

When I started studying the Confession I didn't realizes that a confession is actually a Systematic Theology! :)

Dr Waldron explained things very well, I especially liked his extensive treatment of chapters 29 (Of Baptism), 31 (of the state of man after death and of the resurrection of the dead) and 32 (Of the last judgment). There he interacted with the other side and provided some answers. With the explanations he went also through more detail.

During my study of the 1689 I left some comments about my thoughts on each paragraph that can be viewed here: https://www.thecalvinist.net/post/1689-Second-Baptist-Confession-Of-Faith-With-Commentary-And-Highlighting/922 

Also I have opened a new section wherein I try to go in detail to explain why I agree with the formulation of doctrines in the 1689. The section is found here: https://www.thecalvinist.net/1689 

Few minor problems with the book

One thing that was frustrating me, was the load of typos there. It's not that I'm a grammar nazi, but the quality of the work is so great that the multitude of the typos, wrong headings above pages (pages 103, 381), no spacing between words, wrong numeration really were the only downside, which could have been prevented. Hopefully, they will update it in the future, otherwise we'll just have to wait for James Renihan's exposition of the 1689 that is in progress!

Footnotes

  1. ^ Here is a picture of my baptism back when my hair was long. 

 

...
1689 Baptist Confession Chapter 12: Of Adoption - Commentary
Simon Wartanian | 11,382 views | 2,439 words | 0:12:42 hours | 04 March 2015 21:56
The 1689 Second Baptist Confession Of Faith Confession Commentary Reformed Baptist Chapter 12 Chapter Twelve Adoption Children Of God
...

Chapter 12: Of Adoption

In this chapter, we will try to find what the Bible says about us being the children of God. What does it mean to be children of God and how do we become children of God? These are the questions that we will try to answer.

§1 Make partakers of the grace of adoption

  1. All those that are justified, 1 God vouchsafed, 2 in and for the sake of his only Son Jesus Christ, 3 to make partakers of the grace of adoption, by which they are taken into the number, and enjoy the liberties and privileges of the children of God, have his name put upon them, 4 receive the spirit of adoption, have access to the throne of grace with boldness, are enabled to cry Abba, Father, 5 are pitied, protected, provided for, and chastened by him as by a Father, yet never cast off, but sealed to the day of redemption, 6 and inherit the promises as heirs of everlasting salvation.7
    1. Gal. 3:24-26[1]
    2. 1 John 3:1-3
    3. Eph. 1:5; Gal. 4:4-5; Rom 8:17, 29
    4. Rom. 8:17; John 1:12; 2 Cor. 6:18; Rev. 3:12
    5. Rom. 8:15; Eph. 3:12; Rom. 5:2; Gal. 4:6; Eph. 2:18
    6. Ps. 103:13; Prov. 14:26; Matt. 6:30, 32; 1 Peter 5:7; Heb. 12:6; Isa. 54:8-9; Lam. 3:31; Eph. 4:30
    7. Rom. 8:17; Heb. 1:14; 9:15

God has vouchsafed, i.e., granted, all of them that are justified...in and for the sake of His only Son Jesus Christ, to make partakers of the grace of adoption (Eph. 1:5; Gal. 3:24-26; John 1:12-13). No justified person misses this grace of adoption. Their adoption, as well as their election (chapter 3:5), having the blessings of redemption (chapter 8:8), effectual calling and regeneration (chapter 10:2), justification (chapter 11:3), were not based in themselves. The absolute and free grace of God dominates all of the Christian life. Because we are in...His Only Son Jesus Christ, we are likewise counted as sons (Gal. 3:26-29; 4:4-5). And for the sake of His Only Son and the work He accomplished upon the cross, whereby He purchased our redemption with all of its blessings, we are adopted as sons of God. By this grace of adoption, we are to enjoy the liberties and privileges of the children of God (John 1:12-13). We are freed from sin and are able to willingly please God. We are privileged as children of God and of having God as our Father. The Confession then goes on to list the privileges which the children of God have.

They have His name put upon them (Rev. 3:12), meaning that they belong to Him. He is their owner. He is their Father and Master. They receive the spirit of adoption (Rom. 8:15), Who is the Holy Spirit of God. The Spirit testifies with our spirit about our identity as children of God (Rom. 8:14-17). As children, we have access to the throne of grace with boldness (Heb. 4:16), because God is our Abba, Father. A child should not be afraid to approach their father. So likewise, we, as children of the Father, we may go to the throne of grace with boldness! We, by the fatherly care of God, are pitied, protected, provided for, and chastened by Him as by a Father (Ps. 103:13; Prov. 14:26; Matt. 6:30-32; Heb. 12:6 ). He cares for us and provides for us. But an important part of how He proves that He is our Father and we are His children is by disciplining us. He thereby proves that He cares for us and the wrong things which we do. But this disciplining or chastising is not for the purpose of condemning us. No. We are never cast off (John 6:37-39). It is for the purpose of us sharing in His holiness (Heb. 12:10). We are nev...

1689 Baptist Confession Chapter 20: Of the Gospel, and of the Extent of the Grace Thereof - Commentary
Simon Wartanian | 13,284 views | 3,261 words | 0:17:00 hours | 05 March 2015 19:57
The 1689 Second Baptist Confession Of Faith Confession Commentary Reformed Baptist Chapter 20 General Revelation Special Revelation The Necessity Of The Gospel The Work Of The Holy Spirit
...special revelation of God and is not part of general revelation. Neither the works of creation or providence, with the light of nature, make discovery of Christ. General revelation reveals that there is a God, but to know Who this God is and what He requires, we need special revelation. Furthermore, those who are destitute of the revelation by Him by the promise or gospel cannot be saved (Rom. 10:13-15). It is by the embrace of the gospel and the revelation of God alone that we are saved.

The gospel, unlike the existence of God, is a special revelation, meaning it is only revealed in the Bible. You cannot look at creation and conclude that God gave His only Son to die in our place! Scripture, in no place, gives any hint that people can be saved outside of Christ or without believing the work of Christ. Therefore, for those who are neither infants nor people with mental problems (see chapter 10:3), their end is doom. Not because they rejected the gospel, but because they lived in sin. Romans 1 clearly teaches that all people know God and they suppress the truth about that one God and seek others ways. Paul writes:

Rom. 1:18-20 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 

The reasons that they are ἀναπολογήτους (anapologetous, G379) is because of the fact that God Himself is the One Who has revealed Himself to all people. The things about God and His power are “plain to them” and the reason why they’re plain is “because God has shown it to them.” When we doubt the validity of general revelation, we doubt the power and word of God. They know God for certain, but by sin, they suppress that truth. Because of God’s self-revelation in creation, they are without a defense—they are without an apologetic. This general revelation will shut the mouths of people on the Day of Judgment who never heard of the gospel. There is here not a word about people having an excuse because they never heard the gospel. In fact, at the time when Paul was writing, the majority of the living humans then had not yet received the message of the gospel. Nonetheless, Paul still declares all people to be “without excuse.” They’re without an excuse not because of what they do not know, but because of what they do know. They God from the created world and they have rejected Him. They will not be judged because they’ve rejected the gospel, but because they’ve rejected the God Who has clearly revealed Himself in creation. John Calvin comments on Romans 1:20—

So that they are inexcusable. It hence clearly appears what the consequence is of having this evidence — that men cannot allege any thing before God’s tribunal for the purpose of showing that they are not justly condemned. Yet let this difference be remembered, that the manifestation of God, by which he makes his glory known in his creation, is, with regard to the light itself, sufficiently clear; but that on account of our blindness, it is not found to be sufficient. We are not however so blind, that we can plead our ignorance as an excuse for our perverseness. We conceive that there is a Deity; and then we concl...

God's Absolute Sovereignty: Concise Scripture List
Simon Wartanian | 5,421 views | 1,379 words | 0:07:02 hours | 08 February 2014 15:59
Calvinism Election Predestination Limited Atonement Mercy Sovereignty Verse List God Is In Control
...e authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father.”

Jn 11:49-52 But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, “You know nothing at all. 50 Nor do you understand that it is better for you that one man should die for the people, not that the whole nation should perish.” 51 He did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, 52 and not for the nation only, but also to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad. Irresistible Grace Preservation of the Saints

Scripture quotations are from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version® (ESV®), copyright © 2001 by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

...
Total depravity, Radical corruption - Scripture List
Simon Wartanian | 5,825 views | 3,175 words | 0:16:18 hours | 23 March 2014 18:00
Calvinism Election Predestination Mercy Sovereignty Verse List God Is In Control Total Depravity Radical Corruption
...Ps 5:9; Ps 140:3; Jer 5:16

[3] C.f. Ps 10:7

[4] C.f. Prov 1:16; Isa 59:7-8; Rom 3:15-17

[5] C.f. Ps 36:1

[6] C.f. Isa 6:10; Mt 13:14-15; Mk 6:52

[7] C.f. Ps 14:1-3; Ps 53:1-3

[8] Scripture quotations are from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version® (ESV®), copyright © 2001 by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved..

...