I'm not reading your first 3 posts.
You are not reading them because they expose you as teaching falsehoods.
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
I'm not reading your first 3 posts.
You are not reading them because they expose you as teaching falsehoods.
Oh this is just soooo cute.![]()
Since YOU are the one that is NOT REPLYING to my questions.....
Let it be noted that you have no CONFIDENCE in what you believe.
Your ENTIRE theology is a mistake.
Here's something from PAGE ONE:
Now the word “foreknowledge” as it is used in the New Testament is less ambiguous than in its simple form “to know.” If every passage in which it occurs is carefully studied, it will be discovered that it is a moot pointwhether it ever has reference to the mere perception of events which are yet to take place. The fact is that “foreknowledge” is never used in Scripture in connection with events or actions; instead, it always has reference to persons . It is persons God is said to “foreknow,” not the actions of those persons. In proof of this we shall now quote each passage where this expression is found.
What are you talking about?
We are talking about the biblical use of the term foreknowledge. You and others are wilfully ignorant of it.
Are you saying GOD DOES NOT KNOW what is going to happen?
We have already discussed the fact that God knows everything. That is not an issue. For you to post this is kind of senseless and shows you do not comprehend the basic discussion.
He only knows PERSONS?[/QUOTE]
Are you being obtuse on purpose? He knows everything being omniscient. The discussion is concerning the elect who he foreknows with a special saving love.
Isn't God omniscient?
Of course he is. This shows you have an agenda to resist the truth of God.
Your other two pages must also be full of mistakes.
The only thing full of mistakes is your post...
You do not answer because you have an anti Cal agenda. You are like those in Lk19;P.S.
Just to make sure that you understand that I'm not reading them because they're a WASTE OF TIME since none of what you claim is biblical.
I'm not reading your first 3 posts.
I know about calvinism, and do not need to learn about it from you.[/QUOTE]
You do not understand those truths known as Calvinism, only a caricature.
I'm not reading your first 3 posts.
I know about calvinism, and do not need to learn about it from you.
I find that many calvinists do not enjoy speaking to me.
I do wonder why.
Maybe because they have to face the truth a little?
You didn't reply as to what John 3:16 means.
Oh this is just soooo cute.![]()
Since YOU are the one that is NOT REPLYING to my questions.....
Let it be noted that you have no CONFIDENCE in what you believe.
Nothing in Romans 8:28-30 says anything about individuals unconditionally being elected before the world began apart from loving God, apart from answering the gospel call. Nothing in the context says that those who love God (v28) were forced to love God against their will.
Works of merit/self-righteous works or flawless works required by OT law of Moses cannot save but obedience to the will of God does save, Romans 6:16-18. One FIRST loves God (v28) THEN one can be of the foreknown, predestined, called, justified and glorified (v30).
It is Calvinism that is always putting the cart before the horse;Can you post anything right, or are you on a mission to post the cart before the horse every time?
![]()
NO..we do not love God first; here is the biblical order;1jn4
10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.
God saves people one person at a time. There is no such thing as a corporate election.
Individual saints are called. They are called to be saints, called to be holy.
You are constantly describing a gospel of works that is not the biblical gospel.It is Calvinism that is always putting the cart before the horse;
Romans 6:16 Paul said "obedience UNTO righteousness" and NOT obedience because one already is righteous.
One is not obedient because they already are righteous before God but obedience leads one to being righteous before God.
There is no example in the Bible of an impenitent, disobedient person FIRST seen as righteous by God THEN that person obeys. Acts of the Apostles 10:35 those that work righteousness are accepted with God not those that work UNrighteousness. 1 John 3:10 as long as one continues to not do righteousness he continues to not be of God. Therefore one must FIRST obey God's will THEN one is seen as righteous before God.
God foreknew there would be a group called "Christian" and God foreknew those in the group would have the traits of being "in Christ" being "holy and without blame" and be called "sons". Even though God foreknew the group and predetermined what traits this group would possess God never predetermined for men which ones will or will not be in the group. God left that up to each individual....those men that choose to obey the gospel of Christ (2 Thessalonians 1:8) will be the ones in the group and take on the traits of the group. Those that do not obey the gospel of Christ will not be in the group but instead will be in flaming fire per 2 Thessalonians 1:8.
There is no such thing as unconditional election of the individual by God. There is no example of an individual who was apart from the group yet unconditionally possessed the traits of being in Christ, holy and without blame and a son of God. The individual must CONDITIONALLY become a part of the group to possess the groups traits.
If God solely, unconditionally chose for men which ones will or will not be a member of the group Christian, then that would make God a respecter of persons when He is not Romans 2:6-11; Acts of the Apostles 10:34-35. By God allowing men to choose, then that removes God from being a respecter of persons as to who will or will not be a Christian.
....
The first occurrence is in Acts 2:23. There we read, “Him being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain.” If careful attention is paid to the wording of this verse it will be seen that the apostle was not there speaking of God’s foreknowledge of the act of the crucifixion, but of the Personcrucified: “Him (Christ) being delivered by,” etc.
You do not understand biblical foreknowledge.Error in red. God's foreknowledge of Christ's crucifixion is exactly what Luke was pointing to there. The prophet Stephen even pointed to that foreknowledge God put in His Word through His OT prophets. The unbelieving Jews stoned him for it:
Acts 7:51-53
51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.
52 Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of Whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers:
53 Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.
KJV
Stephen shows by that, that they KNEW who Jesus was by knowing the prophecy from the OT prophets, which came to God's OT prophets by the foreknowledge of God. Even David in Psalms 22 was given to recognize the event of Christ's crucifixion a thousand years before it happened.
So I don't know where you got this junk article, but the guy needs to go back to Sunday school.
That is correct. Unconditional election as presented in Calvinism is totally false and contrary to Scripture. God elects no one for either salvation or damnation, and offers the gift of eternal life freely to "whosoever" will take of the Water of Life.There is no such thing as unconditional election of the individual by God.
You do not understand biblical foreknowledge.
The man you ridicule saying He needs to go back to Sunday School,is known worldwide, lol....when I see people saying ....did you read the post by Davy on CB...then I will read another of your posts. Right now reading you foolish post damages brain cells.
tiYeah, I read the article. It's the same kind seminary gibberish that I heard one time from a Ph.D. from Vanderbilt seminary, trying to create new doctrines based on Scripture so they can write new books and make more money. You must remember, even the President of the United States puts his pants on the same way we do. They are not infallible.
You are constantly describing a gospel of works that is not the biblical gospel.
We are unrighteous. Our works are as filthy rags. Isa64:6
Wait....to be clear, you are saying that Davy cannot believe Pink's Calvinism unless God allows him to believe it?ti
Hello Davy,
At least you took the time to read the article.
He was not creating any knew doctrine, just clarifying an old doctrine.
You cannot believe it, unless God allows you too
He believed it and taught it as did most all of the puritans and reformers, Spurgeon and others.
Romans 6:16 Paul said "obedience UNTO righteousness" and NOT obedience because one already is righteous.
One is not obedient because they already are righteous before God but obedience leads one to being righteous before God.
There is no example in the Bible of an impenitent, disobedient person FIRST seen as righteous by God THEN that person obeys. Acts of the Apostles 10:35 those that work righteousness are accepted with God not those that work UNrighteousness. 1 John 3:10 as long as one continues to not do righteousness he continues to not be of God. Therefore one must FIRST obey God's will THEN one is seen as righteous before God.
God foreknew there would be a group called "Christian"
How did this group acquire these traits?and God foreknew those in the group would have the traits of being "in Christ"
So these natural men who were not individuals, but part of this group...desired to be holy and blameless, and were called sons?being "holy and without blame" and be called "sons".
Even though God foreknew the group and predetermined what traits this group would possess God never predetermined for men which ones will or will not be in the group.
God left that up to each individual....those men that choose to obey the gospel of Christ (2 Thessalonians 1:8) will be the ones in the group and take on the traits of the group.
The only one who might like your post is the great JonC. He loves all manner of anti-Cal, anti-biblical teaching;););)Those that do not obey the gospel of Christ will not be in the group but instead will be in flaming fire per 2 Thessalonians 1:8.
There is no such thing as unconditional election of the individual by God. There is no example of an individual who was apart from the group yet unconditionally possessed the traits of being in Christ, holy and without blame and a son of God. The individual must CONDITIONALLY become a part of the group to possess the groups traits.
If God solely, unconditionally chose for men which ones will or will not be a member of the group Christian, then that would make God a respecter of persons when He is not Romans 2:6-11; Acts of the Apostles 10:34-35. By God allowing men to choose, then that removes God from being a respecter of persons as to who will or will not be a Christian.[/QUOTE]
When a person turns from truth, this is the kind of man-centered - works based message they have. No scriptural base at all.
Wait....to be clear, you are saying that Davy cannot believe Pink's Calvinism unless God allows him to believe it?
In a way I agree (just like you cannot believe John Wesley's doctrine unless God allows you to believe it). But in another way the comment sounds more cultish or gnostic in nature than Christian. I'm sure you mean the former, but the wording allows for the notion of "another gospel".
I do not know what you are talking about, Anthony D.
In case you did not read my post I am a Calvinist (I am a Southern Baptist who agrees with unconditional election).
I do like non-Calvinist teaching, whether I agree with the teaching or not, if it is orthodox to historic Christianity and sincere (e.g., I appreciate the sermons and writings of men like D.W. Moody and A.Z. Tozier. I also enjoy pre-Reformation theology and the ECF's). But I also like authors such as John Piper, J.I. Packer, and Spurgeon has been a favorite for decades.
I am a Calvinist BUT Calvinism is NOT my religion. I am a Christian, Anthony D. As such I can get along and listen to Calvinists and non-Calvinists as long as they are also Christians as well. The gospel of Jesus Christ does that. The gospel unites believers where diverse understandings may otherwise separate them. It is simply a matter of being faithful to Christ rather than leaning on one's own understanding.