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!
No, but I respect your opinion.
Right, what you say is correct. I get it.
In your opinion. Fair enough.
But none can be taken by soft-pedaling or at the exclusion of other passages that say Jesus was given only a few, or those who God predestined, or the like.
Confession and repentance is absolutely necessary, yes. And not just once and for all, but continually. And... not the Catholic version of confession, but yes. <smile>
His children never perish. Sure the body perishes and is dead because of sin as Romans 8 says, but those who are born of God, their spirit does not and cannot sin and it is joined to the Lord God as one spirit with Him. As they are so joined they are raised with Christ into heaven and sit with Him in heavenly places. Which means when you die, you go to be with the Lord Jesus, as in He has gone into heaven to prepare a place for you, so that when you die, he comes and gets you and brings you to himself in heaven to be with Him for all eternity, and all the ages to come.
Hmmm, well that's not really relevant, I don't think, but okay.
Not necessarily. Many things in the Bible can be read and understood in two very different ways, and just based on the wording itself, one way is just as valid as the other, but only one of the two, since they are very different, is correct. This is the case here.
Sometimes it's an either/or thing, KUWN, but at other times it's a both/and thing. In neither case is interpretive method really the issue at all. And neither is it literal versus spiritual; just because something may be understood in a spiritual sense does not mean in any way that it is not literal or have literal implications. In these cases, the problem can be because it is being understood ina far too woodenly literal way. And in other cases ~ and this is the case here ~ it's taking one Scriptural implication at the exclusion of the other ~ which is what I've been saying to you and other posters here ~ rather than holding both implications as equally true and resolving this seeming conflict ~ seeming, because there is no conflict or contradiction ~ between the two.
I dont give testimonials.
6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
I went through quick because you're all over, as I've said before, and this does not make it easy to reply to you.<eye roll> You should stop misrepresenting it... which is either because you do it unknowingly, because of misperception, or otherwise, but neither is good. If you did that, you might take back what you say here, because it's ridiculous.
This is absolutely true, and I and all good Reformed folk do ~ and Augustine, and Martin Luther, and John Calvin, and all the Reformers did ~ absolutely agree.
<chuckles> Not if it's from God's Word... <smile> ...which, the record is clear; just a cursory look back at my posts will show that they have been saturated with quotes from God's Word...
Right. And it's true. The concept is as simple as and parallel to the fact that not everything mentioned in God's Word is approved of or sanctioned by God. For example... well, just a cursory reading of what some people did in the Bible was "evil in the sight of the Lord," so yeah, it's there in God's Word, but obviously God didn't approve, nor was He the author of those perpetrators who did those things.
Oh, if that were only true...
Okay, well, I'm not going to treat it as rhetorical, because it's a good question. I get loud and clear that you're saying, in effect, that he would not decree anything that He doesn't agree with, but... well, two things:
- As I have said, you misunderstand what a decree, in the sense of God's eternal decree, is, namely that it's not an "order to do something," but rather a prescription for how things will be.
- Regarding people, this decree is not really what they will do but how they will live their lives, to put it succinctly... so, some will live out their lives this way, and others will live out their lives very differently, and in this way both will play their part in suiting His overall purpose and His glory. And this is exactly what Paul is talking about in Romans 9, when he writes, "What if God, desiring to show His wrath and to make known His power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of His glory for vessels of mercy, which He has prepared beforehand for glory ~ even us whom He has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?"
If you were to understand what I say directly above about this decreeing, you might then see that God's decreeing consists of, allows for, both His active causing of things and His allowing other things. In this way, all His purposes are served and come to fruition.
Obviously, "the reformed" (which is not really a denomination; some denominations are reformed in their understanding of Scripture and some are not) do believe that God allows... well, everything, in one sense, but in another ~ not actively causing ~ also.
Well, true, but not true in the sense of your understanding of His decreeing. That's the problem. At least one of them; I would exhort you to do, using a good concordance, a wordsearch through the Bible on "decree." You might change your mind, at least somewhat.
Absolutely true. <smile> People can certainly cause confusion, though, especially with regard to God's Word, but still, it is what it is. As Peter says (quoting from Isaiah, who quotes God Himself), "All flesh is like grass and all its glory like the flower of grass. The grass withers, and the flower falls, but the word of the Lord remains forever" (1 Peter 1:24-25).
Well, a Calvinist is a Calvinist, for sure, but a hyper-Calvinist has a distorted view of Calvin's actual words and writings, in the manner that he or she overstates the sovereignty of God even to minimization of and even to the exclusion of human will and/or responsibility. That's what hyper-Calvinists do, because of their misunderstandings of Calvin himself and his systematic theology. The link I provided was a good one; obviously you just dismissed it out of hand, which is okay, but it's, well, it's burying your head in the sand, really.
LOL! Except for at least the fourth and fifth century church (really the first, as we see in Acts, and as I've quoted from all of the New Testament writers, from Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John (and Luke again) and Paul and Peter and James and the writer of Hebrews (and then of course back to John).
Thanks, Gosh. <smile>
I have. You do the same. But, it's not Scripture, so don't equate the two as divinely inspired. But... John Calvin was right... <smile>
If one approaches it with preconceptions, it can seem that way, yes.
Oh wait, but you don't believe in "OSAS," right? So here you're saying one's salvation in Christ is secure? That's a little curious...
Well, I do, because I have faith, which... is assurance from God. And a gift of the Spirit, which will never be revoked. I hope you have that, too.
Ah, ignorance is bliss, I guess... <smile>
Ignoring it doesn't make it so, Gosh.
And if you read Romans 1, you'll see why, at least in the case of God. Here, I'll help (emphasis mine):
"...although they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks to Him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator... For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions... since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done..."
HYPER CALVINISTS (not historical Calvinists).
Yes, but you still misconstrue, which makes me think it's intentional. Well, considering the fact that you won't even consider hyper-Calvinism, maybe it's just ignorance. Or... maybe it's both. But one thing it's not... it's not neither. <smile>
Nope. But hyper-Calvinists think so.
I mean, that would be great! <smile> But considering you've said that several times now... <smile> But yeah, better to keep your mouth shut and be thought ignorant than open your mouth and remove all doubt (as you have several times now)...
Ah. "I've stopped! But, you know, not really..."
Grace and peace to you.
Let no man , woman or child heed calvin . Rather let us learn the scriptures for ourselves . many twist doctrine .
And NO FAITH SYSTEM twists the Word of God more than Calvinism.
Testimonies. Your personal testimony. Well that's too bad. It probably would be encouraging to all of us. But, fair enough.
Hmmm... well, Hebrews 11 shows us that no matter what time frame, we are all saved the same way... The assurance and of God and conviction by the Spirit (verse 1)... through this, which is faith. From Abraham (really before that, even, all the way back to Adam) on down...
Right, but only because you are. I just go where you go...
Ah, well, these conversations do get disjointed, and tend to get wider and wider in scope, so much so that they become... unweildy.
Well, what you think to be Calvinism crosses into what is known as hyper-Calvinism, which is a terrible distortion of Calvinism, and therefore not really Calvinism. You're certainly not alone in that; it's not hard to do, even for people who believe and understand what Calvin really said and wrote.
Of course I do. But, it's necessary to understand the Biblical context of that 'whosoever.' If you're going to read John 3:16, you have to go on and read the next few verses, especially John 3:18.
No, what you don't seem to realize is that because of Adam's and Eve's fall, we are all predisposed to that lust. And it's not just "the reformed" that understand that.
And this is where the misconception goes.
Right, the problem is with your perception, GodsGrace. It's very fair that that's where this perception of yours would take you, but the problem is the perception. Not you, per se, but your perception of "the reformed" and Calvinism. That's the problem.
I've responded to your statements individually, over and over and over again. So no, I don't wish to add any more "over agains." <smile> I suggest you look back through this thread and read my careful and clear responses to all your... individual concerns. If I remember correctly, you complimented me somewhere along the line on my writing skills, which I appreciate (but then you quickly follwed that ups with some kind of insult, but that's okay...). It's all there. And then, if you think of anything else... I'm here for you. <smile>
I've been very patient (part of the fruit of the Spirit; Galatians 5:22-23) in discussing all the topics you've brought up. So, bring one up. My guess is it will be one we've discussed here, and if so, I might direct you back to one of our previous exchanges in this very thread, but maybe not...
No, it's really up to you, actually.
LOL! Maybe there's something my 82 year old mother hasn't told me... <smile>
You being a follower of John Calvin has all of the elect going to heaven regardless of even knowing about Jesus Christ and His good news.
Allah and the god of calvanism does not exist.
Absolutely.
Calvinist's believe babies are born seperated from God due to their sin nature that was inherited from Adam.
