The Myth of saying that Jesus Christ died for all men without exception !

[Eventide]

Good point..

I think Drew makes an important point..

Romans 9 is clearly within the context of national Israel and yet Calvinism grossly distorts it into personal election.

 

[Hitch]

Re: Good point..

I think Drew makes an important point..

Romans 9 is clearly within the context of national Israel and yet Calvinism grossly distorts it into personal election.

So Even how about you support what you have to say about what Calvin does or does not do with quotes from the source?

The answer is you cant quote Calvin on anything because you have no idea what you're talking about, you're just another poser crying wolf in the dark.

Calvin's titles are available everywhere , locate and produce the 'gross distortions' and show them so we can all learn from you, after all this is far too important for mere hearsay, isnt it? You cant be so shallow that you just parrot ,right?

 

[Hitch]

Re: The Lord John Calvin..

It's really pointless to debate scripture with Calvinists for a couple reasons..

1. Everything needs to be checked with John Calvin first and filtered through tulip..
2. It's impossible for Calvinists to be proven wrong according to the scriptures..

So how many of Calvin's titlles have you read for yourself?

Im mean you would be so unchristian as to spout off like this with out first hand knowledge, right? LOL

 

[savedbygrace57]

sam21:

I have seen this song and dance so many times in false teaching, they accuse the person of doing the wrong that they are doing(it is suppose to confuse the issue).

And rightly so, you would rather for it to be you yourself that causes your salvation, than that God should have the right to choose who He eants to be saved..

You cause your ownself to differ than your neighbor, so now you can boast..

 

[Eventide]

Re: The Lord John Calvin..

So how many of Calvin's titlles have you read for yourself?

Im mean you would be so unchristian as to spout off like this with out first hand knowledge, right? LOL

I'd say that's about right.. it's been about 20 years of first hand knowledge speaking with more Calvinists than I could count.. it's always the same.. tulip is parroted as if it's the gospel and nothing (including the truth of scripture) can prove them wrong..

Why else would Calvinists' cleave to things like Unconditional Election or Amillennialism for so long while knowing how ridiculous it actually is.. ?

lol

 

[Eventide]

Re: Good point..

So Even how about you support what you have to say about what Calvin does or does not do with quotes from the source?

The answer is you cant quote Calvin on anything because you have no idea what you're talking about, you're just another poser crying wolf in the dark.

Calvin's titles are available everywhere , locate and produce the 'gross distortions' and show them so we can all learn from you, after all this is far too important for mere hearsay, isnt it? You cant be so shallow that you just parrot ,right?

Can you say.. U N C O N D I T I O N A L E L E C T I O N ...

Romans 9 is primarily where the false doctrine of unconditional election stems from..

 

[Hitch]

Re: Good point..

Can you say.. U N C O N D I T I O N A L E L E C T I O N ...

Romans 9 is primarily where the false doctrine of unconditional election stems from..

Originally Posted by Hitch
So Even how about you support what you have to say about what Calvin does or does not do with quotes from the source?

The answer is you cant quote Calvin on anything because you have no idea what you're talking about, you're just another poser crying wolf in the dark.

Calvin's titles are available everywhere , locate and produce the 'gross distortions' and show them so we can all learn from you, after all this is far too important for mere hearsay, isnt it? You cant be so shallow that you just parrot ,right?

 

[Eventide]

Re: Good point..

Originally Posted by Hitch
So Even how about you support what you have to say about what Calvin does or does not do with quotes from the source?

The answer is you cant quote Calvin on anything because you have no idea what you're talking about, you're just another poser crying wolf in the dark.

Calvin's titles are available everywhere , locate and produce the 'gross distortions' and show them so we can all learn from you, after all this is far too important for mere hearsay, isnt it? You cant be so shallow that you just parrot ,right?

20 years + of talking with Calvinists doesn't count ?

Gee Whiz.. what have I missed..! !

 

[Hitch]

Re: The Lord John Calvin..

I'd say that's about right.. it's been about 20 years of first hand knowledge speaking with more Calvinists than I could count.. it's always the same.. tulip is parroted as if it's the gospel and nothing (including the truth of scripture) can prove them wrong..

Why else would Calvinists' cleave to things like Unconditional Election or Amillennialism for so long while knowing how ridiculous it actually is.. ?

lol

Originally Posted by Hitch
So how many of Calvin's titles have you read for yourself?

Im mean you would be so unchristian as to spout off like this with out first hand knowledge, right? LOL


Yet another blind man describing a painting.

 

[Hitch]

Re: Good point..

20 years + of talking with Calvinists doesn't count ?

Gee Whiz.. what have I missed..! !

Learning for yourself.

 

[Eventide]

Re: Good point..

Learning for yourself.

Yes, learning first hand from people just like you.

 

[Drew]

It is, of course, entirely legitimate for people to challenge critics of Calvinism in respect to whether such critics have indeed read Calvin and understand what he is saying. Fair enough.

This is why I make reasonable efforts to distinguish between "Calvin" and the ideas one reads here that seem, repeat seem, to be associated with Calvinism.

In a sense, the "labels" do not matter. There clearly appear to be a number of posters who ascribe to the position that, from the foundations of time, God "pre-ordained" that some would be lost and some would be saved. And when I say "pre-ordained", I do not mean to say that God "knew in advance that some would 'freely' reject the gospel and others would 'freely' accept it". Instead, I am addressing the view that God causes some people to accept and some people to reject the gospel.

I think that we can discuss this question independant of whether or not Calvin believed exactly this. And one need not have read Calvin to be qualified to discuss this issue. Of course, it would be great if we all did read Calvin - the more we know, the better.

 

[Hitch]

It is, of course, entirely legitimate for people to challenge critics of Calvinism in respect to whether such critics have indeed read Calvin and understand what he is saying. Fair enough.

This is why I make reasonable efforts to distinguish between "Calvin" and the ideas one reads here that seem, repeat seem, to be associated with Calvinism.

In a sense, the "labels" do not matter. There clearly appear to be a number of posters who ascribe to the position that, from the foundations of time, God "pre-ordained" that some would be lost and some would be saved. And when I say "pre-ordained", I do not mean to say that God "knew in advance that some would 'freely' reject the gospel and others would 'freely' accept it". Instead, I am addressing the view that God causes some people to accept and some people to reject the gospel.

I think that we can discuss this question independant of whether or not Calvin believed exactly this. And one need not have read Calvin to be qualified to discuss this issue. Of course, it would be great if we all did read Calvin - the more we know, the better.

It may well be possible but it wont happen. With a few exceptions.

Were truth the object it wouldnt be necessary to expose the utter and willful ignorance of the local 'I hate Calvin because my daddy did' society.

Im not concerned with whether anyone agrees or no wrt Calvin, but the loudest critics have proven over and again to be the most ignorant, pretending all the while they have personal knowledge of the subject. Its not different from those scoffers who claim great bible knowledge and have never read through even a single Gospel, and equally as christian, which naturally shows through the judgemental nature of so many of the posts.

Not being an able defender, as Im new to Calvin is the reason I dont spend much time with it.

 

[Eventide]

Not being an able defender, as Im new to Calvin is the reason I dont spend much time with it.

Hitch, maybe there's still hope for you !

 

[Drew]

Re: Good point..

Romans 9 is primarily where the false doctrine of unconditional election stems from..

I certainly agree that Romans 9 is erroneously seen as supporting the notion that all human beings were either "elected unconditionally" to salvation or to loss.

The entire chapter, and more broadly chapters 9 to 11 is clearly about how the fate of national Israel is woven together in the purposes of God with the fate of the Gentiles. The question of all humans being elected to salvation or to loss is nowhere on Paul's mind.

Yet this material repeatedly is used to support the "pre-destination" position (in the sense that all humans are either pre-destined to loss or to salvation). This shows the power of an agenda - if we want to "see" a certain text as supporting a certain postion we have come to accept as true on other grounds, we will often make every possible move to do so, no matter how much the author's clear intent gets trampled in the process.

 

[Eventide]

Re: Good point..

I certainly agree that Romans 9 is erroneously seen as supporting the notion that all human beings were either "elected unconditionally" to salvation or to loss.

The entire chapter, and more broadly chapters 9 to 11 is clearly about how the fate of national Israel is woven together in the purposes of God with the fate of the Gentiles. The question of all humans being elected to salvation or to loss is nowhere on Paul's mind.

Yet this material repeatedly is used to support the "pre-destination" position (in the sense that all humans are either pre-destined to loss or to salvation). This shows the power of an agenda - if we want to "see" a certain text as supporting a certain postion we have come to accept as true on other grounds, we will often make every possible move to do so, no matter how much the author's clear intent gets trampled in the process.

I agree Drew and unfortunately there are multitudes of young Christians being fed the nonsense of Calvinism.. and seeing that the vast majority of Calvinists are amillenial, they're most likely going to be taught that the church of God is 'spiritual Israel'.. and therefore they'll ignore the mystery pertaining to that nation which is blinded in part until the fulness of the gentiles be come in.

 

[Hitch]

Re: Good point..

I agree Drew and unfortunately there are multitudes of young Christians being fed the nonsense of Calvinism.. and seeing that the vast majority of Calvinists are amillenial, they're most likely going to be taught that the church of God is 'spiritual Israel'.. and therefore they'll ignore the mystery pertaining to that nation which is blinded in part until the fulness of the gentiles be come in.

LOL Told ya Drew.

 

[jasoncran]

while i dont agree with calvinism at all. i do think that for the most part the reformers after calvin have had a positive impact. eventide you are an american. You should read some of the works of the puritians and what they taught that we today need to return too. save the witchhunts.

 

[Eventide]

while i dont agree with calvinism at all..

I think that a massive problem within Christendom is that people could care less about false teaching.. so what if multitudes of young Christians are being force fed that they're the elect, that God chose them, that they were chosen unconditionally, that their calling was special and irresistable.. etc etc etc..

Who cares though right..

 

[jasoncran]

I think that a massive problem within Christendom is that people could care less about false teaching.. so what if multitudes of young Christians are being force fed that they're the elect, that God chose them, that they were chosen unconditionally, that their calling was special and irresistable.. etc etc etc..

Who cares though right..

let me correct you. Many christians barely know their chruches position and the difference tween arminism and calvinism. i'n my circle its the calvinists that are hard to find. actually you hold a mix of calvin and arminist with that eternal security doctrine.

my church is most arminist.