What did Paul preach to the Corinthians?

[OzSpen]

Really? Are you and Oz (Oz I'm not talking behind your back. I'm actually hoping you read this - so I'm saying this to you directly) this desperate for other Calvinism haters? You do realize Free Graceism teaches that devil worshippers will go to heaven provided they believed for a minute when they were kids, right? Free Graceism outright denies the doctrine of sanctification, and also denies that a person can lose their salvation (which any true Arminian should have a problem with). But you're just fine sweeping all of that under the rug as long as he also hates Calvinism?

Let's get something very straight, griff. I am not a Calvinism hater. I've never been a Calvinism hater and I never will be a Calvinism hater. I can disagree with some of their doctrines without being a Calvinism hater.

There are many of the doctrines espoused by Calvinism with which I agree. What we debate here are our areas of disagreement, some of which are in the doctrine of salvation (soteriology).

I am not going to discuss FreeGrace2's views when he is not here to state and clarify them. When you associate me with Calvinism haters, I know that you can be wrong in your statements about me.

 

[Hammster]

That's a false accusation. It is necessary to obtain your understanding of the meaning of preaching/preached, since you are the one claiming that they did not preach to unbelievers.

Please face up to your responsibility of providing a definition of what you mean by preaching.

Oz

My understanding is irrelevant. You made a post to prove that Paul preached. I asked where, and you threw out the red herring. Please answer my question. Then maybe we can go from there.

 

[OzSpen]

The only person who has contested this is "The Boxer". What everyone else is contesting is not whether or not the Gospel was preached universally, but whether or not the Gospel contains the idea that Jesus died unilaterally for all men and atoned for all of their sins, and whether that idea should be shared at all. More specifically, whether we should say "Christ died for you" to an unbeliever.

That is not true. There's another person in this thread who has contested that Paul preached to unbelievers. He does not believe that Paul preached to unbelievers.

 

[Hammster]

What do you mean by 'universal atonement' of those who oppose your view of limited atonement?

That Christ died for all.

 

[OzSpen]

My understanding is irrelevant. You made a post to prove that Paul preached. I asked where, and you threw out the red herring. Please answer my question. Then maybe we can go from there.

It was you who stated: 'He [Paul] didn't preach to unbelievers'. Therefore, it is up to you to define what 'preach' means.

I've already provided an exegesis of two of the words for 'preach' in Acts 17:18. I've answered your question, but you don't seem to be reading it. Why not?

 

[OzSpen]

Unjust?

If I go out on the street and give out $1000 to ten people, is it unjust to not give it out to anyone else I come into contact with?

Is the creator not free to do what He wishes with His creation?

Yes, but all in defense of God's justice and righteousness. We are discussing God's justice/injustice in provision of atonement only for some reprobates while condemning the rest of the reprobates to eternal damnation.

 

[Jack Terrence]

Yes, but all in defense of God's justice and righteousness. We are discussing God's justice/injustice in provision of atonement only for some reprobates while condemning the rest of the reprobates to eternal damnation.

You operate under the false assumption that God owes salvation to men.

"Who has a claim against me that I must pay?" God, Job 41:11

 

[Hammster]

Red herring!

I asked: 'Faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ' (Rom 10:17). How did they hear about this 'word of Christ'?

I was dealing with Romans 10:17 and Paul to the Romans.

Red herring. You interjected yourself in a discussion about the Amorites.

 

[guuila]

Let's get something very straight, griff. I am not a Calvinism hater. I've never been a Calvinism hater and I never will be a Calvinism hater. I can disagree with some of their doctrines without being a Calvinism hater.

There are many of the doctrines espoused by Calvinism with which I agree. What we debate here are our areas of disagreement, some of which are in the doctrine of salvation (soteriology).

I am not going to discuss FreeGrace2's views when he is not here to state and clarify them. When you associate me with Calvinism haters, I know that you can be wrong in your statements about me.

My apologies. One can only speculate when you're sending PMs to FreeGrace2 as if you're bothered by the absence of your teammate.

 

[Jack Terrence]

My apologies. One can only speculate when you're sending PMs to FreeGrace2 that you're bothered by the absence of your teammate.

Oz and FG2 are on totally opposite sides on eternal salvation. Calvinists and FG2 are much closer. Yet Oz and FG2 have an alliance against Calvinists.

This reminds me of the way anti-trinitarians are on the Heaven net Forum. The various types of anti-trinitarians argue with each other. But they become allies when they are debating Trinitarians.

 

[Hammster]

It was you who stated: 'He [Paul] didn't preach to unbelievers'. Therefore, it is up to you to define what 'preach' means.

I've already provided an exegesis of two of the words for 'preach' in Acts 17:18. I've answered your question, but you don't seem to be reading it. Why not?

You didn't answer my question.

 

[OzSpen]

Oz and FG2 are on totally opposite sides on eternal salvation. Calvinists and FG2 are much closer. Yet Oz and FG2 have an alliance against Calvinists.

This reminds me of the way anti-trinitarians are on the Heaven net Forum. The various types of anti-trinitarians argue with each other. But they become allies when they are debating Trinitarians.

Why do you make this false accusation against me. I do not have an alliance with anyone against Calvinists.

We are debating individual theological issues and I come down on the side of many Calvinists with some issues. I come down against Calvinists on some issues.

Please get your facts straight about my view of Calvinists. I'm tired of this kind of straw man argument.

 

[Hammster]

Why do you make this false accusation against me. I do not have an alliance with anyone against Calvinists.

We are debating individual theological issues and I come down on the side of many Calvinists with some issues. I come down against Calvinists on some issues.

Please get your facts straight about my view of Calvinists. I'm tired of this kind of straw man argument.

What soteriological issues have you sided with Calvinists over?

 

[Jack Terrence]

Why do you make this false accusation against me. I do not have an alliance with anyone against Calvinists.

We are debating individual theological issues and I come down on the side of many Calvinists with some issues. I come down against Calvinists on some issues.

Please get your facts straight about my view of Calvinists. I'm tired of this kind of straw man argument.

I am not saying that you have a formal alliance with FG2 against Calvinists. But yours and FG2's attack on Calvinism is an alliance nevertheless. The JW and the Christadelphian do not see eye to eye on much at all. They fight fiercely with each other on Heaven Net. But when debating a Trinitarian an alliance between the two naturally happens.

Calvinism is attacked by the many who err as Trinitarianism is attacked by the many.

 

[OzSpen]

You operate under the false assumption that God owes salvation to men.

"Who has a claim against me that I must pay?" God, Job 41:11

I operate under the true assumption that 'The Lord ... is not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance' (2 Pt 3:9).

It's not only a true assumption, it is the truth that the Scripture declares.

 

[OzSpen]

My apologies. One can only speculate when you're sending PMs to FreeGrace2 as if you're bothered by the absence of your teammate.

That's your speculation, not mine.

 

[OzSpen]

You didn't answer my question.

I most certainly did in my exegesis of Acts 17:18. Why do you continue to accuse me of not answering your question when I've already done it.

I'm waiting for your definition of 'preaching'.

 

[OzSpen]

What soteriological issues have you sided with Calvinists over?

Red herring.

What did I say about Calvinists and my support of a Calvinistic perspective?

 

[guuila]

I operate under the true assumption that 'The Lord ... is not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance' (2 Pt 3:9).

Have you ever read this verse in its context? Just curious.

 

[guuila]

That's your speculation, not mine.

Of course it's not yours. It wouldn't make any sense for you to speculate about yourself.