How can the grace of God be resisted by some yet received by others?

[OzSpen]

Since you're good at looking up posts, finding Skala's should be easy.

What gave you the idea that I'm good at looking up posts?

Why can't you be courteous and provide the link to his post, along with its number?

 

[Hammster]

However, because Calvinists have a bad habit of redefining terms that are simple, like in John 3:16, that is why I attempted to show how Calvinistic theology plays out for evangelistic preaching in post #488.

It does become tiresome in pointing out time after time what they do with the text, in context.

Oz

Can you name one term a Calvinist has redefined?

 

[Hammster]

What gave you the idea that I'm good at looking up posts?

Why can't you be courteous and provide the link to his post, along with its number?

You went through the trouble of finding and listing my post numbers. You can find his posts, if you're interested.

 

[Hammster]

How many have rejected the Gospel, the Good News, because they were taught that God may have created them and their loved ones with the full intention of condemning them to suffering for eternity?

Your theology teaches that. Sorry to disappoint.

 

[OzSpen]

Can you name one term a Calvinist has redefined?

Haven't you been following this thread? I've given examples and I'll not repeat them.

 

[OzSpen]

Your theology teaches that. Sorry to disappoint.

Another one-liner!

That's what Calvinistic double-predestination teaches. John Calvin taught it. See: Did John Calvin believe in double predestination?

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

You went through the trouble of finding and listing my post numbers. You can find his posts, if you're interested.

Resistance again!

 

[ToBeLoved]

Resistance again!

To be fair to Hammster, he always uses a cell phone, which is not really easy to type on. I learned that a few days ago, so I understand somewhat the short ansers.

 

[MennoSota]

However, because Calvinists have a bad habit of redefining terms that are simple, like in John 3:16, that is why I attempted to show how Calvinistic theology plays out for evangelistic preaching in post #488.

It does become tiresome in pointing out time after time what they do with the text, in context.

Oz

LOL

 

[MennoSota]

Maybe they don't even realize what they are saying. Like they don't seem to see the contridictions in their theology and have a different view of themselves. How they cannot see what is so obvious to us is concerning.

LOL, you two are funny.

 

[MennoSota]

How many have rejected the Gospel, the Good News, because they were taught that God may have created them and their loved ones with the full intention of condemning them to suffering for eternity?

Not one. Zero is the correct answer.

 

[OzSpen]

LOL

I do think about my theology and am a Greek exegete, having taught NT Greek. You can call it LOL but it's serious.

 

[MennoSota]

In dealing with Calvinists in about 50 years as a Christian and more intensely in the last 40 years, I have found that they know what they are doing but they are doctrinaire in their stance.

Doctrinaire means that they are 'seeking to impose a doctrine in all circumstances without regard to practical considerations' (Oxford dictionaries 2016. S v doctrinaire). I find that they impose a Calvinistic doctrine on Scriptures and do not engage in careful exegesis of some Calvinistic texts. Yet, at other times I find they can be careful with exegesis. In my person library I have many Calvinistic commentators who give excellent insights on non-Calvinistic topic, but I have to read them as an Acts 17:11 Berean.

I know this from current practical experience. My wife and I attend an evangelical Presbyterian church and the pastor has admitted from the pulpit that his Reformed theology is sometimes doctrinaire. He used that word. He preached on Joshua 24:15 a couple of weeks ago and claimed that it was a choice between two evil options.

After the service, I challenged him on his poor exegesis in context, showing him that this was not the case when we read, Joshua 24:6-15, and discover that those were not the choices available.

Those choices were:

1. They cried out to the Lord (v. 7).
2. I would not listen to Baalam (v. 10).
3. Fear the Lord and serve him; put away the gods (v. 14);
4. Serve the Lord (v. 14);
5. If it is evil to serve the Lord, choose this day whom you will serve - the gods your fathers served - BUT Joshua said he and his house would serve the Lord.

The Israelites had choices when it came to serving God/gods, i.e. they could choose between serving the other gods or fearing/serving the Lord.

That's not what my pastor preached from the pulpit. He gave only one choice - between the gods their fathers served beyond the River AND the gods of the Amorites. They were not the only choices that Joshua gave.

What I observed with the pastor was that his doctrinaire Calvinism was imposed on the text.

Oz

LOL, in all those years you miss the mark. Your judgment is impaired. I walked your works ideology for years until God opened the scriptures. I don't hold anything against you. You can't see what you can't see.

 

[MennoSota]

Oz, what is it like to be a universalist?

 

[ToBeLoved]

Oz, what is it like to be a universalist?

What is the definition of a Universalist? Because Oz is not that.

 

[ToBeLoved]

LOL, you two are funny.

Wow. You sure proved me wrong with scripture now didn't you?

 

[MennoSota]

Another one-liner!

That's what Calvinistic double-predestination teaches. John Calvin taught it. See: Did John Calvin believe in double predestination?

Oz

Oz, you get so stuck on hating Calvin that you fail to see God's sovereign choice from Genesis to Revelation. It is glorious to trust in a fully Sovereign King who picked a sinner to be His child.

 

[MennoSota]

I do think about my theology and am a Greek exegete, having taught NT Greek. You can call it LOL but it's serious.

LOL, I have met people on the street who are deeper theologians in their faith. Your pride goes before you, Oz.

 

[MennoSota]

Wow. You sure proved me wrong with scripture now didn't you?

How many verses does it take where God declares chosen and predestined before you'll believe him?

 

[ToBeLoved]

Oz, you get so stuck on hating Calvin that you fail to see God's sovereign choice from Genesis to Revelation. It is glorious to trust in a fully Sovereign King who picked a sinner to be His child.

We believe in a Sovereign King and we are His Children. Maybe you don't understand the difference and what the issue is. And your theology is not supported by the rest of the Bible and it cannot be, because the Bible is clear when it says 'any' and 'all'.