An issue I've had with the idea of Calivinism: could someone explain please? Thanks!

[RisingSpirit]

...If you could have, you would have.

I have a different view on the meaning of God being, "past, present and future" than you do. What's the point in me saying God has already done it while you say He hasn't done it, yet?

 

[FreeGrace2]

I posted this:

...OK, put your charge where your mouth is. Show me ANY posts where I've said one thing and then the opposite. Go.....
And he dodges and parries with this:
Originally Posted by RisingSpirit
I read most of your post in a bird's eye view and combine them all together to see if you get it. You don't get it. It would take a life time to cherry pick your posts cause you'll switch and go in circles claiming you proved your theology with text proofs. We show you text proofs as well.

Nice going RS!

As I thought, you can't name a single post. "take a lifetime" LOL. Let's not be so dramatic, ok? But a real nice sidestep of you.

As I thought, you can't put your charge where you mouth is.

If you could have, you would have.

And he responds with this:

I have a different view on the meaning of God being, "past, present and future" than you do. What's the point in me saying God has already done it while you say He hasn't done it, yet?

Why did you change the subject, RS? Couldn't find any posts that you claimed contained switching and going in circles? I knew as much.

But, having changed channels, why do you bring up your "different view on the meaning of God being past, present and future" than I do. So what?

How do you know that? How do you know anything? We know by learning. Where did you learn that my view is different than yours? Can you cite some sources?

If you think our views are different, why don't you share yours, and then I will share my view and we can compare.

 

[RisingSpirit]

...If you think our views are different, why don't you share yours, and then I will share my view and we can compare.

I'm a little into Southern and Eastern where the Three Wise Men come from. It's a pure experience, there is no way I could explain it and be right in the description. It is a wondrous thing, that is so very insignificant, however, through its insignificance it becomes so very significant. There is no way to describe what ____ is without sounding like a jumbled mess....it is akin to describing sight to one who has never seen before. Can you accurately tell someone what the shade of red is, when they have absolutely nothing to compare it to? I wish I could explain what ______ is but if anyone can claim to, they have no idea what _____ is.
I'm into duality where being in the past, present and future at the same time. My students are not chatterboxes.

You talk to much.

You think you know what it means for God to be in the past/present/future at the same time. A quiet mind will bring stillness and wisdom. You're not very wise. Be quiet so you can listen to yourself for a minute and pray.

Pray

​

 

[nobdysfool]

Since Calvinism says the reprobate cannot understand the things of God, you are calling Free Grace a reprobate.

No, I did not. just because he doesn't correctly understand Calvinism, that does not equate to reprobate.

Perhaps you should think twice before trying to stir the pot. Remarks like yours here are of no benefit. Stirring up strife is not a fruit of the Holy Spirit.

 

[RisingSpirit]

Original Sin sin affects every aspect of our existence
from the natural world surrounding us to the fact that
our physical bodies die. But in nothing does our resultant
sin nature so affect us as our inclinations. In the Fall we
lost pre-lapsarian inclination to truth. Only regeneration
(re-generation) returns us to the pre-Fall state, restoring
human desire for truth. Until (or unless) that happens
our preference is for Satan's lies.

​

 

[FreeGrace2]

I'm a little into Southern and Eastern where the Three Wise Men come from. It's a pure experience, there is no way I could explain it and be right in the description. It is a wondrous thing, that is so very insignificant, however, through its insignificance it becomes so very significant. There is no way to describe what ____ is without sounding like a jumbled mess....it is akin to describing sight to one who has never seen before. Can you accurately tell someone what the shade of red is, when they have absolutely nothing to compare it to? I wish I could explain what ______ is but if anyone can claim to, they have no idea what _____ is.
I'm into duality where being in the past, present and future at the same time. My students are not chatterboxes.

You talk to much.

After your first paragraph of totaly nonsense, and you charge me with talking too much?! In fact, you're too much. Way too much!

You think you know what it means for God to be in the past/present/future at the same time.

OK, you challenged my view on the concept of God being in the past, present and future all at once. And you won't explain your view. Slick dodge.

You're not very wise.

What would be a worthless opinion of yours.

Be quiet so you can listen to yourself

After you re-read your first paragraph, I suggest that you be quiet. LOL

 

[nobdysfool]

Pro 15:12 ESV A scoffer does not like to be reproved; he will not go to the wise.

Pro 15:32 ESV Whoever ignores instruction despises himself, but he who listens to reproof gains intelligence.

Pro 16:21 ESV The wise of heart is called discerning, and sweetness of speech increases persuasiveness.

 

[BrianJK]

Pro 15:12 ESV A scoffer does not like to be reproved; he will not go to the wise.

Pro 15:32 ESV Whoever ignores instruction despises himself, but he who listens to reproof gains intelligence.

Pro 16:21 ESV The wise of heart is called discerning, and sweetness of speech increases persuasiveness.

I think we could all consider these, especially that last verse.

However, haven't most of us been "scoffers" toward the positions for which we do not see Biblical support?

 

[nobdysfool]

I think we could all consider these, especially that last verse.

However, haven't most of us been "scoffers" toward the positions for which we do not see Biblical support?

One can disagree without being a scoffer. But we have seen a lot of scoffing, along with baiting and goading of one group by a couple of individuals who, along with a lack of sweetness in speech, has done little else but stir up strife here. And I'm fairly well convinced that such was the purpose and goal all along.

I posted those verses to remind everyone that there IS a standard that the Lord expects of us in our interactions with one another.

 

[BrianJK]

One can disagree without being a scoffer. But we have seen a lot of scoffing, along with baiting and goading of one group by a couple of individuals who, along with a lack of sweetness in speech, has done little else but stir up strife here. And I'm fairly well convinced that such was the purpose and goal all along.

I've seen it from both sides, myself, but I agree that strife for its own sake is at best unproductive.

 

[BrianJK]

It would be important to remember that we represent God when we speak. I know I have missed the mark before as well

 

[Skala]

I've seen it from both sides, myself, but I agree that strife for its own sake is at best unproductive.

It's mainly out of frustration, because Freegrace2 is so inconsistent. Yet claims he isn't. For example, see here:

http://www.christianforums.com/t7769235-28/#post64057229

 

[FreeGrace2]

It's mainly out of frustration, because Freegrace2 is so inconsistent. Yet claims he isn't. For example, see here:

http://www.christianforums.com/t7769235-28/#post64057229

I suggest seeing post #288, in which I respond to Skala's ridiculous charge.