Calvinism Refuted

[heymikey80]

Well! Now that is a deep subject

The verses you quoted I accept and say amen to:

The born again is a translation of the Greek Words that are literally translated Born from Above - Spiritual Birth

This Spiritual Birth happens when?

Repent and believe first.

The dead man in his trespasses and sin first must repent and believe before God will cause him to be born from above.

Cite the Scripture that states -- in so many words, since you're saying this is stated in Scripture -- that a person believes and is then born again.

 

[Hammster]

I don't think that 1 John 2:2 needs me to defend it, it speaks for its self, just like all the other scriptures that say, ALL MEN, WHOSOEVER, THE WHOLE WORLD.

You either believe that God in the person of Jesus Christ has provided salvation for ALL or you don't. If you don't, then I would question your faith.

Actually, it does speak for itself. And it doesn't need you to defend it. But it does need you to understand it in context, which it seems nobody in your camp is really big on. Single verses, single words, single thoughts. And yet somehow we get the reputation of those who misrepresent scripture.

You cannot use 1 John 2:2 without verse 1. I have said this over and over, yet every time, you and your like either ignore the post, or as in JDS's case, just change the argument and start with the personal attacks on how evil Calvinism is.

Verse one is the main thrust of the sentence, and it is one sentence. You want to make it two thoughts, and it can't be two thoughts. The Scripture doesn't allow it. Verse one states that if we sin, then Jesus is our advocate. Now, is He the advocate for the lost, or just the saved. Hmmm. I am going with just the saved. So how does He become our advocate? On what basis is He the Advocate? Because He is the propitiation. Because He took the wrath of God for those He saved, He can be the Advocate for those same people. It is very easy to understand. Oh, and the whole world part? All that means is that it isn't just for those Christians to whom John is writing, but to all Christians in the whole world.

Simple, right? Now, you can disagree with that, and that's fine. But you need to give biblical reasons, not just another long post on your view of salvation and telling us how unbiblical we are. We seem to be the only ones using Scripture in context.

 

[Benefactor]

Cite the Scripture that states -- in so many words, since you're saying this is stated in Scripture -- that a person believes and is then born again.

John 3:3

απεκριθη ιησους και ειπεν αυτω αμην αμην λεγω σοι εαν μη τις γεννηθη ανωθεν ου δυναται ιδειν την βασιλειαν του θεου

John 3:7

μη θαυμασης οτι ειπον σοι δει υμας γεννηθηναι ανωθεν

 

[Hammster]

John 3:3



απεκριθη ιησους και ειπεν αυτω αμην αμην λεγω σοι εαν μη τις γεννηθη ανωθεν ου δυναται ιδειν την βασιλειαν του θεου



John 3:7



μη θαυμασης οτι ειπον σοι δει υμας γεννηθηναι ανωθεν

You, know, as much as I like you, it seems that you are really trying too hard to impress by posting things in greek.
Just say what you want to say. We all know you have fancy software.

 

[JDS]

Hebrews 9:11-15

But when Christ appeared as high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all (is this everyone? We will see), having obtained eternal redemption. For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

For this reason He is the mediator of a new covenant, so that, since death has taken place for the redemption transgressions that were committed under the first covenant, those who have been called may receive the promis of the eternal inheritance.

(I am skipping to the end. Feel free to read the in between parts. I am not trying to hid anything)

v. 27 And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and ater this comes judgment, so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly away Him.

I am confident that my non-Calvinist brethren will find some way to make this a universal atonement, so this will be interesting.

But let's ask this: How many times does Christ appear to make an offering? Once.

Is He a mediator? Yes.

Whom does a mediator mediate for? Two opposing parties.

How is He able to mediate? He has an interest in both parties.

How does He have and interest in both parties? He is God and He is man.

Who receives the promise of eternal inheritance? The called.

Can this one sacrifice, this propitiation, be applied to all men? Only if either all men are universally saved, or Jesus mediates for the lost and then you have to say that Jesus has union with the lost, and then it just keeps going downhill from there. So you can try to make the point, but think it through.

When is judgment? After death.

Who isn't afraid of judgment? The many for whom Christ died.

Just thought I would give it another shot.

It is proven on theses various threads that it is a vain effort to attempt to discuss any scripture truth with Calvinists because the foundation of your faith is wrong. It is not surprising then that bible believers are at odds with the reformed faith on any doctrine of consequence in all of scripture. You pervert the doctrine of man, the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, the doctrine of Israel, the doctrine of the second coming of Jesus Christ, and on and on. You come to these wrong conclusions because you do not believe God on the matter of salvation by faith in Jesus Christ and if one builds his theology on the wrong foundation, the end result will be chaotic, like your theology is.

It would be impossible to convince you of the truths of Hebrews 9 or any other doctrine that requires your understanding to result from previous promises to the perpetuation of Israel as God's chosen people. I do not know what your views of eschatology are, but I suspect you are an amillennialist or a post-mil, which requires a great deal of allegory in pointed promises of God to Israel but even if you have chosen a pre-mil position, the liklihood of your understanding the depth of the doctrine would be greatly hampered by your views on the person of Christ and the salvation of God.

You simply must begin at the doctrine of salvation to understand any other bible doctrine because God says he will not reveal his truths to those who have not his Spirit. It is his Spirit who reveals the deep things of God because he gives us the thoughts of God when he indwells us. The fact that you, as a Calvinist, take the position that God has created the majority of men for the pleasure of God in destroying them in the day of destruction and that Jesus Christ through his death and resurrection is not the way to the Father for them is proof that you do not have the correct understanding of God and Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost.

I am on record as believing that Calvinism is a false doctrine because they deny the power of the gospel of Jesus Christ to save everyone who hears it. You deny that the blood of Jesus Christ is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world. You disagree that God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believes on him will be saved and you redefine the world world, and love, and whosoever to fit your preconceptions about God.

The TULIP is a system about unbelief and it is all wrong and I do not think there is any salvation in it. Some saved people get ensnared in it but the system itself can produce no salvation of anyone because it denies the power of salvation, the gospel.

You actually teach that men are incapable of believing a simple truth like the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ and God the Father saying he will give life and salvation to anyone and everyone who believes it. This is too simple for you to believe and so you attempt to correct it by making it harder or impossible to be saved. Teaching this will be catastrophic for you in the judgment.

There are men on this forum who believe the gospel and are men of God who believe as I do that God was motivated by his love and mercy to send his son to die for the whole world so that all who believe in him can be delivered from hell, but not many of them will say that your gospel is a denial of the truth and cannot save and call upon you to repent and believe the truth. I call on you to do that now.

Let me clarify one thing. Some will point to Spurgeon and Whitfied and others like them and say they were soul winners and Calvinists at the same time. To that I would say that neither of these men preached TULIP to the lost in their evangelistic efforts or they would not have won a single convert. They preached that Jesus Christ died for every man and whosoever will let him take of the water of life freely because God so loved the world and sent his son to be the propitiation for all our sins and we can all be saved. Therefore, it was the gospel that they preached by which men were saved and not by the eloquence and intellect of the men themselves and they will have no reward for their efforts because they did not really believe what they said. It was not until they got them into their churches that they indoctrinated them with their real beliefs,this ungodly TULIP. The message of the cross can save men if it is preached by someone who doesn't even believe it.

 

[Benefactor]

You, know, as much as I like you, it seems that you are really trying too hard to impress by posting things in greek.
Just say what you want to say. We all know you have fancy software.

No I don't have any "store bought" language software except for Spanish.

εφαπαξ adverb
ephapax ef-ap'-ax: upon one occasion (only) -- (at) once (for all).

Just copy and paste without understanding what one is dealing with is HYPE. I don't like that kind of nonsense anymore than the next person.

I have a good number of Greek Language Books in my library, and I did study Greek in College and have tried to maintain and expand on it over the years. I enjoy the personal challenge of discovering it on my own. I take most comments that are constructive seriously in the sense that I look into them as I have time. Such as this verse you mentioned.

 

[MamaZ]

nice but because you know greek what good is it to those who do not know greek? I also have a greek study text. It is like a deaf man talking in sign language to a blind man. Nothing is accomplished other than people knowing you know greek. So is for the glorification to you because you know greek?

 

[cygnusx1]

Actually, it does speak for itself. And it doesn't need you to defend it. But it does need you to understand it in context, which it seems nobody in your camp is really big on. Single verses, single words, single thoughts. And yet somehow we get the reputation of those who misrepresent scripture.

You cannot use 1 John 2:2 without verse 1. I have said this over and over, yet every time, you and your like either ignore the post, or as in JDS's case, just change the argument and start with the personal attacks on how evil Calvinism is.

Verse one is the main thrust of the sentence, and it is one sentence. You want to make it two thoughts, and it can't be two thoughts. The Scripture doesn't allow it. Verse one states that if we sin, then Jesus is our advocate. Now, is He the advocate for the lost, or just the saved. Hmmm. I am going with just the saved. So how does He become our advocate? On what basis is He the Advocate? Because He is the propitiation. Because He took the wrath of God for those He saved, He can be the Advocate for those same people. It is very easy to understand. Oh, and the whole world part? All that means is that it isn't just for those Christians to whom John is writing, but to all Christians in the whole world.

Simple, right? Now, you can disagree with that, and that's fine. But you need to give biblical reasons, not just another long post on your view of salvation and telling us how unbiblical we are. We seem to be the only ones using Scripture in context.

excellent work bro , I can see John Owen smile reading this.

 

[Benefactor]

nice but because you know greek what good is it to those who do not know greek? I also have a greek study text. It is like a deaf man talking in sign language to a blind man. Nothing is accomplished other than people knowing you know greek. So is for the glorification to you because you know greek?

I am sorry you take it that way. I believe I give the transliteration with the Greek word and then a translating and some explanation.

This is not intended to be argumentative with you or anyone but many of us read books that are spattered with Hebrew and Greek, some with German and Latin as well. If in doing so the writer explains the word then I for one see this as a valid use of the resource. If on the other hand it is not explained in a reasonable manner then I would agree that it is puff and fluff.

This happens on more than a language level. Some throw out words they learn in College simply because they know the word and in their use of it the word it is disconnect from the thought of the statement. This is no different that using a word in another language and not explaining it in clear terms once it is used.

In doing this some will be disenfranchised from the conversation because they are not willing to engage it at that level. Not on a phony level where you have disconnects, but in a real meaningful manner. I am willing to go to a statement I made and clarify it when a person asks if it is not clear to them. I fully intend to communicate not spew out a words with out meaning to impress anyone.

If you will consider all statements in the same light then the use of a word in a different language not explained is no different than the use of words that are disconnected. Why? If I write something and you don’t get it them I want to communicate clearer to you because YOU and maybe other don’t understand what I am conveying. This should be so for all of us. If you have a particular statement I made that you want me to elaborate on in simpler terms or clarify please let me know.

Thanks,
Benefactor

 

[JDS]

excellent work bro , I can see John Owen smile reading this.


You cannot use 1 John 2:2 without verse 1. I have said this over and over, yet every time, you and your like either ignore the post, or as in JDS's case, just change the argument and start with the personal attacks on how evil Calvinism is.

Whoever thinks I have made a personal attack against anyone on this forum, please point it out. I have not done that. I do not even know any of you. However, to accuse me of personally attacking you is a personal attack against me. But, I don't mind and I forgive you.


My premise is that we have such a different view of God that we will never agree on any doctrine. Haven't you noticed that in all of these threads?

The most simple and understanable doctrine in the whole bible is the gospel of Jesus Christ and we do not agree on it. To observe that is not an attack against you and to say your gospel, which is really not a gospel, if gospel means good news, is bad news to most creatures to whom the scriptures has instructed it to be preached.

Now, anyone with common sense can understand that the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ (That is what he wanted preached See Mk 16) is neither good news or bad news to someone on whom the message has no effect.

How could it be good news, glad tidings if it was explained that many, if not most of the inhabitants of earth was chosen by God almighty to go to the Lake of Fire and he created them for that purpose. That is what TULIP teaches and one of you have the quote from Spurgeon that TULIP is the gospel as his tag line. C'mon. There is no sense that could be good news, glad tidings.

You men can not convince me that you go out in public and say to people in general that you have some good news to proclaim and then give the the news that most of them are created for the day of destruction and that Hell is just waiting for them to die and there is no remedy for it. The cross of Jesus Christ has no value to you if you are not prechosen. You must be prechosen and you have nothing to do with that.

I would not desire that to be my view of the cross of Jesus Christ at the judgment. That is not good news.

God will not give you any of his secrets if you do not believe the gospel. The gospel is the power of God unto salvation to anyone who believes it and their preelection has nothing to do with it.

 

[cygnusx1]

nice but because you know greek what good is it to those who do not know greek? I also have a greek study text. It is like a deaf man talking in sign language to a blind man. Nothing is accomplished other than people knowing you know greek. So is for the glorification to you because you know greek?

precisely Mamaz , Paul dealt with this type of thing to the Corinthians who were quick to boast of their gift of languages but indifferent to the need for interpretation , Spirit verses flesh .....

 

[Benefactor]

Ezekiel 36:25-28
Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean; I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols. I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them. Then you shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; you shall be My people, and I will be your God.

John 3
Jesus answered and said to him, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.”
Nicodemus said to Him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?”
Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you,

‘You must be born again.’

These words are taken as meaning the same as expressed up to this point. "born of water and the Spirit" are taken in a number of ways:

• (1) one group sees water as ameonic birth fluid and spirit as "from above";
• (2) others see "water" as meaning or referring to the Word of God and Spirit as born from above.
• Whichever it is it includes both and is summarized in the following statement "you must be born again" which literally means "born from above" verse 7.
• μὴ θαυμάσῃς ὅτι εἶπον σοι· δεῖ ὑμᾶς γεννηθῆναι ἄνωθεν.
• Do not be amazed that I said to you, 'You must be born again.'

The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

Nicodemus answered and said to Him, “How can these things be?”
Jesus answered and said to him, “Are you the teacher of Israel, and do not know these things?

It would appear that Jesus thought that Nicodemus should know these things. God, without anyone 'accepting Jesus' is sprinkled with clean water and given a new heart.

One verse I often here misquoted is John 3:3. I hear it often as "Unless one is born again, he cannot enter the kingdom of God". But that isn't what Jesus said, as noted by the highlight.

We cannot even see the kingdom, let alone enter it, unless and until the Holy Spirit does something to us, like wash us with clean water and take our heart of stone, and give a heart of flesh. Jesus said that Nicodemus should have known that.

When you use these verses are you saying what Paul's outlines in Romans 10 represents what you are expressing as highlighted?

8. But what does it say? "THE WORD IS NEAR YOU, IN YOUR MOUTH AND IN YOUR HEART"--that is,

1. the word of faith which we are preaching,

• Verses 14. How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher? 15. How will they preach unless they are sent? Just as it is written, "HOW BEAUTIFUL ARE THE FEET OF THOSE WHO BRING GOOD NEWS OF GOOD THINGS!"

• So faith {comes} from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.

Verse 9. that if you

2. confess with your mouth Jesus {as} Lord, and

3. believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead,

4. you will be saved;

10. for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.
11. For the Scripture says, "WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED."
12. For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same {Lord} is Lord of all, abounding in riches for all who call on Him;
13. for "WHOEVER WILL CALL ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED."
14. How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher?
15. How will they preach unless they are sent? Just as it is written, "HOW BEAUTIFUL ARE THE FEET OF THOSE WHO BRING GOOD NEWS OF GOOD THINGS!"
16. However, they did not all heed the good news; for Isaiah says, "LORD, WHO HAS BELIEVED OUR REPORT?"
17. So faith {comes} from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.
18. But I say, surely they have never heard, have they? Indeed they have; "THEIR VOICE HAS GONE OUT INTO ALL THE EARTH, AND THEIR WORDS TO THE ENDS OF THE WORLD."

 

[Hammster]

It is proven on theses various threads that it is a vain effort to attempt to discuss any scripture truth with Calvinists because the foundation of your faith is wrong. It is not surprising then that bible believers are at odds with the reformed faith on any doctrine of consequence in all of scripture. You pervert the doctrine of man, the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, the doctrine of Israel, the doctrine of the second coming of Jesus Christ, and on and on. You come to these wrong conclusions because you do not believe God on the matter of salvation by faith in Jesus Christ and if one builds his theology on the wrong foundation, the end result will be chaotic, like your theology is.

It would be impossible to convince you of the truths of Hebrews 9 or any other doctrine that requires your understanding to result from previous promises to the perpetuation of Israel as God's chosen people. I do not know what your views of eschatology are, but I suspect you are an amillennialist or a post-mil, which requires a great deal of allegory in pointed promises of God to Israel but even if you have chosen a pre-mil position, the liklihood of your understanding the depth of the doctrine would be greatly hampered by your views on the person of Christ and the salvation of God.

You simply must begin at the doctrine of salvation to understand any other bible doctrine because God says he will not reveal his truths to those who have not his Spirit. It is his Spirit who reveals the deep things of God because he gives us the thoughts of God when he indwells us. The fact that you, as a Calvinist, take the position that God has created the majority of men for the pleasure of God in destroying them in the day of destruction and that Jesus Christ through his death and resurrection is not the way to the Father for them is proof that you do not have the correct understanding of God and Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost.

I am on record as believing that Calvinism is a false doctrine because they deny the power of the gospel of Jesus Christ to save everyone who hears it. You deny that the blood of Jesus Christ is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world. You disagree that God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believes on him will be saved and you redefine the world world, and love, and whosoever to fit your preconceptions about God.

The TULIP is a system about unbelief and it is all wrong and I do not think there is any salvation in it. Some saved people get ensnared in it but the system itself can produce no salvation of anyone because it denies the power of salvation, the gospel.

You actually teach that men are incapable of believing a simple truth like the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ and God the Father saying he will give life and salvation to anyone and everyone who believes it. This is too simple for you to believe and so you attempt to correct it by making it harder or impossible to be saved. Teaching this will be catastrophic for you in the judgment.

There are men on this forum who believe the gospel and are men of God who believe as I do that God was motivated by his love and mercy to send his son to die for the whole world so that all who believe in him can be delivered from hell, but not many of them will say that your gospel is a denial of the truth and cannot save and call upon you to repent and believe the truth. I call on you to do that now.

Let me clarify one thing. Some will point to Spurgeon and Whitfied and others like them and say they were soul winners and Calvinists at the same time. To that I would say that neither of these men preached TULIP to the lost in their evangelistic efforts or they would not have won a single convert. They preached that Jesus Christ died for every man and whosoever will let him take of the water of life freely because God so loved the world and sent his son to be the propitiation for all our sins and we can all be saved. Therefore, it was the gospel that they preached by which men were saved and not by the eloquence and intellect of the men themselves and they will have no reward for their efforts because they did not really believe what they said. It was not until they got them into their churches that they indoctrinated them with their real beliefs,this ungodly TULIP. The message of the cross can save men if it is preached by someone who doesn't even believe it.

That was a great deflection of the Scripture at hand. If we are so wrong, wouldn't it behoove you to explain the text mentioned? The text is there. I am not trying to trick anyone with gathering single verses to try to make a point.

 

[nobdysfool]

It is proven on theses various threads that it is a vain effort to attempt to discuss any scripture truth with Calvinists because the foundation of your faith is wrong. It is not surprising then that bible believers are at odds with the reformed faith on any doctrine of consequence in all of scripture. You pervert the doctrine of man, the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, the doctrine of Israel, the doctrine of the second coming of Jesus Christ, and on and on. You come to these wrong conclusions because you do not believe God on the matter of salvation by faith in Jesus Christ and if one builds his theology on the wrong foundation, the end result will be chaotic, like your theology is.

It would be impossible to convince you of the truths of Hebrews 9 or any other doctrine that requires your understanding to result from previous promises to the perpetuation of Israel as God's chosen people. I do not know what your views of eschatology are, but I suspect you are an amillennialist or a post-mil, which requires a great deal of allegory in pointed promises of God to Israel but even if you have chosen a pre-mil position, the liklihood of your understanding the depth of the doctrine would be greatly hampered by your views on the person of Christ and the salvation of God.

You simply must begin at the doctrine of salvation to understand any other bible doctrine because God says he will not reveal his truths to those who have not his Spirit. It is his Spirit who reveals the deep things of God because he gives us the thoughts of God when he indwells us. The fact that you, as a Calvinist, take the position that God has created the majority of men for the pleasure of God in destroying them in the day of destruction and that Jesus Christ through his death and resurrection is not the way to the Father for them is proof that you do not have the correct understanding of God and Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost.

I am on record as believing that Calvinism is a false doctrine because they deny the power of the gospel of Jesus Christ to save everyone who hears it. You deny that the blood of Jesus Christ is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world. You disagree that God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believes on him will be saved and you redefine the world world, and love, and whosoever to fit your preconceptions about God.

The TULIP is a system about unbelief and it is all wrong and I do not think there is any salvation in it. Some saved people get ensnared in it but the system itself can produce no salvation of anyone because it denies the power of salvation, the gospel.

You actually teach that men are incapable of believing a simple truth like the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ and God the Father saying he will give life and salvation to anyone and everyone who believes it. This is too simple for you to believe and so you attempt to correct it by making it harder or impossible to be saved. Teaching this will be catastrophic for you in the judgment.

There are men on this forum who believe the gospel and are men of God who believe as I do that God was motivated by his love and mercy to send his son to die for the whole world so that all who believe in him can be delivered from hell, but not many of them will say that your gospel is a denial of the truth and cannot save and call upon you to repent and believe the truth. I call on you to do that now.

Let me clarify one thing. Some will point to Spurgeon and Whitfied and others like them and say they were soul winners and Calvinists at the same time. To that I would say that neither of these men preached TULIP to the lost in their evangelistic efforts or they would not have won a single convert. They preached that Jesus Christ died for every man and whosoever will let him take of the water of life freely because God so loved the world and sent his son to be the propitiation for all our sins and we can all be saved. Therefore, it was the gospel that they preached by which men were saved and not by the eloquence and intellect of the men themselves and they will have no reward for their efforts because they did not really believe what they said. It was not until they got them into their churches that they indoctrinated them with their real beliefs,this ungodly TULIP. The message of the cross can save men if it is preached by someone who doesn't even believe it.

JDS, so much of what you accuse Calvinists of does not represent in the least what Calvinists here actually believe and teach. Ever since you came roaring into these threads to "set us straight", you have made false accusations, false statements, and portrayed Calvinism as something completely other than what it is. You have been corrected many times on these points, but you continue to make the same wrong statements, accusations, and false portrayals. Rather than making your case, you have ruined it, by your use of less than honest means. No one here takes you seriously, because there is nothing in your screeds that can be taken seriously, because they are so obviously flawed, inaccurate, and downright false.

What you accuse Calvinists of are in reality lies, slander, and libelous innuendo and outright falsehoods that even you must know are false. The unspoken view in your many long winded screeds is an underlying belief that we Calvinists are not truly saved. We're not stupid, we can read between the lines. Never once has any of us questioned your salvation. Not once. But to try to gain advantage, you have subtly questioned ours on a regular basis. Such is not a Christian attitude, and is not motivated by the Holy Spirit, but rather by your own carnal nature, your desire to "win".

You simply do not have it right, and more's the pity that you refuse to accept that fact. You are really an intelligent guy, it's too bad your intelligence is being so misguided.

Know this, that the Calvinists here do believe in the Lord, and in His work on the Cross, and in His Resurrection. We are as saved as you consider yourself to be, and all your falsehoods and slanderous false accusations do not and cannot change that.

 

[Hammster]

When you use these verses are you saying what Paul's outlines in Romans 10 represents what you are expressing as highlighted?









1. the word of faith which we are preaching,

• Verses 14. How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher? 15. How will they preach unless they are sent? Just as it is written, "HOW BEAUTIFUL ARE THE FEET OF THOSE WHO BRING GOOD NEWS OF GOOD THINGS!"
  

• So faith {comes} from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.
  

2. confess with your mouth Jesus {as} Lord, and



3. believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead,



4. you will be saved;

That was an interesting argument; go right to chapter 10 and ignore chapters 8 and 9.

 

[Benefactor]

I hate clay pot theology. Why should I drag that into my arsenal of proof?

 

[Hammster]

I hate clay pot theology. Why should I drag that into my arsenal of proof?

Ii am not familiar with that term. Explain?

 

[Benefactor]

Romans 9:21. Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?

invented term off the top of my head

 

[heymikey80]

John 3:3

απεκριθη ιησους και ειπεν αυτω αμην αμην λεγω σοι εαν μη τις γεννηθη ανωθεν ου δυναται ιδειν την βασιλειαν του θεου

John 3:7

μη θαυμασης οτι ειπον σοι δει υμας γεννηθηναι ανωθεν

I don't wonder at Jesus' terminology. I wonder at the lack of response.

Neither verse is explicit. Neither mentions belief.

I requested an explicit statement of Scripture. You returned two verses which made no comment about faith being before New Birth.

Have you one?

 

[Hammster]

Romans 9:21. Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?



invented term off the top of my head

So Paul's argument about predestination and God's sovereignty over His creation was just inconvenient for your theology?