Denying Calvinism...

[Alithis]

Ok, then what is the tipping point?

What is the point that I go from being just a sinner trying to please Christ to a sinner who makes a practice of sinning?

Because you are using this verse to show that sin tells us who the children are of God and who the children of the devil are, so what is the tipping point that the scale tips from being God's child to the devil's child?

nope - i am using this verse to show you what this verse says

it says "Everyone who sins is breaking God’s law, for all sin is contrary to the law of God. And you know that Jesus came to take away our sins, and there is no sin in him. Anyone who continues to live in him will not sin. But anyone who keeps on sinning does not know him or understand who he is.
Dear children, don’t let anyone deceive you about this: When people do what is right, it shows that they are righteous, even as Christ is righteous. But when people keep on sinning, it shows that they belong to the devil, who has been sinning since the beginning. But the Son of God came to destroy the works of the devil. Those who have been born into God’s family do not make a practice of sinning, because God’s life is in them. So they can’t keep on sinning, because they are children of God. So now we can tell who are children of God and who are children of the devil.". .."

 

[Alithis]

And how does this make Calvinism right or wrong?

it doesn't because it is neither right nor is it wrong .

what i said was- i can see how either side of this kind of debate can err . we do not "do" to be saved -we "do" because it is evidence that we are saved .
and if our life displays that we continue in practice of sin then "that" is evidence that we are not yet saved .

and you disagreed . but i do not view your disagreement as wrong .. for you have disagreed with a partial statement -and it is right to do so -however at times it is better to ask a person to clarify ,rather then to outrightly disagree with a partial statement .

for i also see that person who does not continue to practice sin..is a person who must have been practicing sin in order to no longer practice it , so he/she is a person who is constantly decreasing in sin . once aware of it as sin, repents of it , is cleansed from it and does not continue in it any more .

if they then return and keep doing it -they merely show thier repentance was feigned .

the truth is , no one needs to sin if they are in Christ .

but both calvinist and arminian are correct - God does and we do .

 

[ladodgers6]

... interesting . i am assuming the scripture you are alluding to is 1 john 2 -
My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.
He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked." -
you will note i have highlighted the word IF .. as opposed to the word you have used which is "when" .
on assumes that to sin is a tragic occurrence .. the other word assumes it is ok to do so .

Yes,I love these passages,because as Christians being freed from the curse of the Law,we can now walk in righteousness,because of the work of God in us.Our sanctification is ALSO the work of God.God does not leave us stranded after being Justification in Christ through faith alone!

 

[ToBeLoved]

it doesn't because it is neither right nor is it wrong .

what i said was- i can see how either side of this kind of debate can err . we do not "do" to be saved -we "do" because it is evidence that we are saved .
and if our life displays that we continue in practice of sin then "that" is evidence that we are not yet saved .

and you disagreed . but i do not view your disagreement as wrong .. for you have disagreed with a partial statement -and it is right to do so -however at times it is better to ask a person to clarify ,rather then to outrightly disagree with a partial statement .

for i also see that person who does not continue to practice sin..is a person who must have been practicing sin in order to no longer practice it , so he/she is a person who is constantly decreasing in sin . once aware of it as sin, repents of it , is cleansed from it and does not continue in it any more .

if they then return and keep doing it -they merely show thier repentance was feigned .

the truth is , no one needs to sin if they are in Christ .

but both calvinist and arminian are correct - God does and we do .

I guess this is really not a thread about Calvinism then, because both know that we can sin. I'm not sure what your purpose was in sharing that, but it's fine.

Yes sin is a problem in our lives.

 

[Alithis]

Once understood, you'll know the difference between the body producing the babbles on its own and the gospel. Its about control. Tongues is out of control event. The untamed tongue

say what... ?

 

[Alithis]

The wolves in sheep clothing talks too much not knowing how the human body works. You have been fooled

methinks you talk to much .. and thats not wise .we shall be held to account for every word we speak

 

[Alithis]

your both speaking opinions of things you obviously know nothing about

 

[jiminpa]

Charimatic has been around along as kundulindi yoga power been around. They are the same. Two religions on the same path. Same goals. Eastern religions have the same vocal mouth patterns.

That would be interesting if you weren't directly contradicting scripture, but then what authority does scripture have to a cessationist?

 

[High Fidelity]

That would be interesting if you weren't directly contradicting scripture, but then what authority does scripture have to a cessationist?

Cessationism doesn't presuppose the authority of Scripture ended with the apostolic era.

 

[jiminpa]

Cessationism doesn't presuppose the authority of Scripture ended with the apostolic era.

Cessationism opposes the authority of scripture when it holds as it's core doctrine a belief system contradicted by scripture. Since scripture does not say that revelation ended with the establishment of the cannon of scripture, cessation relies completely on the very thing it vehemently denies. But the hypocrisy of cessation does not end with merely ignoring scripture, since cessation tries to claim scriptural superiority in refusing the content of scripture.

 

[LovebirdsFlying]

MOD HAT ON

Closing for review. We'll get back to you shortly.

MOD HAT OFF​