How to become a Calvinist in 5 easy steps

John Mullally · Nov 3, 2022

Clare73 said:
And you're addressing this to me, because?

You must have me confused with someone else. . .

Per the Bible, rebirth requires man's positive response to the Gospel message - its not based on favoritism as you and a certain theology implies. Its not like God arbitrarily zaps a few with the new-birth and lets the rest go to hell. Comprende?

John Caldwell · Nov 3, 2022

Clare73 said:
And the answer to the question?

There were no questions in your post.

atpollard · Nov 3, 2022

John Mullally said:
The Calvinist Theological Framework (a maze supporting fatalistic philosophy best understood by its five-points in the TULIP acronymn - with each point in turn requiring long argumentation).

Sorry, but I LOVE a good challenge:

“No one can come to Me (T)
unless the Father who sent Me (U)
draws him; and I will (I)
raise him up (L)
on the last day." (P)
- John 6:44

Not that long an argumentation.
Which word don't you understand?

John Mullally · Nov 3, 2022

Mark Quayle said:
As @Clare73 says, Already litigated.

John Mullally said:
Clare73's method of dismissing the clear meaning of 1 Timothy 2:1-6 is to say Paul is talking about "all types of men" rather then "all men" in that passage.

Clare73 said:
And which has nothing to do with "Previously litigated."

John Mullally said:
You frequently use terse pat phrases like "previously litigated" or "already addressed in ....". I know we have interchanged on 1 Timothy 2:1-6 multiple times. Given your habits, those phrases should apply unless you have changed your mind or I misrepresented you - in which case please detail. As you like to say, QED. Is this "irrelevant to the point"?

Clare73 said:
Feel free to address what I present in any of those posts.

I have been doing that.

Clare73 · Nov 3, 2022

John Caldwell said:
There were no questions in your post.

Read it again. . .there are two/three.

Clare73 · Nov 3, 2022

John Mullally said:
I have been doing that.

Good for you!

John Mullally · Nov 3, 2022

atpollard said:
Sorry, but I LOVE a good challenge:

“No one can come to Me (T)
unless the Father who sent Me (U)
draws him; and I will (I)
raise him up (L)
on the last day." (P)
- John 6:44

Not that long an argumentation.
Which word don't you understand?

Context: Jesus addressed this to the free-loaders who wanted to forcefully make him king after he miraculously fed him. Jesus frequently presented truth in a way to alienate others as he guarded his time and desired to invest it in the disciples. This passage was made before He made atonement for the sins of the world. After his crufixtion and resurrection, the good news is that Jesus draws all humanity (John 12:32) - its called the Gospel message. Not everyone responds to the draw which is accompanied by the conviction of the Holy Spirit (Acts 7:51). Jesus personally drew the rich young ruler, but he refused (Mark 10:17-27) - so grace is not irresistable.

In Acts 2, Peter promises salvation to those who respond in repentance to the Gospel message. The significance of baptism here is that it is a confession of repentance. Frankly the practice of infant baptism has muddied the waters.

Acts 2:36 “Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.” 37 Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” 38 Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call.” 40 And with many other words he testified and exhorted them, saying, “Be saved from this perverse generation.” 41 Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them

The call in Acts 2:38-39 is not restricted to the elect (i.e. those who respond positiviely), as God commands all to repent (Acts 17:30).

John Caldwell · Nov 3, 2022

Clare73 said:
Read it again. . .

I did. It was just you asking the answer to a question not asked.

As believers we should be able to answer for our beliefs, to explain what we believe, and to articulate reasonable responses.

My question was what part of my view of ransom did you not understand. I asked so that I could try to explain my view to you.

Your replies have been nothing but attempts to obscurify.

Let's speak plainly.

What part of my view of the ransom do you not understand or disagree with?

John Mullally · Nov 3, 2022

Clare73 said:
Good for you!

Yup, another one of your frequently used pat responses.

Clare73 · Nov 3, 2022

John Mullally said:
Yup, another one of your frequently used pat responses.

You're a hard guy to please. . .don't even like "atta' boys". . .

Clare73 · Nov 3, 2022

John Caldwell said:
I did. It was just you asking the answer to a question not asked.

Q.E.D.

As believers we should be able to answer for our beliefs, to explain what we believe, and to articulate reasonable responses.
My question was what part of my view of ransom did you not understand. I asked so that I could try to explain my view to you.
Your replies have been nothing but attempts to obscurify.
Let's speak plainly.
What part of my view of the ransom do you not understand or disagree with?

Not answering my two/three questions (post #849, following) regarding Romans 3:25 is a fail, which answer is the answer to your question regarding my problem with your view of the ransom.

Post #849:
dikaiosune - quality or character of being right or just, and which root word is
dike - justice (execution of a sentence--2 Thessalonians 1:9; punishment, vengeance--Acts 28:4;
Jude 7).

How does God demonstrate his justice (dikaiosune - sentence, punishment, vengeance)
in Jesus' sacrifice of atonement (Romans 3:25)?

How did God "pass over," what did he previously omit doing (Romans 3:25), that he then did on the cross, regarding the sin of the OT saints, and which was Jesus' payment of the ransom to buy us back, redeem us from our sentence to eternal death (Romans 5:18)?

My problem with and objection to your view of the ransom is that it is in disagreement with the NT apostolic teaching of Romans 3:25 regarding God demonstrating his justice on the cross.

John Mullally · Nov 3, 2022

Clare73 said:
You're a hard guy to please. . .don't even like "atta' boys". . .

Get real. You have probably said "Good for you" about a hundred times on this forum. You always use it in a satirical sense - and it is typically issued in response to others presenting credentials. As you like to say: Q.E.D.

Clare73 · Nov 3, 2022

John Mullally said:
Get real. You have probably said "Good for you" about a hundred times on this forum. You always use it in a satirical sense - and
it is typically issued in response to others presenting credentials.

Like I said. . .you're a hard guy to please. . .

John Mullally · Nov 3, 2022

Clare73 said:
Like I said. . .you're a hard guy to please. . .

You want to please? I like transparency and real dialog, not dismissive pat and one-line responses.

Clare73 · Nov 3, 2022

John Mullally said:
You want to please? I like transparency and real dialog, not dismissive pat and one-line responses.

Don't we all? . . .good luck with that.

atpollard · Nov 3, 2022

John Mullally said:
Jesus addressed this to the self-righteous Pharisees who needed a kick in the but. It was made before He made atonement for the sins of the world. After his crufixtion and resurrection, the good news is that Jesus draws all humanity (John 12:32) - its called the Gospel message. Not everyone responds to the draw which is accompanied by the conviction of the Holy Spirit (Acts 7:51). Jesus personally drew the rich young ruler, but he refused (Mark 10:17-27) - so grace is not irresistable.

Let us ... just for the sake of discussion ... begin with the assumption that your synergistic "cooperative salvation" is 100% correct and my monergistic "sovereign salvation" is 100% wrong. It changes nothing toward:
- your point: "five-points in the TULIP acronymn - with each point in turn requiring long argumentation"
- my refutation: "Not that long an argumentation."
Contrary to your opinion, Jesus did not address John 6:44 to the Pharisees ... he addressed it to the doubting crowd:
- John 6:26, 41-45 [NKJV] Jesus answered them and said, "Most assuredly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw the signs, but because you ate of the loaves and were filled. ... The Jews then complained about Him, because He said, "I am the bread which came down from heaven." And they said, "Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How is it then that He says, 'I have come down from heaven'?" Jesus therefore answered and said to them, "Do not murmur among yourselves. "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day. "It is written in the prophets, 'And they shall all be taught by God.' Therefore everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me."
You are conflating the Son with the Father. The Son does draw "all men" to him [we can debate "all without exception" vs "all without distinction" another day] ... however a more careful reading of John 6:44 will reveal that all whom the FATHER DRAWS will come and THOSE INDIVIDUALS will ALL be raised by the Son on the Last Day. One group - drawn by the Father and raised by the Son - contrasted with another group - grumblers told to "stop complaining". Identical to John 10 and "not my sheep" vs "my sheep, given to me by my Father".

As I said, kick at the goad to your heart's content with my blessing. God's word can defend itself and only God changes hearts and minds. I merely accepted the challenge of creating a SHORT "argumentation" for TULIP ... I only needed the words found in John 6:44 to explain TULIP.

Gr8Grace · Nov 3, 2022

atpollard said:
Sorry, but I LOVE a good challenge:

“No one can come to Me (T)
unless the Father who sent Me (U)
draws him; and I will (I)
raise him up (L)
on the last day." (P)
- John 6:44

Not that long an argumentation.
Which word don't you understand?

John 12:32
New International Version
And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.”

New Living Translation
And when I am lifted up from the earth, I will draw everyone to myself.”

English Standard Version
And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.”

Berean Standard Bible
And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw everyone to Myself.”

Questions: Is Jesus God? Are Jesus and the Father one?

Clare73 · Nov 3, 2022

See post #871.

atpollard · Nov 3, 2022

Gr8Grace said:
John 12:32
New International Version
And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.”

New Living Translation
And when I am lifted up from the earth, I will draw everyone to myself.”

English Standard Version
And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.”

Berean Standard Bible
And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw everyone to Myself.”

Questions: Is Jesus God? Are Jesus and the Father one?

No, no, no ... none of that offers the short explanation of TULIP that he was asking for.

... but this does:

“No one can come to Me (T)
unless the Father who sent Me (U)
draws him; and I will (I)
raise him up (L)
on the last day." (P)
- John 6:44

John Caldwell · Nov 3, 2022

Clare73 said:
Q.E.D.

Not answering my two/three questions (post #849, following) regarding Romans 3:25 is a fail, which answer is the answer to your question regarding your view of the ransom.

Post #849:
dikaiosune - quality or character of being right or just, and which root word is
dike - justice (execution of a sentence, 2 Thessalonians 1:9; punishment, vengeance, Acts 28:4;
Jude 7).

How does God demonstrate his justice (dikaiosune - sentence, punishment, vengeance)
in Jesus' sacrifice of atonement (Romans 3:25)?

How did God "pass over," what did he previously omit doing (Romans 3:25), that he then did on the cross, regarding the sin of the OT saints, and which was Jesus' payment of the ransom to buy us back, redeem us from our sentence to eternal death (Romans 5:18)?

That does not make sense.

In your post (the one I addressed and quoted...i.e. your pre-edited post) you erroneously claimed that atonement means ἀντίλυτρον (ransom....what we were discussing) but then here you switch to ἱλαστήριον.

ἱλαστήριον does mean what we call Atonement (reconciliation), to include escaping the wrath to come.

But you change your posts so much it is difficult to follow your train of thought.

But yes, Jesus Christ ransomed us from the power of death (Hosea 13), He ransomed us from the grave (Job 33), He ransomed us from the powers of darkness and freed us from the bondage of sin and death (Colossians 1).

You change the powers of darkness to God's wrath.

How to become a Calvinist in 5 easy steps

Well-Known Member

Me

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Blood-bought

Blood-bought

Well-Known Member

Me

Well-Known Member

Blood-bought

Blood-bought

Well-Known Member

Blood-bought

Well-Known Member

Blood-bought

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Blood-bought

Well-Known Member

Me

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency