ICONO'CLAST
Well-Known Member
Those 17 texts are not addressing mans will.
They are speaking of of offerings not commanded by the law.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Those 17 texts are not addressing mans will.The words free will are in the bible.
In the Torah we're told to make free will offerings.
More tomorrow.
'Night
No. I have not read Calvin’s writings, so I would not refer to it. It is common for people to complain that “it is not fair for God to save some without giving everyone an equal chance”.Concerning God being unfair: Do you mean Calvin's claim that God predestines some to eternal hell before they are born? That tops my list of attributing God's nature as beomg satanic. If Calvin was humane, that should have been a clue to him that he was in error. But per scripture arrogance trumps reason.
Who cares? I still don’t know what the theory of “Penal Substitutionary Atonement” is, so I have no idea if the Bible supports it or not … or how any of these questions or verses relate to it.So how did God demonstrate his justice (righteousness) 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 doing was Jesus' payment of the ransom to buy us back, redeem us from our sentence to eternal death (Romans 5:18)?
You are accountable to what you are saying. It may not be something you want to address, but you already addressed it - How abuut being more transparent?No. I have not read Calvin’s writings, so I would not refer to it. It is common for people to complain that “it is not fair for God to save some without giving everyone an equal chance”.
Frankly, that amuses me because even with 100% free will, those living in America in AD 1000 (who had no chance to ever hear of Jesus or the Gospel) clearly did not have the same chance to believe as the crowd that heard Peter in Acts 2.
Perhaps it is presented in Romans 3:24-26.Who cares? I still don’t know what the theory of “Penal Substitutionary Atonement” is,
I assumed you would be more interested in what Scripture presents than in what I believe, so I presented Scripture.so I have no idea if the Bible supports it or not … or how any of these questions or verses relate to it.
You steadfastly refuse to tell me what you believe.
G’Night.
Calvin did not teach most anything you say. You did not understand the one quote you did offer.You are accountable to what you are spewing. The fatalistic God predestines most to hell and a few to salvation is from Calvin. You subscrbe to and yet plead ignoramous - sorry you are trapped by what you said - its too late.
You are doing well. blessings.No, I gave the basis.
I am many things, but I never claimed ignoramus. I claimed to have never read The Institutes (or any of Calvin’s other works). I have read the Westminster Confession (very long and just a little boring), the London Confession (shorter and slightly less boring), the Heidelberg Catechism (actually, pretty interesting). I have read the report of the Synod of Dort (refuting the Articles of Remonstrances) and a lot of sermons by C.H. Spurgeon. I have read some of R.C. Sproul’s writings, but I prefer the videos of him speaking (he is a charismatic speaker).You are accountable to what you are spewing. The fatalistic God predestines most to hell and a few to salvation is from Calvin - I find that as satanic. You subscrbe to it and yet plead ignoramous - own up you have prevously agreed with that.
Calvin did indeed say this: I find it satanic, but maybe you would find it acceptable to being predestined to hell before you are born. Maybe if you find yourself predestined to hell, you can take comfort that God received glory from blasting you in eternal flameCalvin did not teach most anything you say. You did not understand the one quote you did offer.
You are just making things up.
Calvin did indeed say this: I find it satanic, but maybe you would find it acceptable to being predestined to hell before you are born. Maybe if you find yourself predestined to hell, you can take comfort that God received glory from blasting you in eternal flame
"The Lord has made all things for himself; yea, even the wicked for the day of evil," (Prov. 16:4). Now, since the arrangement of all things is in the hand of God, since to him belongs the disposal of life and death, he arranges all things by his sovereign counsel, in such a way that individuals are born, who are doomed from the womb to certain death, and are to glorify him by their destruction.
(John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 6)
Man up! If you are participating on these forums in defence of Calvinism, you should educate yourself to the father of your faith Posting on a theoelogy forum while claimiin ignorance is infuriating!I am many things, but I never claimed ignoramus. I claimed to have never read The Institutes (or any of Calvin’s other works). I have read the Westminster Confession (very long and just a little boring), the London Confession (shorter and slightly less boring), the Heidelberg Catechism (actually, pretty interesting). I have read the report of the Synod of Dort (refuting the Articles of Remonstrances) and a lot of sermons by C.H. Spurgeon. I have read some of R.C. Sproul’s writings, but I prefer the videos of him speaking (he is a charismatic speaker).
Where I have far too much experience is listening to anti-Calvinists talk nonsensical ‘smack’ about what “Calvinists” believe (almost always getting it grossly wrong) and feeling an obligation to correct their pathetic strawman errors with the facts … typically from SCRIPTURE … but from the above listed sources when necessary.
John Calvin is not the founder of the First Church of Calvinism or of Calvin’s Theological Seminary … no matter how much you think it is true or want it to be true. He was just one of many reformers that lived during the Reformation. The actual theological movement is called REFORMED (and there are “reformed” Churches and Seminaries). The term “Calvinist” was coined by the Lutheran State Church as an insult to those that followed the second wave of the Reformation and moved beyond Lutheranism and the Book of Concord to embrace the 5 Solas. It was meant to be used as you use it … an insult to imply that these “Bible Only” crowd were following the teaching of a man (Calvin) rather than the Lutheran State Church (and God).
By the 20th Century, Calvinist just became synonymous with TULIP Sotierology and ceased to be an insult for those that accept TULIP.
Personally, I am a Particular Baptist … so my historic pedigree is a little different and has less “Reformed Church” than groups like the Presbyterians.
Were it not so late, I would correct your excretory presentation on predestination and Reformed Theology … perhaps another day. Suffice it to say you have no clue what “Calvinists” believe.
Ok, let’s have at it …Perhaps it is presented in Romans 3:24-26.
I assumed you would be more interested in what Scripture presents than in what I believe, so I presented Scripture.
Guess I got that wrong. . .
This is another blame God for mans sin post. The quote is accurate, it does not mention predestination to hell as you falsely claim.
It speaks of sinners being doomed by sin. Death is certain for sinners who remain outside of Christ.
Do you deny this?
Non sequitur.Man up! If you are participating on these forums in defence of Calvinism, you should educate yourself to the father of your faith who stated monstrous things before you post here!
I also have never claimed the status of ignoramus, however it has been bestowed upon me at times...probably deservingly more often than not.I am many things, but I never claimed ignoramus. I claimed to have never read The Institutes (or any of Calvin’s other works). I have read the Westminster Confession (very long and just a little boring), the London Confession (shorter and slightly less boring), the Heidelberg Catechism (actually, pretty interesting). I have read the report of the Synod of Dort (refuting the Articles of Remonstrances) and a lot of sermons by C.H. Spurgeon. I have read some of R.C. Sproul’s writings, but I prefer the videos of him speaking (he is a charismatic speaker).
The topic is "How to be a Calvinist in 5 days" and you support Calvinism and yet you state you have never studied Calvin's writings. I think that shows how to being a Calvinist: hear some half-truths from friendly godly folk and bury your head in the sand.Non sequitur.
Reread the post.
Non sequitur.The topic is "How to be a Calvinist in 5 days" and you support Calvinism and yet you state you have never studied Calvin's writings. I think that shows how to being a Calvinist: hear some half-truths from friendly godly folk and bury your head in the sand.
John Calvin is not the founder of the First Church of Calvinism or of Calvin’s Theological Seminary … no matter how much you think it is true or want it to be true. He was just one of many reformers that lived during the Reformation. The actual theological movement is called REFORMED (and there are “reformed” Churches and Seminaries). The term “Calvinist” was coined by the Lutheran State Church as an insult to those that followed the second wave of the Reformation and moved beyond Lutheranism and the Book of Concord to embrace the 5 Solas. It was meant to be used as you use it … an insult to imply that these “Bible Only” crowd were following the teaching of a man (Calvin) rather than the Lutheran State Church (and God).
By the 20th Century, Calvinist just became synonymous with TULIP Sotierology and ceased to be an insult for those that accept TULIP.
Personally, I am a Particular Baptist … so my historic pedigree is a little different and has less “Reformed Church” than groups like the Presbyterians.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?