Of course, but I'm not playing the game with you, I was as specific as you, as specific I need to be.
Last edited:
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.
It's not important?
Well you are mistaken. Maybe it is you who have very poor understanding of Reformed? Why don't you tell me what you consider the " traditional sense ".I can tell by your questions you might not be Reformed in the traditional sense.
What is wrong with you? I have said three times that it is NOT BECAUSE OF OUR GOONESS! Only God knows His reasons. Why can you not understand what I am sayin?But if it is because of any goodness, you share in his glory.
I already did give you my interpretation of the passage in James. So I'm done.If you were to read my OP, I explain that Provisional Atonement is applied by the two aspects of salvation called "Justification," and "Sanctification." Eternal Security Proponents, and or Non-Eternal Security Belief Alone Proponents try to say that the word "justified" in relation to works is not referring to salvation in James 2:24. Yet, the same word "justified" is used in relation to "faith" in the same very verse. No doubt Belief Alone Proponents do back flips over the idea that we are justified by faith for salvation. Yet, in James 2:24, are they saying that this is not the case? Some try to say that we are "justified before men" and not God when they talk about James 2:24. But we know that James 2:24 is also referring to being justified by faith, too. So their interpretation does not work.
Anyways, if you have a different interpretation on James 2:24, then please feel free to share it. So far, I see James 2:24 saying we are justified (declared "just" or saved) by works AND faith.
Also, 1 John 1:7. It says if we walk in the light as He is in the light, the blood of Jesus cleanses us from all sin. What is walking in the light? According to 1 John 2:9-11 (using other words), walking in the light is loving your brother. So we have to love our brother in order for the blood of Jesus to cleanse us from all sin. 1 John 3:15 says if we hate our brother we are like a murderer and no murderer has eternal life abiding in them. Paul says that loving your neighbor will automatically fulfill the Moral Law (like: Do not kill, do not steal, do not commit adultery, etc.) (See Romans 13:8-10). Jesus says we can commit adultery just by looking upon another in lust (Matthew 5:28-30). This means that if we are lusting after others, we are not loving our neighbor. Even Jesus agreed with the lawyer on the truth that to love GOD and to love your neighbor is a part of inheriting eternal life (Luke 10:25-28). Loving one's neighbor involves helping the poor beat up person on the side of the road (Luke 10:25-37). Hence, why those believers who did not help the poor were told to go away into everlasting punishment (Matthew 25:41-46). Is loving the brethren, and or the poor just something automatic to all true believers or do they have to actively work at doing that?
Paul says if love is your motive, the law is unnecessary. It only makes the unregenerate act like Christians = hypocrisy.
I already did give you my interpretation of the passage in James. So I'm done.
Do you believe God loves you? If you do, why? Because He demonstrated it or because you are behaving "well"?
The NC is based on Love. Here's how;Paul was referring to the 613 Laws of the Torah (the Old Law) when he spoke negatively of the Law and or works. Paul talks about how we are not under that Old Testament Law anymore. Paul was not speaking against the words of Jesus Christ and the doctrine according to godliness; If so, he would condemn himself (See 1 Timothy 6:3-4).
Jesus was not primarily teaching Torah, or the Old Law, but He was primarily teaching New Covenant. This is evident in the fact when He says things like, "Turn the other cheek" vs. "an eye for an eye"; or "Swear not at all (Do not make oaths)" vs. "You can make oaths & if so, be obligated to fulfill them," etc.
God tells us why he saves sinners. For his glory. But if we have any merit, we glory and leave him the scraps.What is wrong with you? I have said three times that it is NOT BECAUSE OF OUR GOONESS! Only God knows His reasons. Why can you not understand what I am sayin?
Calvinism. The Reformed creeds.....Well you are mistaken. Maybe it is you who have very poor understanding of Reformed? Why don't you tell me what you consider the " traditional sense ".
That did not even come close to answering my question. I do not ask you to Name the theology you believe. I ask about the CONTENT of what you believe Reformed states.Calvinism. The Reformed creeds.....
What Reformed Creeds do you study?That did not even come close to answering my question. I do not ask you to Name the theology you believe. I ask about the CONTENT of what you believe Reformed states.
Missing my point again. Let me guote from R.C. Sproul in "What Is Reformed Theology" . He is an authority on what Reformed is and he can state it more clearly than I can. Plus maybe you will actually be able to HEAR him.God tells us why he saves sinners. For his glory. But if we have any merit, we glory and leave him the scraps.
Arbitrary = nothing in us to base his choices on.Missing my point again. Let me guote from R.C. Sproul in "What Is Reformed Theology" . He is an authority on what Reformed is and he can state it more clearly than I can. Plus maybe you will actually be able to HEAR him.
"The ground in which God chooses the objects of His mercy is solely the good pleasure of His will." Then he quotes Ephesians 1:3-5.
"That God chooses according to the good pleasure of His will does not mean that His choices are capricious or arbitrary. An arbitrary choice is one made for no reason at all. Though Reformed theology insists that God's election is based on nothing foreseen in the individuals lives, this does not mean that He makes the choice for no reason at all. It simply means that the reason is not something God finds in us. In His inscrutable, mysterious will, God chooses for reasons known only known to Himself. He chooses according to His own good pleasure, which is His divine right."
Where is any glory given to man in that? Where is any merit in man?
Later, when I have more time I will delve into your false assertion that Reformed believe that God save s people against their will.
I asked you first!What Reformed Creeds do you study?
It could have that sub meaning of could be a result of an arbitrary choice but arbitrary actually MEANS for no reason at all.Arbitrary = nothing in us to base his choices on.
no reason at all in any of the saved.It could have that sub meaning of could be a result of an arbitrary choice but arbitrary actually MEANS for no reason at all.
Thanks (sarcasm) for actually paying attention to what I wrote and making a serious and thoughtful comment on it.Arbitrary = nothing in us to base his choices on.
If it was anything at all in us, it would be;Th
Thanks (sarcasm) for actually paying attention to what I wrote and making a serious and thoughtful comment on it.
No reason at all PERIOD is the definition of arbitrary. Do you just like to strain out knats and swallow camels?no reason at all in any of the saved.
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?