The worst thing about Calvinism

[Bible Highlighter]

I'm saying that you should deal with what I said, especially since you've been quoting me. That shouldn't be too difficult.

I did deal with what you posted. You agreed with JimmyJimmy and I am replying to your agreement with what he said.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

My birth was irresistible. My mother pushed me out without even bothering to ask my opinion on the matter.

Nicodemus understood that. He understood that Jesus was saying the new birth was out of our hands.

This sounds to me like you are agreeing with JimmyJimmy. This sounds like you are saying that the new birth is not by our choice (Which is what I was replying to you about).

 

[Hammster]

Here is the problem with this. You still are not saying.... "Yes, this is what I believe." You are making me assume that is what you believe when in reality it may not be. Before you seem to be upset that I was misrepresenting folks in regards to their belief on Calvinism. If you were included in that group, then I do not see how that is my fault for your lack (or others lack) of not communicating to me properly what you or others believe in regards to the standard 5 point Calvinistic belief.

You also had to use different words as if to throw me off from Unconditional Election and or Limited Atonement. You gave me different words for your belief making me think it was different. For if they are the same, then all you had to do is say,

"Yes... I believe in Unconditional Election and Limited Atonement."

But you did not do that. What do you have to hide? Why are you being so mysterious about what you believe? Tell it to me straight.

There's nothing mysterious. I don't care for the terms you used, so I used ones that I find more accurate.

 

[Hammster]

I did deal with what you posted. You agreed with JimmyJimmy and I am replying to your agreement with what he said.

Where did I take it to be literal in the most extreme way?

By relating Calvinism to our spiritual / physical birth. Somebody can do the same by saying that Mary is our spiritual mother and pointing to the fact that all people have a mother.

My question, your answer. Your answer does not reflect what I said.

So again, try dealing with what I said since you are going through the trouble of quoting me.

 

[Hammster]

This sounds to me like you are agreeing with JimmyJimmy. This sounds like you are saying that the new birth is not by our choice (Which is what I was replying to you about).

It's not by our choice. But again, you distorted what I said into something I didn't come close to saying.

 

[Hammster]

I did deal with what you posted. You agreed with JimmyJimmy and I am replying to your agreement with what he said.

Sorry, but no you didn't.

 

[RisenInJesus]

So it was limited to those people.

Thanks. That's the point.

At that time in history God was only working with the nation of Israel and the point is that the atonement sacrifices were for all the people of Israel. Gentiles were not under the law, therefore did not need the sacrificial system God instituted for Israel. Now, Christ has died and tasted death for the whole world, every man.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

There's nothing mysterious. I don't care for the terms you used, so I used ones that I find more accurate.

Then why not say that they mean the same thing instead of throwing me off on some kind of wild goose chase? You could have said you prefer these terms instead although they mean the same thing.

In the world of Calvinism: Is not God's election .... unconditional?
In the world of Calvinism: Is not God's atonement... limited?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

It's not by our choice. But again, you distorted what I said into something I didn't come close to saying.

Like what? Tell it to me straight.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Sorry, but no you didn't.

So you are now saying you did not agree with him?
If you think I misrepresented what you believe, then YOU have to clarify what that problem is.
What post # is the problem?
What is the problem exactly?
Tell it to me straght and stop being mysterious.
If you do not do so, it just makes it seem like you are intentionally trying to not be clear in the way you communicate with me and you are just messing with me. If that is the case, then I am going to ignore your posts and move on.

 

[Hammster]

At that time in history God was only working with the nation of Israel and the point is that the atonement sacrifices were for all the people of Israel. Gentiles were not under the law, therefore did not need the sacrificial system God instituted for Israel. Now, Christ has died and tasted death for the whole world, every man.

So the atonement was for all of God's people?

I agree. Everyone who wasn't part of Hos people died in their sins.

 

[Hammster]

Then why not say that they mean the same thing instead of throwing me off on some kind of wild goose chase? You could have said you prefer these terms instead although they mean the same thing.

In the world of Calvinism: Is not God's election .... unconditional?
In the world of Calvinism: Is not God's atonement... limited?

Wild goose chase? I thought you were well versed in Reformed Theology.

Now that we both know you aren't, you should probably stop acting as if you are.

 

[Hammster]

Like what? Tell it to me straight.

Again? Okay, but pay attention this time. Write it down. Do something so that you can remember what I said.

In the same way that we have no control over our birth, we have no control over our new birth.

Now, I've said this a few times today. Hopefully I won't have to repeat it again.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Wild goose chase? I thought you were well versed in Reformed Theology.

I am aware of the 5 points of Calvinism and I have talked with Calvinists on forums for many years. I am not aware of the splinter or sub groups of Calvinism as much. If people do not hold to the 5 points of Calvinism, then they need to tell me how their belief differs from the standard Tulip belief. I am not a mind reader.

Now that we both know you aren't, you should probably stop acting as if you are.

Nowhere do I act like a Calvinist in any way. I am merely replying to people's posts based off the standard Tulip Calvinist belief. If there belief differs, they need to explain that clearly instead of getting bent out of shape. I cannot possibly know what people believe if they don't tell me clearly.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Again? Okay, but pay attention this time. Write it down. Do something so that you can remember what I said.

In the same way that we have no control over our birth, we have no control over our new birth.

Now, I've said this a few times today. Hopefully I won't have to repeat it again.

Is this not essentially the same thing JimmyJimmy was saying?
Did I not reply to you in disagreement with this idea?
I am not seeing the problem here.

 

[Hammster]

I am aware of the 5 points of Calvinism and I have talked with Calvinists on forums for many years. I am not aware of the splinter or sub groups of Calvinism. If people do not hold to the 5 points of Calvinism, then they need to tell me how their belief differs from the standard Tulip belief. I am not a mind reader.



Nowhere do I act like a Calvinist in any way. I am merely replying to people's posts based off the standard Tulip Calvinist belief. If there belief differs, they need to explain that clearly instead of getting bent out of shape. I cannot possibly know what people believe if they don't tell me clearly.

I never said that you acted like a Calvinist. How could even come up with that?

Maybe that's how you treat scripture. It would explain a lot.

 

[Hammster]

Is this not essentially the same thing JimmyJimmy was saying?
Did I not reply to you in disagreement with this idea?
I am not seeing the problem here.

Once again, deal with what I said. No rabbit trails about Jimmy.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I never said that you acted like a Calvinist. How could even come up with that?

You said,

"Now that we both know you aren't, you should probably stop acting as if you are." ~ Hammster.​

Are you not talking about Calvinism here?

Maybe that's how you treat scripture. It would explain a lot.

Ad hominems only work against a person using them and they do not help to further the truth.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Once again, deal with what I said. No rabbit trails about Jimmy.

But I do not see how you said anything different than what he said. You were agreeing with what he said, did you not?

 

[Hammster]

You said,

"Now that we both know you aren't, you should probably stop acting as if you are." ~ Hammster.​

Are you not talking about Calvinism here?



Ad hominems only work against a person and they do not help to further the truth.

You deconstructed my post. Had you read it in context, you wouldn't have come to that conclusion.

Hence my comment about scripture.