The worst thing about Calvinism

[Hammster]

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

See this.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

See this.

I just re-read it again. I am not sure what the problem is.
You are saying the same thing as JimmyJimmy. If not, then please point me to a post that says that you do not agree with JimmyJimmy's statement about how a beleiver's spiritual birth is like our physical birth in the fact that we do not have any say so in the matter.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

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

Hence my comment about scripture.

You are not explaining anything. You are shooting one liners out and expecting me to get it. Give me a full and detailed explanation. Do not point me to a post. Just tell it to me straight. Write a paragraph and quote words of who said what and then explain the whole thing. I honestly have no idea what you are talking about as to why you think there is a problem.

If anything, I have a problem in the way that you communicate because you are very evasive about what you actually believe. For when I asked you if you believed in Limited Atonement and Uncondtional Election you initially made me think otherwise.

You also have accused me of misrepresenting what people are saying. I need post #'s of them explaining their beliefs to me in view of the standard Calvinistic Tulip belief and me ignoring that. I do not see that I did such a thing. Folks have to realize that when we are talking about Calvinism, that we are talking about the standard Tulip belief. If they do not believe this, they need to clarify that with me, and it is not my job to do that for them. For example: If somebody thought I believed in Eternal Conscious Torment, it is my job to convince them that I do not believe in that with Scripture. For I believe in Dualistic Conditional Immortality.

Do you see where I am coming from, my friend?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

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

Hence my comment about scripture.

Stop being mysterious. Tell it to me straight. What are you talking about?
If I misunderstood you, it would be helpful if you explained in how I did so.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Dear Hammster:

Honestly, if you cannot explain things for me clearly, I think it is best that I not read your posts anymore and move on. I will give you one more chance to explain things. If you do not explain things clearly for me, I am going to ignore your posts, my friend. I say this not to wound you, but I say this in love because I am not into trying to read people's minds and nor am I into pulling teeth so as to get folks to admit to what they believe.

May God bless you;
And may you please be well.

 

[Hammster]

I just re-read it again. I am not sure what the problem is.
You are saying the same thing as JimmyJimmy. If not, then please point me to a post that says that you do not agree with JimmyJimmy's statement about how a beleiver's spiritual birth is like our physical birth in the fact that we do not have any say so in the matter.

Then respond to the argument. Whether or not it agrees with Jimmy isn't relevant.

 

[Hammster]

Stop being mysterious. Tell it to me straight. What are you talking about?
If I misunderstood you, it would be helpful if you explained in how I did so.

Reread the post. As a whole. Nowhere did I say or imply that you were a Calvinist.

 

[Hammster]

Dear Hammster:

Honestly, if you cannot explain things for me clearly, I think it is best that I not read your posts anymore and move on. I will give you one more chance to explain things. If you do not explain things clearly for me, I am going to ignore your posts, my friend. I say this not to wound you, but I say this in love because I am not into trying to read people's minds and nor am I into pulling teeth so as to get folks to admit to what they believe.

May God bless you;
And may you please be well.

You obviously don't read my posts now. So I'm not sure what would change.

 

[Hal A Peno]

You are not explaining anything. You are shooting one liners out and expecting me to get it. Give me a full and detailed explanation. Do not point me to a post. Just tell it to me straight. Write a paragraph and quote words of who said what and then explain the whole thing. I honestly have no idea what you are talking about as to why you think there is a problem.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

You obviously don't read my posts now. So I'm not sure what would change.

You could just explain it and that would help me. Anyways, you are right in what you said. I re-read the post and you were talking about my knowledge of Calvinism and not that I was a Calvinist. This was my misunderstanding, and I apologize. But it would have been nice if you just said what I just told you. Remember, Jesus said the greatest among you serves.

I also do not see how I misrepresented what people said if they have not clarified their beliefs for me. I am not a mind reader and they have to expect that the standard Calvinistic belief is Tulip.

Wikipedia says this,

"Most objections to and attacks on Calvinism focus on the "five points of Calvinism", also called the doctrines of grace, and remembered by the mnemonic "TULIP".

Calvinism - Wikipedia

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Then respond to the argument. Whether or not it agrees with Jimmy isn't relevant.

Stating the truth is never irrelevant.

 

[Hammster]

Stating the truth is never irrelevant.

See? There you go. Here's part of the problem. Did I say stating the truth was a problem? Was it implied? No. Not at all. So why respond as if I did?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

See? There you go. Here's part of the problem. Did I say stating the truth was a problem? Was it implied? No. Not at all. So why respond as if I did?

Because you said that your agreement with JimmyJimmy is not relevant (Which is a truth). I think we as believers can be influenced by what others think. For if nobody believed in Calvinism, would you believe it?

 

[Hammster]

Because you said that your agreement with JimmyJimmy is not relevant (Which is a truth).

It's not important to my argument. How about just dealing with that? What have we had to drag this out for who knows how many posts now?

Good grief.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

It's not important to my argument. How about just dealing with that? What have we had to drag this out for who knows how many posts now?

Good grief.

If it is not relevant to you than ignore it, my friend. I believe all things are connected. We may not have all the answers to everything, but I believe God surely knows.

 

[Hammster]

If it is not relevant to you than ignore it, my friend. I believe all things are connected. We may not have all the answers to everything, but I believe God surely knows.

I'm trying to ignore it.

Now, are you planning on responding to the post, or not?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I'm trying to ignore it.

Now, are you planning on responding to the post, or not?

*Gives you a big macho hug*

Lets love each other okay?

 

[ClementofA]

I believe regeneration is irresistible.

So you believe in forced regeneration. Not forced salvation. LOL.

Is that what Calvinists believe.

 

[ClementofA]

I do believe that we have free will in choosing to repent and obey (we don't "choose Jesus"). We just don't choose whether we are renerate or not (thank the Lord).

That sounds like co-op salvation to me.

Are you sure you are a Calvinist?

 

[RisenInJesus]

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

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

No, those who were not part of Israel did not necessarily die in their sins... because the law brings about wrath; for where there is no law there is no transgression. Romans 4:15.

Actually, the atonement animal sacrifices which God only required of and had Israel practicing in the OT were foreshadows of the ultimate atonement sacrifice of Christ, who would come through Israel to be the Savior of the world. The sacrifices law and sacrifices were limited to Israel for this purpose, yet this does not mean that salvation was not available to Gentiles or that they had no opportunity to express faith in God. Paul taught that Mosaic Law was “added because of transgression” (Gal. 3:19). He explained that it was given so that “sin might appear sin” ...( Has then what is good become death to me? Certainly not! But sin, that it might appear sin, was producing death in me through what is good, so that sin through the commandment might become exceedingly sinful.Rom. 7:13). He described it as a “tutor” to bring men to Christ...(Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. Gal. 3:24). So, the Law came because of sins that were being committed, to show more clearly sin’s sinfulness, and to point the way to Christ.

God’s covenant with Israel did not mean that God didn’t care about the Gentiles. Paul declared that God did not leave Himself “without witness” but provided for the Gentiles ...
(We also are men with the same nature as you, and preach to you that you should turn from these useless things to the living God, who made the heaven, the earth, the sea, and all things that are in them, who in bygone generations allowed all nations to walk in their own ways. Nevertheless He did not leave Himself without witness, in that He did good, gave us rain from heaven and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness. Acts 14:15-17). Romans chapter one also gives a summary of the world’s rejection of God that tells us some things about His relationship to the Gentiles and further in Romans that they and all men will be judged by their response to what is written on their conscience and revealed to them about God and Jesus Christ.


For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel (Rom 2:14-16

So the atonement is by no means limited.