What if we don't PRACTICE what Jesus PREACHED?

[calluna]

Sure, as long as you don't apply it to anyone.

The saints get great encouragement from this doctrine, of course.

 

[nobdysfool]

The saints get great encouragement from this doctrine, of course.

The Saints get great encouragement from the fact that their sins are forgiven, and they will be with Christ when they die physically. That is the Great Hope of the Saints, provided by Christ.

Right belief about predestination does not save anyone.

Faith in Christ, and in His finished work on the Cross, does save.

 

[calluna]

The Saints get great encouragement from the fact that their sins are forgiven

But that infuriates those who refuse to repent.

 

[nobdysfool]

But that infuriates those who refuse to repent.

So? What does that have to do with anything? The unregenerate hate God, and blaspheme His Name in that hatred. They will receive their just due, for their sin and their hatred of God.

Only God can change a blasphemer into a Child of God. Jesus said "it must needs be that offenses come, but woe to the man by whom those offenses come". He wasn't talking about insults, or hurting peoples' feelings, or the offense that comes from the proclamation of the Gospel.

The Truth insults those who live in sin. That is as it should be. Do you think we should water down the Gospel to the point where it isn't offensive? Jesus would say to you as he said to Peter, "Get thee behind me, Satan, you set your mind on the things of man, rather than the things of God".

 

[calluna]

he said to Peter, "Get thee behind me, Satan

Did Jesus use old-fashioned language?

 

[nobdysfool]

Did Jesus use old-fashioned language?

Is that all you can muster? What, do you want Jesus to say,"Yo Peter, get away from me, 'cause you be talkin' smack!"

Would that make you happy?

Or would you rather He say,"Please forgive Me for saying so, Peter, but I do believe that you may be missing what I'm saying, and drawing an erroneous conclusion. If I understand you correctly, you seem to be more concerned about the things of man, rather than the things of God. Please reorient your thinking, and listen more carefully to what I am saying".

 

[AndOne]

Is that all you can muster? What, do you want Jesus to say,"Yo Peter, get away from me, 'cause you be talkin' smack!"

Would that make you happy?

Or would you rather He say,"Please forgive Me for saying so, Peter, but I do believe that you may be missing what I'm saying, and drawing an erroneous conclusion. If I understand you correctly, you seem to be more concerned about the things of man, rather than the things of God. Please reorient your thinking, and listen more carefully to what I am saying".

Hey bro - I wouldn't waste my time if I were you. I think he is either baiting you or simply unable to refute your posts. You won this one - time to move on!

 

[calluna]

What, do you want Jesus to say,"Yo Peter, get away from me, 'cause you be talkin' smack!"

It would be better than Latin, anyway.

 

[nobdysfool]

It would be better than Latin, anyway.

Ain't no Latin being spoken here. Feel free to continue in your delusions and hatred. You aren't worth the time.

 

[nobdysfool]

Hey bro - I wouldn't waste my time if I were you. I think he is either baiting you or simply unable to refute your posts. You won this one - time to move on!

I think you may be right. He hasn't refuted a thing, nor can he.

 

[Kutte]

nobdysfool wrote:
Please explain your point. Do you deny that Jesus is God?

Answer,
Look, the question is not if I am denying that Jesus is God, but when he told his listeners: “I am not teaching you my own thoughts, but those of God who sent me.” (John 7:16) then the answer to your question is rather obvious. In other words, Jesus himself is denying that he is God since he was sent by God.

Blessing, Kutte

 

[nobdysfool]

Oh, but the question remains. You can try and slip around it, but you fail, because Jesus did say that He was God.

Joh 8:56-58 Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad." (57) So the Jews said to him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?" (58) Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am."
​

If you deny that Jesus is God, then you cannot be a Christian. You have taken satan's side in the past, so I believe I am safe to assume that you are at least sympathetic to satan's viewpoint, if not an outright satanist.

Either way, you don't belong here. Please leave.

 

[chestertonrules]

Oh, but the question remains. You can try and slip around it, but you fail, because Jesus did say that He was God.

Joh 8:56-58 Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad." (57) So the Jews said to him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?" (58) Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am."
​

If you deny that Jesus is God, then you cannot be a Christian. You have taken satan's side in the past, so I believe I am safe to assume that you are at least sympathetic to satan's viewpoint, if not an outright satanist.

Either way, you don't belong here. Please leave.

Three persons, one God.

Jesus is not identical to God the father or to the Holy Spirit. Jesus prayed. Jesus told us that the Holy Spirit could not come until he left.

This is a mystery of our faith. If you can explain it, please do. Otherwise, please refrain from policing the board.

 

[nobdysfool]

Three persons, one God.

With you on that one.

Jesus is not identical to God the father or to the Holy Spirit. Jesus prayed. Jesus told us that the Holy Spirit could not come until he left.

I never said He was identical to the Father or the Holy Spirit. God is the collective term for all three, and I used it in its collective sense. They differ in function, not in essence. Jesus is God. The Holy Spirit is God. The Father is God. There should be no issue with my statement. Why are you making one? Is it just that you can't abide a Calvinist saying anything correct, even in your estimation, so you have to nit-pick and try to find fault with a statement you basically agree with?

This is a mystery of our faith. If you can explain it, please do.

I agree, we do not really understand how the One God can be Three, yet One. But then, God is totally other than what we are. I am content to know that the Father, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are all the One God.

Otherwise, please refrain from policing the board.

Seems like no one else has the guts to stand up to the satanist, and ask him to leave. Someone has to do it. The mods expect us to do some self-policing. I am doing the right thing. Lose your anti-Calvinist bias for a minute, and think.

 

[chestertonrules]

Three persons, one God.

With you on that one.



I never said He was identical to the Father or the Holy Spirit. God is the collective term for all three, and I used it in its collective sense. They differ in function, not in essence. Jesus is God. The Holy Spirit is God. The Father is God. There should be no issue with my statement. Why are you making one? Is it just that you can't abide a Calvinist saying anything correct, even in your estimation, so you have to nit-pick and try to find fault with a statement you basically agree with?

My problem was with you telling him to refrain from posting.

Seems like no one else has the guts to stand up to the satanist, and ask him to leave. Someone has to do it. The mods expect us to do some self-policing. I am doing the right thing. Lose your anti-Calvinist bias for a minute, and think.

This particular point had nothing to do with Calvinism or Catholicism. I must have missed something, but why are you calling this poster satanic?

 

[nobdysfool]

Three persons, one God.

This particular point had nothing to do with Calvinism or Catholicism. I must have missed something, but why are you calling this poster satanic?

Because in several other threads, he has quite vocally taken the side of satan against Christian doctrine. If you can search his posts, you will see it. He denied that Jesus is God. That alone marks him as non-Christian.

 

[chestertonrules]

Because in several other threads, he has quite vocally taken the side of satan against Christian doctrine. If you can search his posts, you will see it. He denied that Jesus is God. That alone marks him as non-Christian.

My reading of his post was the Jesus and God the father are separate persons, which I believe. However, I also believe Jesus is God. That's why I jumped, plus the fact that I enjoy yanking your chain!


Given this new information, I say let him have it!

 

[nobdysfool]

My reading of his post was the Jesus and God the father are separate persons, which I believe. However, I also believe Jesus is God. That's why I jumped, plus the fact that I enjoy yanking your chain!


Given this new information, I say let him have it!

It's one thing to yank someone's chain but when it comes to basic core doctrine, if you agree with something I say, yanking my chain only confuses the issue. As to the nature of the Godhead, you and I agree. Actually, I don't mind a little kidding, as long as it doesn't get out of hand, but the doctrine of Salvation is serious stuff to me, and I don't really approach discussing it with a mindset of levity and frivolity.

I spoke as I did to Kutte because of his posts in other threads. I think there is ample evidence to show that he is at least non-Christian, and at worst, a satanist. He certainly plays the devil's advocate often enough.

 

[chestertonrules]

It's one thing to yank someone's chain but when it comes to basic core doctrine, if you agree with something I say, yanking my chain only confuses the issue. As to the nature of the Godhead, you and I agree. Actually, I don't mind a little kidding, as long as it doesn't get out of hand, but the doctrine of Salvation is serious stuff to me, and I don't really approach discussing it with a mindset of levity and frivolity.

I spoke as I did to Kutte because of his posts in other threads. I think there is ample evidence to show that he is at least non-Christian, and at worst, a satanist. He certainly plays the devil's advocate often enough.

I'm not familiar with him, but I'll take you at your word here!

Here's a serious question in light of your comments.

If you truly believe in unconditional election, what is there to debate about? If nothing we do can change our destiny, why bother?

Wouldn't life be empty and pointless?

 

[nobdysfool]

I'm not familiar with him, but I'll take you at your word here!

Here's a serious question in light of your comments.

If you truly believe in unconditional election, what is there to debate about? If nothing we do can change our destiny, why bother?

Wouldn't life be empty and pointless?

Well, I believe that us even having this discussion was predestined, but the thing is, we didn't know we would have this discussion until we actually began having it. God's predestination does not negate our having to experience what He has predestined, without the knowledge of what comes after this. We must still make the journey, and within that journey, we still choose freely, but God so completely knows us that He knows what we will choose, and has therefore incorporated those foreseen choices into His predestined Purpose and Plan. We walk it out, but God knows our every move, our every thought, our every choice, and has known them from before Creation.

I realize it's a hard concept to wrap your mind around, and I am probably not explaining it clearly enough, but I am trying to help you understand my thinking, and why I believe as I do. I wasn't force-fed this by someone, it is the product of years of study, prayer, and thinking on these things. I was never formally taught "Calvinism", I didn't even know what Calvinism was until a few years ago. When I began to hear and learn about calvinism, I realized that much of it was what I had already learned from my own study, prayer, and thinking on God's Word.

The journey is still ours to walk out and experience, and it is only in retrospect that we begin to realize that it unfolded exactly as God intended. What could we go back and do differently? Even if we were given a second chance, with all of the situations exactly the same, but us only knowing what we knew at that original moment, would we really choose any differently? I don't believe we would. At any moment we make a conscious choice, we choose what we desire most, based on all available data, and according to the inclination of our natures and wills. Even if we intentionally try to choose other than what our natural inclinations would be, God knew it beforehand, and even that choice was predestined. We can't fake out God.

God sees the future. We see the past. We live in the present, moving forward. We walk out exactly what God has predestined for us, yet we still experience the journey as though there were no limitations, because from our viewpoint, there are none. From God's viewpoint, it is all as He has predestined it to be.