What is wrong with Calvinism ?

[Clare73]

I don't feel like addressing that today, I`m already ruffling Baptist feathers.

It`s a big church world though. The Bible says "try the spirits and see if they are of me." 1 John 4:1

Spirit is a Biblical word for church and that verse is an invitation from God Himself to try different churches.

Where do you find in the NT that "spirit" is a Biblical word for "church" (called-out assembly)?

If you're thinking of Hebrews 12:22-23, that refers to spirits of the OT saints being in the church, as the angels are also in the church there, but so are born-again humans.

By what do you test the "spirits of churches" to measure and judge them?
There is only one measure. . .the word of God written.

So to what are they contrary as specified in the word of God written?

 

[Clare73]

My favorite saying for my expressing my views in opposition to others view sometimes is "Every tub sets on its own bottom"

That's an oldie.

 

[Clare73]

And sometimes they fall on the floor and convulse. But to each his own.

!!! ???

That ain't good.

 

[Clare73]

Just as an FYI, Jews including the apostle Paul considered the entire Old Testament to be Torah.

The NT refers to the entire OT with several terms: Law; or Law and Prophets; or Law, Prophets and Psalms.

The NT also sometimes refers to the two Feasts of Passover and Unleavened Bread as either just Passover or just Unleavened Bread.

 

[RickReads]

Where do you find in the NT that "spirit" is a Biblical word for "church" (called-out assembly)?

If you're thinking of Hebrews 12:22-23, that refers to spirits of the OT saints being in the church, as the angels are also in the church there, but so are born-again humans.

By what do you test the "spirits of churches" to measure and judge them?
There is only one measure. . .the word of God written.

So to what are they contrary as specified in the word of God written?

What accusation do you make now? Fabrication is it?

 

[enoob57]

But do we need hermeneutics for the answers to those questions?
Hermeneutics gives us neither the right application of the OT to the NT, nor of the NT to the OT.
That is the function of the whole counsel of God, in the light of the NT.

There were great divines centuries before the development of hermeneutics, who dug deep into God's word showing us truths there that are hidden from most of us until they show them. . .all done for centuries without hermeneututics.

Nor do we need hermeneutics for an "objective format" of Scripture, nor to test the spirits by Scripture, for that is the function of Scripture itself, as understood in the light of all Scripture, and which has served well in the absence of man's hermeneutics, recently developed for the study of human literature, which the word of God is not.

Scripture being words written on on paper by men does not make it human literature, subject to hermeneutical analysis as human literature.

Hermeneutics is nothing more than modern man's attempt to establish authority over the meaning of Scripture, superseding the authority established by God over it; i.e., the context of the whole counsel of God.

This appears to be without reason so who could apply reason to it... thanks anyway...

 

[RickReads]

The NT refers to the entire OT with several terms: Law; or Law and Prophets; or Law, Prophets and Psalms.

The NT also sometimes refers to the two Feasts of Passover and Unleavened Bread as either just Passover or just Unleavened Bread.

And the word Torah which is translated Law in the King James refers to the whole. You aren't very knowledgeable when it comes to Jewish things so you would look less clumsy if you left issues like these alone.

 

[Clare73]

What accusation do you make now? Fabrication is it?

Is there a reason you do not answer the simple question?

 

[Clare73]

But do we need hermeneutics for the answers to those questions?
1) Hermeneutics gives us neither the right application of the OT to the NT, nor of the NT to the OT. That is the function of the whole counsel of God, in the light of the NT.
2) There were great divines centuries before the development of hermeneutics, who dug deep into God's word showing us truths there that are hidden from most of us until they show them
. . .all done for centuries without hermeneutics.

3) Nor do we need hermeneutics for an "objective format" of Scripture, nor to test the spirits by Scripture, for that is the function of Scripture itself, as understood in the light of all Scripture, and which has served well in the absence of man's hermeneutics, recently developed for the study of human literature, which the word of God is not.
Scripture being words written on on paper by men does not make it human literature, subject to hermeneutical analysis as human literature.

Hermeneutics is nothing more than modern man's attempt to establish authority over the meaning of Scripture, superseding the authority established by God over it; i.e., the context of the whole counsel of God.

This appears to be without reason so who could apply reason to it... thanks anyway...

Thanks.

There are several reasoned statements there that could be addressed.

 

[iwbswiaihl]

Just as an FYI, Jews including the apostle Paul considered the entire Old Testament to be Torah.

That's an oldie.

Are you thinking of Pilgram Progress, I noticed in there though that he says, every tub sets on its on legs. I had heard someone use it as bottom and liked it, and later discovered it may have been originally from Pilgrams Progress, and I just stopped and tried to find where it was in Pilgrams Progress but run into an ad for a book:
Every Tub Sits on Its Own Bottom: The true story of a very unlikely boy who chose not to accept “reality” as his destiny.
Cooper Jr., Mr. Ardist came out in 2012 ain't that something!

Just noticed you may have responding to RickReads said. if so, sorry about that

 

[Clare73]

The NT refers to the entire OT with several terms: Law; or Law and Prophets; or Law, Prophets and Psalms.
The NT also sometimes refers to the two Feasts of Passover and Unleavened Bread as either just Passover or just Unleavened Bread.

And the word Torah which is translated Law in the King James refers to the whole.

Aren't you repeating what I just stated?

You aren't very knowledgeable when it comes to Jewish things

Didn't I got that one correct?

so you would look less clumsy if you left issues like these alone.

Like your repeating what I stated?

"Clumsy" doesn't bother me, it's what I do best. . .
Making sausage is also clumsy, but I make good sausage. . .lotta' folks like it.

 

[RickReads]

Is there reason you do not answer the simple question?

I don't feel like starting a new conversation. If you have the Reverend ask me I'll tell him where the verse is.

 

[Clare73]

Are you thinking of Pilgram Progress, I noticed in there though that he says, every tub sets on its on legs. I had heard someone use it as bottom and liked it, and later discovered it may have been originally from Pilgrams Progress, and I just stopped and tried to find where it was in Pilgrams Progress but run into an ad for a book:
Every Tub Sits on Its Own Bottom: The true story of a very unlikely boy who chose not to accept “reality” as his destiny.
Cooper Jr., Mr. Ardist came out in 2012 ain't that something!

Just noticed you may have responding to RickReads said. if so, sorry about that

Okay. . .glad to see that quote. . .it answers my question.

The word is "sits" rather than "sets."

 

[ReverendRV]

I don't feel like starting a new conversation. If you have the Reverend ask me I'll tell him where the verse is.

Lol, where is it?

 

[Clare73]

I don't feel like starting a new conversation. If you have the Reverend ask me I'll tell him where the verse is.

That's okay. . .get some rest.

 

[RickReads]

Lol, where is it?

1 John 4:1. I did misquote. It says of God instead of, of me

 

[iwbswiaihl]

Okay. . .glad to see that quote. . .it answers my question.

The word is "sits" rather than "sets."

Yes in that book I saw that, but before I saw that I use to say the same thing, and I put a post on an article on fox news sometime and a gentleman came back and said to me, its not sits down, its sets, it sets on its own bottom, not sit, one sits down and not sets down. So I not going to change back because someone else may tell me it sets and not sits down. I'm probably older than you, so respect your elders and let me say, every tub sets on its own bottom, PLEASE, PLEASE LET ME BE RIGHT JUST ONCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Just funning

 

[Clare73]

1 John 4:1. I did misquote. It says of God instead of, of me

Same thing. . .if by "me," you mean "God."

So where do you see that spirit means church there?

Or should you be resting now?

 

[Clare73]

Yes in that book I saw that, but before I saw that I use to say the same thing, and I put a post on an article on fox news sometime and a gentleman came back and said to me, its not sits down, its sets, it sets on its own bottom, not sit, one sits down and not sets down. So I not going to change back because someone else may tell me it sets and not sits down. I'm probably older than you, so respect your elders and let me say, every tub sets on its own bottom, PLEASE, PLEASE LET ME BE RIGHT JUST ONCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Just funning

Are you sure about that?

And be my guest, PLEASE. . .you're right lots of times.

 

[iwbswiaihl]

I slept through most of my English classes when I was in high school so, when it comes to proper English use, I generally just agree most of the time if someone corrects me for using a word wrong, I may change my use of it, but I now look it up on the internet, like everyone agrees, the internet is always right, isn't that true?????????????????????????