Why do people blame calvinists ?

[RickReads]

I believe Jesus as God can traverse time, which is the fourth dimension, and that every time that God in form of a man appears in the OT, it’s Jesus.

He appeared to Moses face to face and talked to him as a man talks to a friend.

In Genesis 18:1 YHWH appears as one of three men, Abraham washes His feet.

In Genesis 19, YHWH on earth, rains down fire and brimstone from YHWH in heaven.

Etc.

Yes.

 

[RickReads]

I believe it was later, in Acts 13:

Act 13:45 But when the Jews saw the multitudes, they were filled with envy, and spake against those things which were spoken by Paul, contradicting and blaspheming.

Act 13:46 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.

Act 13:47 For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying,I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.

It is a debatable point. However, I think the standing Jesus in Stevens vision Indicates the transition from converting Israel to world evangelism without Israel. Mind you, I am not anti-Israel.

 

[RickReads]

Never heard of that before but that seems really interesting Chad. I have no problem with your belief.

I disagree with Jesus ever being in OT, because it was GODS WORD, that was in the OT, then the word later became flesh named Jesus, in the NT. ~ ~ ~ That is just my thoughts on that subject Chad.

Me saying Jesus Christ is God, doesn't save me.

I believe that faith through grace saves us.

Here`s the issue John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

Question: If no man has seen God then who was the God that was seen in the Old Testament?

Jesus said He was "I Am" and the Jews who knew what He meant wanted to stone Him for saying that.

 

[mlepfitjw]

Here`s the issue John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

Question: If no man has seen God then who was the God that was seen in the Old Testament?

Jesus said He was "I Am" and the Jews who knew what He meant wanted to stone Him for saying that.

You know a lot of people like to use the I am statement. When Jesus Christ speaking in that verse was him saying that He was from above.

Though after Jesus Christ has accomplished all the things God need Him, and Jesus Christ gave everything back to God so that God may be all in all.

We do see later on in the Revelation, about how Jesus Christ is the Lord God Almighty on the throne.

The whole I am statement is used an a lot... those none of these things are salvation issue.

 

[RickReads]

You know a lot of people like to use the I am statement. When Jesus Christ speaking in that verse was him saying that He was from above.

Though after Jesus Christ has accomplished all the things God need Him, and Jesus Christ gave everything back to Go so that God may be all in all.

We do see later on in the Revelation, about how Jesus Christ is the Lord God Almighty on the throne.

The whole I am statement is used an a lot... those none of these things are salvation issue.

If we just stick to salvation issues there isn`t much to bicker about

 

[mlepfitjw]

If we just stick to salvation issues there isn`t much to bicker about

Ah, let me get you a little high off some dopamine. Hey I like you, you are cool. Where you from?

 

[RickReads]

You know a lot of people like to use the I am statement. When Jesus Christ speaking in that verse was him saying that He was from above.

Though after Jesus Christ has accomplished all the things God need Him, and Jesus Christ gave everything back to God so that God may be all in all.

We do see later on in the Revelation, about how Jesus Christ is the Lord God Almighty on the throne.

The whole I am statement is used an a lot... those none of these things are salvation issue.

Ok, I`ll slap u with this one

John 14

6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.

8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.

9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father?

10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.

 

[RickReads]

Ah, let me get you a little high off some dopamine. Hey I like you, you are cool. Where you from?

Indiana. You?

 

[mlepfitjw]

John 14

6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.

• Jesus speaks explaining that he is the truth, the way, and the life. All will come to him, first before they reach his father.
• 
  
• If those who had realized he was messiah would have understand that he was from above, and sent by his father. If those who did realize that Jesus was the messiah, then you know the father because (Jesus is the express image of God).

8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.

9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father?

• Philip ask, Lord Show us the Father that will be good. Jesus then said... You have seen me, do you know see how God is? Im from God, and above and am the Word, yet you still do not believe.

10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.

• Do you not believe that God is with me? Have you not see all the miracles I have done? I'm with the Father (Word), and Father is with me (Jesus).
• 
  
• The Father that indwells me does all the miracles, Believe that me and the Father are intertwined.

I like reading sometimes, not all the time Rick I'm from Alabama.

 

[All Glory To God]

On the contrary, it’s an excellent parable, which was a tool Jesus used to teach truth by using an analogy.

It shows why freewill doesn’t mean the lost saves themselves, which is YOUR carnal claim, that isn’t found in the scriptures- but freewill IS found there.

Shalom.

Actually Jesus used Parables to conceal the truth of the kingdom of heaven from the crowds,which is why they always needed to be explained,again,privately to the apostles. Also Jesus did not proclaim his own excellence like you are doing,people did it on his behalf.

That non-sense you offered is no parable and I certainly do not think it is ''excellent''. It is a carnal attempt to illustrate the spiritual. You could at least compare spiritual things with spiritual,like the Bible recommends.

 

[All Glory To God]

What verses are they that you think I'm denying? As I said, "ALL" of the passages have to fit what one believes. By saying all, I'm not denying any.

You spoke about John 6:44 only applying in the context of that time not verbatim. And if one does that,we do it to all the Bible but I think you have agreed people work things together to what they believe. Just wanted to bring that initial point up.

 

[Dave L]

What Jacobus (aka Jacob aka James) Arminius believed and taught is not precisely the same thing as what became Arminianism, but it allowed for it and produced it.

There it is: Arminius himself may not have said it, but he provided for it to be said, as:
"Although human nature was seriously affected by the fall, man has not been left in a state of total spiritual helplessness. God graciously enables every sinner to repent and believe, but He does not interfere with man's freedom. Each sinner possesses a free will, and his eternal destiny depends on how he uses it. Man's freedom consists of his ability to choose good over evil in spiritual matters; his will is not enslaved to his sinful nature. The sinner has the power to either cooperate with God's Spirit and be regenerated or resist God's grace and perish. The lost sinner needs the Spirit's assistance, but he does not have to be regenerated by the Spirit before he can believe, for faith is man's act and precedes the new birth. Faith is the sinner's gift to God; it is man's contribution to salvation." --In which, a person's eternal destiny hinges on his choice and not God's. "Faith is the sinner's gift to God; it is man's contribution to salvation." --either Arminius agrees with this abomination, or Arminianism contradicts Arminius.
Calvinism and Arminianism comparison

Let's cut to the chase. You save yourself according to Arminius. God saves you according to Calvin.

 

[Cormack]

“Why do people blame Calvinists?” Blame them for what exactly? Maybe people aren’t fond of Calvinism as a doctrine, but what exactly do Calvinists feel they’re being “blamed” for? What’s the charge being brought against them?

 

[Dave L]

Imagine a man dangling from a cliff, who's going to fall to his death.

Just before he loses his grip, a man comes along and sees his plight, and reaches out a hand to save him.

The one in danger has to accept the offer of help.

He could turn it down. Maybe the rescuer is black, and the one ready to fall is racist and refuses the offered hand, or maybe he was committing suicide and wants to die - so he could refuse the saving hand.

To claim that the man about to fall to his death decides to accept the offer from the saving hand, grasps that hand, and is saved from death, means that the man in peril saved himself, is ludicrous.

He obviously couldn’t save himself - nor would anyone in that situation claim that he saved himself - nor would any observer of the rescue claim that the act of accepting the saving hand meant that he was his own savior.

That typical Calvinist claim, is pretty ludicrous..

You don't realize how sin makes God unrecognizable. The man dangling is blind. Grace grabs him and saves him. You are saying the man saved himself by grabbing the rope.

 

[RickReads]

Let's cut to the chase. You save yourself according to Arminius. God saves you according to Calvin.

Once again you make a critical, provocative remark without backing it up. You contribute nothing by doing that.

 

[Dave L]

Once again you make a critical, provocative remark without backing it up. You contribute nothing by doing that.

Prove it wrong if it is as you say.

 

[RickReads]

You don't realize how sin makes God unrecognizable. The man dangling is blind. Grace grabs him and saves him. You are saying the man saved himself by grabbing the rope.

If grace grabs why worry about repentence? No need for faith under grace grabbin.

 

[Dave L]

Why would new birth make choices unlimited? That doesn`t make sense to me.

No one but God has unlimited choices. If that`s what you consider freewill to be then its not a very useful term.

You are blind to God before the New Birth. You only see idols you think are God.

 

[Cormack]

Prove it wrong if it is as you say.

Depending on who made the claim would decide who’s job it is to prove something. Just an observation while passing through

Whoever made the claim has the proving to do, not the poor fella who disagrees with an unsubstantiated claim.

 

[Dave L]

Depending on who made the claim would decide who’s job it is to prove something. Just an observation while passing through

Whoever made the claim has the proving to do, not the poor fella who disagrees with an unsubstantiated claim.

So you have no scripture proving my position is wrong?