Calvinism Refuted

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
G

gregfl

Guest
#61
proof is in the pudding
 
2

2Thewaters

Guest
#62
John 3:15-16

Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)


15 that whosoever believeth in him ... whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. ... and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.... Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.... who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. 5

5 Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: a..., not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

obciously you dont know what BELIEVE means

let me help you...
 
G

gregfl

Guest
#63
The practical value of Calvinism is the humility it brings ?

thats a joke,right?kind of like this qoute,atwood?

Had I written the Bible, no one would go to Hell;
i see the humility there,not
 

Patnubay

Senior Member
May 27, 2014
498
8
18
#64
I think the Calvinists and the Lutherans are friends. They have the same idea only presented in opposite manner: Glass half full and glass half empty

Bottomeline: do not fall for the wicked and satanic system of Calvinism where Calvinists are teaching that God has pre-ordanined some to damnation, "while only electing and ordaining some to eternal life". ​My bottom-line : Both denominations at the end of the day will have " Elected and ordained SOME " ... The theory of "Irresistable Grace"

Anyone can get saved. God chooses to save those who believe. Anyone can become part of the elect. But some will choose NOT TO BECOME PART OF THE ELECT .... The principle behind " Perseverance of the Saints "

God's will is that ALL should come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9). Yet He is an ALL KNOWING GOD and He knows who will NOT. ...... God's unconditional power in "Unconditional Election"

God chooses to elect those who are in Christ. The question is: When did God choose: After you chose to be with Christ or Before you choose to be with Christ? God knows both times being all-knowing.

No lost person at the Great White Throne Judgment will be without excuse. Every single damned and lost person will know that they COULD HAVE BEEN SAVED. But that by their own wicked rebellion and refusal to believe on and trust the Lord Jesus Christ is, they will know that it was this decision of theirs that damned them. They will know that they will be cast into the Lake of Fire for all of Eternity because they chose and decided to reject the Lord Jesus Christ . HENCE IT IS NOT IMPORTANT WHO CHOSE WHO. A child who accomplished something great with Dad behind him will claim his victory and the father will just smile and let him be.

And the very fact that there is a Judgment also refutes the dumb system of Calvinism. I mean why judge someone if he never had a change to get saved??? Calvinism is not DUMB but just another side of the coin or just another perspective. Or at the very least, not stupidity but pure honest ignorance.

So, if you have gotten caught up in the Satanic system of calvinism, simply forsake it, repent and start believing God's word, the Authorized King James Holy Bible.[/QUOTE] My bottom-line: In all honesty, I truly believe that anyone who worships Jesus Christ as the Son of God, the Messiah, our Saviour, the redeemer, will never be Satanic whatever its theology may be.
 

Elin

Banned
Jan 19, 2013
11,909
141
0
#65
wrong!
]What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? 23 And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory,
That's not what the verse states.

You are a troll.

Trolls are now welcome here.
 
May 31, 2014
179
0
0
#66
I have heard of the 3 tenors.
Sola scriptura is not congruent with sola fide. "For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous." counters sola fide. Sola fide over rides Sola scriptura in Calvinism. In other words Calvinism is an unreasonable self contradictory assumptive construction of salvation. Romans 2:13 must be relegated to being a falsehood for sola fide to stand, but if Romans 2:13 is judged to be false Sola Scriptura is impinged.
 
K

Kerry

Guest
#68
I never trusted Calvin and he is not in the bible so why should you.
 
2

2Thewaters

Guest
#69
sola fide is not biblical soa scriptura is not a bible term pthis is a bible thread catholic terms are not clear/
use the bible please.
 
K

Kerry

Guest
#70
I would rather follow the perfect man than any other man.
 
K

Kerry

Guest
#71
the perfect man said I am the vine and you are the branch and if any branch does not produce fruit it is pruned and cast into the fire.
 
May 31, 2014
179
0
0
#72
sola fide is not biblical soa scriptura is not a bible term pthis is a bible thread catholic terms are not clear/
use the bible please.
I did not say either term is biblical. What I did say is that those two terms are intrinsically counters when compared to Rom. 2:13, which is actually using the bible by the way.
 
K

Kerry

Guest
#73
Alot of people trusted in Mooney and they all drink the kool aid. don't drink the kool aid.
 
Aug 15, 2009
9,745
179
0
#74
Who in the world would want to believe someone who had people who dissagreed with him whipped, imprisoned & killed? This Calvin did, oh yes.
 
K

Kerry

Guest
#75
Who in the world would want to believe someone who had people who dissagreed with him whipped, imprisoned & killed? This Calvin did, oh yes.
Its my way or else.
 

Atwood

Senior Member
May 1, 2014
4,995
53
48
#76
Augustine was a bigger cracked pot than little lord Johnny Calvin. Calvin was a lawyer. One thing he did understand is that substitutionary atonement cannot be a practicality.
Sounds like you may know more about Augustine than I. I remember reading How to Become a Bishop without Being religion, in which it was noted how when disgusting Augustine, someone may try to do the old One-Up-Manship by coming back to your Aú-gusteen with an Uhgús-tin. Then the way you win the One-Up-Manship is by maneuvering your adversary somehow having to use the adjective Augustinian.

I don't think of Calvin as any crackpot, but a really brilliant thinker. But in the final analysis, is not trying to figure out election (without going to pot on it) trying to unscrew the unscrewable?

Now I did meet an extreme Calvinist who was to me a real crackpot who had gone to pot on the subject. He was a Camper predicting May 21. And he did not know he was elect or not. But he was sure that you should not tell anyone to believe in the Lord Jesus, because that has to follow election logically -- so it was futile. I guess for him no one should trust Christ as Savior because that would violate election. But that is not typical Calvinism.
 

Atwood

Senior Member
May 1, 2014
4,995
53
48
#77
Who in the world would want to believe someone who had people who dissagreed with him whipped, imprisoned & killed? This Calvin did, oh yes.
Who would want it? I suppose someone who believed that the Church was Israel, called to political power, and called to enforce the OT Law.

But on Calvin, if you have proof of it, please post it, indicating the extent.

I think that at the root of Calvin's & the reformers theological errors was the belief that the Church was Israel -- dispensationalism was hardly popular at the time. Now Israel was to burn witches. If the Church is Israel, then surely the Church would wish to rule politically and exterminate idolaters and witches. Perhaps it never dawned on Calvin how the Church was not Israel and destined ever to be a persecuted minority as strangers and pilgrims. Luther published (I think near his death) a terrible attack on Jews calling for their persecution.

I did just get through looking at scholarly paper on religious persecution in the History of the RCC. The murders attributed seemed to be a fantastic number. Early in the Roman "Christian" (false name) Empire, the government turned to persecuting heretics. This is so utterly foreign to the NT. Surely that system is one big anti-Christ.
 

Atwood

Senior Member
May 1, 2014
4,995
53
48
#78
the perfect man said I am the vine and you are the branch and if any branch does not produce fruit it is pruned and cast into the fire.
And note Kerry, that you quote no verse that speaks of eternal life nor being saved. John 15 is about abiding [in fellowship] with Christ. I take such statements as indicative of the chastisement which a believer may receive for being fruitless. And note that it doesn't even refer to active sin; just being fruitless.

To know about eternal security, you must consider passages on eternal life and salvation; not try to infer this or that from other subject passages.

Can you not rest in the Lord, and trust Him with your eternal destiny? Why talk yourself out of eternal life?

eternal life, shall never perish.
 

Atwood

Senior Member
May 1, 2014
4,995
53
48
#79
sola fide is not biblical soa scriptura is not a bible term pthis is a bible thread catholic terms are not clear/
use the bible please.
Those who keep going on about "sola scriptura," sneering at it, don't seem to be able to produce any document outside the Bible and prove that such document is the very Word of God, readily available to man-in-general now.

But if anyone can do that, have at it.
 

Atwood

Senior Member
May 1, 2014
4,995
53
48
#80
I did not say either term is biblical. What I did say is that those two terms are intrinsically counters when compared to Rom. 2:13, which is actually using the bible by the way.
And then along came Jonz!
Slow walking Jonz,
Slow talkin Jonz.

Now look Jonz: (LOL)

If you have some document which you claim is the Word of God, other than the Bible bring it forth and prove it is God's Word. I mean bring forth a document which is readily available to men-in-general now. (Don't refer to the Book of Jasher, 'cause we don't gots.) And explain why since the last book of the NT was written, no document written after that has ever been successfully added to the Bible.