Calvinism vs. Arminianism?
- Thread starter mcubed
- Start date
-
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.
ESAU sought for repentance with tears but it was not granted to him Hebrews 12: 16-17
This isn't the forum the 'God loves everybody' theory, but THINK.....did God love Esau? Hated him in the womb Micah 1: 1-8
Did God love the that group of people when he told Saul to kill every man, women and child? every slave, every animal, etc....
Did God love the Philistines or the Caananites?
Why is it so hard to understand that God does not change, He hated some and loved others.
Even Jesus said He did not come to everyone but for the lost sheep of ISRAEL.
sheep and goats, wheat and chaff, ...........think! sheep do not become goats, goats do not become sheep etc etc etc ..we are we are born to be. Some peope are reprobate, period
REPROBATE – adokimos – unapproved, rejected, castaway, worthless, reprobate (Strong’s)
Men ordained to damnation (Webster’s)
Not all of God's truths are easy
Now stop being a grouch, like.......where's the LOVE??? ROLF
This isn't the forum the 'God loves everybody' theory, but THINK.....did God love Esau? Hated him in the womb Micah 1: 1-8
Did God love the that group of people when he told Saul to kill every man, women and child? every slave, every animal, etc....
Did God love the Philistines or the Caananites?
Why is it so hard to understand that God does not change, He hated some and loved others.
Even Jesus said He did not come to everyone but for the lost sheep of ISRAEL.
sheep and goats, wheat and chaff, ...........think! sheep do not become goats, goats do not become sheep etc etc etc ..we are we are born to be. Some peope are reprobate, period
REPROBATE – adokimos – unapproved, rejected, castaway, worthless, reprobate (Strong’s)
Men ordained to damnation (Webster’s)
Not all of God's truths are easy
Now stop being a grouch, like.......where's the LOVE??? ROLF
The topic is at hand in that he and many others say Christ died for ALL and yet somehow they still will face a judgment because they rejected him because of their free will. It’s a oxymoron statement in that if Christ died for ALL or better said paid the penalty for all and that would have to do with sin, then there is no need for judgment. Everybody or ALL would be free.
Again the calvinist trick argument here.
WHY Do you assume that when Jesus dies for someone, they are AUTOMATICALLY saved?
GIVE ME ONE VERSE THAT SAYS THAT ALL WHO CHRIST DIED FOR WILL BE SAVED.
I can show you a verse to the contrary. Here you go: (
2Pe 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
Fun enough, this one verse debunks calvinism, it refutes limited atonement AND irresistable grace, all in one verse. Double trouble for the Calvinists!
Now how can these false prophets deny the Lord that bought them, if the Lord didnt buy them? In the calvinist-land, these guys would either be: A) group who Christ died for, and therefore cannot deny the Lord that bought them, or B) group who Christ did not die for, so the Lord did not buy them to begin with.
CHECK MATE
WHY Do you assume that when Jesus dies for someone, they are AUTOMATICALLY saved?
GIVE ME ONE VERSE THAT SAYS THAT ALL WHO CHRIST DIED FOR WILL BE SAVED.
I can show you a verse to the contrary. Here you go: (
2Pe 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
Fun enough, this one verse debunks calvinism, it refutes limited atonement AND irresistable grace, all in one verse. Double trouble for the Calvinists!
Now how can these false prophets deny the Lord that bought them, if the Lord didnt buy them? In the calvinist-land, these guys would either be: A) group who Christ died for, and therefore cannot deny the Lord that bought them, or B) group who Christ did not die for, so the Lord did not buy them to begin with.
CHECK MATE
Thanks for the answer.
So God gives the essential doctrines like Gospel, God and man's condition. Then the rest is for man to learn in time from teachers and so on?
Does this mean that God does all the saving, giving of faith and repentance, but people still have a will (of some kind) they can use to learn more doctrine and decide to read the Bible for themselves?
So God gives the essential doctrines like Gospel, God and man's condition. Then the rest is for man to learn in time from teachers and so on?
Does this mean that God does all the saving, giving of faith and repentance, but people still have a will (of some kind) they can use to learn more doctrine and decide to read the Bible for themselves?
I can't wait to hear their answer for this one.
Here we have Carl saying that everyone that 'Jesus' died for is automatically saved no they need do nothing. My OP mentioned this and all the big C's jumped on me and said THAT IS NOT THE TEACHING OF CALVINISM. No we see one of them says the OP is true.
Liars, liars, liars . . . truly a doctrine of demons.
Here we have Carl saying that everyone that 'Jesus' died for is automatically saved no they need do nothing. My OP mentioned this and all the big C's jumped on me and said THAT IS NOT THE TEACHING OF CALVINISM. No we see one of them says the OP is true.
Liars, liars, liars . . . truly a doctrine of demons.
Jesus paid the price for everyone's sin.. BUT!!!! it is a gift that each individual sinner must believe and trust in...
So the Atonement that Jesus secured was sufficient to pay the price for all the sins of all men.. But in the end it will only be paying for the sins of those who believe Jesus and trust in the Atonement He secured on the cross..
So the Atonement that Jesus secured was sufficient to pay the price for all the sins of all men.. But in the end it will only be paying for the sins of those who believe Jesus and trust in the Atonement He secured on the cross..
dont hold your breath. I have heard it all from these guys.
This is the answer I expect, either they skip over it, move the target, duck and dodge. OR they will actually say "The Lord that bought them" doesnt mean Jesus died for them, and will force us to prove that, using the greek, because in "the greek" the word there means Master, and Peter never uses that for Jesus, but uses kurious for Jesus, so they argue the Lord (or Master in other translations) that bought them is actually the Father God, and the bought them is from SLAVERY in Egypt.
If you then say: Wow thats a terrible argument the PLAIN reading of the text suggests that Lord that bought them means Jesus died for them, but they will now whip out the debate-card and say "Bu-bu-but you are shifting the burden of proof. You have to prove that it means that, and we dont have to prove a thing"
And you would think im joking, but sadly I have heard this argument used on me, WEAK SAUCE to say the least.
But I know some EX-calvinists who when I showed them some scriptures immediately jumped the sinking geneva-ship, so there are some who are willing to consider the scriptures.
This is the answer I expect, either they skip over it, move the target, duck and dodge. OR they will actually say "The Lord that bought them" doesnt mean Jesus died for them, and will force us to prove that, using the greek, because in "the greek" the word there means Master, and Peter never uses that for Jesus, but uses kurious for Jesus, so they argue the Lord (or Master in other translations) that bought them is actually the Father God, and the bought them is from SLAVERY in Egypt.
If you then say: Wow thats a terrible argument the PLAIN reading of the text suggests that Lord that bought them means Jesus died for them, but they will now whip out the debate-card and say "Bu-bu-but you are shifting the burden of proof. You have to prove that it means that, and we dont have to prove a thing"
And you would think im joking, but sadly I have heard this argument used on me, WEAK SAUCE to say the least.
But I know some EX-calvinists who when I showed them some scriptures immediately jumped the sinking geneva-ship, so there are some who are willing to consider the scriptures.
