The False Church
- Thread starter Slayer
- 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.
Outrageous hardly begins to describe the magnitude of your statement. Calvin the first to correctly interpret the gospel. That is arrogant beyond belief.
You are certainly indoctrinated and well on your way to cult like behavior. If you rely on your election according to Calvinism you are quite possibly in grave danger.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
L
LPT
Guest
John didn't interpret nor translate a thing, yes he approved of the Geneva bible and use it quite often.
While not a direct translator for the first edition of the 1560 Geneva Bible, John Calvin-almost as much as Martin Luther, who seized upon the novel-for-the-day Gutenburg technology in Germany-was certainly one of earliest and strongest advocates for of Bible translation. To be sure, Luther arrived at this conclusion a little earlier, emphasizing that the Bible needed to be known by both clergy and laity alike. However, Luther’s German language translation (New Testament [NT] in 1522; whole Bible in 1534), over time, reached fewer readers than did the Genevan Bible’s various English editions.
Prior to the 1560 Geneva Bible, of course, several groundbreaking English Bibles had been translated by John Wyclife (NT, 1382), William Tyndale (NT in 1525), Miles Coverdale (1535), and the Great Bible in 1539. These pioneering translations catapulted the ancient Scriptures into the language of English-speaking people, who would soon colonize North America. The Geneva Bible, thus, became a megaphone for the Scriptures and, by its commentary, a broadcast mechanism for a certain type of theology: John Calvin’s.
It was the invention of the printing press in 1455 that made it possible for every day people to own a bible though quite exspensive in those days, before that getting someone to translate scripture into English handwritten out would have cost you a large fortune to do so.
For example, THIS CONTEXT is in the midst of Paul vindicating his apostleship (start back AT LEAST as far as chpt 10, but the whole epistle is really on this topic, overall). Paul, here, is not saying that all people who think they might be saved ought to repeatedly and continually "examine themselves TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT they are indeed truly saved" (the result of "self-focus" is usually either prideful pharisaism or self-condemnation)... Paul, in vindicating his apostleship (the CONTEXT), is saying to this particular group of people, that IF they are indeed saved persons (and their internal response to this is expected [by Paul] to be "yes, indeed we are") then this is PROOF of his apostleship. THEY are the PROOF.
Calvinists continually wrench this from its context, and thus do not grasp what the point actually is, here.
L
LPT
Guest
Poor Calvin had to scratch around to get a few bits of scripture, where do you come up with such statements, for the one you said above is farthest from the truth by far. John did not have to scratch around for scraps of scripture.
Do I need to list those 40 odd verses which support Calvin's teaching and you can come back with 2 or 3 which support Arminius.
Calvin was a sinner just like anyone else, maybe even worse that most. The truth remains true, no matter who proclaims it, so forget Calvin or anyone else. The truth is at stake here, we are to uphold the truth and let every man be a liar if they contradict Gods Word.
Remember one of Gods greatest men Paul, used to persecute Christians so lets deal with the issue rater than digging into Calvin's personal activities.
Why not try to support the word of God not the doctrine or Calvin, Arminius, or whoever else?
I mean seriously folks let's not try and put some men up on a pedestal over God.
And concerning Paul the Apostle he didn't persecute Christians anymore after he became a Christian so what does that say about Calvin's personal activities.
I mean seriously folks let's not try and put some men up on a pedestal over God.
And concerning Paul the Apostle he didn't persecute Christians anymore after he became a Christian so what does that say about Calvin's personal activities.
L
LPT
Guest
Yeah, and Calvin didn't die for anybody's sins, but he sure had people killed for not agreeing with his made up doctrine.
L
LPT
Guest
Execution was a common practice all over the world in the 1500's, as a leader Calvin was expected to uphold the law of the land. Every country should go back to executing the wicked again, it would make the world a much better place.
Whom do you have in mind?
I know about Servetus, but Servetus was a heretic regarding Trinity etc. Free will vs election was not the issue. Servetus was also wanted by the RCC for his heresies and run away from prison in Vienna, when he was arrested in Swiss.
I know about some "witches" to be burnt alive in Swiss, but I do not know about any direct involvment of Calvin in these cases, especially regarding predestination or election.
So, who was killed because of Calvin based on Calvin's man made doctrine?
USA still, one of the last democratic country, has a death penalty. But the USA do not seem to be a much better place regarding criminality, murder rate, rape etc. compared to countries without a death penalty.
Actually, the opposite seems to be true.
Are you a proponent of "Dominion Theology / Reconstructionism / Kingdom theology / Kingdom Now theology / Theonomy" ?
... just wondering.
The truth is that one mans false church is anothers true one. If you read Pauls letters and the seven in Revelation you will find practices and attitudes that are condemned then and are still condemned today.
Who on this forums rejects James 2? In James 2:14, we read of one who says/claims he has faith but has no works to evidence his claim. That is not genuine faith, but a bare profession of faith. So when James asks, "Can that faith save him?" he is saying nothing against genuine faith, but only against an empty profession of faith/dead faith. *So James does not teach that we are saved "by" works. His concern is to show the reality of the faith professed by the individual (James 2:18) and demonstrate that the faith claimed (James 2:14) by the individual is genuine. Simple!
In James 2:20, "faith without works is dead" does not mean that faith is dead until it produces works and then it becomes a living faith or that works are the source of life in faith as I have heard certain individuals teach before. (That would be like saying a tree is dead until it produces fruit and then it becomes a living tree and the fruit is the source of life in the tree.) *James is simply saying faith that is not accompanied by evidential works is dead. If someone says-claims he has faith but lacks resulting evidential works, then he has an empty profession of faith/dead faith and not authentic faith.
*Man is saved through faith and not by works (Ephesians 2:8,9; Titus 3:5; 2 Timothy 1:9); yet genuine faith is vindicated, substantiated, evidenced by works (James 2:14-24).
Christ saves us through faith based on the merits of His finished work of redemption "alone" and not based on the merits of our works.
*It is through faith "in Christ alone" (and not by the merits of our works) that we are justified on account of Christ (Romans 3:24; 5:1; 5:9); yet the faith that justifies is never alone (solitary, unfruitful, barren) if it is genuine (James 2:14-24). *Perfect Harmony*
Oh well, excuse me then he had a difference of opinion on the Trinity and the RCC wanted him too because they all considered him a heretic...He deserved to die I guess?????
No where have I seen where Jesus said to put anyone to death. I mean he talked pretty rough to the Pharisee's, but I never read where he killed anyone or instructed anyone to kill anyone for not following what he said.