Calvinism and Context?
- Thread starter throughfaith
- 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.
- Status
You see how it is....we post scripture like...
Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God
And we are told we do not understand and God wills salvation with no choice and differently than what we know the bible states and when we question, show scripture etc.....we are automatically attacking the person....
Wow.....is this what it has devolved to....!
Just like my take on SUPERNATURAL FAITH.....found NO WHERE in scripture yet set forth as gospel truth .........
and I can quote a verse, use a little sarcasm like Jesus, John, Paul, Elijah etc.....and I get reported.....
Whatever!
Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God
And we are told we do not understand and God wills salvation with no choice and differently than what we know the bible states and when we question, show scripture etc.....we are automatically attacking the person....
Wow.....is this what it has devolved to....!
Just like my take on SUPERNATURAL FAITH.....found NO WHERE in scripture yet set forth as gospel truth .........
and I can quote a verse, use a little sarcasm like Jesus, John, Paul, Elijah etc.....and I get reported.....
Whatever!
-
1
- Show all
Exactly.....they can mouth us, skew what we say, call us liars etc....
Just like the round we had where I simply said...
Show me a verbatim verse that says Jesus LIVES in our heart.
and she embellished to I did not know the Holy Spirit indwells the believer and she had to show me
and then she doubled, tripled down on it and to this day is still saying it....
and when we oppose this we are attacking......no honesty at all with this crowd
Just like the round we had where I simply said...
Show me a verbatim verse that says Jesus LIVES in our heart.
and she embellished to I did not know the Holy Spirit indwells the believer and she had to show me
and then she doubled, tripled down on it and to this day is still saying it....
and when we oppose this we are attacking......no honesty at all with this crowd
-
1
- Show all
it might be different if you had any leg to stand on, if the case you were making was in any way convincing or had merit when examined against the text.
have you been keeping count of how many false accusations against Elihu you've made, that i pointed out were each directly contradicted by scripture? are we up to ten yet?
i think it's enough. by the code of Hammurabi ((not that this is the code of the Bible, but of pagan Chaldea)), that you are now making your central premise by which to ignore him, you should already be put to death. you accused and could not substantiate your testimony. that's article #3 --
isn't it good, that God gives so much grace?
have you been keeping count of how many false accusations against Elihu you've made, that i pointed out were each directly contradicted by scripture? are we up to ten yet?
i think it's enough. by the code of Hammurabi ((not that this is the code of the Bible, but of pagan Chaldea)), that you are now making your central premise by which to ignore him, you should already be put to death. you accused and could not substantiate your testimony. that's article #3 --
Does our law judge a man before it hears him and knows what he is doing?
(John 7:51)
isn't it good, that God gives so much grace?
Quite the opposite. In order to establish any doctrine, one needs to search the Scriptures from Genesis to Revelation. If the Bible were a book of systematic theology, every subject and doctrine would be organized in its totality in one spot.
For example, who would have imagined that the Brazen Serpent in the wilderness was a type of Christ on the cross? And that absolutely no one was barred from looking at that Serpent and being healed, since the Bible says that WHOSOEVER believes on Christ will receive the gift of eternal life.
Jesus personally used this Serpent to confirm that salvation is offered to WHOSOEVER -- anyone and everyone. Which totally refutes the Calvinistic idea of election for salvation.
JOHN 3: THE BRAZEN SERPENT REFUTES THE DOCTRINE OF UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION WITH "WHOSOEVER"
14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
Now had you ignored the systematic theologians representing Reformed Theology, and simply read your Bible as presented above, you would be compelled to reject election for salvation, since it OPPOSES the words of Christ. Therefore unless you abandon this false doctrine, you will give account for perverting the Gospel.
For example, who would have imagined that the Brazen Serpent in the wilderness was a type of Christ on the cross? And that absolutely no one was barred from looking at that Serpent and being healed, since the Bible says that WHOSOEVER believes on Christ will receive the gift of eternal life.
Jesus personally used this Serpent to confirm that salvation is offered to WHOSOEVER -- anyone and everyone. Which totally refutes the Calvinistic idea of election for salvation.
JOHN 3: THE BRAZEN SERPENT REFUTES THE DOCTRINE OF UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION WITH "WHOSOEVER"
14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
Now had you ignored the systematic theologians representing Reformed Theology, and simply read your Bible as presented above, you would be compelled to reject election for salvation, since it OPPOSES the words of Christ. Therefore unless you abandon this false doctrine, you will give account for perverting the Gospel.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
Say what? Well I'm certainly not going to stop reading books for your sake. I am just now finishing Eusebius' History of the Church, and it is far from being completely factual. Yet I have no intention whatsoever of putting it down and walking away from it for you or anyone else.
And we have already corrected your error pertaining to the term "whosoever" many many times.
But more to the point, I have yet to see one satisfactory rebuttal from you Wesleyans (??I guess??) to this one solitary post. Nothing but total radio silence. So tell me what exactly is this ELECTION that Paul speaks about in such florid and passionate terms? And all this business about eternity past. So far I have heard nothing in the way of debate that is in the least bit satisfactory. Just a bunch of insults, screaming, bitter denials and worse.
#704
"Well, I have to wonder how people can miss the 800lb gorilla in the room.
Avoidance is not reconciliation.
https://biblehub.net/searchnt.php?q=elect
https://biblehub.net/searchnt.php?q=election"
And we have already corrected your error pertaining to the term "whosoever" many many times.
But more to the point, I have yet to see one satisfactory rebuttal from you Wesleyans (??I guess??) to this one solitary post. Nothing but total radio silence. So tell me what exactly is this ELECTION that Paul speaks about in such florid and passionate terms? And all this business about eternity past. So far I have heard nothing in the way of debate that is in the least bit satisfactory. Just a bunch of insults, screaming, bitter denials and worse.
#704
"Well, I have to wonder how people can miss the 800lb gorilla in the room.
Avoidance is not reconciliation.
https://biblehub.net/searchnt.php?q=elect
https://biblehub.net/searchnt.php?q=election"
This has already been answered a hundred times. Election and predestination are for PERFECTION AND GLORIFICATION. So that believers are "conformed to the image [likeness] of His Son" (Rom 8:29).
Perfected in body, soul, and spirit, and rendered immortal, incorruptible, and glorious -- without spot or blemish -- which means that the sin nature ("the flesh") is ultimately eradicated.
Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not. Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like Him; for we shall see Him as He is. And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as He is pure. (1 John 3:1-3)
How pure and perfect is Christ? Absolutely pure and perfect. And unless God and Christ perfect the saints at the Resurrection/Rapture ("when He shall appear") they cannot dwell in the presence of God eternally. Therefore "we shall be like Him".
Perfected in body, soul, and spirit, and rendered immortal, incorruptible, and glorious -- without spot or blemish -- which means that the sin nature ("the flesh") is ultimately eradicated.
Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not. Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like Him; for we shall see Him as He is. And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as He is pure. (1 John 3:1-3)
How pure and perfect is Christ? Absolutely pure and perfect. And unless God and Christ perfect the saints at the Resurrection/Rapture ("when He shall appear") they cannot dwell in the presence of God eternally. Therefore "we shall be like Him".
-
2
-
1
- Show all
I have heard and read exegesis on the matter of the term and concept election so far and away and vastly superior to what you have now posted that there is absolutely no way I'm going to regress backwards into what amounts to a stygian dank cavern.
I am not some hard-boiled Calvinist. Not even close. But I have just now, once again, encountered what I've encountered dozens and dozens of times: Such a shifty shoddy exegetical treatment that it gives me woefully insufficient cause to seriously consider alternatives. And believe me I'm looking.
I am not some hard-boiled Calvinist. Not even close. But I have just now, once again, encountered what I've encountered dozens and dozens of times: Such a shifty shoddy exegetical treatment that it gives me woefully insufficient cause to seriously consider alternatives. And believe me I'm looking.
-
1
- Show all
And they have corrected no one on the use of whosoever.....can you believe the arrogance of these religionists.....I honestly believe that I have never seen any false religion abuse words in a manner worse than those that push Calvinism........and then they honestly believe in their mind that it is A.O.K. to change the meaning of words, embellish the use of words and flat change scripture to mean something other than what they actually imply.
-
1
- Show all
That's one of the informing structures, and it's been what I've maintained from the start as you will note in the post directed to cv I reference an ANE trial.
And it's not that I am stating to ignore him, I'm pointing out the ambiguity in the text. Because literary devices, customs of the original audience, and judicial structure all prime the reader to discard Elihu as an interloper. Elihu is neither clearly a herald, nor an interloper but a case can be made for both and the silence on the part of God feeds that ambiguity.
The only reason I focused on the negative with Elihu is because a lot of modern theology fails to see it as negative, and instead forwards Elihu purely as a voice for God without any of arrogance that customary markers present.
That you now accuse me based on your not understanding the nuance of my argument and instead taking me as accusing Elihu, well, that is what it is.
And it's not that I am stating to ignore him, I'm pointing out the ambiguity in the text. Because literary devices, customs of the original audience, and judicial structure all prime the reader to discard Elihu as an interloper. Elihu is neither clearly a herald, nor an interloper but a case can be made for both and the silence on the part of God feeds that ambiguity.
The only reason I focused on the negative with Elihu is because a lot of modern theology fails to see it as negative, and instead forwards Elihu purely as a voice for God without any of arrogance that customary markers present.
That you now accuse me based on your not understanding the nuance of my argument and instead taking me as accusing Elihu, well, that is what it is.
- Status