Lordship salvation vs. "easy believism"
- Thread starter MyrtleTrees
- 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.
God has permitted all may come . God is pleased to save all who believe. 1 cor 1.21 ..
God’s sovereignty in salvation means that he executes it in accordance with Scripture .
Free will or lack thereof (or lack of a type of it, such as libertarian) is not a proper interpretive pre-consideration. Scriptural authority is the one and only concern, irrespective of the implications to man’s will. (Pro. 30:5)
Conviction of the Holy Spirit is necessary for salvation, but occurs to sinners alike, regardless of consequent faith or unbelief. It is not irresistible or unconditionally selective. (Jn. 16:7-11)
God’s sovereignty in salvation means that he executes it in accordance with Scripture .
Free will or lack thereof (or lack of a type of it, such as libertarian) is not a proper interpretive pre-consideration. Scriptural authority is the one and only concern, irrespective of the implications to man’s will. (Pro. 30:5)
Conviction of the Holy Spirit is necessary for salvation, but occurs to sinners alike, regardless of consequent faith or unbelief. It is not irresistible or unconditionally selective. (Jn. 16:7-11)
-
1
- Show all
You mean things like when Calvinists interpret scriptures as teaching the Deity of Christ and the other things they get right
Maybe I shouldn’t teach the Deity of Christ, the existence of hell, the resurrection, or sanctification because Calvinists teach them, and all things Calvinist are heretical, or so you seem to think.
I do not do Calvinist interpretations. I just accept every word of scripture and don’t care to omit parts, like “ before the foundation of the world” part in Ephesians. Nor do I change “ chose us” to “chose a plan”.
Maybe I shouldn’t teach the Deity of Christ, the existence of hell, the resurrection, or sanctification because Calvinists teach them, and all things Calvinist are heretical, or so you seem to think.
I do not do Calvinist interpretations. I just accept every word of scripture and don’t care to omit parts, like “ before the foundation of the world” part in Ephesians. Nor do I change “ chose us” to “chose a plan”.
You keep complaining to me about the fact that I agree with Calvinists on some points. Your problem is you fail to attack a persons argument. All you really have is that everything you disagree with “is Calvinist”.
I saw you do that when someone mentioned commentaters. You did not address their argument, you addressed the churches they were a part of
When you fail to rebut a persons argument, you default to “ you’re a Calvinist”. So you show that you are unable to address that persons argument and resort to a type of ad hominem, attacking the person instead of dealing with their argument.
As far as Benny Hinn, when I start promoting his errors, you can use that example. My point was, an interpretation is not wrong simply because Calvinists hold it
How many Calvinists have I cited? None by my count.
I saw you do that when someone mentioned commentaters. You did not address their argument, you addressed the churches they were a part of
When you fail to rebut a persons argument, you default to “ you’re a Calvinist”. So you show that you are unable to address that persons argument and resort to a type of ad hominem, attacking the person instead of dealing with their argument.
As far as Benny Hinn, when I start promoting his errors, you can use that example. My point was, an interpretation is not wrong simply because Calvinists hold it
How many Calvinists have I cited? None by my count.
I simply said that benny hinn also believes in the deity of Christ ect . Many denominations agree on the trinity , the virgin birth , the deity of Christ , hell ect but you yourself would find questionable because that's how deception works. They can be right on all those things but still be false. Thats all my point was .
Election of Calvinism
God’s unconditional choice of individual sinners for salvation by divine
decree, by which they are drawn irresistibly to faith in Christ.
• Election of Arminianism
God’s choice in individual sinners for salvation, conditional on the
person’s free choice to believe in Christ, as foreknown by God.
• Election of Scripture
God’s choice of the church in Christ, for heavenly blessings.
God’s unconditional choice of individual sinners for salvation by divine
decree, by which they are drawn irresistibly to faith in Christ.
• Election of Arminianism
God’s choice in individual sinners for salvation, conditional on the
person’s free choice to believe in Christ, as foreknown by God.
• Election of Scripture
God’s choice of the church in Christ, for heavenly blessings.
1 Peter 1:1–2 (KJV)
1 PETER, an apostle of Jesus Christ,
to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia,
Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,
2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God
the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit,
unto obedience and sprinkling of the
blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.
Not “saved according to God knowing in advance that you would believe.” That’s Arminianism reading Calvinistic presuppositions into the word “elect.”
Chosen to serve in a capacity in
accordance with what God foreknew
would be required to be accomplished by you at this time and place.
Sprinkling blood on the people goes back to Exodus 24:7-8. It’s a covenant God makes with his
people after he gives them instruction and they reply with, “All that the LORD hath said, will we
do, and be obedient.”
Exodus 24:7–8 (KJV)
7 And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they
said, All that the LORD hath said will we do, and be obedient. 8 And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words.
In other words, “You are now part of a covenant where you are
expected to do something and to be obedient. That is, be a servant.
1 PETER, an apostle of Jesus Christ,
to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia,
Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,
2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God
the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit,
unto obedience and sprinkling of the
blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.
Not “saved according to God knowing in advance that you would believe.” That’s Arminianism reading Calvinistic presuppositions into the word “elect.”
Chosen to serve in a capacity in
accordance with what God foreknew
would be required to be accomplished by you at this time and place.
Sprinkling blood on the people goes back to Exodus 24:7-8. It’s a covenant God makes with his
people after he gives them instruction and they reply with, “All that the LORD hath said, will we
do, and be obedient.”
Exodus 24:7–8 (KJV)
7 And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they
said, All that the LORD hath said will we do, and be obedient. 8 And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words.
In other words, “You are now part of a covenant where you are
expected to do something and to be obedient. That is, be a servant.