Prayer of the Arminian, Charles Spurgeon

Wrong

I have no idea who these "free willers" are....

......however, the non Reformed non Arminius believers know that faith is not a decision of the will, so your whole premise is faulty from the start.

That's pretty funny I'm going to share that with my Reformed friends lol

Too bad you can't play the same game for Romans 8, where the golden chain of redemption is presented.

Romans 8:28-30 And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. 29 For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.
(ESV)

you put me on ignore cause you cant win a single debate on this forum, which should be calvinist special to debate. you keep saying anderson is my pastor, lol, i dont even live in america. i could say "misrepresentation" to use your vocabulary.

i understand the parable perfectly, for what it says, not all the added junk. and keep shaking the dust because i will keep dumpstering your arguments if they are not good or are uber-pseudo-intellectual arguments based on just slogans and philosophy
you can do your circle with your reformed buddies i know you guys love to just sit around and mock others and debate since you are so humble unlike us. most arrogant bunch ive ever seen really, and everyone agrees with that. even a calvinist wrote in his book warning new callvinists of not becoming arrogant, that doctrine doesnt deliver what it promises. they say we are picked out of grace we are not worthy, but its all words.

i dont need to play game of romans 8:28-30. i believe what it says. its rightthere, those whom he foreknew he also predestinated. and thats it.

It's called the golden chain of redemption, and it goes all the way from foreknowledge to glorification.

Meaning that all those God foreknows (fore-loves) are glorified. God doesn't lose a single one of them.

Listen, I have been aware of this site for a long time, and there are constant attacks on Reformed believers. That has led to a defensive approach on our part. If we simply accept the misrepresentations and slanders, then that would be like saying anti-Reformed people are right.

Proverbs 26:4-5 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him yourself.
5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes.

There are times when a fool should simply be ignored because if you argue with him, he's just going to continue attacking you, and you end up adopting his argumentative nature. But, there are other times when you need to address his slanders and lies, otherwise others will think he is right on his claims. I'm not so concerned about changing his attitude as letting others know the problems with his claims.

That's how I view those verses.

In relation to here, I am planning on clearly explaining the Reformed position AND accurately correcting all the misrepresentations I've seen. I imagine those who are anti-Reformed will simply deny what I've presented, though, and continue to accuse me of being the hostile one. However, for a while it will keep the Arminian clique from bullying others like they have been doing here.

By the way, YOU are the one who called him Pastor Anderson.

If he isn't your pastor why did you call him that?

Additionally, don't you know how rude it is to call people homos, and how juvenile it is to enjoy the antics of guys like Steven Anderson? Why would anyone talk about how they enjoy Steven Anderson's antics so much, and why would they approve of an alleged Christian pastor who says that homosexuals should shoot themselves in the head, rather than saying they should repent of their sinful lifestyle and place their faith in Jesus?

This simply shows how spiritually mature you are, that you cannot discern that Steven Anderson is a false teacher. Anyone who claims that homosexuals cannot repent and be saved, and should shoot themselves in the head, is a spiritual baby wearing diapers and sucking bottles. It is a doctrine of demons to engender hopelessness in anyone who has committed a specific sin, claiming that it is unforgiveable, in essence. And that is what Anderson has done.

There is an unforgiveable sin, which is related to claiming Jesus is doing miracles through the Holy Spirit by the power of Satan, in order to discredit him. Nowhere in Scripture does it say that a man who has committed homosexual sin cannot repent and be saved. In fact, in 1 Cor 6, it says that some of the members in the churches of Corinth were former homosexuals. Yet, you approve of a man who makes such claims.

So, your spiritual discernment is in question, not mine. If any Christian thinks Steven Anderson is a true man of God....wow..I don't know what to say. And, if you watch some of his outrageous behavior such as publicly rebuking members of his church and throwing them out without going through the process outlined in Matthew 18....even a baby Christian should be able to see he has serious issues.

mocking response once again

and yet he will go on to say that so and so did not include scripture

tells a person to state their case with scripture

promptly mocks and sneers when they do

which is why I did not bother when he told me to use scripture

this is the tactic often employed by those who follow Calvin's interpretation, or, have wrongly concluded what salvation is and how it happens from their own studies

real Calvin like

only we are not supposed to be trying to be like another person

ad hominim attack on yet another person

and a pretty viscious one at that

typical of not being able to explain a viewpoint without anger and a desire to smudge out the person

reveals either a real big ego or someone thinking they have the gift of spearing with misapplied scripture

You don’t love God, you love yourself. If you loved God you wouldn’t be so cocky, arrogant and condescending to people you believe condemned to hell. You’re going to be PO’d when Jesus welcomes people to His Table you deem not worthy to be there.

It is remarkable to note that one cannot become a Calvinist until after they are saved. You will never meet a Calvinist who will tell you they are not elect. They will imply that you are not elect but they are always elect.

Sectarianism is a disease in the body. If election were absolute then Israel would be saved and the rest of us would be forever lost.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

I'm not sure what you are saying.
You're claiming to read my heart when you cannot.

My position is that God CHOOSES some of the worst individuals to make His glory shown more clearly. And, he regenerates individuals that others consider worthless.

Read 1 Cor 1:26 ff.

1 Corinthians 1:26-31 26 For consider your calling, brothers: not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth. 27 But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; 28 God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, 29 so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. 30 And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption, 31 so that, as it is written, “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.”
(ESV)


It is amusing to me how many people are blind to the fact that 1) God chooses 2) God chooses people with particular characteristics 3) that he chooses people like this to make his glory known.

However, the claim of free-willers is that GOD DOESN'T CHOOSE AT ALL. Or they twist it around to claim that they chose God instead, and that is why God chose them, and therefore God doesn't choose and there was something more noble about them that caused them to choose God while someone else didn't.

That's what it all boils down to.

Additionally, I am continually surprised by those who claim to know my heart. It is true that I state my position bluntly and plainly, and folks don't like that, and I am shocked people don't acknowledge these things. Or, they see the truth but retreat back to their old position in short order.

I am like the blind man who was healed by Jesus, and praised God for it. He told the Pharisees that it's plain Jesus isn't from Satan, yet they refused to see and they cast him out of the synagogue (John 9). It is just plain that God chooses individuals, yet most people will simply refuse to see it because it doesn't fit what they've been taught. It's pretty simple to me. But, they don't want to hear things that challenge what they've been TAUGHT.

That's actually what Melach said.....he started to see that people believe because they are Jesus' sheep, and they are not Jesus' sheep because they believe. He said, that isn't like I was TAUGHT. This betrayed the fact that what he believes relates to what he's been TAUGHT by other people. Ultimately, I think he rejected the position that people believe because they are Jesus' sheep, and he causes them to believe, but he saw it for a moment then retreated back into his free-willer worldview.

I realize there's a strong anti-Reformed element here though. They want to bully those who believe differently on this matter. Too bad I can't be bullied and I know what the Bible says

At any rate, claiming I believe I'm superior isn't true. In fact, I know God can take anyone and cause them to understand what he wants them to understand. LOL He is like the star athlete who chooses the dumbest, fattest, less athletic kid who wears thick glasses to be his teammate so he can display his glory more fully in the wins that he achieves

Israel was not elected to salvation. Christians are.

Israel was a type of the Church. It was not the Church itself.

And, by the way, I have never implied someone else isn't elect. If their fruit isn't good, then there's a chance that they are not saved. However, that doesn't mean they aren't one of the elect, and even if they are, they may not be saved yet.

I personally don't like the word Calvinist. I am Reformed or monergistic. I believe God elects a certain group to salvation, and the atonement applies to them alone, and their salvation will be secured. I believe in a God who really saves, not just potentially saves. In other words, I don't believe in weak gods who cannot accomplish their will.

And, I believed that before I was saved I had to be "re-educated" by free-willers who believed in pathetic gods who may be able to save, but maybe not, too.

Your cavalier attitude toward God is disconcerting. You confuse your will with the will of God. God is sovereign you are not. I see nothing in your post that indicates the presence of the Holy Spirit. No fruit of the Holy Spirit evident in your post as it reflects your theology.

I do not care what you prefer to call yourself you do not understand the grace of God.

You are not elect unto salvation. You are elect because you are saved. Just like Israel need to believe in God to be elect.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

In other words, God does not choose in your theology. You choose, therefore if you are saved, you can glorify yourself on that point.

The word "elect" means to choose. To claim that you need to choose to be chosen is ridiculous. That is the entire problem with free-willer theology.

It presupposes that fallen, corrupt man has the ability to choose God, and places it's faith in unregenerate man. It presupposes that you need to repent and have faith, with a fallen, corrupted nature in order to receive a new nature that wants to please and obey God.

It makes more sense that God gives the person the new nature, and the new nature creates the faith and repentance in the born-again individual.

In other words, the free-willer view makes the man with the fallen, corrupt nature the determining factor in his salvation rather than God, in the end.

This is exactly what 1 Cor 1:26ff and other Scriptures address. Election and predestination is meant to humble prideful man who tends to glorify himself in every way. It is part of the doctrinal teaching of the church, and it is there for a REASON. It isn't just a questionable teaching; it is meant to force the person to acknowledge that he can take NO GLORY in his salvation.

By the way, thanks for judging my heart and my salvation. Do you really think you have the power to do that, seeing as Matt 7:1-2 teaches against it? Do you know me well enough to make that determination?

Better read that whole chapter. If you judge someone, which I think specifically applies to claims about their salvation, the same measure that you use will be applied to you. I once told someone he wasn't saved, and I regret it. He was a hateful man who would go off into rants after drunkenness and smoking marijuana. However, I didn't really consider that even he could be saved and still struggling with addictions that affected his behavior in that manner.

reason for that is simple: i believe that GOd wants all to be saved because bible teaches it. in many many places. Jesus tasted death for every man. thats why john 10:26 doesnt fit those verses, so i need to look where is this verse said historically, what time period, who is spoken to, context, where does it fit, what does it mean. it cant mean something that contradicts

john 10:38 But if I am doing them, even though you do not believe Me, believe the works themselves, so that you may know and understand that the Father is in Me, and I am in the Father.”

so that you may know.

it cant mean something that contradicts Jesus tasted death for all men, wants all to be saved and come to knowledge of truth, wants all to come to repentance, commands all men everywhere to repent. etc.

thats why im not gonna just look at john 10:26 and say "oh look calvinism is true, who cares about any of these other verses"

John 7:17
"If anyone’s will is to do God’s will, he will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own authority."

The saved are those who, after hearing the Gospel message are willing to allow God's Will to be done in their lives. Their faith is in God and His Word, holding fast in faith to God's promises to the end. God overshadows them and guides them all the way to glorification. Therefore Jesus is Lord over them by the informed decision of their own will.

Arminians, law-keepers and works salvationists have one thing in common: they do THEIR OWN WILL, and are in effect Lord over their own lives. Supposedly God must respond to these occasions of willful deeds, decisions and acts. Jesus is therefore placed in a subordinate position.

Not a perfect analysis, but I think it is on the right track.

i love it when calvinists say stuff like "you cant answer the catholics with that theology. you cant argue with the mormons with that there. that apologetic wont work with islam" . and coming up with all these arguments regular people dont care about, all these apologetics.

but joe sixpack doesnt ever talk about papyri or codex vaticanus or codex sinaiticus this or hermeneutics or any of these things they talk about on their podcasts. joe sixpack wants to hear the simple gospel. the bible teaches "the common people heard Him gladly". not this intellectual apologetics language nobody understands.

im not arminian either btw. thanks for telling me your view bro. which one are you? or neither like me?