Calvinism

[Waiting on him]

I didn’t say you did, she’s sitting right next to me and didn’t get that impression either.

But to your post we are not Jehovah witnesses but we do witness for Jehovah.

 

[Grailhunter]

But to your post we are not Jehovah witnesses but we do witness for Jehovah.

Ok

 

[Giuliano]

I matter less day by day, I see him decaying away(decreasing) I wish he were fully gone.

I think everyone matters; and I doubt you want other people to treat you like nothing.

 

[Waiting on him]

I think everyone matters; and I doubt you want other people to treat you like nothing.

I think others begin to matter when I cease to matter.

 

[Anthony D'Arienzo]

You reckon that's really any better than infralapsarianism? LOL

Infralarsarianism is the biblical position. Do you know what it is.?

 

[VictoryinJesus]

But to your post we are not Jehovah witnesses but we do witness for Jehovah.

Couldn't be a Jehovah witness where only a select few get an invite to the Kingdom of God.

 

[Giuliano]

I think others begin to matter when I cease to matter.

We need to treat others the way we would like to be treated, no?

 

[Anthony D'Arienzo]

John Caldwell,

LOL....again, you seem to lack even the basic understanding of Church history.

Not really...how many of the ECF were baptists...?

You seem to have discipled yourself under the writings of many men. I recommend you set aside human wisdom and just read the Bible.

I am not sure where your train was derailed, but you need to get back on track. You are unraveling John/ Are you okay?
The teaching of scripture is known as Calvinism which is Christ centered .
Do you believe Calvinism is the gospel of Jesus Christ?[/QUOTE]

John Caldwell,

You indicated in Biblical foreknowledge (post 294) that Calvinism is the gospel.
A proper understanding of the gospel is found in what is called Calvinism. In 1 cor15 in which many run to it says;
15 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;

2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.

3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;

4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

Notice it speaks of the term"according to the scriptures". That is all of the scripture. It is not only the historical facts of the death burial, and resurrection....Both all of the scriptures {plural} that fully reveal the great salvation we embrace.
in fact, your failure to embrace this fullness of biblical usage and understanding is why your ideas come up short.

I, for one, have a strong distaste for gospels other than the gospel of Jesus Christ.
So do we. We really dislike a man-centered gospel, which is a weak gospel and resists truth along the way.
When you try and act as our spokesman inevitably you cease from being truthful, invent your own caricature, or flat out drift into falsehoods.
2tim2;
24 And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient,

25 In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;

26 And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.

I just do not appreciate cultish belief, and it is worse when held by professing Christians.
This might be your view. It is sadly mistaken and unkind. Nevertheless, I am okay with it as I understand any defective understanding must portray others in a way that will prevent them from welcoming the truth.

Christianity was not in want of another gospel when Calvin articulated the gospel in the context of 16th century philosophy. Believe it or not, Scripture really is enough.
The Reformers worked to recover and teach the full Gospel of a sovereign God, that had been badly corrupted and perverted.
It was in scripture the whole time. Like fallen leaves can cover the walkway until being raked away...the walkway was there the whole time but obscured. It is the same with men and carnal philosophy obscuring it now.
Calvin among others did what they could, but I doubt anyone here could have done as much without commentaries, google search, sermonaudio, and many other books and tools that help in unpacking "all the scriptures'.

You and @David Taylor insist that this new gospel
We do not need you as our spokesman claiming we believe a "new gospel". You do not agree with us, we do not agree with you at this time. You, however, insist on posting on our behalf and suggesting things we have not said at all.
I will illustrate it for you.
Let's say a poster made a thread on the topic of censorship. he says he is totally against it. Then some non-cals suggest and question the salvation of all Calvinists, which is against the rules. reporting that post and asking if it to be checked out would NOT be the same as a request to censor a person, just because the person had started a different thread on it, totally unrelated to it?

It is not your place to lie and say he is being hypocritical, saying one thing publically and another thing privately. That would be an evil falsehood, a slander, and a total lie. If any poster has to lie in such a way, we could conclude they are somehow twisted.
What would compound such sin, is if they had a way to hide or delete what the poster said, then substitute this slander in place of the truth.
Don't you agree that this would be sub-Christian to the core?
Now, this is the same thing here. You might not agree with how we and millions of others in the confessing church have viewed things. That is fine. Slander and false witness is not the answer, however.

That is fine. I do not mind people holding whatever views they want to hold. But you should not hate people just because they have a greater appreciation for Scripture than you.
This is another example of such slander. Every confession of faith has scripture front and center. Those that hold that confession hold that also.

 

[CharismaticLady]

Many Calvinists don't read Scripture. They search it for proof texts to support their theories.

Normal C's possibly, but the ones on forums have read a lot, but just like Galatians 5:19-21 believe "not inheriting the Kingdom of God" is just not receiving rewards in heaven. So just like in the text, they could turn to sorcery and still be saved because OSAS. In other words, they twist Scripture to fit their erroneous assurance.

 

[Steve Owen]

I think you would do better to read more of the Bible and less of your commentaries, Steve

Not snide at all.

 

[Steve Owen]

Many Calvinists don't read Scripture. They search it for proof texts to support their theories.

Not snide at all.

 

[Steve Owen]

Has anyone else noticed that anyone who disagrees with @Steve Owen , @David Taylor , @Anthony D'Arienzo , and @Preacher4Truth is automatically "snide" or something like that?

Not anyone, just you. Others are openly abusive, but you just do snide.

 

[Steve Owen]

Do you believe all of the theories of Atonement should be called "doctrines" or just the one(s) you hold?

I explained this in my earlier posts. If it is a teaching that has, or has had, support from a reasonable section of the Christian Church, it;s a doctrine. If it's something that has sprung out of your head, or that you have dreamed up on your own (c.f. Jeremiah 31:28) then it's a theory.

This should read to you. It (the atonement) makes no sense without Penal SubstitutIon TO YOU. Most Christians throughout history and alive today have not shared your problem.

This is priceless! having accused Calvinists of not using Scripture, your very first recourse is to Church history. The irony is just wonderful. No doubt you have conducted a poll among all Christians, living and dead, before making that comment. However, the point is that Scripture teaches it. You say below that it is not a question that Scripture asks. Quite right! It is the answer that Scripture gives.
Exodus 34:6-7, NIV. 'The LORD, the LORD, , the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands, forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet He does not leave the guilty unpunished.
So how does God forgive wickedness, rebellion and sin, and not leave the guilty unpunished? How can He be just in so doing? Because 1 John 1:9 tells us that, 'If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. How can He do that? The Scripture does not ask, it tells. 'Whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate....... at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who believes in Jesus' (Romans 3:25-26).

Yes. God set forth Jesus Christ, His Son, as a propitiation (which is a sacrifice that turns away wrath, as Scripture states, we escape the wrath to come), by His blood through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness (which Paul states is the righteousness of God apart from the law, not worked through it). Yep. And we cannot pick and choose. The acuital [sic]of the wicked and the condemnation of the righteous are both abominations to God.

There is a righteousness of God which is apart from the law through Christ Jesus. Yet it is only possible because the full weight of the law fell upon His sinless shoulders. 'Do we then make void the law through faith?' @John Caldwell says yes, but..... 'On the contrary, we establish the law' (Romans 3:31). 'The LORD is well pleased for His righteousness' sake; He will establish the law and make it honourable' (Isaiah 42:21). Christ fulfilled the law by His obedience unto death; He didn't abolish it.

Yes. Christ has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows - this from the manger to the cross.

Indeed.
Yes. Scripture is clear that “we” considered Christ stricken and afflicted by God when in fact (pay attention to the actual text and the language) He was healing us as the strickennes [sic] and affliction (the “sickness”) was ours and not his.Exactly. Chastisement is another word for discipline - NOT “punishment”. In Hebrews and Proverbs we read that God chastises NOT the wicked but those He loves. In fact, Scripture tells us it is through this chastisement that we know we are not illegitimate. [/QUOTE]
Indeed, the 'strickenness' and affliction were ours, but He has taken them upon Himself. That is Substitution. He has also been 'wounded,' 'bruised' (or 'crushed') and has received our stripes. That is Penal Substitution. Because of this, we will not receive the chastisement and other punishments of a righteous Judge, but the correction of a loving Father.

Does God chastise you, Steve?

Frequently. I am not sinless like @Charismatic Lady But He does not chastise me as I deserve because my sins are taken away in Christ. Praise God for Penal Substitution.

The Lord lay [sic] the iniquity of us all on Christ. Have you not read? It’s right there (right after your commentary).

When I see this sort of snide comment, I am torn between Proverbs 26:4 or 5. Today I choose v.5. Your commentary seems to be deficient. Or perhaps it your brain that's not up to the job.

According to Scripture wicked men punished Him but they could be forgiven because they did not know what they were doing and it was according to the will and plan of the Father. It pleased God to bruise Him and he has put Him to grief. This, of course, is not Penal Substitution (although I suspect some may read it into the text….i.e., eisegesis).

Of course it is Penal Substitution, though some may read it out of the text (false exegesis). 'It pleased God to bruise Him and He has put Him to grief.' Yes, it was done through the hands of sinful men, but it was God who did it. 'He has put Him to grief.' Why did it please God to bruise or crush His beloved Son? Because it was the only way that He could be just and the justifier of the one who believes in Jesus.

Scripture does not ask that question. Scripture states that this is what God does. Why do you question God?

This is exactly right. God does not ask our opinion; He tells us. Why do you not listen to God?

Anyway, just because Scripture does not ask that question does not mean it does not give you the answer. It is appointed man once to die and then the Judgment. There is no condemnation in Christ. It is not a matter of God punishing our sins but of God making us a new creation in Christ.

It is both. 'There is now therefore no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus,' because He has taken all our condemnation and drunk the cup of God's wrath on our behalf, and therefore, instead of 'by no means clearing the guilty,' God declares, 'Their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.' Then, and only then, can God be 'just and the justifier of the one who believes in Jesus' and, having justified us He gives us the Holy Spirit and we are new creatures in Christ Jesus. The old has gone; the new has come.'

I think you would do better to read more of the Bible and less of your commentaries, Steve.

Yeah, right. This time I choose Proverbs 26:4.[/QUOTE]

 

[Giuliano]

Lol. Okay. I understand. but you wouldn’t offend me. I’m not Calvinist but I do believe and trust God has a plan and has revealed that plan. How could I not in what He has woven seamlessly together to reveal Himself in everything...even those vessels of destruction you care about and care where they go.

I believe God wants the best for everyone, so of course He has good ideas about how we could achieve the best things He wants for us.

God doesn't force people though to do what's best for them. If someone hates God's way and rejects the Path of Love, God allows him to fumble around and fall; but that's not God's choice. If that person changes his mind -- and tries to draw nigh to God, God will draw nigh to him. God will also start pulling that person in the right direction since he's willing to be drawn.

 

[Anthony D'Arienzo]

I explained this in my earlier posts. If it is a teaching that has, or has had, support from a reasonable section of the Christian Church, it;s a doctrine. If it's something that has sprung out of your head, or that you have dreamed up on your own (c.f. Jeremiah 31:28) then it's a theory.
This is priceless! having accused Calvinists of not using Scripture, your very first recourse is to Church history. The irony is just wonderful. No doubt you have conducted a poll among all Christians, living and dead, before making that comment. However, the point is that Scripture teaches it. You say below that it is not a question that Scripture asks. Quite right! It is the answer that Scripture gives.
Exodus 34:6-7, NIV. 'The LORD, the LORD, , the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands, forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet He does not leave the guilty unpunished.
So how does God forgive wickedness, rebellion and sin, and not leave the guilty unpunished? How can He be just in so doing? Because 1 John 1:9 tells us that, 'If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. How can He do that? The Scripture does not ask, it tells. 'Whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate....... at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who believes in Jesus' (Romans 3:25-26).

There is a righteousness of God which is apart from the law through Christ Jesus. Yet it is only possible because the full weight of the law fell upon His sinless shoulders. 'Do we then make void the law through faith?' @John Caldwell says yes, but..... 'On the contrary, we establish the law' (Romans 3:31). 'The LORD is well pleased for His righteousness' sake; He will establish the law and make it honourable' (Isaiah 42:21). Christ fulfilled the law by His obedience unto death; He didn't abolish it.

Indeed.
Yes. Scripture is clear that “we” considered Christ stricken and afflicted by God when in fact (pay attention to the actual text and the language) He was healing us as the strickennes [sic] and affliction (the “sickness”) was ours and not his.Exactly. Chastisement is another word for discipline - NOT “punishment”. In Hebrews and Proverbs we read that God chastises NOT the wicked but those He loves. In fact, Scripture tells us it is through this chastisement that we know we are not illegitimate.

Indeed, the 'strickenness' and affliction were ours, but He has taken them upon Himself. That is Substitution. He has also been 'wounded,' 'bruised' (or 'crushed') and has received our stripes. That is Penal Substitution. Because of this, we will not receive the chastisement and other punishments of a righteous Judge, but the correction of a loving Father.

Frequently. I am not sinless like @Charismatic Lady But He does not chastise me as I deserve because my sins are taken away in Christ. Praise God for Penal Substitution.

When I see this sort of snide comment, I am torn between Proverbs 26:4 or 5. Today I choose v.5. Your commentary seems to be deficient. Or perhaps it your brain that's not up to the job.

Of course it is Penal Substitution, though some may read it out of the text (false exegesis). 'It pleased God to bruise Him and He has put Him to grief.' Yes, it was done through the hands of sinful men, but it was God who did it. 'He has put Him to grief.' Why did it please God to bruise or crush His beloved Son? Because it was the only way that He could be just and the justifier of the one who believes in Jesus.

This is exactly right. God does not ask our opinion; He tells us. Why do you not listen to God?
It is both. 'There is now therefore no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus,' because He has taken all our condemnation and drunk the cup of God's wrath on our behalf, and therefore, instead of 'by no means clearing the guilty,' God declares, 'Their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.' Then, and only then, can God be 'just and the justifier of the one who believes in Jesus' and, having justified us He gives us the Holy Spirit and we are new creatures in Christ Jesus. The old has gone; the new has come.'

Yeah, right. This time I choose Proverbs 26:4.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Thank you for yet another solid post, Steve! This points out the love of God found in the penal substitution that we have become familiar with. The wrath and penalty of the law that was poured out was taken by our Lord at the appointed time.
4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,

5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.

 

[Anthony D'Arienzo]

Normal C's possibly, but the ones on forums have read a lot, but just like Galatians 5:19-21 believe "not inheriting the Kingdom of God" is just not receiving rewards in heaven. So just like in the text, they could turn to sorcery and still be saved because OSAS. In other words, they twist Scripture to fit their erroneous assurance.

We do not believe in osas.
We believe in the perseverance of the saints.

1689 LBC: Chapter 17: "Of The Perseverance of the Saints"

 

[CharismaticLady]

We do not believe in osas.
We believe in the perseverance of the saints.

1689 LBC: Chapter 17: "Of The Perseverance of the Saints"

Who started the term OSAS, do you know?

 

[Willie T]

Infralarsarianism is the biblical position. Do you know what it is.?

Of course I do. (and it is not Biblical)

 

[Preacher4Truth]

Normal C's possibly, but the ones on forums have read a lot, but just like Galatians 5:19-21 believe "not inheriting the Kingdom of God" is just not receiving rewards in heaven. So just like in the text, they could turn to sorcery and still be saved because OSAS. In other words, they twist Scripture to fit their erroneous assurance.

If a person turns to these things they were never truly converted no matter what popular big name preachers and proponents of Free Grace Theology say.

 

[Willie T]

I thought some of you might get a chuckle out of some of the "double-speak foolishness" Calvin wrote that started this craze. (I think those poor people probably just looked at his writings and thought to themselves: "I have no idea what he said, but to keep from looking dumb, I'd better just go along with it.")
And, don't forget, this gibberish was first written in Latin that perhaps a handful of people in the whole town could read. (And he ground out multiple thousands and thousands of pages of this stuff.)
*****************

There is singular consolation, moreover, when we are persecuted for righteousness’ sake. For our thought should then be, How high the honor which God bestows upon us in distinguishing us by the special badge of his soldiers. By suffering persecution for righteousness’ sake, I mean not only striving for the defense of the Gospel, but for the defense of righteousness in any way. Whether, therefore, in maintaining the truth of God against the lies of Satan, or defending the good and innocent against the injuries of the bad, we are obliged to incur the offence and hatred of the world, so as to endanger life, fortune, or honor, let us not grieve or decline so far to spend ourselves for God; let us not think ourselves wretched in those things in which he with his own lips has pronounced us blessed (Mt. 5:10). Poverty, indeed considered in itself, is misery; so are exile, contempt, imprisonment, ignominy: in fine, death itself is the last of all calamities. But when the favor of God breathes upon is, there is none of these things which may not turn out to our happiness. Let us then be contented with the testimony of Christ rather than with the false estimate of the flesh, and then, after the example of the Apostles, we will rejoice in being “counted worthy to suffer shame for his name,” (Acts 5:41). For why? If, while conscious of our innocence, we are deprived of our substance by the wickedness of man, we are, no doubt, humanly speaking, reduced to poverty; but in truth our riches in heaven are increased: if driven from our homes we have a more welcome reception into the family of God; if vexed and despised, we are more firmly rooted in Christ; if stigmatized by disgrace and ignominy, we have a higher place in the kingdom of God; and if we are slain, entrance is thereby given us to eternal life. The Lord having set such a price upon us, let us be ashamed to estimate ourselves at less than the shadowy and evanescent allurements of the present life.

Since by these, and similar considerations, Scripture abundantly solaces us for the ignominy or calamities which we endure in defense of righteousness, we are very ungrateful if we do not willingly and cheerfully receive them at the hand of the Lord, especially since this form of the cross is the most appropriate to believers, being that by which Christ desires to be glorified in us, as Peter also declares (1 Pet. 4:11, 14). But as to ingenuous natures, it is more bitter to suffer disgrace than a hundred deaths, Paul expressly reminds us that not only persecution, but also disgrace awaits us, “because we trust in the living God,” (1 Tim. 4:10). So in another passage he bids us, after his example, walk “by evil report and good report,” (2 Cor. 6:8). The cheerfulness required, however, does not imply a total insensibility to pain. The saints could show no patience under the cross if they were not both tortured with pain and grievously molested. Were there no hardship in poverty, no pain in disease, no sting in ignominy, no fear in death, where would be the fortitude and moderation in enduring them? But while every one of these, by its inherent bitterness, naturally vexes the mind, the believer in this displays his fortitude, that though fully sensible of the bitterness and laboring grievously, he still withstands and struggles boldly; in this displays his patience, that though sharply stung, he is however curbed by the fear of God from breaking forth into any excess; in this displays his alacrity, that though pressed with sorrow and sadness, he rests satisfied with spiritual consolation from God.