Calvinism

[Preacher4Truth]

My main issue is not about justification by faith in Jesus - He is the only road. My issue has to do with Scriptures I've seen other Calvinists take out of context in the middle of Paul's teaching, and in doing so have come up with a completely different conclusion than what Paul was making.

Paul did a teaching dealing with sin. It included the Law of the Old Covenant and the new method of the Law of the New Covenant. It spanned the first 8 chapters of Romans, but this Calvinist I'm recalling took a verse out of Romans 4 about imputed righteousness, right in the middle and didn't seem to read the whole teaching.

His conclusion was that the death of Jesus was Him paying for our punishment. Then His righteousness was covering us and all God could see was His Son's blood, and not the sin we keep committing underneath.

What is your conclusion of Romans 1 through 8?

What is the exact Scripture taken out of context, and what the person stated about it, concisely? There are 25 verses in Romans 4 so we really need the context of the discussion and the section of the chapter that was used. All we have at this point is, don't take this offensively or personally, but it is hearsay.

 

[Mjh29]

What is the exact Scripture taken out of context, and what the person stated about it, concisely? There are 25 verses in Romans 4 so we really need the context of the discussion and the section of the chapter that was used. All we have at this point is, don't take this offensively or personally, but it is hearsay.

This would help a ton... I was working on an entire exegesis of Romans 1, but would rather deal with the things you had the most issue with if you don't mind @CharismaticLady

 

[Willie T]

If I'm not in a discussion with someone, I usually don't read the whole thread unless I have time, just alerts to me. I wish you would quote as I can then trace back what the other person said to begin with. Otherwise, out of context it is confusing.

You reply without reading the other, possibly relative, things that are being discussed in a thread?

 

[Preacher4Truth]

This would help a ton... I was working on an entire exegesis of Romans 1, but would rather deal with the things you had the most issue with if you don't mind @CharismaticLady

Agreed. In my opinion, and as far as legal matters are concerned, hearsay does not stand. It cannot justly stand now either.

I really want the documentation, otherwise it appears libelous and defamatory with zero evidence. No offense intended, it is just common sense and a courteous request.

Frankly, it just doesn't stand: one undocumented, vague implication is literally being implemented to indict all Calvinism. That's not righteous or fair, no offense, but one witness is not to be biblically considered, so I insist upon more evidence.

I hope all understand and see this as fair. Thank you.

 

[Steve Owen]

Look at @Steve Owen 's post (where he offers Scripture "proving" Penal Substitution Theory). The passages do not really support his conclusions. Presuppositions are those ideas and philosophies that fill in the gap between Scripture and his conclusion.

For example, I believe Hell is a place of eternal torment.

What I notice is that you keep accusing me of pre-suppositions, but you never actually get to grips with what I write and show me where the passages I quote do not support me.

You would rather change the subject and talk about hell.

 

[CharismaticLady]

You reply without reading the other, possibly relative, things that are being discussed in a thread?

That is why I asked you who you were replying to. There was no way your post without context made sense.

 

[CharismaticLady]

What is the exact Scripture taken out of context, and what the person stated about it, concisely? There are 25 verses in Romans 4 so we really need the context of the discussion and the section of the chapter that was used. All we have at this point is, don't take this offensively or personally, but it is hearsay.

I'll see if I can find the original post from the other Calvinist, not you two. Give me time to find it.

 

[CharismaticLady]

Agreed. In my opinion, and as far as legal matters are concerned, hearsay does not stand. It cannot justly stand now either.

I really want the documentation, otherwise it appears libelous and defamatory with zero evidence. No offense intended, it is just common sense and a courteous request.

Frankly, it just doesn't stand: one undocumented, vague implication is literally being implemented to indict all Calvinism. That's not righteous or fair, no offense, but one witness is not to be biblically considered, so I insist upon more evidence.

I hope all understand and see this as fair. Thank you.

And to @Mjh29
Found it. It was in another thread called Romans 4:6 Imputed Righteousness.

He said: Our transgressions are forgiven and our sins are covered. God does not input sin. However much sin abounds in us, Grace does much more abound. Therefore, it text is Romans 4:6

 

[Steve Owen]

And to @Mjh29
Found it. It was in another thread called Romans 4:6 Imputed Righteousness.

He said: Our transgressions are forgiven and our sins are covered. God does not input sin. However much sin abounds in us, Grace does much more abound.

Romans 5:20b. 'But where sin abounded, grace abounded much more.'
But of course, that verse has to be reconciled with Romans 6:1-2.

 

[Stranger]

I admire the two that tried to "reform" the Reformation.

OK.

Stranger

 

[CharismaticLady]

Romans 5:20b. 'But where sin abounded, grace abounded much more.'
But of course, that verse has to be reconciled with Romans 6:1-2.

Yes, however, the poster just banked on Romans 4 and didn't study to the conclusion of the lesson - Romans 8.

 

[Mjh29]

And to @Mjh29
Found it. It was in another thread called Romans 4:6 Imputed Righteousness.

He said: Our transgressions are forgiven and our sins are covered. God does not input sin. However much sin abounds in us, Grace does much more abound. Therefore, it text is Romans 4:6

So, you wanted me to deal with Romans 4:6?
[I'm sorry... I'm kinda slow sometimes lol]

 

[CharismaticLady]

So, you wanted me to deal with Romans 4:6?
[I'm sorry... I'm kinda slow sometimes lol]

Yes, for starters. Read what his conclusion was. Do you agree, or have another view. (I have another view).

 

[Mjh29]

Yes, for starters. Read what his conclusion was. Do you agree, or have another view. (I have another view).

Yes, I do agree that it is all Christ's righteousness that saves us, but I do believe that we, as Christians are still called to work towards holiness, without which no man may see God. [Heb. 12:14]

Again, I'm not a "one-verse" theology kinda guy; here are a few verses that state the same thing as above:

~ 1 Corinthians 1:30 --> Christ is our Righteousness
~ Titus 3:5-6 --> Christ died to secure our regeneration [faith in Him] and renewal [righteousness; our ability to become more like Him]

But this, at the same time, does NOT excuse men to live any way they want to; we are still commanded to be as holy as we possibly can be, and to never stop until we are Holy "as God is holy" [1 Peter 1:16] We will never achieve this goal, but we cannot ever stop pursuing it because it is what we as Christians were commanded to do.

 

[CharismaticLady]

That is not true.

Our transgressions are forgiven and our sins are covered. God does not input sin. However much sin abounds in us, Grace does much more abound.

Yes, I do agree that it is all Christ's righteousness that saves us, but I do believe that we, as Christians are still called to work towards holiness, without which no man may see God. [Heb. 12:14]

Here is what I feel is the beginning of our difference. How are we to "work" towards holiness?

 

[Preacher4Truth]

Here is what I feel is the beginning of our difference. How are we to "work" towards holiness?

All by and to God's glory, Philippians 2:12-13.

 

[CharismaticLady]

All by and to God's glory, Philippians 2:12-13.

Right path, but how?

 

[Willie T]

Here is what I feel is the beginning of our difference. How are we to "work" towards holiness?

I think we need to be careful of not confusing "working" with the maligned term, "WORKS." The Aramaic can be translated “push through the service of your life” or “work the work of your life.”

 

[Preacher4Truth]

Right path, but how?

What does the text say? The "how" is right there.

 

[CharismaticLady]

What does the text say? The "how" is right there.

The confusion is the interpretation. How do we work?