Calvinism

[John Caldwell]

R.C., rest his soul, was not of unbiased opinion; he himself was a Reformed Presbyterian. What I am saying is that you should be careful lumping people all together.

LOL....if we're waiting for unbiased opinions we're going to be waiting a long time. We are all biased. ;)

My point is I am not lying when I state his view is not within Reformed Theology and he is not lying when he says it is.

Point of fact is that at the Reformation his view would not be considered Reformed Theology and he would be considered a heretic. But times change. He's still a heretic, but I can accept he's a Reformed one.

 

[reformed1689]

David does not hold Reformed Theology as defined by R.C. Sproul (he's my "cheat sheet" for Reformed definitions).

Where do you get said definition. In his whole teaching series of "What is Reformed Theology" What Is Reformed Theology? by R.C. Sproul He doesn't even address baptism.

 

[Mjh29]

LOL....if we're waiting for unbiased opinions we're going to be waiting a long time. We are all biased. ;)

Then how can we ever deal with the Scriptures? [based on your approach]
We are supposed to take one verse and without commentary or bias allow it to completely speak for itself without any interpretation... but this is impossible if we are all biased.

 

[reformed1689]

We both know Scripture does not state that God punished Jesus instead of punishing us.

Only by your crazy interpretation methods.

My statement is that you believe Scripture does not state (in the text) that Jesus is God.

And it does not. You have yet to provide a single verse (that is the standard you set forth) that states such.

You believe Scripture teaches both, but states neither. And you are wrong.

Prove it.

 

[John Caldwell]

Then how can we ever deal with the Scriptures? [based on your approach]
We are supposed to take one verse and without commentary or bias allow it to completely speak for itself without any interpretation... but this is impossible if we are all biased.

We have to be able, as best we can, to identify and separate our presuppositions.

This is where it is important (and why I have insisted on) sticking with what is written. This way we can compare what we believe with what is actually written in Scripture and see the differences. This does not necessarily mean we abandon what is not written, but we can know the differences.

 

[Waiting on him]

LOL....if we're waiting for unbiased opinions we're going to be waiting a long time. We are all biased. ;)

My point is I am not lying when I state his view is not within Reformed Theology and he is not lying when he says it is.

Point of fact is that at the Reformation his view would not be considered Reformed Theology and he would be considered a heretic. But times change. He's still a heretic, but I can accept he's a Reformed one.

I’m glad the closest thing I have to a PHD is the post hole diggers in my basement.

 

[John Caldwell]

Only by your crazy interpretation methods.

And it does not. You have yet to provide a single verse (that is the standard you set forth) that states such.

Prove it.

I did. You missed it. I could give you another fish. I could try to teach you to fish. But reason dictates it is not a good idea to lead a blind man towards a large body of water.

 

[John Caldwell]

I’m glad the closest thing I have to a PHD is the post hole diggers in my basement.

I was Infantry with a Phd (post hole digger....I was a combat engineer).

 

[Mjh29]

We have to be able, as best we can, to identify and separate our presuppositions.

But how? We can't turn off our presuppositions; the moment we read a verse our brains begin formulating them! In fact, presuppositions are the very reason you hate Calvinism! Because you read a verse, and come to a different conclusion than we do.

Based on your methods of study, we should never read the Scriptures because we will inevitably and unavoidably get it wrong anyways.

 

[CharismaticLady]

Careful... you're slandering his name as a pastor; and assuming no one is holding you hostage you are committing this sin willingly.

He has called me a liar. He's just projecting his own lies. I doubt he is ordained. I can get a license off the internet.

 

[Mjh29]

He has called me a liar. He's just projecting his own lies.

Which gives you the right to willingly slander his name as a pastor? [Which is a sin]

 

[CharismaticLady]

Which gives you the right to willingly slander his name as a pastor? [Which is a sin]

What makes you think he is a pastor? By the rules he breaks he would flunked out.

 

[Preacher4Truth]

I find it interesting that all of a sudden today people are to read their Bible, all on their own, and they will come up with truth, all on their own, when the fact is not one single person today can or will do this. It's kind of hilarious that we have these lone ranger maverick spiritual giants who claim to have gotten all their teaching directly from God yet do not understand even basic Scripture.

Need Scripture for this? Note Ephesians 4:11ff. We have ALL learned from others, none today were taught "directly from God" we have instead all learned from others as God ordained it to be so.

Beware of anyone claiming they got all their teaching directly from God. Marshall Applewhite, Jim Jones, and David Koresh are prime examples. Thankfully fools online who claim such a position do not have much of an influence, they're only "popular" online.

 

[Anthony D'Arienzo]

It seems strange that there are all kinds of "Baptists" with whole different bases of belief. Some are Calvinist, while others are Arminian; some are Cessationists, while others are Continuists. Everybody believes in baptism, so why use the confusing name of Baptist?

Believers baptism, by full immersion

 

[Mjh29]

What makes you think he is a pastor? By the rules he breaks he would flunked out.

I can't believe you ever received a degree in theology

You seem to think he is as well.

So, again;

Which gives you the right to willingly slander his name as a pastor? [Which is a sin]

 

[CharismaticLady]

You seem to think he is as well.

So, again;

I was just repeating his claim. Besides, Anton Szandor LaVey was a pastor of his own church. I don't respect him either. A false church is a false church

 

[Mjh29]

I was just repeating his claim. Besides, Anton Szandor LaVey was a pastor of his own church. I don't respect him either.

Isn't about respect. It's about slandering his name as a pastor. It's a sin to slander, especially a pastor who we are commanded to hold in high regard. I don't care if you respect him or not. You committed a WILLFUL sin by slandering the name of a pastor.

 

[John Caldwell]

But how? We can't turn off our presuppositions; the moment we read a verse our brains begin formulating them! In fact, presuppositions are the very reason you hate Calvinism! Because you read a verse, and come to a different conclusion than we do.

Based on your methods of study, we should never read the Scriptures because we will inevitably and unavoidably get it wrong anyways.

I do not hate Calvinism. I hate that some hold Calvinism as their gospel when it is not even in the Bible (it is not a different translation of a text, it is not in the text at all).


Here is what I do to help me:

Bible Study Methods

 

[Mjh29]

I do not hate Calvinism. I hate that some hold Calvinism as their gospel when it is not even in the Bible (it is not a different translation of a text, it is not in the text at all).


Here is what I do to help me:

Bible Study Methods

Still, according to your interpretation rule we should never even touch our Bibles, because we will inevitably get it wrong no matter what! Because, as you admitted, we all have bias, and as you have claimed numerous times we need to read the Scriptures unbiasedly, by definition no one should read their Bibles

 

[Preacher4Truth]

Lot's and lot's of slanderous remarks are coming from anti-Calvinists on this site.

Any attempt to reconcile is met with more slander, sadly.