Donations for the month of November


We have received a total of $100 in donations towards our goal of $175.


Don't want to use PayPal? Go HERE


Search

Member Spotlight
Tom
Tom
Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 3,305
Joined: April 2001
Show All Member Profiles 
Forum Statistics
Forums30
Topics6,533
Posts50,718
Members921
Most Online373
Mar 5th, 2017
Top Posters(All Time)
Pilgrim 13,297
Tom 3,305
chestnutmare 2,862
J_Edwards 2,615
Wes 1,856
John_C 1,748
RJ_ 1,582
MarieP 1,578
gotribe 1,057
Top Posters(30 Days)
Tom 24
Pilgrim 18
John_C 2
Recent Posts
Peter Enns
by Pilgrim. Thu Nov 23, 2017 5:20 PM
Why I hate the left
by Anthony C.. Thu Nov 23, 2017 11:43 AM
Law and Grace
by Tom. Wed Nov 22, 2017 1:21 PM
The Church of England Announcement
by Tom. Fri Nov 17, 2017 12:11 PM
What is a missionary work
by Pilgrim. Fri Nov 10, 2017 9:07 AM
Terrorist Attacks
by AJ Castellitto. Sat Nov 04, 2017 7:08 AM
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
#5154 - Sun Sep 07, 2003 2:27 PM Nice Story, but???  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,615
J_Edwards Offline
Needs to get a Life
J_Edwards  Offline
Needs to get a Life

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,615
USA
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Let me explain: There was a little island of the coast of Alaska. There was a community of Eskimos that lived there and they lived off of fishing, for the most part. They decided that they needed a doctor on the island, so they chose a young man that was intelligent and seemed to have promise. They made an agreement with him - they would pay for all his education if he would go to college and med school and return and provide medical care for all the villagers for at least 10 years after his graduation. The young man became a doctor and returned to fulfill his obligation. One day one of the villagers became quite ill. The man's neighbor went to the doctor to get him to go see the sick man. The doctor went to the man's house and knocked on the door. The sick man would not let him in the house. The neighbor pleaded with the man to let the doctor come in and help. The sick man refused. The man died of pneumonia. The doctor could have, and would have given the man antibiotics to defeat the infection.<br><br>The young man was the doctor of ALL the villagers. The young doctor was WILLING TO TREAT THEM ALL, and WANTED TO DO SO. But the sick man wanted nothing to do with him.</font><hr></blockquote><p> Nice little story of an UN-POWERFUL doctor who could not even enter a door without the help of another. Not a very Sovereign God that is represented here. [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/drop.gif" alt="drop" title="drop[/img] Of course, I could say that the man was so sin-sick that he could not open the door for the doctor to come in as well (i.e. total depravity), and thus died in his just sickness and thus the doctor never went to school to heal this man for it was never predestined for this door to be opened! [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/grin.gif" alt="grin" title="grin[/img]<br><br>Please answer this Mr Criter: Whose penalty did Christ bear? Whose salvation did He acquire? <br><br><ul>[color:red]1. All the sins of all men. <br>2. All the sins of some men, or <br>3. Some of the sins of all men.</font color=red>[/LIST] Pick a # and defend it with Scripture!


Reformed and Always Reforming,
#5155 - Sun Sep 07, 2003 8:15 PM Re: Nice Story, but??? [Re: J_Edwards]  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


You are kidding, right Joe? You have already destroyed the verse as WRITTEN. It says ALL but your theology won't let the verse MEAN what it clearly SAYS.<br><br>But you want another verse. RRrright.<br><br>You will do the very same thing with ANY verse that destroys Calvinism. Why? Because CALVINISM is your final authority. Arminians do the very same thing. As do Catholics, Charismatics, etc based on THEIR theologies.<br><br>I can quote many verses that CLEARLY SAY that Jesus died for all men. But you won't let them stand. You will attack them because you don't BELIEVE what the Bible SAYS, you have to interpret scripture and make it fit your theology. I can show the Arminian how a born again child of God is eternally secure, or the Catholic that Jesus spoke spiritually in John 6, or the Charismatic that Jews require a sign and the church is to walk by faith and not by sight. But you all do exactly the same thing. Elevate your theology to the position of final authority.<br><br>And the little smilies and calling me MR CRITTER.... very spiritual of you (one of the consistent marks of heresy is carnality).<br><br>I made it clear that you can leave the verse alone and it means exactly what it says.<br><br>Joh 3:12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you [of] heavenly things?

#5156 - Sun Sep 07, 2003 8:58 PM Re: Nice Story, but???  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,615
J_Edwards Offline
Needs to get a Life
J_Edwards  Offline
Needs to get a Life

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,615
USA
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]It says ALL but your theology won't let the verse MEAN what it clearly SAYS.</font><hr></blockquote><p>So Mr <span style="background-color:yellow;"><font class="big">criley</font mu=big></span> Christ died for [color:red]ALL</font color=red> the sins of [color:red]ALL</font color=red> men? Unusual that you would believe this. Is UNBELIEF a sin. YES, it is! Well then, you believe ALL MEN without exception will be saved then. No one may be loss in your "gospel." [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/drop.gif" alt="drop" title="drop[/img]<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"] And the little smilies and calling me MR CRITTER.... very spiritual of you (one of the consistent marks of heresy is carnality).</font><hr></blockquote><p> Sorry, about the "criter" name [color:red]not</font color=red> CRITTER as you MIS-POSTED!!! Very spiritual of you to misquote me? PS there is nothing offensive about the name "Criter" is there? Several people have this name, such as Ken Criter LB for Wisconsin??? But, I will remember that mis-spelling an Arminian's name mounts to heresy, though it is a "nick name"--touchy, touchy [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/shrug.gif" alt="shrug" title="shrug[/img]


Reformed and Always Reforming,
#5157 - Sun Sep 07, 2003 9:00 PM Re: The use of "all" [Re: J_Edwards]  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


You have a convenient way of using a Biblical term like grace, and then letting Calvinism define the term. Salvation is always by grace. But when the Calvinist redefines grace to mean something irresistable, he is on par with the Catholic who redefines grace to mean grace through sacraments.<br><br>Grace is unmerited favor. It remains grace if a man refuses to receive it. It remains grace if a man decides to receive it. Your theology fails to understand that basic truth. You would contend that grace stops being grace if a man has a choice to receive it or not. Totally untrue.<br><br>Since you mention the passage, you might want to go read the account of God hardening Pharoah's heart. God didn't harden his heart until Pharoah denied God's very existence.<br><br>In your third paragraph, none of us receive MERITED favor, and that brings us full circle.

#5158 - Sun Sep 07, 2003 9:17 PM Re: The use of "all"  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Pardon me for interjecting in your correspondence with Joe, Criley.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Since you mention the passage, you might want to go read the account of God hardening Pharoah's heart. God didn't harden his heart until Pharoah denied God's very existence</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]"Yahweh said to Moses, 'When you go back to Egypt see that you perform before Pharaoh all the wonders which I have put in your power; but I will harden his heart so that he will not let the people go.'"<br>Exodus 4:21</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]"For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, 'For this very purpose I raised you up, to demonstrate My power in you, and that My name might be proclaimed throughout the whole earth.' So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires."<br>Romans 9:17-18</font><hr></blockquote><p><br><br>Chris

#5159 - Sun Sep 07, 2003 9:26 PM Re: The use of "all"  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,298
Pilgrim Offline
Head Honcho
Pilgrim  Offline

Head Honcho

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,298
NH, USA
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Since you mention the passage, you might want to go read the account of God hardening Pharaoh's heart. God didn't harden his heart until Pharaoh denied God's very existence.</font><hr></blockquote><p>Perhaps you failed to read ALL the Scriptures concerning the hardening of Pharaoh's heart? Obviously, the apostle Paul got it right.... not hopefully you will too. [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/shrug.gif" alt="shrug" title="shrug[/img]<blockquote>Notice the historical time-frame of these texts, not only as they concern Pharaoh, but the entire nation of Egypt (aka: Egyptians, people, individuals). Also notice the tense of the verb "to harden" (hint: future tense):<br><br>Exodus 4:21 (KJV) "And the LORD said unto Moses, When thou goest to return into Egypt, see that thou do all those wonders before Pharaoh, which I have put in thine hand: but I will harden his heart, that he shall not let the people go."<br><br>Exodus 7:3 (KJV) "And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and multiply my signs and my wonders in the land of Egypt."<br><br>Exodus 14:4 (KJV) "And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, that he shall follow after them; and I will be honoured upon Pharaoh, and upon all his host; that the Egyptians may know that I [am] the LORD. And they did so."<br><br>Exodus 14:17 (KJV) "And I, behold, I will harden the hearts of the Egyptians, and they shall follow them: and I will get me honour upon Pharaoh, and upon all his host, upon his chariots, and upon his horsemen."</blockquote>Now, back to this matter of the meaning of the word "all".. From what you have said about how we should all simply take things plainly as they are "clearly written", can I then deduce that you are a Universalist; i.e., that you believe that ALL, every man, woman and child will be saved? As silly as that may sound to you, I'm simply applying your own hermeneutical principle to a few texts, for example:<br><br>John 12:32 (KJV) "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all [men] unto me."<br>Romans 5:18 (KJV) "Therefore as by the offence of one [judgment came] upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one [the free gift came] upon all men unto justification of life."<br><br>Are Christians really hated by ALL men, which would mean that they would hate each other as well?<br>Luke 21:17 (KJV) "And ye shall be hated of all [men] for my name's sake."<br><br>When Jesus Christ walked on earth, is it true that ALL men came to him?<br>John 3:26 (KJV) "And they came unto John, and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all [men] come to him."<br><br>To hold to a view as you do, which is to commit grammatical and linguistic suicide, things become very problematic don't they! [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/evilgrin.gif" alt="evilgrin" title="evilgrin[/img]<br><br>In His Grace,<br>


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
#5160 - Sun Sep 07, 2003 9:43 PM Re: The use of "all"  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,615
J_Edwards Offline
Needs to get a Life
J_Edwards  Offline
Needs to get a Life

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,615
USA
Well since others beat me to the punch and already revealed your error I am only left with your little tid-bit here:<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Grace is unmerited favor. It remains grace if a man refuses to receive it. It remains grace if a man decides to receive it. Your theology fails to understand that basic truth. You would contend that grace stops being grace if a man has a choice to receive it or not. Totally untrue.</font><hr></blockquote><p><ul> 1. How can DEAD unregenerate men receive anything, they are dead to God, they can not receive anything from him. P.S. before you TELL me they are NOT dead:<br><br>The Greek word for [color:blue]dead</font color=blue> in Eph 2:1 is [color:blue]nekros</font color=blue> meaning [color:blue]dead</font color=blue> or [color:blue]without life</font color=blue> (Kittle, it is also used in other verses of manís state: Matt. 8:22; John 5:25; Eph. 2:5; 5:14; Phil. 3:11; Col. 2:13; cf. Luke 15:24). If there would have been a ďspark of life,Ē Paul could have used another term such as [color:blue]hemithanes</font color=blue> meaning ďhalf-deadĒ (used in Luke 10:30). Apparently, Paul under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit chose the term that best fit the stateóthat of being DEAD, without life, to God, and [color:red]not</font color=red> half-dead as you contend. Thus, your argument is against Scripture not me or other Calvinists? You wrestle with the Scripture (2 Pet 3:16).<br><br>2. I contend, not that Grace ever ceases to be grace, but ONLY that grace is offered effectually to the elect. <br><br>3. Where have I said that EVERY man is offered effectual GRACE?--this is your contention not mine!<br><br>4. Your theology fails to understand these basic truths[/LIST]


Reformed and Always Reforming,
#5161 - Mon Sep 08, 2003 2:59 PM Re: The use of "all"  
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 285
carlos Offline
Addict
carlos  Offline
Addict

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 285
Philadelphia, PA
Hello criley,<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Well, according to your logic I guess I am a Campbellite, too...</font><hr></blockquote><p> <br>Actually, thereís no problem with my logic. Your own statements throughout all the posts have shown you to hold to the 4 points of arminian/semi-pelagian system, minus eternal security. Iím quite aware that you donít like the labels. However, the matter of the fact is that you holding to that system of doctrines, whether you want to admit it or not. Pilgrim has given you some excellent comments regarding your denial of labels; thus I donít need to go any further.<br>The Great Comission<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]You cite passages, when the only things that you know about them are what Calvinist teachers have told you. Romans 9.... who is Paul speaking of in the chapter? He is speaking of his KINSMEN ACCORDING to the FLESH.</font><hr></blockquote><p><br>Actually Iím quite knowledgeable of what is going on in that chapter. I studied it for months, and it was NOT just from the calvinisitic perspective. Iíve read several of the <span style="background-color:yellow;">evasion techniques</span> that are employed here by arminians[img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/laugh.gif" alt="laugh" title="laugh[/img]. Joe has already given you a very good summary of the chapter as whole. Iíll just add in a few things and repeat some of what he said since you did not listen to it. Paul, while proving that God's word does not fail, brings up the doctrine of unconditional Election of TRUE Israel, whom are the ELECT from both JEWS and GENTILES. Rom 9:23 states, "What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to <span style="background-color:yellow;">the objects of his mercy</span>[i.e. the Elect], whom he prepared in advance for glory-- 24even <span style="background-color:yellow;">US</span>[i.e.THE ELECT], whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles[/b]</span>?" Your quotation of Romans 9:6 only serves to help our case not yours. Paulís point there is that even if many Jews do not believe, Godís word has NOT failed (9:6). Godís word has not failed because God selects ďthe children of the promiseĒ and He does this in ďorder that God's purpose in <span style="background-color:yellow;">election</span> might stand: 12not by works but <span style="background-color:yellow;">by him who calls</span>Ē (Romans 9:11-12). Thus, It is you who fails to see what is going on in this chapter. <br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Same thing applies in John 6. Did your father eat manna in the wilderness? Those addressed in John 6... their fathers ate manna in the wilderness. One who fails to rightly divide the word of truth can't begin to understand those passages.</font><hr></blockquote><p><br>I agree that the word must be rightly divided. Iím affraid you must doing some other kind of math[img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/rofl.gif" alt="rofl" title="rofl[/img]. You totally missed the boat my friend on John. <span style="background-color:yellow;">READ</span> JOHN 6:35-45. Christ makes the point that even though He has done miracles,etc. among the unbelieving jews, they remain hardened. John 6:35 ďBut I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe.Ē See also John 10:26. In Verse 37, Christ goes on to show that those who have been chosen do come/believe in Him, as he states that ďAll that the Father gives me <span style="background-color:yellow;">WILL</span> come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast outĒ. In the rest of the verses, Christ continues on demonstrating what is commonly called CALVINISM. Hence, Iím not ignoring context, rather Iím explaining it to you. You did not even employ the hermeneutic that you wanted to use in the timothy passages. <br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]Your question regarding "all" is non-sensical, to me. </font><hr></blockquote><p><br>Actually my question makes good sense, because I was going to use it to show you how foolish your position is when I apply your OWN hermeneutic to the rest of the biblical texts. Pilgrim already beat me to it.<br> grammatical and linguistic suicide<br><br>I agree with Luke 13:3, thus I donít see what you are trying to prove. <br> <br><br>In Christ,<br>Carlos <br>

Last edited by carlos; Mon Sep 08, 2003 3:08 PM.

"Let all that mind...the peace and comfort of their own souls, wholly apply themselves to the study of Jesus Christ, and him crucified"(Flavel)
#5162 - Mon Sep 08, 2003 6:29 PM Re: The use of "all"  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


criley,

You stated:
Well, this is my second post, and now I realize this is a Calvinist discussion board.

1Tim 4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
5 For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

That is not a very difficult passage of scripture. It means just what it says. But the Calvinist can't leave it alone because it destroys his man-made system of theology. Now you will be quick to tell me that if we take the verses literally, then all souls would have to be saved. That is not even close to being correct. I can leave the verse alone and believe it, and it is in harmony with the rest of the Bible.

Why not just consider this a discussion board where Christians discuss concerns? Everytime the term 'Calvinism' is brought into a discussion, that term alone soon becomes the center of attention. To say that Calvinism is a 'man-made' system of theology proves only that one truly doesn't understand Biblical Calvinism as they should. That's not intended to be aggressive or insultuous so please don't misunderstand me. That's truly not my intent.

The verses you presented certainly give the appearance that God wants all humans to be saved. However, the verses you presented are far from being all there is the Bible has to say on this issue and they should never be presented without allowing the Bible to present the fullness of its theology.

Isa. 55:11 clearly states "[color:"ff0000"][i]So will My word be which goes forth from My mouth; It will not return to Me empty, Without accomplishing what I desire, And without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it[/i]". This text should be the most important text that lays the foundation for whatever else we believe. I will quote you concerning the use of Isa. 55:11, "[i]That is not a very difficult passage of scripture. It means just what it says[/i]". So, if it means just what it says, then what it says is that God's will is always accomplished and succeeds in the matter for which He sent His word. Since His word is the gospel and if His intent was/is to save all humans, then nothing can prevent the salvation of all humans. If something could prevent that, then obviously God's word returns to Him void of having accomplished His intent.

Another text we should observe is Rev. 5:9, "[i][color:"ff0000"]for You were slain, and purchased for God with Your blood men [u]from every tribe and tongue and people and nation[/u].[/i]" Notice that God states He purchased men FROM among all humans and never does He say He purchased all humans without exception. Rev. 14:14 repeats the usage with "[i][color:"ff0000"]...These have been purchased from among men as first fruits to God and to the Lamb[/i]". Are ALL humans without exception first fruits of God and to the Lamb? Even those who view the gospel as 'foolish' and are enemies against the gospel who have their eyes blinded by Satan so they cannot see the truth of the glorious gospel? Christ says of whom the Father gave Him, He will lose NONE. Christ said He died for His sheep and His sheep hear His voice and follow Him. Do all humans without exception hear Christ and follow Him? Has Christ lost any of whom the Father gave Him among those for whom He died?

Sam


#5163 - Wed Sep 10, 2003 9:17 PM Re: The use of "all"  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


chris,<br><br>Thank you. You might want to read my reply to another poster on this thread.<br><br>I am well aware of the misuse of the fact that God hardened Pharaoh's heart. God did indeed harden Pharaoh's heart, but the entire picture of events hardly supports Calvinism, instead it brings about its defeat.<br><br>As the Holy Bible defeats ALL ISMS and every contender for preeminence, which belongs to the Lord Jesus Christ.

#5164 - Wed Sep 10, 2003 9:35 PM Re: The use of "all" [Re: Pilgrim]  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Problem? None at all.<br><br>Your Calvinism is no match for the Bible.<br><br>Re: Pharaoh"<br>Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 ∂ Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed [it] unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, [even] his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. 24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.<br><br>Pharaoh HELD the truth. God was MANIFESTED unto him. Or do you not believe Romans 1 as written? Do you have to interpret the clear meaning away here, too?<br><br>1Sa 16:7 But the LORD said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for [the LORD seeth] not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart.<br><br>God could see Pharaoh's heart and know what he did with the faith that was dealt to him. ( Of course you don't believe Rom 12:3, either ) God knew that Pharaoh had REJECTED the truth BEFORE God hardened his heart. And as a result: Mt 13:12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. Pharaoh's faith is taken away.<br><br>Let's see what Pharaoh said BEFORE God hardened his heart:<br><br>Ex 5:2 And Pharaoh said, Who [is] the LORD, that I should obey his voice to let Israel go? I know not the LORD, neither will I let Israel go.<br><br>Romans 1 said God had been made manifest to Pharaoh, yet Pharaoh denied God. BEFORE God hardened his heart.<br><br>God says in Ex 4:21 And the LORD said unto Moses, When thou goest to return into Egypt, see that thou do all those wonders before Pharaoh, which I have put in thine hand: but I will harden his heart, that he shall not let the people go.<br><br>Now just WHEN did God harden Pharaoh's heart?<br><br>Ex 7:13 And he hardened Pharaoh's heart, that he hearkened not unto them; as the LORD had said.<br><br>AFTER Pharaoh denied God.<br><br>God looks on Pharaoh's heart and finds that Pharaoh has discarded the faith he was dealt. Ex FOUR God says he will harden his heart. Ex FIVE Pharaoh makes it clear that he has abandoned the faith he was dealt. Ex SEVEN God hardens his heart.<br><br>The WHOLE PICTURE surrounding how and why God harden's Pharaoh's heart DESTROYS Calvinism. <br><br>Calvinistic fast talking doesn't mess up someone who knows the Bible and believes what it says. Calvinists love to say how God hardened Pharaoh's heart. Most Calvinist's are ignorant of how and why. Those Calvinists who do know are dishonest with the facts. <br><br>Point 2. Your lack of understanding of Biblical context and the proper definition of the word "all" in its context does not make me a Universalist. That is a lame, tired argument used by lazy Calvinists. Much akin to "you are either a Calvinist or an Arminian." Hogwash. <br><br>Point 3. Jesus said clearly in Joh 12:32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all [men] unto me.<br><br>Calvinists cannot believe the verse as written, because it destroys their man-made theology. The verse as written and clearly understood does NOT promote Universalism. As "Heb 10:39 But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul" makes clear. Coming to Jesus does not mean salvation occurs. I guess you have conveniently forgotten the "certain ruler" in Luke 18 as well. No need for more examples, you will try to explain them away anyway.<br><br>As far as Romans 5:18 ... so every gift that is offered HAS to be accepted, eh? That is nonsense on its face. The fact that the free gift comes upon all men does not mean all men are saved any more than it means you have to receive a "freebie" from a drug dealer if you get an offer for a free sample of heroin. See the picture? Or would you have no choice but to accept the free gift of herion simply because it was offered?<br><br>And of course here you will try and hide in the false doctrine of "irresistable grace." As if God forces a GIFT upon men. That is CALVINISM, not B-I-B-L-E. The Bible makes clear "AS MANY AS RECEIVED HIM, to them GAVE" - men are offered and men must RECEIVE. It isn't forced. Love CAN'T be forced. Calvinism knows nothing of love.<br><br>Your disingenious use of Luke 21:17 actually shows the bankruptcy of Calvinism. You attempt to take a verse using "all" where the context has no possibility of being used as you present as a defense. And then say that "all" can't mean "all" when it destroys Calvinism. That only fools Calvinists.<br><br>And John 3:26 likewise. You scramble for your "prooftexts" so hurridly that you forget to engage your brain. That was a QUOTE spoken by men giving their perceptions and opinions. And you attempt to use that feeble argument to say that "all" can't mean "all" when it clearly refutes the heresy of Calvinism. <br><br>This will be my time here. 1Co 14:38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant. Calvinism is your final authority. The Bible is secondary (at best).<br><br>I want to make something perfectly clear as I leave. I have compasssion for you folks mired down in this heresy of Calvinism. I don't hate you CalvinISTS.... but I certainly do hate CalvinISM.<br><br>Ps 119:104 Through thy precepts I get understanding: therefore I hate every false way.<br>Ps 119:128 Therefore I esteem all [thy] precepts [concerning] all [things to be] right; [and] I hate every false way.<br><br>Those of you who are saved and trusting the finished work of the Lord Jesus Christ - I will see you in heaven as you will see me - by the grace of God. But you will no longer be Calvinists. You will not give preeminence to Calvin, Pink, Boettner, Spurgeon, etc., nor give preeminence to reformed theology or to election and predestination..... you will be giving ALL THE GLORY to the Lamb of God.<br><br>Good day, and good bye.

#5165 - Wed Sep 10, 2003 9:59 PM Re: The use of "all"  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


I was not posting to try to defend any particular "ism", sir. It just so happens to be that what I find to be true in the Bible corresponds closely with what is commonly refered to as "calvinism." I hope that you do not believe that just because someone is a "calvinist" that they are giving credit to a man for which God is to be credited. It is not my intention, and I'm sure, though I won't speak directly for anyone else, that it is not the intention of most of the people here to give glory and honor to anyone other than the Lamb of God.<br><br>It is true that men, being sinful, will tend to hold dearly to and sometimes idolize that which they think makes them different from someone else. It is true about calvinists, arminians, campellites, pagans, and even "anti-ism-ists". Though this idolization is sin and cannot be seen as anything else, I think that there is nothing wrong with being associated with one such "ism" if that which the "ism" teaches or claims is defined solely by the holy Word of God. Again, I'll say, that I, along with others that I know personally, do not hold to calvinism because of Calvin, or because the doctrines make us feel good, or because it's fun to be argumentative (for I abhored that which I did not understand till I found it in Scripture), but rather, I hold to it because I have not found any inconsistancy between it and what the Word of God teaches. I seek to give Him glory alone, though I admit to not being perfect.<br><br>In Him,<br>Chris

#5166 - Thu Sep 11, 2003 6:06 AM Re: The use of "all"  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,298
Pilgrim Offline
Head Honcho
Pilgrim  Offline

Head Honcho

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 13,298
NH, USA
criley,<br><br>Thanks for the laughs! I really enjoyed your personal "interpretations" of the Bible, which you say is clearly wrong for anyone else to do. We are to take the Bible "for what it says".... but I guess this doesn't apply to you? [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/rolleyes.gif" alt="rolleyes" title="rolleyes[/img] Interesting enough, your "methodology", if one can really call it that, is not unique. [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/nope.gif" alt="nope" title="nope[/img] All the cults use that type of fractured logic and twist the Bible into a Gordian knot so as to avoid "what it actually says"!<br><br>I do hope you make it. But to be honest, if you truly believe this garbage you have spouted here, then I don't expect to see you singing praises to God, but rather you will be asking that one of us be sent with a drop of water on our fingers to quench your burning thirst. [Linked Image]<br><br>In His Sovereign Free Grace,


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
#5167 - Thu Sep 11, 2003 8:25 AM Re: The use of "all"  
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 285
carlos Offline
Addict
carlos  Offline
Addict

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 285
Philadelphia, PA
Hello Criley,<br><br>I'm waiting for a response to my post. Please give a biblical response. <br><br><br>in Christ,<br>Carlos


"Let all that mind...the peace and comfort of their own souls, wholly apply themselves to the study of Jesus Christ, and him crucified"(Flavel)
#5168 - Thu Sep 11, 2003 11:00 AM Re: The use of "all" [Re: Pilgrim]  
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,305
Tom Offline
Needs to get a Life
Tom  Offline
Needs to get a Life

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,305
Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
Pilgrim<br><br>When you said: "All the cults use that type of fractured logic and twist the Bible into a Gordian knot so as to avoid "what it actually says"!"<br><br>Would I be correct that you are not talking about Arminians here? (Though obviously some may be included)<br><br>Is criley's interpretation the same as what the average Arminian would conclude?<br>Sorry I am just curious is this is the norm.<br><br>Tom<br>

Page 2 of 3 1 2 3

Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 17 guests, and 113 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
drewk, patrice, Robert1962, Ron, billmcginnis
921 Registered Users
Shout Box
November
S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30
Today's Birthdays
Bob
Popular Topics(Views)
652,812 Gospel truth
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.317s Queries: 16 (0.100s) Memory: 2.7236 MB (Peak: 3.0373 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2017-11-23 23:57:23 UTC