A Proposition: True Or False ?

[EdSutton]

False!

"Wait a minute!

Hold the phone!"

What was the question, since I haven't read the thread, but was just answering the title? :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Ed

 

[skypair]

Sad.
Because when you get to heaven (if you are indeed going there), you will find a lot of Calvinists there and then you will have to confront your Savior and ask Him why He saved those Calvinists when you, and only you, deserve the right to be there because you are not a Calvinist and you have always hated those damned Calvinists, and if for some reason you find John Calvin there, what are you going to do ?

I'm gonna say he was a Democrat! He's just from the "liberal wing" of Christianity! The one that says we ought to take a allegorical view of scripture and that God should have "given" salvation to everyone.

Then I will go down to his "mansion" of "wood, hay, and stubble" and watch as the "big bad wolf" has blows all that he has "built." Then I will let him come live with me, my tame, housebroken "potbelly pig." :laugh:

No, sorry. I got carried away. I will welcome him into my prayer group praying for the tribulation lost that we both pray will come to Jesus.

skypair

 

[PK]

Nope! Failure to be one of the elect of God is a sinners condemnation.
(Very Heavy Sarcasm! I am not a Calvinist)

I did not post this with the intent of hurting some ones feelings, however I will not take it back. I just don't understand why a Calvinist would ask this question? I have never, nor will ever, say anything bad about my Calvinist friends on the BB or here at home. We just strongly disagree....

"Failure to believe that Christ died in particular for one's self is the ( or "a"cause )for a sinner's condemnation."

Your only going to believe if your ordained, chosen, elected, predestinated, and for-known right? So isn't that the underlying requirement?

 

[Rippon]

Your only going to believe if your ordained, chosen, elected, predestinated, and foreknown right? So isn't that the underlying requirement?

Well, a couple other things are in there too, such as being given faith and repentance and drawn etc. However, you've got the essence down. Actually chosen,elected and predestined are pretty much the same. Foreknown is foreloved. The Lord has set His love on the ones of His choosing. He has decreed it.

 

[Rippon]

I'm gonna say he was a Democrat! He's just from the "liberal wing" of Christianity! The one that says we ought to take a allegorical view of scripture and that God should have "given" salvation to everyone.

Then I will go down to his "mansion" of "wood, hay, and stubble" and watch as the "big bad wolf" has blows all that he has "built." Then I will let him come live with me, my tame, housebroken "potbelly pig."

skypair

Do you think if you repeat lies scores of times some will believe you?

Calvin could in no way be considered a theological liberal.I have set you straight several times about the allegorical method as it pertains to John Calvin( the last time was just about 10 days or so). He deplored that view of Scroipture. John Calvin was a true exegete.And he certainly would not have insisted "that God should have given salvation to everyone." God is a debtor to no one. He owes no one salvation. How you can claim this was Calvin's view is beyond belief.

You better be careful how you are laying your own foundation SP. You might live in a thatched hut. From the kind of posts you have made over the last 2 and a half years that I have been here you speak of many empty, trifling and useless things. You have not spoken honestly or respectfully of the grace of God. The Day will show how well or poorly you have built your house.

No wonder your wings have been clipped. You are no longer air-worthy to air your errant opinions.

 

[PK]

Well, a couple other things are in there too, such as being given faith and repentance and drawn etc. However, you've got the essence down. Actually chosen,elected and predestined are pretty much the same. Foreknown is foreloved. The Lord has set His love on the ones of His choosing. He has decreed it.

Yes but your still not answering my question brother...

 

[skypair]

Calvin could in no way be considered a theological liberal.

Actually, in those days the "conservatives" were CATHOLIC. So yes, he was "liberal." But my description also captures the notion of new ideas that may not all be good ideas.

I have set you straight several times about the allegorical method as it pertains to John Calvin (the last time was just about 10 days or so). He deplored that view of Scripture.

It would be quite curious if you were right. How then, do his followers come by allegorizing the church as Israel? How do they allegorize Revelation to support amil?

skypair

 

[Rippon]

Actually, in those days the "conservatives" were CATHOLIC. So yes, he was "liberal." But my description also captures the notion of new ideas that may not all be good ideas.

Rip: He was not liberal according to the Bible.That's the only thing that counts.His "new ideas" were old in reality -- they came from the B-I-B-L-E.

It would be quite curious if you were right. How then, do his followers come by allegorizing the church as Israel? How do they allegorize Revelation to support amil?

Rip: "His followers"?! Calvinists do not follow John Calvin. But you love to repeat your lies around the clock, don't you?

Calvinists come in all shapes, sizes, and personalities etc.They hold a variety of Millennial views. Their views on escatology are diverse. It's not so monolithic.In the realm of soteriology we are closer together. But even here there remain some nuanced differences.

 

[PK]

Rip: He was not liberal according to the Bible.That's the only thing that counts.His "new ideas" were old in reality -- they came from the B-I-B-L-E.
RIP:Calvinists come in all shapes, sizes, and personalities etc.They hold a variety of Millennial views. Their views on escatology are diverse. It's not so monolithic.In the realm of soteriology we are closer together. But even here there remain some nuanced differences.

PK:Yeah SP remember, their Biblical, their all over the place in their Doctrine....

 

[Rippon]

Rip: He was not liberal according to the Bible.That's the only thing that counts.His "new ideas" were old in reality -- they came from the B-I-B-L-E.
RIP:Calvinists come in all shapes, sizes, and personalities etc.They hold a variety of Millennial views. Their views on escatology are diverse. It's not so monolithic.In the realm of soteriology we are closer together. But even here there remain some nuanced differences.

PK:Yeah SP remember, their Biblical, their all over the place in their Doctrine....

Rip: So I suppose that all non-Cals are uniform when it comes to escatology? They have it pieced together correctly?

(BTW,you said "Yeah SP remember,their Biblical,their all over the place in their Doctrine..."
You meant :Yeah, SP. They're supposed to be biblical, but instead they're all over the place doctrinally."Just some language helps for you PK.)

 

[Allan]

Rip: So I suppose that all non-Cals are uniform when it comes to escatology?

Boy don't I wish! Then everyone would finally agree with me :thumbs: :saint: :laugh:

 

[Rippon]

A Blast From The Past

I actually disagree with the proposition of the OP. If one does not believe that Christ died in particular for him/her does not cause a sinner's damnation or condemnation.

The Gospel is not -- believe Christ died for you.It is not that God loves you.

First, one has to repent and believe that the gospel is the true Word of God. One has to believe that Jesus who is revealed in the Bible is God's only way of salvation. Salvation is escape from one's sins which separates people from God.

Second, one needs to understand that there is a link between faith and salvation.

Third, the Holy Spirit brings conviction of the need for the Savior -- because of his/her sin. That's because he/she becomes "weary and heavy-laden" as the KJV expresses it.All who come into the hearing of God's Word do not have a such a burden.

Fourth: There is a casting of one's self on Christ alone in reaction to the promises of the Gospel that Christ will receive all who come to Him and turn none away.

At this point, and not before, there is assurance of the love of God and that Christ's death was for this person in particular.

All of the above was due to the work of the Holy Spirit of God.

So, all who hear the Gospel are not led to believe that Christ died in particular for him -- but only those who have gone through such a process as I have dealt with earlier.Those who merely hear are condemned because they have not believed the truth of God's Word.

What do you think?

 

[Rippon]

With respect to my 6th post... the following is from J.I. Packer's Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God.

The fact is that the New Testament never calls on any man to repent on the ground that Christ died specifically and particularly for him. The basis on which the New Testament invites sinners to put faith in Christ is simply that they need Him... and that those who receive Him are promised all the benefits that His death secured for His people. What is universal and all-inclusive in the New Testament is the invitation to faith, and the promise of salvation to all who believe. (page 68)

Ponder the above.

 

[Rippon]

More From Packer's Book

It is obvious that if a preacher thought that the statement,'Christ died for every one of you', made to any congregation, would be unverifiable, and probably not true, he would take care not to make it in his gospel preaching. You do not find such statements in the sermons of, for instance, George Whitefield or Charles Spurgeon [ or in any sermons in the book of Acts --Rip]... For preaching the gospel,... means inviting sinners to come to Jesus Christ, the Living Saviour, who, by virtue of His atoning death, is able to save all those who put their trust in Him. What has to be said about the cross when preaching the gospel is simply that Christ's death is the ground on which Christ's forgiveness is given.And this is all that has to be said.(pages 67,68 )

The gospel is, 'believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, who died for sins, and now [presents ] you Himself as your Saviour.' This is the message which we are to take to the world... our job is to point them to the living Christ, and summon them to trust in Him. (page 69)

Well, do you agree,or disagree? Why or why not?

 

[Tom Butler]

I certainly agree. Only one whom the Lord has saved can say "Jesus died for me."

And so far I have yet to find a scriptural example of someone saying to a lost person, "Jesus loves you" or "Jesus died for you."

 

[psalms109:31]

love

I certainly agree. Only one whom the Lord has saved can say "Jesus died for me."

And so far I have yet to find a scriptural example of someone saying to a lost person, "Jesus loves you" or "Jesus died for you."

Jesus only came to save the elect. Those who trust in Him. The meek and the humble. God doesn't need to look down time to know who they are. He has the finished work of the tree of life. Those who he cut out for unbelief. Those who He included when they heard the Gospel of their salvation having believed and those who He crafted back in that did not continue in their unbelief .

 

[Gabriel Elijah]

Actually, in those days the "conservatives" were CATHOLIC. So yes, he was "liberal." But my description also captures the notion of new ideas that may not all be good ideas.

It would be quite curious if you were right. How then, do his followers come by allegorizing the church as Israel? How do they allegorize Revelation to support amil?

skypair

Skypair—just out of curiosity—how come it says your “banned”? And if your band how come you can still post? Not trying 2 be rude—but I’m fairly new & have never seen someone identified as “banned”--& I see 2 in this thread.

 

[Amy.G]

Skypair—just out of curiosity—how come it says your “banned”? And if your band how come you can still post? Not trying 2 be rude—but I’m fairly new & have never seen someone identified as “banned”--& I see 2 in this thread.

The post you are quoting was from May 2008.

 

[Gabriel Elijah]

The post you are quoting was from May 2008.

Awww—now it makes sense--Thank you dear sister---that pretty much answers my question--:thumbsup:

 

[Rippon]

I certainly agree. Only one whom the Lord has saved can say "Jesus died for me."

And so far I have yet to find a scriptural example of someone saying to a lost person, "Jesus loves you" or "Jesus died for you."

Years ago I bought a book which has some sermons of Rolfe Barnard (1904-1969). His words in this quote are not original. Spurgeon and others before him have said the same things in essence.

From R.F.'s message :Why We Preach The Gospel And Particular Redemption.

"Now will you follow me? The knowledge of being the object of God's eternal love,and the knowledge of being the object of Christ's redeeming death;this knowledge belongs to the assurance of one who has already believed. This knowledge that Christ died for me,that God loves me individually is to be inferred from the fact that one has believed. and it is not to be proposed as a reason why one should believe. These things are just not true. No man can know that God loves him until after he has believed. ( p.149. BTW,the words emboldened were in the original.)