Piper teaches that some Calvinists might not be Born Again.

{My Bold}

When did you get authority to limit the number of the elect? Just curious!

 

My problem with you and your clan, is that you make Calvinists and us of the Doctrine of Grace out to be despots and tyrants, and spawns of hell (for only a spawn of hell would make the Creator God out to be such as you describe us making Him).
Look at the above statement, for example.

You have yet to establish by Scripture, that the unregenerate, natural man, has the innate, God-independent ability to honor God and to love God in the way which God seeks men to do, in spirit and in truth, and the ability to do good, as God defines good, and that the fall of Adam did not alter the nature of his race, and yet you lament the right of God to grant repentance to whom He will and to extend mercy to whom He will ?

And then you mock God by telling Him how stupid He is to say He wants all to come to repentance (something which you and yours have totally taken out of its context, and yet you demand context from us) when He already knows they can't because He is the one who makes them unable or leaves them to their inability ?

[PERSONAL ATTACK SNIPPED]


So when somebody celebrates an event in which a gift is called for, you think the gift should be offered, and if it is unwanted, then the gift should be withdrawn, or maybe the intended recipient is not worthy of the gift ?

Your wife or somebody you love celebrates her birthday and you offer her a gift instead of going out, buying something you are sure she will like, and then gifting her with what you bought ?

The word "gift" occurs at least fifty times in the Bible from Old Testament to the New Testament, and I have yet to see it as OFFERED as opposed to GIVEN other than the one in Matthew 8:4 in reference to offering in accordance with a ritual.

There is NFFER OF SALVATION.
There is a GIVING OF SALVATION, A GRANTING OF IT, AND GOD DETERMINES WHO RECEIVES THAT GIFT, and no deception you employ will change that.

[PERSONAL ATTACK SNIPPED - WARNED TO WATCH YOUR LANGUAGE]

 

So, winman, is that scripture about saving oneself from the wrath of God, or is it saving oneself from an untoward generation........of men, since only men have generations.

What's the matter ?

You kicking yourself somewhere for turning out to be the one twisting Scripture ?

 

You're the one who came on with criticisms of what we believe as Calvinists and as DoG's.
The burden of proof is on you.
So far, all you've engaged in are innuendoes, and statements that expose your ignorance of the Doctrine and your lie that you were once a Calvinist.
I've seen guys like you in other fields of this fallen world.
Guys who say they were part of the struggles, both underground and aboveground that I've been part of against the dictatorship that once lorded it over our people.
Yet were not familiar with the concepts of the struggle, terms we used, and histories we've had.
They marched with us, yes, but they were not really members.

fine.

Given the way you've been misrepresenting us and what we hold to, I seriously doubt what you're saying.
You can keep your prayers to yourself.

 

The above is the constant refrain from many on this board.

To which Allan replied:"Not in the manner you are using the words when speaking for anothers (sic)view."

What is the difference then? Haven't you ever used the phrase fair and square? Fair means not unjust. It means equitable,right or lawful.

I think the words mean the very same thing. Fair and just are as alike as faith and belief.

 

Then don't be hypocritical and blame it on the Doctrine of Sovereign Grace!

 

Who one here believes that? It's not the Arminains.

 

Ask your friend, he does.

 

warning noted.

 

I don't know what he believes. I'm just saying Arminans don't believe what you implied in your other post.

 

Those two don't seem to deny they are Arminians, so I guess they're saying that's what Arminians believe.
If you say otherwise, then fine.
You don't believe that way, they do.
And just for the record, I believe you, if you are a classical Arminian.
The modern Arminian, on the other hand, misrepresent what Jacobus believed.

 

On this I agree but I believe it is more due to a lack of historical knowledge.
Most modern Arminians are Wesleyian Arminians and not Classical/Reformed Arminian which was what Jacobus believed.

 

According to Romans chapters 1 and 2 they will not accept God's truths and still they are without excuse.

You apparently believe that some who have never heard the Gospel will open themselves up to God in some way -- the first two chapters in Romans do not back you up there.

And you're in the realm of sheer speculation when you say that God will send someone to reveal the full truth --i.e. the Gospel, if they believe the law written in their hearts.

 

Sorry, but your assumption here is pure speculation - that Romans 1 and 2 is about what All men always do, though you are correct in that it reflects all men are without excuse. Why? Because reaches out to every man revealing us all spirital truths, and that we, by God, also have a conscience. It is a funny thing though, even if your theory on Romans 1 and2 is correct, it still stands in direct contradiction with other aspects of your view... ie. that is in fact God dealing with these men and revealing truth them, those NOT His own and that they do in fact understand those spiritual truths though they choose to reject it.

For some reason it seems to be almost an impossibility for you to not only grasp what someone else is saying, but that you also have a real inability to relay back accurately what you claim to understand the other person is saying or holding to.

My point proven yet again. Enjoy your night.