Featured Noncals main flaw

I will make a comment in this thread.

The author of the OP and I share many of the same doctrinal stands. That said, I wonder about the purpose of the OP. Was it to spur theological discussion with the hope that his argument would be taken seriously and given the best possible condition? Perhaps it is me, but the OP doesn't read that way. It comes across as an in-your-face rebuke of the other side of the Calvinism debate without making any pretense of serious engagement.

 

Since this is your declaration, I suppose this would be a good time for you to show how preachers preach this, give some quotes, maybe use your own quotes when you were a freewill Baptist. If you don't have any examples......well........folks can draw their own conclusions about this OP then.

 

Can you quote even one notable non-Calvinist who teaches that for God to be GOOD it REQUIRES a sacrifice?

Luke, even for you this is way over the top. I'm glad to see many from both sides soundly rebuke this unfounded rant. You can do better my friend.

 

I see what the OP is saying, and although it is kinda brusque, he does make some points. People around here believe that Christ died for everyone, and He will try to save everyone, if they choose to come to Him. It's the "one step after another" altar call methodology presented. The church I belong to doesn't have altar calls, but we would pray with anyone who came forth desiring salvation. But, they think God will call everyone, they see babies being innocent, that people are good, &c.

The way God is portrayed in the bible is One who chooses according to His good will and pleasure, loves some and hates the rest, has mercy on some and hardens the others, calls some and leaves the rest in their fallen state.

 

Thank you. Exactly:thumbs:

 

Very sad........


"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!"

"What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it?"

"And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely."

 

And the quicker you properly exegete those passages, the better, Steaver....


That's truly sad.....

 

And that would have to be properly through the premise of Calvinism for you to accept.......

 

He does call everyone through the gospel...

I don't know of many who actually believe or teach this on either side of the isle. Its certainly not orthodox Arminianism and its also certainly not Baptist doctrine of any kind.

You have been deceived my brother. You are confusing God's appointment of messengers with his love and atoning provision for all mankind.

 

This ridiculous thread was dead.

 

Are you saying ONLY calvinists preach and teach the real Gospel, that non cals/arminians hold to a flase one then?t is that your point here?

 

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

:thumbsup:

 

Only one??


I must have liked it a whole lot better. I gave him three of'em. :tongue3:

 

It matters not how much truth there "may" be in the op. They way in which it was presented trumps it.

 

I think I understand what you're saying, but IMHO truth (which is God-given) can never be trumped by anything. It can, however, be muddled or obscured because of sin.

The theological discussions on this board often become self-defeating because the truth is saturated in bitter rivalries. Insults, harsh words, caustic attitudes; these behaviors make me think of what James wrote:

James 3:10 from the same mouth come both blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not to be this way.

I can only speak for myself. I had to change the way I interact on this board because my prior attitude was not glorifying God. That does not mean I have lessened my convictions. It also does not mean that we should avoid all vigorous discussions. Since all truth is from God, if that truth is being attacked, we have a right to contend for it.

 

I was not suggesting that the way he posted made any possible truth in his post less truthful, what I am saying is the mean spirited way in which his position was presented detracts from his own credibility as to whether or not he actually knows what in the world he is talking about.

Those who already hold to his position will agree, at least in part, with him but those who may be converted to his position will never be moved to believe a word he says because of the nature of his heart on the matter.

 

And that was my concern when I jumped into the thread with my earlier comment. How we say things really does matter. I am thankful that some godly men had patience with me when I was a younger Christian. I look back at the things that came out of my mouth back then and cringe. The men were kind to me. They reasoned with me in a fatherly way. They won me to the truth without antagonizing me.

 

Amen! :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup: