Featured Faith? Where does it come from?

The statement made in 2Pet.2:1 is a simple statement to understand. The refusal of most Calvinists to understand it is one of belief. It is very telling that almost all non-Cal commentaries agree with what I have said. My view is not novel of course. It is simply reiterating what the verse says.

 

No, I am not going to bother to answer someone who simply posts innuendos and demonstrates openly he has no use for the Bible.

 

Whoever wrote the above did not finish their thoughts. You chopped things off.

You added this from someone else a long time after the other person's thoughts. That was dishonest of you. But typical.

 

Hi Again brother,

Yes, but don't you see the distinguishing factors that are different between how you obtain faith in your wife is by visibly witnessing her in her earthly flesh with your own eyes carry out faithful decisions in the past, but unlike with your relationship with the Lord, you can not visibly observe with your senses God carry out faithful actions (though assuredly He does) that would enable you to rely on Him for the future because he is invisible, thus also unlike your wife's existence and actions His existence cannot be proven or disproven by science. One cannot prove or disprove the existence of God. As God's faithful actions, unlike all physical things in this world we put faith in as a result of either science, witness of past faithful actions to have confidence in future performance, or human reasoning, this is not the case with God as he is an intangible spiritual being, not a natural being, therefore for you to consistently compare faith in natural things to having faith in God is not analogous, thus proving faith in God which is spiritual must be imparted by a spiritual source (the Holy Spirit), not an "earthly" source our "carnal minds" that are "at enmity with the things of God" or our "natural minds" that cannot receive the "things of God". Where do you disagree with these points dear brother?

 

Brother,

So am I understanding you correctly that you view the verse in Peter more appropriately as translated a "destructive teaching" therefore those teaching it are not indeed dammed to Hell though they are causing harm in your view to the body of Christ?

I am not of the type of person that it going to "voice...conerns... to other administrators" on you even if I felt you are violating forum rules because I am not a baby. I actually appreciate our discussions and though I disagree with 90% of what you post I do regard you as a brother in Christ and think it shows devotion on your point that you take the time to debate about 3-5 people at once on this thread with nobody, but yourself representing your view and you seem to respond to every post. Besides this, if you are no longer on the forum who would we have to debate? I don't want you banned from the forum.

 

Again, your suicide bomber just like your wife example is not analogous to Biblical faith. The reason being is the suicide bomber is having faith in a lie and a false God and this is something the natural unregenerate man by nature does, but having faith in the God of the Bible and His promises is faith in the truth, the unseen, and spiritual not earthly things, and this is not innate in what scripture tells us of a "carnal mind", "natural mind", or "the flesh". Romans 8:8 says, "So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God" , but you say they are able to have faith in God for imputed righteousness, therefore you must no believe Romans 8:8 as doing so would "please God" as seen by those in the hall of faith in Hebrews 11.

 

While you said you do not believe brother T Cassidy is a "false teacher or false prophet", do you believe Brother T Cassidy is guilty of propagating this "destructive teaching" in Peter?

 

Brother DHK,

I will post for the third and last time for you my question you have not answered as I have grown weary of posting something that goes unanswered each time-

 

Non-Calvinists typically think that 2 Peter 2:1 somehow supports unlimited atonement and therefore is against the doctrine pf particuluar redemption. However, no non-Calvinist that I have come across personally or in commentaries has espoused the views of DHK. DHK insists that the destructive heresy of that text is particular atonement. Again, no honest biblical commentator would say it has anything to do with the extent of the atonement. But as I have told DHK repeatedly, those false teachers are described in detail from verse 1-22 of chapter 2 in 2 Peter and verses 4-16 in Jude --a parallel passage.

No one with even the slightest bit of integrity would insist that those descriptions are characteristic of Calvinists. Honestly. Read verses 2-22 and tell us. Is blackest darkness reserved for us? (v.17) Are we slaves of depravity? (v.19). Are we bold in slandering celestial beings? (v.11). are we like brute beasts, born only to be caught and destroyed?(v.12) Are we experts in greed? (v.3 and 14).

DHK, face up to what your corrupt imagination has come up with and repent for your allegations against brothers and sisters in the Lord.

 

Wesley and Whitefield were best of friends but differed greatly in their theology. It has been that way throughout much of history.

 

The chapter also refers to "just Lot" in its overall context of false teachers. I am not avoiding the context of either false teachers or false teaching.

 

The word despot is used, and it refers to the Lord Jesus Christ. I don't consider Christ to be a wicked despot. The implication of that English word certainly isn't implied or applied to Christ. The word, as I understand it, has more the sense of Master, and we his servants. That doesn't change the meaning any. If a false teacher tells someone "God is not my master; I am not his slave; He never purchased me." That makes the denial of Particular Redemption all the greater with the use of that word IMO. That is what redemption is all about--paying the purchase price.

 

Neither did I.

 

I don't know what you are talking about. I posted those quotes quite some time ago. I copy and pasted them word for word, the full quotes. I am not sure what you are referring to or what your problem is.