Continuation of Why Y'all Aint Calvinists thread

I am saying it has no etymology. It is a recent invention by calvies. Further:

Synergism is used in scripture but never in a soteriological context:

Rom 8:28 And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

1Co 16:16 That ye submit yourselves unto such, and to every one that helpeth with us, and laboureth.

2Co 6:1 We then, as workers together with him, beseech you also that ye receive not the grace of God in vain.

Jas 2:22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?

Scripture never defines these types of terms (i.e. synergism vs. Monergism) in soteriological contexts. In fact the only issue that is dealt with regarding works is to rely on the works of the law. "Works" is never placed in any other context in scripture. Therefore the false dichotomy calvies have created out of thin air is not supported by scripture in any way shape or form.

 

I care, especially when calvies use words, that they make up, to create false dichotomies. Monergism only has a theological use and it was recently made up. The idea cannot found in scripture, at all, when synergism can and even then synergism is never used in the context of soteriology.

So the use of these two words to create a false dichotomy (i.e. you are either a monergist or you are a synergist.)

We cannot have peaceful discussions because Calvies want to impose their terms, which we reject, on others. No one wants that no will they accept that. Its nothing but bullying pure and simple. Now the term calvinist has such a bad connotation that calvies are running from it as fast as they can to their made up terms such a monergyst.

 

Please, please go back and read the entirety of what I posted. If we are going to discuss this further you need to bring in the whole not just your characterization.

 

I find it amusing that after having it pointed out that you were using the term “calvies” as a slur it’s almost like you are going out of your way to use the term in every subsequent post. You of course knew what you were doing there and it is childishly transparent.

 

Only in the mind of calvies. Since synergism is placed by you all in a soteriological context when scripture never does (the part you have thus far ignored) then your statement here is patently false. Synergism is only used in the contexts of the verses I supplied, in scripture that is. Monergism is unnecessary and only exists to create a false dichotomy (another portion of my posts you have failed to address).

Further Calvies are synergists unless one holds to the idea that man does not also preach the word that leads to mens salvation.

 

spamming the board with your off topic list of scriptures

 

Some Calvinists refer to every instance of Calvinism-refuting-texts as "spam" because... well... they can't refute them... so what "else" were they going to do?

I think we can all see that.

And of course the whole point of this thread is to continue the calvinism-refuting discussion from the Bible.

 

Dr. Fee has the disease.

Any legitimate truth-seeking scholar will often be right. No one person has all the right answers/conclusions. If, as you say, he is so often right, we need to pay attention and give respect to his endeavors. But always, as we must do, use discernment.

 

we can all see you spamming the board....with verses that have been answered many times.

 

The verses are irrefutable -- so you simply call them spam as you did when you first saw them.

What is 'not to get'???

This is the easy part.

Your tactic is far more transparent than you may have at first imagined to yourself.

Your response to scripture that refutes calvinism? it is the much expected false-accusation and ad hominem derail.

Were we supposed to be surprised that this is the discussion you would prefer rather than scripture? Seriously?

 

@JonC, you liked this post but I am interested in whether you agree with my statement on the federal headship view or not.

 

Brother, I do not need to be right. I want to be right if for no other reason than I do not want to intentionally mispresent the scriptures.