Calvinism/Arminianism Forum - Finally Imploded?

[Winman]

That's what I said. "life" in John 5:40 is referring to eternal life, not regeneration.

So, you believe that regeneration equals being saved, but it does not equal eternal life?

Well, again Spurgeon disagrees with you. Here is a portion of his sermon entitled Eternal Security

If the life that Christ gives us, when we are born again, can die, then it is not “eternal” life, or else words have ceased to have any meaning at all. In its nature, as being the work of the Holy Spirit, and emanating from God, the life bestowed in regeneration is an everlasting one.

Spurgeon disagrees with you. He said the life bestowed in regeneration is an everlasting one. It is eternal life.

So tell, me who holds the correct Calvinistic doctrine, you or Spurgeon? You cannot both be correct, because you believe differently. Spurgeon does believe that regeneration equals eternal life, you do not.

 

[jbh28]

So, you believe that regeneration equals being saved, but it does not equal eternal life?

I said regeneration does mean the same as eternal life. Yes, wen you are regenerated, you have eternal life.

Well, again Spurgeon disagrees with you. Here is a portion of his sermon entitled Eternal Security



Spurgeon disagrees with you. He said the life bestowed in regeneration is an everlasting one. It is eternal life.

Yes, you get eternal life too.

So tell, me who holds the correct Calvinistic doctrine, you or Spurgeon? You cannot both be correct, because you believe differently. Spurgeon does believe that regeneration equals eternal life, you do not.

I'm not a Calvinist just as you are not an Arminian. You do get eternal life at regeneration, I agree with Spurgeon that you get eternal life at regeneration. I never said differently.

Saved: regenerated, new birth, holy spirit, eternal life.
Unsaved: unregenerated

John 5:40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life. I said that the "life" here is an eternal one, eternal life. You get this at regeneration.

 

[Winman]

I'm not a Calvinist just as you are not an Arminian. You do get eternal life at regeneration, I agree with Spurgeon that you get eternal life at regeneration. I never said differently.

You absolutely implied that regeneration and eternal life are not the same. Here are your exact words:

That's what I said. "life" in John 5:40 is referring to eternal life, not regeneration.

You are changing your story now. Regeneration and eternal life are the same thing.

If John 5:40 is speaking of receiving eternal life, then it must also be speaking of receiving regeneration. If you have to come to Christ to get eternal life which equals regeneration, then you have to come to Christ to be regenerated.

Therefore, you must come when you are unregenerated.

But I am glad you agree with Spurgeon. On this matter I do too. When you believe on Jesus, you are born again, you are regenerated and receive eternal life. But you must come to Jesus and believe on him while unregenerate to receive life.

John 20:31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

John 20:31 is very clear. You have to believe to have life.

If it were as the Calvinists teach, this verse would say:

But these are written, that ye might have life, and that having life ye might believe.

It doesn't say that does it? No, it says you must believe to have life. This life is regeneration, it is eternal life, they are the same.

 

[jbh28]

You absolutely implied that regeneration and eternal life are not the same. Here are your exact words:

I did no such thing. Do you know how to read? I'm beginning to wonder because you appear to have the reading comprehension skills of a 5th grader.

That's what I said. "life" in John 5:40 is referring to eternal life, not regeneration.

Read what I said. I said the word "life" in JOHN 5:40 is referring to eternal life. You get eternal life, justification, regeneration, indwelling of the holy spirit, new birth, new life, new man all at the same time at salvation. They are not all the same things, but happen at the same time. understand? Again. Regeneration and eternal life, you get them(2 different things) at the same time.

You are changing your story now.

Where have I changed my story?

Regeneration and eternal life are the same thing.

How's that? Regeneration is when you get a new nature. Eternal life is what you get when you are saved, life that never ends. Regeneration has to do with your heart and your new nature. Eternal life is that you will never perish. They are not the same thing any more than justification and regeneration are the same thing.

If John 5:40 is speaking of receiving eternal life, then it must also be speaking of receiving regeneration. If you have to come to Christ to get eternal life which equals regeneration, then you have to come to Christ to be regenerated.

Again, eternal life doesn't equal regeneration. they are two terms with two different meanings.

Therefore, you must come when you are unregenerated.

You almost make out like coming is a long process. It is instant. You don't walk down a path. Salvation is instance. An unregenerate person becomes regenerate at salvation.

But I am glad you agree with Spurgeon. On this matter I do too. When you believe on Jesus, you are born again, you are regenerated and receive eternal life. But you must come to Jesus and believe on him while unregenerate to receive life.

John 20:31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

John 20:31 is very clear. You have to believe to have life. This life is regeneration, it is eternal life. They are one and the same.

No, they are not one in the same. Spurgeon never said they were. You get "life" in John 20:31 is speaking again of "eternal life." Regeneration is when you have a new nature, your new birth. Re-birth. Regeneration. Eternal life is that you will never perish.

 

[Winman]

I did no such thing. Do you know how to read? I'm beginning to wonder because you appear to have the reading comprehension skills of a 5th grader.

Give me a break, I quoted your very words. One more time.

That's what I said. "life" in John 5:40 is referring to eternal life, not regeneration.

If being regenerated equals receiving eternal life (which it does), then they are the same exact thing.

Regeneration means to be made new, to be made alive again. It means being a new creation "in Christ". And you can't be "in Christ" unless you first believe on him. Regeneration means to be born again, to receive everlasting life.

How's that? Regeneration is when you get a new nature. Eternal life is what you get when you are saved, life that never ends. Regeneration has to do with your heart and your new nature. Eternal life is that you will never perish. They are not the same thing any more than justification and regeneration are the same thing.

Now you are just playing games. You just said you agree with Spurgeon, and Spurgeon said:

the life bestowed in regeneration is an everlasting one.

Regeneration is not only receiving a new nature, it is receiving everlasting, eternal life. It is passing from death to life.

John 5:25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.

Did Jesus say the living will hear his voice and those that hear shall live? No, he said the "dead" shall hear his voice and those that hear shall live.

What? Do you think Jesus made a mistake here? Did he make an error? Does Jesus not understand what regeneration and everlasting life are? Does Jesus know the difference between the dead and living?

Look, I have been very patient and very civil, which is difficult for me. I have a very difficult time tolerating people I perceive to be disingenuous. You are starting to come across that way. You are changing your story with every new post.

I appreciate that you have held this long conversation with me this day. We have both seen each other's views several times. That is good. Let's keep it that way.

 

[jbh28]

Give me a break, I quoted your very words. One more time.



If being regenerated equals receiving eternal life (which it does), then they are the same exact thing.

Regeneration means to be made new, to be made alive again. It means being a new creation "in Christ". And you can't be "in Christ" unless you first believe on him. Regeneration means to be born again, to receive everlasting life.

Eternal/everlasting life is one thing you get when you are saved, but it is not equal to the meaning of regeneration. Theoretically, you could have regeneration without eternal life(this isn't the case though). If regeneration gives you eternal life, then regeneration isn't eternal life. you get eternal life though eternal life? No, regeneration is the new nature, the re birth. You get eternal life also at salvation while you get regeneration.

Now you are just playing games. You just said you agree with Spurgeon, and Spurgeon said:

the life bestowed in regeneration is an everlasting one.

Regeneration is not only receiving a new nature, it is receiving everlasting, eternal life. It is passing from death to life.

You receive item 1 while you receive item 2. Item one is regeneration. One benefit of regeneration is eternal life. I'll take that, but the terms are not synonymous. I'm not playing any games. I think you just like to disagree.

John 5:25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.

Did Jesus say the living will hear his voice and those that hear shall live? No, he said the "dead" shall hear his voice and those that hear shall live.

What? Do you think Jesus made a mistake here? Did he make an error? Does Jesus not understand what regeneration and everlasting life are? Does Jesus know the difference between the dead and living?

you receive both, eternal life and regeneration at salvation.

Look, I have been very patient and very civil, which is difficult for me. I have a very difficult time tolerating people I perceive to be disingenuous. You are starting to come across that way. You are changing your story with every new post.

Where have I changed my story? I haven't once changed my story. The reason you think I do is that you read part of what I say(proof in that you only respond to about 20% of my post) and assume the rest.

Regeneration doesn't equal justification doesn't equal everlasting life. But they all (3 separate things) happen at the same time. You won't find one place where I have ever denied nor changed this. I'm not being disingenuous and I don't think you are either. You have a major problem of reading into something someone says and thinking what they are meaning without them saying it.

I appreciate that you have held this long conversation with me this day. We have both seen each other's views several times. That is good. Let's keep it that way.

No problem.(I think it is cool we got to page 17 without being shut down ) I think you are a sincere Christian. We don't interpret passages the same and that isn't a problem. If you were at my church tomorrow, I would shake your hand and worship with you with no problem. i don't separate over conditional/unconditional election as long as the person is trying to believe what the Bible teaches. My biggest issue with you is that you read into things I say. (which is why you misrepresent my view and think I change my view) What you are doing is seeing part of what I say and combining it with what you think Calvinist believe and assume I believe that. As I said, I'm not a Calvinist. I don't believe everything you have to believe to be called a Calvinist in my opinion. (and I don't like all the terms used in the TULIP, some are misleading in my opinion)

Also, in case you missed it. I retraced my statement of calling you a liar. What happened is that you misread(about 4 times in a row) what I was saying. That is why I though you were just misrepresenting on purpose. (especially when I said the opposite in my quote. But if you were not doing that on purpose, you were not lying.

 

[Winman]

It is not that I ignore 80% of what you say, it is that I focus and respond to where we disagree.

You view regeneration as seperate from eternal life. And that is a Calvinistic view (I understand you have said you are not a Calvinist). Nevertheless, you hold a similar view. That presents several problems when you consider it.

Non-Cals view regeneration as being born again, being made spiritually alive, receiving everlasting life. There is more to regeneration than just receiving eternal life, but it is included in regeneration.

Calvinists believe a person has to be regenerated in order to be able to believe. Now, they correctly believe that you have to trust on Christ in order to receive everlasting life. The problem with this is that Calvinists believe a person can be regenerated for years, and yet not have eternal life. This is not what Spurgeon believed, he believed you received everlasting life the very moment you were regenerated. In this view, Spurgeon departs from Calvinism.

Examine this statement to understand what I am saying here.

The Reformation Study Bible (formerly called The Geneva Study Bible) claims to be a clear statement of Reformed theology. On page 1664 there is an article on Regeneration. It is a shocking statement relating to infant salvation: "Infants can be born again, although the faith that they exercise cannot be as visible as that of adults." I wrote to R.C. Sproul (General Editor) to ask for clarification of this statement. I received a written response from Sproul’s assistant, V.A. Voorhis (dated 1/6/2000) in which he made the following statement which is even more shocking:

When the RSB speaks in the notes of John 3 of "infants being born again," it is speaking of the work of quickening God does in them which inclines their will to Him. In Protestantism, regeneration always precedes faith and if God quickens them, the person will surely come . . .Often, regeneration and our subsequent faith happen apparently simultaneously but logically, regeneration must precede faith. An infant’s faith may not come until years after God has worked by His Holy Spirit to regenerate him or her. Two Biblical examples of infants who were born again are seen in Psalm 22:9-10 and Luke 1:15.

Do you see a problem here? Sproul's associate (and I don't think it presumptuous to believe Sproul as well) believes an infant can be regenerated for many years. They do not have eternal life at this point, because they are incapable of knowing and understanding the gospel and trusting on Jesus.

So, they are teaching you can be regenerated but not have eternal life.

Now, this is the major difference between non-Cals and Calvinists. The non-Cal believes an unregenerate man can be taught of God and trust in Jesus. And at the moment they believe on Jesus they are regenerated and receive eternal life.

And I believe John 5:40 and John 20:31 support this view. Both show you must come (believe) to Jesus in order to receive life. Now, if you believe that a person must be regenerated to come or believe, then you must believe that regeneration is not life. And if regeneration is life, why would a person who already has eternal life need to come to Christ? This is what Spurgeon asked:

"If I am to preach the faith in Christ to a man who is regenerated, then the man, being regenerated, is saved already, and it is an unnecessary and ridiculous thing for me to preach Christ to him, and bid him to believe in order to be saved when he is saved already, being regenerate. Am I only to preach faith to those who have it? Absurd, indeed! Is not this waiting till the man is cured and then bringing him the medicine? This is preaching Christ to the righteous and not to sinners."

Do you understand what Spurgeon is asking here? He is asking why should he preach to someone to believe on Jesus when that person already has eternal life?? If you already have life, why would you need to come to Jesus? And Spurgeon is correct here.

If a person is walking along and suddenly God regenerates him, then he has eternal life that very moment. There is no need for him to go to Jesus and trust on him for eternal life, he already has it.

Do you see the huge problem in this Calvinist concept?

 

[jbh28]

It is not that I ignore 80% of what you say, it is that I focus and respond to where we disagree.

You view regeneration as seperate from eternal life. And that is a Calvinistic view (I understand you have said you are not a Calvinist). Nevertheless, you hold a similar view. That presents several problems when you consider it.

Non-Cals view regeneration as being born again, being made spiritually alive, receiving everlasting life. There is more to regeneration than just receiving eternal life, but it is included in regeneration.

Calvinists believe a person has to be regenerated in order to be able to believe. Now, they correctly believe that you have to trust on Christ in order to receive everlasting life. The problem with this is that Calvinists believe a person can be regenerated for years, and yet not have eternal life. This is not what Spurgeon believed, he believed you received everlasting life the very moment you were regenerated. In this view, Spurgeon departs from Calvinism.

I don't view regenerate at a separate time from receiving eternal life, my point was that "regeneration" and "eternal life" are not the same thing, yet happen at the same time. I have heard Calvinists say that you can be regenerated many years before you are saved, but I don't see any biblical support for that view. Regeneration means new birth. You receive a new nature. This does not happen until you are saved. No unsaved person has the indwelling Holy Spirit in them. Eternal life is given to you at the same time.

Examine this statement to understand what I am saying here.




Do you see a problem here? Sproul's associate (and I don't think it presumptuous to believe Sproul as well) believes an infant can be regenerated for many years. They do not have eternal life at this point, because they are incapable of knowing and understanding the gospel and trusting on Jesus.

So, they are teaching you can be regenerated but not have eternal life.

Which, in my opinion, is unbiblical.

Now, this is the major difference between non-Cals and Calvinists. The non-Cal believes an unregenerate man can be taught of God and trust in Jesus. And at the moment they believe on Jesus they are regenerated and receive eternal life.

I would agree with you that "at the moment" they believe they are regenerate and receive eternal life. Before they believed, they didn't want to believe(ie unable because of their nature). I do agree that you must be regenerate to believe, I believe this happens the moment of Salvation. There is no failed regeneration nor delayed regeneration(regenerate for years before getting saved).

And I believe John 5:40 and John 20:31 support this view. Both show you must come (believe) to Jesus in order to receive life. Now, if you believe that a person must be regenerated to come or believe, then you must believe that regeneration is not life. This is not what Spurgeon believed, and it is not what I believe either.

Even Spurgeon said that "life" in John 5:40 was speaking of eternal life. Spurgeon didn't say that eternal life and regeneration are the same thing, he just believed(as do I) that they happened at the same time. There is more to regeneration that just eternal life.
"the life bestowed in regeneration is an everlasting one" - http://www.biblebb.com/files/spurgeon/2120.htm

Spurgeon is right, that you receive eternal, not temporal life. You say that Spurgeon said we get this in regeneration. True, we received many things in regeneration. Indwelling of the Holy Spirit isn't eternal life, yet happen at the same time. Justification happens at the same time, but isn't eternal life. They are all related, but not the same things. They are different parts of Salvation that happen at the same time.

btw, not all Calvinists believe that you can be regenerate for years before you are saved. I have heard many agree with Spurgeon that it happens at the same time. They many times speak of the logical, not chronological order.

Saw you edited your post

Do you understand what Spurgeon is asking here? He is asking why should he preach to someone to believe on Jesus when that person already has eternal life?? If you already have life, why would you need to come to Jesus? And Spurgeon is correct here.

If a person is walking along and suddenly God regenerates him, then he has eternal life that very moment. There is no need for him to go to Jesus and trust on him for eternal life, he already has it.

Do you see the huge problem in this Calvinist concept?

I agree with Spurgeon. A regenerate person is a saved person.

When God regenerates a person, he has eternal life at that very moment. He believes at that very moment. He is justified at that very moment. He has come at that very moment. He has trusted at that very moment.

 

[Winman]

I don't view regenerate at a separate time from receiving eternal life, my point was that "regeneration" and "eternal life" are not the same thing, yet happen at the same time. I have heard Calvinists say that you can be regenerated many years before you are saved, but I don't see any biblical support for that view. Regeneration means new birth. You receive a new nature. This does not happen until you are saved. No unsaved person has the indwelling Holy Spirit in them. Eternal life is given to you at the same time.

Well, I believe the word regeneration itself means to be made alive again. But we are in basic agreement here.

Which, in my opinion, is unbiblical.

I agree.

I would agree with you that "at the moment" they believe they are regenerate and receive eternal life. Before they believed, they didn't want to believe(ie unable because of their nature). I do agree that you must be regenerate to believe, I believe this happens the moment of Salvation. There is no failed regeneration nor delayed regeneration(regenerate for years before getting saved).

In my opinion, you are confusing conviction with regeneration. Jesus said when the Holy Spirit comes he will reprove (convict) the world of sin, not regenerate them.

John 16:8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:

Conviction is necessary for a person to repent or turn to Jesus, but a person can be convicted and not saved. Judas was very convicted and repented when he realized he had betrayed Jesus, so much so that he committed suicide. He was very sorry for his sin, but he did not trust on Jesus. If he had trusted on Jesus he would have been saved.

An unsaved person has the ability to be convicted. And you may disagree, but I believe an unregenerate person has the ability to believe on Christ provided he has heard the gospel. Without hearing the gospel no man would come to Christ.

And who did Jesus say will come to him? Did he say those who have been regenerated? No, he said those who have learned and been taught by the Father come to him. Unregenerate man can learn and be taught.

John 6:45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.

So, you see, Jesus said those who have learned and been taught of the Father cometh to him. And how is this done? Through the Word of God.

Even Spurgeon said that "life" in John 5:40 was speaking of eternal life. Spurgeon didn't say that eternal life and regeneration are the same thing, he just believed(as do I) that they happened at the same time. There is more to regeneration that just eternal life.
"the life bestowed in regeneration is an everlasting one" - http://www.biblebb.com/files/spurgeon/2120.htm

Spurgeon is right, that you receive eternal, not temporal life. You say that Spurgeon said we get this in regeneration. True, we received many things in regeneration. Indwelling of the Holy Spirit isn't eternal life, yet happen at the same time. Justification happens at the same time, but isn't eternal life. They are all related, but not the same things. They are different parts of Salvation that happen at the same time.

btw, not all Calvinists believe that you can be regenerate for years before you are saved. I have heard many agree with Spurgeon that it happens at the same time. They many times speak of the logical, not chronological order.

Saw you edited your post

I agree with Spurgeon. A regenerate person is a saved person.

When God regenerates a person, he has eternal life at that very moment. He believes at that very moment. He is justified at that very moment. He has come at that very moment. He has trusted at that very moment.

Well, you do agree that it is impossible to be regenerate and not also have eternal life, so the teaching that infants can be regerenerate for years is unscriptural.

I still get the strong impression that you do not believe an unregenerate person can express faith. This still presents the problem that if a person is already regenerate and saved as Spurgeon said they would have no need to trust on Christ, because they are already saved.

Is this what you believe?

 

[jbh28]

I would agree with you that "at the moment" they believe they are regenerate and receive eternal life. Before they believed, they didn't want to believe(ie unable because of their nature). I do agree that you must be regenerate to believe, I believe this happens the moment of Salvation. There is no failed regeneration nor delayed regeneration(regenerate for years before getting saved). - jbh

In my opinion, you are confusing conviction with regeneration. Jesus said when the Holy Spirit comes he will reprove (convict) the world of sin, not regenerate them. -winman

John 16:8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:

No, conviction happens first, regeneration is the process of changing the person. A person can be under conviction for a while before he is saved. Some Calvinist would say he is regenerate(confusing the two) but I see a difference between them.

Conviction is necessary for a person to repent or turn to Jesus, but a person can be convicted and not saved. Judas was very convicted and repented when he realized he had betrayed Jesus, so much so that he committed suicide. He was very sorry for his sin, but he did not trust on Jesus. If he had trusted on Jesus he would have been saved.

I agree

An unsaved person has the ability to be convicted. And you may disagree, but I believe an unregenerate person has the ability to believe on Christ provided he has heard the gospel. Without hearing the gospel no man would come to Christ.

When the unregenerate person believes, he is no longer regenerate. What you say, it sounds as if a person can believe without the regenerating work of the Spirit, of which I would disagree.

Ephesians 2:5 "Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened(made alive) us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved"

A person can be under conviction for a time. At regeneration, this is when he has faith, repentance, trust, belief.

And who did Jesus say will come to him? Did he say those who have been regenerated? No, he said those who have learned and been taught by the Father come to him. Unregenerate man can learn and be taught.

John 6:45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.

Regenerate men have no need to come because they are already saved. So the only ones that need to come is unregenerate.

This is how I see the different sides. Correct me if I'm wrong. These are general statements.

Calvinist. Regeneration, after that Faith
You. Faith, after that regeneration
Me. Regeneration and faith happen at the same time. Logically, regeneration happens first, but only logically, not chronologically. Some Calvinists would agree with me and some would not. Jesus makes us alive(new birth) which gives us faith. An unregenerate person has no faith. A regenerate person has faith. There is no in between.

So, you see, Jesus said those who have learned and been taught of the Father cometh to him. And how is this done? Through the Word of God.

Of course! That is what God uses, his word.

Well, you do agree that it is impossible to be regenerate and not also have eternal life, so the teaching that infants can be regerenerate for years is unscriptural.

Right. Regeneration is new life, born again. A person that is born again is a saved person. I think you are correct that conviction and regeneration get confused sometimes.

I still get the strong impression that you do not believe an unregenerate person can express faith.[ This still presents the problem that if a person is already regenerate and saved as Spurgeon said they would have no need to trust on Christ, because they are already saved.

Is this what you believe?

Let me ask you this to help you understand where I'm coming from. Can an unregenerate person have faith? If so, why is he still unregenerate? Or, are there any people that are unregenerate that have faith in Christ? Again, if so, why are they unregenerate?

 

[Winman]

I have to go to work, I will answer you later.

 

[jbh28]

I have to go to work, I will answer you later.

I guess work is more important than forums :type:

I'll at work now and will be out some later, today is my dad's birthday.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I Dont want to work, I wana bang on de drums all day! Great Song

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Calvinism won. :thumbs::jesus:

 

[saturneptune]

Transcirpt of Calvinism/Arminian debate:

Calvinist: blah, blah, blah, blah

Arminian: blah, blah, blah, blah, blah

Calvinist: blah, blah, blah, blah

Arminian: blah, blah, blah, blah, blah

Calvinist: blah, blah, blah, blah

Arminian: blah, blah, blah, blah, blah

Calvinist: blah, blah, blah, blah

Arminian: blah, blah, blah, blah, blah

Calvinist: blah, blah, blah, blah

Arminian: blah, blah, blah, blah, blah

And the final eternal result is blah, blah, blah, blah.

 

[Tom Butler]

Hey, no fair, SN.

The Arminians got more blahs than we Calvinists. We demand an equal number of blahs.

Oh, maybe you intended to say that Calvinists can say more with fewer words.

Never mind, then.

 

[jbh28]

Transcirpt of Calvinism/Arminian debate:

Calvinist: blah, blah, blah, blah

Arminian: blah, blah, blah, blah, blah

Calvinist: blah, blah, blah, blah

Arminian: blah, blah, blah, blah, blah

Calvinist: blah, blah, blah, blah

Arminian: blah, blah, blah, blah, blah

Calvinist: blah, blah, blah, blah

Arminian: blah, blah, blah, blah, blah

Calvinist: blah, blah, blah, blah

Arminian: blah, blah, blah, blah, blah

And the final eternal result is blah, blah, blah, blah.

blah blah!:type::applause::laugh:

 

[psalms109:31]

Regeneration

John 15:
3You are already clean because of the word I have spoken to you.

Ephesians 5:
25Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26to make her holy, cleansing[Or having cleansed ] her by the washing with water through the word, 27and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless.

If we don't trust in Christ through unbelief in His word and reject His word. The Spirit and life in His word we have rejected. The work God is doing in us through His word will not even begin. It has given us the ability to take the two roads placed in front of us through His word, but His will is to save those who trust in Christ and condemn those who don't. This isn't our Decision or choice or our will, but it is His to do so. It is God's good pleasure to do this.

If you refuse to come to Christ and be saved, you can only blame yourself. God wants you to come on His terms not yours to just trust in Christ and not to lean on your own understanding, to just trust in His Son and His word.

 

[Acumenical]

Transcirpt of Calvinism/Arminian debate:

Calvinist: blah, blah, blah, blah

Arminian: blah, blah, blah, blah, blah

Calvinist: blah, blah, blah, blah

Arminian: blah, blah, blah, blah, blah

Calvinist: blah, blah, blah, blah

Arminian: blah, blah, blah, blah, blah

Calvinist: blah, blah, blah, blah

Arminian: blah, blah, blah, blah, blah

Calvinist: blah, blah, blah, blah

Arminian: blah, blah, blah, blah, blah

And the final eternal result is blah, blah, blah, blah.

Sadly, that pretty much sums up most threads on most internet forums these days.

 

[Tom Butler]

Sadly, that pretty much sums up most threads on most internet forums these days.

C'mon now, don't tar us all with the same brush.

I think my posts are pretty incisive and persuasive.

Ordinarily I wouldn't brag about my posts, since I am a very humble man.

And proud of it.