J. Macarthur on John 3:16

I bet John didn't have people telling him what he really believed in the middle of his discussion.

 

George, you certainly have little grasp of monergism and the Supremacy of God when you make these statements.

 

Reynolds, you bring up MacArthur, but you provide zero information about what he actually said. Your OP is therefore worthless as a talking point. If you have zero information from MacArthur, just admit it so we can be assured you are merely speaking out of your own baseless opinion.

 

Reynolds, I don't know where to go. Post the link and I will go listen to the section you are referring to. I will not look for a needle in a haystack simply because you are too stubborn to do the work you should have done in the OP.

 

You're probably right; such little grasp is most likely due to being more familiar with the scriptures than Gnostic philosophy.

 

First, thank you for the link. This is what I was wanting to have and you supplied it.

Second, it is actually RC Sproul sharing his definition of double-predestination and the positive-negative view against the abhorrent positive-positive view (which many non-calvinists seem to imagine to be the standard Reformed view). John MacArthur fully agrees with Sproul at the end of the clip. I agree with Sproul's definition of double-predestination as it what I believe God expresses in the Bible.

 

Totally off-topic: Listen to Paul Simon's "Boy in the Bubble" and compare it to Peter Gabriel's version of the same song. Peter Gabriel's version gives you the intensity of what was happening in South Africa compared to Simon's happy sound.

 

I admit I am very familiar with the scriptures, not with gnosticism. It seems you know much about gnosticism.

 

To which question?

 

No, for we hold that the Gospel is a real call made out to all of the lost, but that their rejection is not due to any deficit in God nor the Gospel, but in themselves!

 

Both are saying classic Calvinism, as we do offer Jesus as the risen Lord to all sinners, but those who reject do so willingly!

 

Most calvinists view that as Dr Sproul held!

 

so, for these to be "able" to reject the Gospel, must mean that they have a "free will" to do so? Or do you suppose God "made" them reject the Gospel? You can see the folly of Calvinism!

 

Why did many missions form by calvinists? they held to God being the One to work to make sure that thru their preaching /teaching of the Lord Jesus, he would make sure to get some saved, as their results would not be in vain!

 

If being a calvinist means we do not even bother to teach/preach Jesus to the lost, I am not a calvinist then!
I know that we affirm to be doing that, so we are in "mainstream calvinism" here on the board!

 

All calvinists hold to the primacy and supremacy of the scriptures. not vain philosophy!

 

Guess many think that we calvinists all hold to the "terrible doctrine" of DP as Calvin held with!

 

They are doing what comes naturally to them, as being lost in adam!

 

Rm is me