Featured Harambe the Gorilla: A Serious Theological Lesson

I am reminded of the old chestnut, "even a blind squirrel finds an acorn every once in a while." Yes, as ambassadors of Christ with the message and ministry of reconciliation, the gospel is indeed for us.

 

A real reliable witness lol. No imput, like SW.....no scripture, like benjamin,no scripture, no scripture......no truth.

 

LOL, IT, you go from one unbiblical view to the next. I know you think Ephesians 1:4 says God chose us individually before creation. But that is not what it says. And since no charge can be brought against God's elect, how is it we were children of wrath? No answer will be forthcoming.

1 Corinthians 9:19-22 says Paul sought to win some for salvation. The word "win" means "to gain any one, i.e. to win him over to the kingdom of God, to gain one to faith in Christ."

Clearly the idea is that believers are to share the gospel through word and deed, such at some might trust in Christ. When God chooses them for salvation through faith in the Truth, He transfers them into Christ. Thus no individual was chosen for salvation before they believed in God.

 

Could one of you Calvinists explain why it bothers you so much that other believers, saved brethren in the Lord, don't hold to TULIP? Why does that get your dander up and make you so argumentative? Anyone?

 

We enjoy the truth of scripture and are commanded to hold to it.
Turn the question around now......look at everyone who opposes these truths......they use no scripture here, just attack those who do.
Not one of the opponents can answer Protestant, Biblicist, TC, Reformed, Reformed baptist, Rippon,Blessed wife,Annsni,IT,SG. GT,.....no one can...there is a total inability to do so...

 

Why should we "answer" someone that creates strawmen and mischaracterizes our beliefs? It's a fools errand.

 

Brother Sapper Woody,

If you will delve deep into the bible, you will find many examples of regeneration via the Spirit exampled in the bible.

In Ezekiel 37, Ezekiel comes upon a valley of very dry bones. Left to themselves, they are dead, with no hope, within themselves that is, of ever living again. God tells him to prophesy and the earth quakes and bone comes to its bone, then sinew, then flesh. Yet, even after this, they are still dead. God then tells Ezekiel to prophesy and the wind(typified as the Spirit) blows upon them and they stand upon their feet. They are now alive. This is an example of us prior to regeneration. We were a 'a valley of very dry bones' inwardly, unable to choose life. Remember, Jesus told the Pharisees they were full of dead men's bone.

In Luke 7, Jesus comes upon a funeral procession. All hope was lost. They were on the way to the tomb, the widow's son fate sealed. Yet Jesus touched the bier(coffin) and tells him to arise and he does. What choice did he have when Jesus told him to arise? When Jesus says to arise, He effects it, it affects us, and we arise.

In 1 Kings 18, Elijah takes a widow's deceased son, lays him upon his bed, stretches upon him three times, praying over him, and he brings her back to him alive. What say or lot did that son have?

In Acts 14, Dorcas is dead. Peter raises her to life. In Acts 20, Paul brings Eutychus back to life after falling three stories. What say or lot did they have in being brought back to life?

Jesus said in John 5, "The hour is coming, AND NOW IS,(already occuring at that time), when the dead(Ephesians 2:1), shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and they that hear SHALL LIVE." Now, carry that over to Isaiah 55, where Isaiah said "Hear, and your soul SHALL live."

Then look at how Jesus conversed with Nicodemus in John 3. In John 3:3, John 3:5, and John 3:8, Jesus compared the moving of the wind with how the Spirit moves. None can stop it from blowing and none can thwart the Spirit moving.

When the Spirit moves within a sinner, they will hear, they will see, they will love the One they once hated after being given a new heart[Ezekiel 11:19 & Ezekiel 36:26].

But if you wish to correspond via PM, please feel free to ask me any question you wish. (snip)

 

I've got two Calvinists that rated my post (above) as Disagree.

So, you believe that answering strawmen arguments is a worthy endeavor? Hmmm...

 

Nobody's asking Calvinists. Calvinists are jumping on others and pounding them into submission.

Been there and done it a hundred times, mostly when I first joined. There's no point in continuing.

 

Give me a break!! Look at the strawman in question from the Op:

This has been corrected countless times!

The person who posted this garbage has been here for 3 years arguing C&A and you want to tell me he honestly doesn't know better that the above is a strawman? If after all this time you Calvies don't know your opposition's view better than that you're all a lost cause here and need to find a new line of work.

The denial, or playing dumb that a strawman has been given speaks volumes in its self as to tactics in practice here...

 

No.

Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo.

 

I usee to be in your camp. I know all the weaknesses therein. It is only a fool's errand from my point of view, because you will just dismiss them.

 

So you just go and give 'pop-shots' and won't engage us?


Here, blow your nose.

 

"If" it is a strawman?! ...IF??? Do you not see a problem with such denial, that I just spoke of?

Doesn't the "chase the rabbit game" ever get old for you guys? LOL

I just don't know what it is with you guys! You guys seem to be conveniently forgetting something, over and over and over... I'll give you a hint, fresh off the slate:

Back to the point:

"Give me a break!! Look at the strawman in question from the Op:

Again, "The person who posted this garbage has been here for 3 years arguing C&A and you want to tell me he honestly doesn't know better that the above is a strawman? If after all this time you Calvies don't know your opposition's view better than that you're all a lost cause here and need to find a new line of work."

Simply, those rabbits just keep springing back to life over and and over and truth is "some" here do nothing but encourage (and cover for) the repeating of the misrepresentations presented in these strawman arguments, over and over again...