Snuggling With Satan?

In a previously closed thread, The poster John C in trying to help us understand the bible, without PSA offers several ideas he believes are helpful! Let's take a look!

You needed an explanation for God laying our iniquities on Christ.

I thought it self-explanatory. But I realized you may be one of those visual learners.

Click to expand...

Okay John, go for it!

Think of how it works for us in terms of righteousness. We put on a garmet of salvation (Isaiah) and robe of righteousness (Rev). We are clothed in the righteousness of Christ.

Click to expand...

Okay

Now reverse that. How would it be if the Word became flesh?

Think of a blanket (since we are talking about the sins of the human race and a bunch of peoole instead of the righteousness of Christ).

Click to expand...

A blanket??? Not the law of God, which we have broken? Not the law keeping of the Savior?

We earn the blanket of sin. But Jesus is sinless. The Word becomes flesh (is made as one of us). He is under this blanket too...but it is our blanket (just as our righteousness is His righteousness).

This blanket over mankind (and Jesus) is sin. It is our sin. It is laid on Christ. He bears our din. He dies for our sin. But this blanket is the power of Satan. It produces death. Jesus dies under the power of Satan (under this blanket).

Click to expand...

So, in Johns mind, we are snuggling under a blanket with Satan? Not that we are responsible for our own sin, that we do in the flesh, that we have broken God's law word being spiritually dead as a result of the fall??? No, according to John's "helpful illustration", it is rather a blanket of sin which is the power of Satan?? Like flip Wilson used to say, the devil made me do it, the devil made me do it! Not only that...But it was not God who designed the cross as the place where His Divine wrath would be poured out, but rather Jesus is the victim of Satan, sort like he is a mugging victim! It has nothing to do with God's law being broken, or God's wrath against all sin as romans 1 declares. No instead, Jesus is lured in to snuggle under Satan's blanket. John explains is that this blanket gives us our own sin! So is he saying that Jesus, snuggling under the blanket of Satan, gets His own sin??? Jesus is sinless, so the question must be asked of John, are you saying jesus is awarded His own sin?

And God judges Him righteous. He is another type of life. Although we die under this blanket we will live in Christ. The power of that blanket is gone.

Click to expand...

So, now Jesus in John's explanation, Jesus is judged as righteous, and although we die under this blanket of sin, somehow we live in Christ? The power of the blanket is gone, lol...John never answers the many verses about God's wrath.

Now....obviously that is an illustration. It is not foctrine but a visualization to help you understand what is causing you confusion.

Click to expand...

John suggests he helps us, and removes confusion, by suggesting that we turn away from real truth, the verses related to the sacrificial system, the Passover, the cross, and learn how we all snuggle with Satan. Does this snuggling with Satan under this blanket of sin, in any way model the biblical revelation? We will investigate this remarkable teaching a bit further, stay tuned!

Thankfully John offered more of these "helpful alternatives " here!

But it may help. Just think of us as wearing a robe of Jesus' righteousness and Jesus coming under our blanket of sin.

Does Jesus loose His righteousness when men wear it? No.
Does man loose their sin when it is laid on Jesus? No.

I am trying to dumb it down to helo you out. This type of visualization may help you. At least it gives you some consistency in working your way through the Bible.

Click to expand...

Earlier, in the previous post John had offered more helpful ideas.

I did answer your question.

You asked what God laid our iniquities on Jesus means.

Click to expand...

Okay, clarify it, thanks!

I told you it means that the Word became flesh, He is the "Son of Man" ( ἀνθρώπου means "mankind").

Click to expand...

Okay...Every Christian knows Jesus came in a body in the likeness of sinful flesh. If he just came to eath by means of virgin birth, does that alone solve our problem? Martin and others actually explain the OT. Law and it's demands. They explain the problem of spiritual death as a result of the fall. No magical blanket of sin! JohnC continues-

Jesus bore our sins, died for our sins (He is sinless). He who knew no sin became sin for us.

Click to expand...

here Johnc quotes scriptural fragments, but does not explain anything, just gives partial quotes, divorced from the scriptural context. he tells us that is not necessary! As another poster points out {maybe it was atpollard} John wants to use the language of scripture, which teaches PSA, but then deny it teaches PSA!

We suffer the wages of sin because we have sinned. Jesus suffered the wages of our sin.

Click to expand...

JohnC disconnects the scriptural atonement, the penalty for our individual sins plural, and in his mind , we all snuggle under the blanket of Satan!

If you mean exactly how God laid our sins on Jesus that is a simpler explanation. It is called the "Incarnation".

Click to expand...

So, trying to cover up his denial of PSA, he offers that just the reality of the Son being incarnate in some magical way, removes the wrath of the elect???or rather in his newfound beliefs, it removes all wrath for all people, then we wind up with a man centered theology in which man himself decides if he will be saved or not. No need to be concerned with a Covenant keeping God, God leaves it all up to man to decide, and He hopes man will choose Him!

I do not know what you find so difficult in the oassage. You have to tell me what you do not understand about God laying our iniquity on Jesus in order for me to explain it to you.

Click to expand...

If we only knew all about the special snuggle blanket of Satan, we would not need all the theology of the sacrificial system. Who knew???

Zaatar71 said:

In a previously closed thread, The poster John C in trying to help us understand the bible, without PSA offers several ideas he believes are helpful! Let's take a look!


Okay John, go for it!

Okay

A blanket??? Not the law of God, which we have broken? Not the law keeping of the Savior?

So, in Johns mind, we are snuggling under a blanket with Satan? Not that we are responsible for our own sin, that we do in the flesh, that we have broken God's law word being spiritually dead as a result of the fall??? No, according to John's "helpful illustration", it is rather a blanket of sin which is the power of Satan?? Like flip Wilson used to say, the devil made me do it, the devil made me do it! Not only that...But it was not God who designed the cross as the place where His Divine wrath would be poured out, but rather Jesus is the victim of Satan, sort like he is a mugging victim! It has nothing to do with God's law being broken, or God's wrath against all sin as romans 1 declares. No instead, Jesus is lured in to snuggle under Satan's blanket. John explains is that this blanket gives us our own sin! So is he saying that Jesus, snuggling under the blanket of Satan, gets His own sin??? Jesus is sinless, so the question must be asked of John, are you saying jesus is awarded His own sin?

So, now Jesus in John's explanation, Jesus is judged as righteous, and although we die under this blanket of sin, somehow we live in Christ? The power of the blanket is gone, lol...John never answers the many verses about God's wrath.

John suggests he helps us, and removes confusion, by suggesting that we turn away from real truth, the verses related to the sacrificial system, the Passover, the cross, and learn how we all snuggle with Satan. Does this snuggling with Satan under this blanket of sin, in any way model the biblical revelation? We will investigate this remarkable teaching a bit further, stay tuned!

Click to expand...

Satan had no ransom debt owed to Him, as the party that we are obligated to was God the Father, as our law breaking incurred a sin debt to Him, not satan

Zaatar71 said:

Thankfully John offered more of these "helpful alternatives " here!

Earlier, in the previous post John had offered more helpful ideas.

Okay, clarify it, thanks!

Okay...Every Christian knows Jesus came in a body in the likeness of sinful flesh. If he just came to eath by means of virgin birth, does that alone solve our problem? Martin and others actually explain the OT. Law and it's demands. They explain the problem of spiritual death as a result of the fall. No magical blanket of sin! JohnC continues-

here Johnc quotes scriptural fragments, but does not explain anything, just gives partial quotes, divorced from the scriptural context. he tells us that is not necessary! As another poster points out {maybe it was atpollard} John wants to use the language of scripture, which teaches PSA, but then deny it teaches PSA!

JohnC disconnects the scriptural atonement, the penalty for our individual sins plural, and in his mind , we all snuggle under the blanket of Satan!

So, trying to cover up his denial of PSA, he offers that just the reality of the Son being incarnate in some magical way, removes the wrath of the elect???or rather in his newfound beliefs, it removes all wrath for all people, then we wind up with a man centered theology in which man himself decides if he will be saved or not. No need to be concerned with a Covenant keeping God, God leaves it all up to man to decide, and He hopes man will choose Him!

If we only knew all about the special snuggle blanket of Satan, we would not need all the theology of the sacrificial system. Who knew???

Click to expand...

My bible stated that Jesus death for due to the predestined plan and purpose of God the Father, not satan

JesusFan said:

Satan had no ransom debt owed to Him, as the party that we are obligated to was God the Father, as our law breaking incurred a sin debt to Him, not satan

Click to expand...

When any person turns away from the scriptural teaching of PSA, the have to invent false ideas that come up way short of truth, as we see with the snuggling under Satans blanket!

JesusFan said:

My bible stated that Jesus death for due to the predestined plan and purpose of God the Father, not satan

Click to expand...

Imagine that! That the bible teaches that God is in total control.

JesusFan said:

Satan had no ransom debt owed to Him, as the party that we are obligated to was God the Father, as our law breaking incurred a sin debt to Him, not satan

Click to expand...

To illustrate this, let’s again look back at the Day of Atonement rituals in the earthly Sanctuary. Remember, there were two goats involved in the earthly Day of Atonement ritual.

The first goat served the sacrificial death, as a substitute for the sinner, “for it is the blood that makes atonement by the life” (Leviticus 17:11, ESV). This represented Jesus, as He was innocent, and it is His blood that cleanses us.

The second goat, the scapegoat, bore the blame of the sins because it symbolized the ultimate author sin. The wickedness of all Israel’s sin was symbolically transferred to that goat and it was banished and set loose into the wilderness (Leviticus 16:20-22) thus removing the sins from the Israelite camp,

JohnC thinks there is no transference of the sin as the sacrificial system indicates there is; In stead Johnc suggests we all snuggle under Satans blanket???

I think I see your confusion.

When the Bible speaks of God clothing us with Jesus' righteous it does not mean that God literally takes Christ's righteousness away from Him and makes it into clothes for us to wear.

We would call this type of language figurative, explaining truth.

God laying Jesus righteousness on us does not mean that God removes Jesus righteousness from Him and puts it on us. It remains Jesus' righteousness. Same with sin.

Sin and righteousness are not material things. These are not literally taken and woven into garments.

You have made the mistake of looking at each word while missing how the words are used in sentences. So you read "clothed", or "robe", or "garment" and you believe that since sin is laid on Jesus and righteousness on us that God has to somehow make these into a material form.

Sin and righteousness are not like fabric.

It would help you if you would stop looking at the Bible as teaching what is not said (like a code) and as teaching what is actually said (like a narrative).

You do not seen like a stupid person (perhaps a bit dishonest based on your request to have an honest discussion and this thread, but not stupid). You simply missed the forrest because you were too focused on the trees.

If you step back, I think you will also find humor in your misunderstanding. It is funny, but only when you realize that laying righteousness on us or sin on Jesus does not make those things material objects.


But to correct your error, my answer about how God could lay our sins on Jesus without removing them from us is exactly like how God lays Jesus righteousness on us without removing it from Him.

Zaatar71 said:

When any person turns away from the scriptural teaching of PSA, the have to invent false ideas that come up way short of truth, as we see with the snuggling under Satans blanket!

Click to expand...

Again, you make the mistake of thinking God literalky takes away Jesus' righteousness and makes it into clothes fir us to wear.

This does not even make sence. Righteousness and sins are not things to be moved around or woven into clothes.

God lays Jesus' righteousness on us. Saying we are clothed in His righteousness, that we wear a robe of righteousness, that we put on a brestplate of righteousness...these are figures of speech.

God DOES NOT take Jesus' righteousness away from Him and weave it into clothes to lay on is.
God does not take our sins off of us and weave it into clothes for Jesus to wear.

God laying Jesus' righteousness on is DOES NOT mean that God transfers Jesus' righteousness from Him to us. Jesus is still righteous.

Same with sins. These are not material things.


Now, IF the Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement is biblical then you shoukd be able to find it stated in Gpd's Word without having to explain what the Bible "really" teaches.

You offer one of many theories and want people to consider it biblical because the men you choose to follow tell you it is really what the Bible teaches. But all of those other sects follow leaders who tell them they are correct.

We have God's Word.
We have your theory about what the Bible really teaches.
We have many other theories about what the Bible really teaches.


We can follow God or man

If we choose to follow men then we pick which ever ones tickle our ears

If we choose to follow God we leave Penal Substitution Theory, Recapitulation, Satisfaction Theory, Ontological Substitution Theory, Substitution Theory, ....which ever one we had been following....behind. If we turn back to those theories we are not fit for the kingdom.

JonC said:

I think I see your confusion.

Click to expand...

Yes, your strange ideas are confusing.lol

JonC said:

When the Bible speaks of God clothing us with Jesus' righteous it does not mean that God literally takes Christ's righteousness away from Him and makes it into clothes for us to wear.

We would call this type of language figurative, explaining truth.

Click to expand...

I never used the language of a garment or fabric of any king. After all it was you who spoke of Satans blanket of sin and death. lol Quite bizarre I might add

JonC said:

God laying Jesus righteousness on us does not mean that God removes Jesus righteousness from Him and puts it on us. It remains Jesus' righteousness. Same with sin.

Click to expand...

Again I did not use that language, that is all you my friend, lol

JonC said:

Sin and righteousness are not material things. These are not literally taken and woven into garments.

Click to expand...

you again are the fabric expert. lol

JonC said:

You have made the mistake of looking at each word while missing how the words are used in sentences. So you read "clothed", or "robe", or "garment" and you believe that since sin is laid on Jesus and righteousness on us that God has to somehow make these into a material form.

Click to expand...

I did not do that at all. Satans special blanket was your idea, not mine.lol

JonC said:

Sin and righteousness are not like fabric.

Click to expand...

Glad you have come to realize that!

JonC said:

It would help you if you would stop looking at the Bible as teaching what is not said (like a code) and as teaching what is actually said (like a narrative).

Click to expand...

I am not sure I want to take any tips from a person who denies PSA. Thanks for offering though.

JonC said:

You do not seen like a stupid person (perhaps a bit dishonest based on your request to have an honest discussion and this thread, but not stupid). You simply missed the forrest because you were too focused on the trees.

Click to expand...

No, I am honest and do not need your accusation, thank you very much.

JonC said:

If you step back, I think you will also find humor in your misunderstanding.

Click to expand...

I did not misunderstand as you suggest.

JonC said:

It is funny, but only when you realize that laying righteousness on us or sin on Jesus does not make those things material objects.

Click to expand...

again, You invented the idea of satan's magic blanket being laid upon people , not me

JonC said:

But to correct your error, my answer about how God could lay our sins on Jesus without removing them from us is exactly like how God lays Jesus righteousness on us without removing it from Him.

Click to expand...

You have not corrected anything, but compounded your many errors.

JonC said:

Again, you make the mistake of thinking God literalky takes away Jesus' righteousness and makes it into clothes fir us to wear.

Click to expand...

i never said that. You have an active imagination, but I will speak what I do in biblical terms.

JonC said:

This does not even make sence. Righteousness and sins are not things to be moved around or woven into clothes.

Click to expand...

Again, you suggest this to deflect away from your Satans blanket example, I never said any of this,lol

JonC said:

God lays Jesus' righteousness on us.

Click to expand...

that is not scriptural language, but your novelty.

JonC said:

Saying we are clothed in His righteousness, that we wear a robe of righteousness, that we put on a brestplate of righteousness...these are figures of speech.

Click to expand...

I never said otherwise. I guess whan you cannot find a person saying such a thing, you pretend they said it so you can claim they are wrong???

JonC said:

God DOES NOT take Jesus' righteousness away from Him and weave it into clothes to lay on is.

Click to expand...

I never said anything like this, so I do not need to defend against your bizarre theories!

JonC said:

God does not take our sins off of us and weave it into clothes for Jesus to wear.

Click to expand...

So for about the 10th time you invent this garment excuse they i never mentioned???

JonC said:

God laying Jesus' righteousness on is DOES NOT mean that God transfers Jesus' righteousness from Him to us. Jesus is still righteous.

Click to expand...

I never said anything like you are posting??/ are you confusing me with someone else??

JonC said:

Same with sins. These are not material things.


Now, IF the Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement

Click to expand...

when you call the truth a theory, it is hard to take you seriously.

JonC said:

is biblical then you shoukd be able to find it stated in Gpd's Word without having to explain what the Bible "really" teaches.

Click to expand...

No John, we do explain what the bible teaches, we do not do a bible reading only.

JonC said:

You offer one of many theories and want people to consider it biblical because the men you choose to follow tell you it is really what the Bible teaches. But all of those other sects follow leaders who tell them they are correct.

Click to expand...

here JohnC seeks to avoid truth casting blame toward me, or any other Cal.

JonC said:

We have God's Word.
We have your theory about what the Bible really teaches.
We have many other theories about what the Bible really teaches.

Click to expand...

you live in the language of theory, we go by biblical data

JonC said:

We can follow God or man

Click to expand...

All the cals follow God and his word, you follow yourself.

JonC said:

If we choose to follow men then we pick which ever ones tickle our ears.

Click to expand...

you seem to be chasing your own tail

JonC said:

If we choose to follow God we leave Penal Substitution Theory, Recapitulation, Satisfaction Theory, Ontological Substitution Theory, Substitution Theory, ....which ever one we had been following....behind. If we turn back to those theories we are not fit for the kingdom.

Click to expand...

you are lost in theory will follow biblical revelation

Zaatar71 said:

i never said that. You have an active imagination, but I will speak what I do in biblical terms.

Again, you suggest this to deflect away from your Satans blanket example, I never said any of this,lol

that is not scriptural language, but your novelty.

I never said otherwise. I guess whan you cannot find a person saying such a thing, you pretend they said it so you can claim they are wrong???

I never said anything like this, so I do not need to defend against your bizarre theories!


So for about the 10th time you invent this garment excuse they i never mentioned???

I never said anything like you are posting??/ are you confusing me with someone else??

when you call the truth a theory, it is hard to take you seriously.

No John, we do explain what the bible teaches, we do not do a bible reading only.

here JohnC seeks to avoid truth casting blame toward me, or any other Cal.

you live in the language of theory, we go by biblical data


All the cals follow God and his word, you follow yourself.

you seem to be chasing your own tail

you are lost in theory will follow biblical revelation

Click to expand...

I do not understand the purpose of your thread then


You asked me to explain what it means that God laid our sins on Jesus because I said God did not transfer our sins from us and put on Jesus.

I said that it is exactly the same as God laying Jesus' righteousness on us now. God dies not take Jesus' righteousness away from Him to put it on us.

I used the example of a blanket and a robe as an illustration because Christians have used the phrase "wrapped in Jesus' righteousness" and "covered in Jesus' righteousness".

This actually references Isaiah and Rev. God lays Jesus' righteousness on is. Clothes us in His righteousness. Puts a robe of righteousness on us.

Once you grasp that concept- how those of us who are Christians are clothed in Chriat's righteousness without Chriat being made unrighteous - you should be able to at least grasp how God laying our sins on Christ does not transfer our sins from us.


You are making the same language mean different things because of your theory.


And you lied. You said that you wanted an honest discussion and then went back to dishonesty.

The irony, @Zaatar71 , is that I am not disappointed you returned to insults and ad hominem. It was bound to be one of us sooner or later. I am actually glad it was you.

JonC said:

I do not understand the purpose of your thread then


You asked me to explain what it means that God laid our sins on Jesus because I said God did not transfer our sins from us and put on Jesus.

I said that it is exactly the same as God laying Jesus' righteousness on us now. God dies not take Jesus' righteousness away from Him to put it on us.

I used the example of a blanket and a robe as an illustration because Christians have used the phrase "wrapped in Jesus' righteousness" and "covered in Jesus' righteousness".

This actually references Isaiah and Rev. God lays Jesus' righteousness on is. Clothes us in His righteousness. Puts a robe of righteousness on us.

Once you grasp that concept- how those of us who are Christians are clothed in Chriat's righteousness without Chriat being made unrighteous - you should be able to at least grasp how God laying our sins on Christ does not transfer our sins from us.


You are making the same language mean different things because of your theory.


And you lied. You said that you wanted an honest discussion and then went back to dishonesty.

Click to expand...

I did not lie. I said I wanted an honest discussion, but you seem to go back to repeated failed ideas, and attacking posters, denying elements of the cross, give lip service to partial verses does not seem to constitute honesty. Thanks for trying, but you cannot escape yourself, as others have commented. Davex50 summed it up really well on your other failed thread. he helped me understand your struggle to understand the whole OT. sacrificial system, martin has offered you personalized teaching to help you. When I saw you skipped heb,2:16 to avoid the correct understanding of Jesus being the propitiation for all of God's elect, and you leaving that out, showed me once again what you do in your theologically confused condition. These men offer help day by day, but it escapes you thus far.

JonC said:

I think I see your confusion.

When the Bible speaks of God clothing us with Jesus' righteous it does not mean that God literally takes Christ's righteousness away from Him and makes it into clothes for us to wear.

We would call this type of language figurative, explaining truth.

God laying Jesus righteousness on us does not mean that God removes Jesus righteousness from Him and puts it on us. It remains Jesus' righteousness. Same with sin.

Sin and righteousness are not material things. These are not literally taken and woven into garments.

You have made the mistake of looking at each word while missing how the words are used in sentences. So you read "clothed", or "robe", or "garment" and you believe that since sin is laid on Jesus and righteousness on us that God has to somehow make these into a material form.

Sin and righteousness are not like fabric.

It would help you if you would stop looking at the Bible as teaching what is not said (like a code) and as teaching what is actually said (like a narrative).

You do not seen like a stupid person (perhaps a bit dishonest based on your request to have an honest discussion and this thread, but not stupid). You simply missed the forrest because you were too focused on the trees.

If you step back, I think you will also find humor in your misunderstanding. It is funny, but only when you realize that laying righteousness on us or sin on Jesus does not make those things material objects.


But to correct your error, my answer about how God could lay our sins on Jesus without removing them from us is exactly like how God lays Jesus righteousness on us without removing it from Him.

Click to expand...

Jesus became sin bearer, so he indeed received all that we were due to receive from the Father

JonC said:

The irony, @Zaatar71 , is that I am not disappointed you returned to insults and ad hominem. It was bound to be one of us sooner or later. I am actually glad it was you.

Click to expand...

JohnC. I am just replying to you in kind! You do this with martin ,me and the other cals all the time! How does it look to you??/
Do you like it, or disapprove? I did not retrun to them, I just mirrored what you offer to us ,everyday. Ask anyone on here if you do that, or not

JonC said:

I do not understand the purpose of your thread then

Click to expand...

I hoped you might consider actual bible teaching, you declined. I also hoped it would help others see what you offer , day in and day out.

Zaatar71 said:

I did not lie. I said I wanted an honest discussion, but you seem to go back to repeated failed ideas, and attacking posters, denying elements of the cross, give lip service to partial verses does not seem to constitute honesty. Thanks for trying, but you cannot escape yourself, as others have commented. Davex50 summed it up really well on your other failed thread. he helped me understand your struggle to understand the whole OT. sacrificial system, martin has offered you personalized teaching to help you. When I saw you skipped heb,2:16 to avoid the correct understanding of Jesus being the propitiation for all of God's elect, and you leaving that out, showed me once again what you do in your theologically confused condition. These men offer help day by day, but it escapes you thus far.

Click to expand...

Failed ideas is not a reason to start bring dishonest.

I have asked you many times to defend your theology. Every time you give passages we all agree with and then tell me what it really teaches.

You have to explain your presuppositions because they get you from Scripture to what you believe the Bible really teaches.

My understanding (my stayed belief) is simply what God has said. God forgives our sins when we "repent", a "new heart", when we "die to sin", "turns from wickedness", "turns to God".

You say that you acceot my stated belief as true but that God's actual words leave out the most important part - satisfying the demands of justice.

So I ask you to state and defend this philosophy of justice you are using.

Then you start with the insults again. You start by misrepresenting what I have posted.


That tells me what I already know. You have no clue why you hold your faith except that you like the vonclusions 9f one sect of men.

That is what I mean by you not realky being a Calvinist. You adopt the conclusions of these men but cannot grasp how they got there.

This is different for actual Calvinists. Calvin, for example, explained how he developed Penal SubstitutionTheor. He explained his judicial philosophy. You simply regurgitate their conclusions.


If you want to resume an honest discussion then start at the point where you ran away.

What is the purpose of punishment?

Why is it impossible for God to forgive actual sins?

Why does the Atonement fall under divine justice?

Zaatar71 said:

I hoped you might consider actual bible teaching, you declined. I also hoped it would help others see what you offer , day in and day out.

Click to expand...

We differ on what the Bible actually teaches.

I believe the Bible teaches "what is written" in the biblical text (God's actual words) and tgat we must conform our understanding to His words.

You believe the Bible teaches what men say the Bible really teaches. But you cannot defend how you get from God's words to what those men have told you to believe (you do not understand the thought process in the beliefs you have borrowed from other men).

But yes, I have offered God's words. You criticized me for it, saying snybody can quote Scripture. And you were right. Anybody can quote Scripture. But not just anybody can believe "the words that come forth from God" as many end up "leaning on their own understanding".


That said, if you ever find yourself able to legitimately posses the belief you correctly borrow then I am willing to listen to how you move from God's words to what you think it teaches.

Zaatar71 said:

JohnC. I am just replying to you in kind! You do this with martin ,me and the other cals all the time! How does it look to you??/
Do you like it, or disapprove? I did not retrun to them, I just mirrored what you offer to us ,everyday. Ask anyone on here if you do that, or not

Click to expand...

Nope. If I were doing it to you then I would say you were replying in kind.

That is why I respond to @Martin Marprelate as I do (we have a long history).

But I was legitimately hoping you and I could have an honest conversation.

What you did was join the pack - jump into the frey because of how I responded to a member who agrees with the belief you are currently affiliated with. That is another readon I believe you are not truly a Calvinist. Rather than engaging in our conversation you defend members of the camp you admire.