Search results

Brother, you can argue it any way you like, and that's fine with me. Paul is plainly telling us in 2 Thess, Eph. 1 and Rom. 8 of God's plan of Redemption we have been predestined to for our salvation. It has not one iota thing to do with who will be saved but entirely the process in which we...

Calvinism is bust, my friend! It was blown out of the water many centuries ago.

@canadyjd Let me explain something. We are just as much saved in this life as we will ever be by grace through faith. Paul tells us that after we believe we receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, that is the down-payment (as Paul put it) on our salvation until the resurrection. God must save...

Now that deserves an explanation. The wrath of God is on man through his sin, so the wrath is because of man's sin. So you can say we are saved from our sin against God and His wrath on that sin.

I see being saved as the result of the born-again experience. We are saved from what the Scripture tells we are saved from, "the wrath of God to come."

Here again you are mistaken! Here again Paul is speaking of our sanctification process through His redemption plan in which all who believe will follow. From the very beginning God has chosen us (Paul is speaking to believers) to salvation THROUGH sanctification of the Spirit. How many times...

Peter said there is no other name under heaven given to man whereby we must be saved. What is gommed up about that, or what do you not understand?

I guess you are Hyper after all.

I've read both Calvin and Gills commentaries in part over 40 years ago. He is a comparison of their beliefs . John Calvin's Election Theory Atonement: Calvin taught that Christ's atonement was sufficient for all humanity, meaning its value could cover the sins of all people, but it is...

Calvin believed all men should hear the gospel, Gill didn't. That is the main reason most consider Gill as Hyper. There are several other things where Gill takes Calvinism to extremes. You can read all about it comparing their commentaries.

I can't read all of that, Ken, that much reading gets me fidgety. So I skimmed it. What he's claiming as Hyper seems to be what Calvin taught more/less and I consider that Calvinism. Hyper, in my opinion goes over the edge of Calvinism, such as Gill. I haven't seen the Hyper in your posts...

If you don't believe you were saved before you were born, or that all men do not need to hear the Gospel, why do you think you're Hyper?

Referring to the Hyper-Calvinist who wrote the commentary you posted.

Thus coming from a man who believed he was saved before he was born. Didn't see the need for the Gospel to be preached to all men. A very disturbed man!

No matter where you go there's a Calvinite lurking in the shadows.

Not totally ate up with it like some I know. I do try escape it at times and thought I had.

His grace is for all who will choose it, "whosoever will." Man chooses his own destiny in this world. There's something bad wrong with believing God has left man without that choice.

Well, I stand corrected. We are further apart than I suspected.

That knowledge comes from the hearing of the Gospel through the Great Commission. God having the desire that all men everywhere repent and come to the knowledge of the truth.

Come on, Cathode! How in the world do you expect us to believe such history in the Church as Mary being taken to heaven body and soul at her death? This falls in line with Apostolic Succession, not of word of it in Scripture. I could bring up several other things. The history of the Church...