Search results

That's the warm fuzzy make me feel good part of Calvinism. My OP sermon gets into the dirty, let's not say it that way part......and might I remind everyone here there has not been one Calvinist object to any part of MY sermon, no, not one. In fact we have two which have agreed that I do...

Actually, you confirmed that my OP sermon was spot on, so where does that leave you? SBM has confirmed my OP is spot on. Icon has by default confirmed my OP sermon is spot on bc he cannot point to any dishonest part in it. So yeah, you guys keep saying I don't understand but then keep on...

Sadly, you cannot give one quote of mine where I bashed a Cal, no, not one. Calvinism is taking a beating though, and it bothers you that you cannot defend it's conclusions. And we can all see by your post exactly what you believe, and you have been given ample space to make any clarifications...

Willis, you agreed with my OP sermon giving it a :thumbs:. Do you really know what you believe??

They can't. SBM speaks the truth in Calvinism, they don't like it so they give a label of "Hyper". The doctrines of TULIP themselves are "Hyper".

Are you not "ultra-hyper"? You agreed with my OP sermon which declares the same as SBM.

In the words of Willis....your getting there :thumbs:

STOP messing up MY perfect exposition with all these difficult questions!!!!!!!!!!! :smilewinkgrin: Questions are what try the spirits, to see if they are from God. Questions try doctrinal povs, real life applications must be worked through and settled. This is why you see me raising lots of...

Thank you! Which answers my questions I posed earlier to you... I believe SBM has accepted the ultimate conclusions of TULIP. And I believe if truth be known, most Calvinist either believe the same and won't admit it publically, or they are in a state of struggle over this within their own...

Can someone delete Willis' giant picture and fix this page!!!!! Thank you!

:laugh: Good one brother! How bout you start a new thread on Cal sermons. This OP is very specific being about MY sermon, which you say I have no understanding of Calvinism, but give absolutely no criticism of the sermon I have prepared, nada, zip! Go ahead and point out which part you find...

Well this is the controversy within the Calvinist camp. SBM believes TULIP is the Gospel, Icon and Willis believes the same. Willis gives the OP sermon a :thumbs:. Icon says I don't understand Calvinism yet has not opposed the OP sermon and given any reason why it would NOT be honest. And...

Well then, you really have no legitimate objection that I can respond to. :wavey:

Yes, but as I said not completely, and for good reason. You see, Calvinism, when it is thought through thoroughly with investigative questioning, has no choice but to conclude the extremes to which it wants to deny. SBM admits that if one embraces TULIP then one must conclude TULIP to be the...

I have not had the time to put together an exposition on it yet, but I would assume Calvinist would agree that the Passover of the OT is a revelation of the Passover which was to come through Jesus Christ. The Hebrews were given an instruction by God to save them from the angel of death...

My apologies. For quite awhile now posters have been referring to you as "she" and you never corrected them so I assumed you were. He or she has nothing to do with debate, so I hope they were not trying to demean you in any way.

I pointed this out to another Calvinist poster Icon when I asked him if God hated him while he was yet unsaved and living in his iniquity before God then loved him and saved him. He wouldn't answer either....did the Calvin two step...it's easy to get them dancing :smilewinkgrin:

To a point she is, but often she ignores a few of the very pointed tough questions as seen in my "Preparing a truthful Calvinist sermon" thread where I ask her twice now if one can believe on Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour yet reject TULIP and still be saved. No response......

I understand your position and agree that as a Calvinist this is the position one must ultimately conclude. But what about my questions..... Do you also conclude as the OP sermon concludes, that without this belief, one cannot be saved? Or do you believe one can believe on Jesus Christ as Lord...

Thank you for your honesty. I believe that being a Calvinist, one would have no choice but to conclude the same as you do. Do you also conclude as the OP sermon concludes, that without this belief, one cannot be saved? Or do you believe one can believe on Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour yet...