Are Calvinists in danger of HELL FIRE??

And your point is...?

 

what?

Yet another Calvinist bashing? This is like the 5th thread in less then 2 weeks started by Bismarck along these lines. This is the same as questioning our salvation

Lets see if the non-Calvinist that say "we are all ONE ...brothers in Christ" will come forward and reprimand this thread for the hate it shows. Time will tell.

********

1st...if Your verses in James means what you claim, then why would you start this thread? Hell fire? Indeed

Mind you, I'm not saying that your reading of James is right, but rather if this is what you believe it means why would you start this thread, for you have just done what you said should not happen. humm

again we can ask the same in Romans 14:4,10,13

Hebrews 10:30, 12:23 is so far out of line...no need to go there.

**********

ok...now what will be your next thread? Not sure...but My guess it will include another Calvinist bashing.

 

Huh? Can you give an example where a Calvinist on this board has done this?

 

Lets see, those going to hell are the unsaved, if you ask are calvinists going to hell, aren't you attcking the calvinists salvation. Isn't that against bb rules?
I ahve never challenged anyone salvation based on them being armenian

 

And your scripture for this is..... what?
Ah, I see, in order to further attack the calvinist and challenge thier salvation you must seek others texts outside scripture, why, becasue scipture simply does not support you.

 

Let me get this straight (from one Non-Cal to another):

You ask if those who hold to the Soveriegn Grace doctrines are going to go to hell based upon that faulty and godless accertion against them. Your declaration assumes or postulates they declare they know who the elect are and who are not. As if they state 'You are without a doubt going to hell"?

Being that Math 5:22 is actaully about 'Judging a persons salvation' it is funny to me that this is exactly what it this thread about...hmmmm. Go figure.

 

1. Yet the very title of your post assumes the worst.

2. I challenge you to step forward and tell us why you should not be considered equally judgmental as those you are accusing of being judgmental.

 

bismarck,

1. That condemnation "rubs both ways." From time to time we all question another's presence in the kingdom.

2. Mt 5-7 concerns the law in the physical MK. It is unclear which ones, though some do, apply to the present spiritual kingdom of Christ but this one appears to be MK-based.

3. The assertion you make is in bad taste.

skypair

 

What is the purpose of this thread? How can you get any fruitful exchange of ideas started with that opening?

 

Well here is one non cal James that doesn't agree with the OP and reprimands this kind of nonsensical posting. I would never claim a cal is in danger of hell fire for being a cal.

 

I know we all hate to see this kind of attack on fellow believers with whom we might disagree and we all should defend against this kind of silly attack, but there comes a point where we ought to adapt the time honored adage of

PLEASE DON'T FEED THE TROLLS!​

 

Here is another. :thumbs:

 

Well that four James. Will your side now come to our defense and do the same by reprimanding your own when we are told that we serve another "god"?

Hasn't happened in the past... :tear:

 

By emphasizing "Grace only" Calvinists turn their back on Christ's command to "Come and follow me.' This would constitute a work by Calvinist standards. Jesus also said:

Luk 14:27 And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.
Luk 14:28 For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he have [sufficient] to finish [it]?
Luk 14:29 Lest haply, after he hath laid the foundation, and is not able to finish [it], all that behold [it] begin to mock him,
Luk 14:30 Saying, This man began to build, and was not able to finish.
Luk 14:31 Or what king, going to make war against another king, sitteth not down first, and consulteth whether he be able with ten thousand to meet him that cometh against him with twenty thousand?
Luk 14:32 Or else, while the other is yet a great way off, he sendeth an ambassage, and desireth conditions of peace.
Luk 14:33 So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.
Luk 14:34 Salt [is] good: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be seasoned?

Calvinists sit smugly and say that God predestined them as one of the elect before the beginnings of time. How do you know that you're one of the elect? Christ stressed the need to count the cost and to follow Him whether or not that leads to martyrdom or harsh treatment in this life. But here I'm talking about works again. In this case. it's not me but Christ our Lord instead. You can refute His words if you care to try.

 

You know not of what you speak.

 

SNAP!!!!

That was the sound of the OP logic stretched way beyond the breaking point.

 

Yes, I do. Do you know anything about what you speak?

 

I've seen several here mention that the op is challenging the salvation of calvinists, then isn't that breaking bb rules?

 

I don't know of any Christian (Calvinist or not) who views their saved state with smugness. And all the Christians I know who do believe the Doctrines of Grace of the Reformation (or "Calvinism" to use your word) are the very opposite of smug. They know that God saved them although there was nothing good in them that should motivate Him to do so, and He did it in a way that was tremedously costly to Himself. Such a belief does not lead to smugness. You might just as well say that a non-Calvinistic person might be smug because they "went forward" at a tent meeting, or "prayed the sinner's prayer", or signed their name on a decision card. (Note - I am not accusing non-Calvinists of actually thinking like that, just that it is no more accurate to accuse Calvinists of smugness as it would be to accuse non-Calvinists of the same thing.)