Bobby talks to his Pastor about God.

[Van]

And as sure as the tide, here come Iconoclast, making false and manufactured charges.
1) Van claims to be a Pastor. False and slanderous charge.
2) Did the Pastor take verses out of context. No, so yet another false and slanderous charge.
3) Did the Pastor twist scripture? No, so yet another false and slanderous charge.
4) Did the Pastor show no understanding of Romans 9? No, so yet another false and slanderous charge.
5) Did the Pastor stretch common grace? No, so yet another false and slanderous charge.
6) Did the Pastor make God dependent upon Man? No, so yet another false and slanderous charge.
7) Does the Bible teach you can be saved without receiving the reconciliation? No, so yet another false and slanderous charge.
8) Did the Pastor leave the child without hope? No, so yet another false and slanderous charge.

Folks, this is all they have, vilify, misrepresent, and make strawman arguments, one fallacy after another.

Lets deal with the premise Christ did not die for us while we were yet sinners, i.e. Did Christ lay down his life as a ransom for all, or just the elect. Romans 5:6 says Christ died for the ungodly. This would include those who have been justified, and those who were never justified. Otherwise you must rewrite the verse to say Christ died for the elect rather than the ungodly. Not how it reads. Does John 3:16 say God so loved the world? Yes. So this must be rewritten as "the elect of the world". Calvinism must rewrite scripture after scripture, so they charge others with doing what they are doing. The charges are false and slanderous.

 

[annsni]

And as sure as the tide, here come Iconoclast, making false and manufactured charges.
1) Van claims to be a Pastor. False and slanderous charge.
2) Did the Pastor take verses out of context. No, so yet another false and slanderous charge.
3) Did the Pastor twist scripture? No, so yet another false and slanderous charge.
4) Did the Pastor show no understanding of Romans 9? No, so yet another false and slanderous charge.
5) Did the Pastor stretch common grace? No, so yet another false and slanderous charge.
6) Did the Pastor make God dependent upon Man? No, so yet another false and slanderous charge.
7) Does the Bible teach you can be saved without receiving the reconciliation? No, so yet another false and slanderous charge.
8) Did the Pastor leave the child without hope? No, so yet another false and slanderous charge.

Folks, this is all they have, vilify, misrepresent, and make strawman arguments, one fallacy after another.

Interesting how I don't see proof of YOUR statements here. Just your assertion that it was wrong - and yet no support for what you are saying.

Lets deal with the premise Christ did not die for us while we were yet sinners, i.e. Did Christ lay down his life as a ransom for all, or just the elect. Romans 5:6 says Christ died for the ungodly. This would include those who have been justified, and those who were never justified. Otherwise you must rewrite the verse to say Christ died for the elect rather than the ungodly. Not how it reads. Does John 3:16 say God so loved the world? Yes. So this must be rewritten as "the elect of the world". Calvinism must rewrite scripture after scripture, so they charge others with doing what they are doing. The charges are false and slanderous.

So Christ died for all. Why do people go to hell?

 

[saturneptune]

Here's my prediction...............you could fall on your cyber-face, and in tears admit your "felony" and beg for forgiveness, admit your crime and publically disown your incarceration-worthy sinfulness........if ONLY they would cease the de-railing and address your OP.

You tried twice:


Perhaps if you groveled more???? Then maybe you would receive forgiveness from these non-offended parties and then they might address your OP.

Lemme see if I can help you out....Own this statement, and maybe you can get someone to address your OP:

"I....Van; either through ignorance (which is no excuse) or through malicious intent, did, indeed plagiarize the work of another man in my opening post and must apologize for my wrong-doing. As this has been publically brought to the attention of the members and readers of "Baptist-Board" writ-large, I must own my wrong-doing and humbly ask that mine accusers accept my sincere repentance and now address the content of my OP as originally intended."

Will they address your OP?..............nah......they didn't want to, hence side-show of "borking" you.

So are you the Barney Fife of your squad?

 

[Inspector Javert]

So are you the Barney Fife of your squad?

Why ask? If I were.....I wouldn't realize it now would I? :flower:

 

[Inspector Javert]

You're deceived then. Many have addressed the OP, Heir of Salvation, yet you, as is typical, want to divert from that and swallow another camel.

But these things are common for you.

You've shown yourself as one who desires to excuse miss-truths and then accept such who do so as being led by the HS, and all as OK with you as long as this persons theology agrees with yours or condemns truth.

In other words these can fabricate, accept praise for said fabrication, contribute their false post to leadership of the HS and give imprecatory praise to God, and you rush in to support them.

Same HoS. Different day.

Go figure.

I think you need a hug :1_grouphug:

Blessings :jesus:

 

[Iconoclast]

Van

And as sure as the tide, here come Iconoclast, making false and manufactured charges.

Really??? false and manufactured??? that would be a bad thing...you know.let's see where the falsehoods might be found:thumbsup:

1) Van claims to be a Pastor. False and slanderous charge.

Icon never actually said Van claimed to be a Pastor....here is what Icon said;

Sure we did..poor little Bobby was being taught falsehood from the unscriptural person who claimed to be a Pastor.. lets for discussion sake call him Pastor VANTWADDLE....
For discussions sake...this pastor was assigned a fictious name

So as far as falsehoods go...VAN 1...Icon 0

2) Did the Pastor take verses out of context. No, so yet another false and slanderous charge.

Sure he did...right at the start;
Bobby: "Pastor, does God love everybody?"

Pastor: "Yes, Bobby, even while we were still sinners He demonstrated His love for us

The Pastor quotes from romans 5:6-8.....this as Icon pointed out is a context dealing with those who are justified and have peace with God...not the ungodly....
8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

falsehoods Van 2...Icon 0

3) Did the Pastor twist scripture? No, so yet another false and slanderous charge

.

Yes several times as a matter of fact...

falsehoods Van3...Icon 0

4) Did the Pastor show no understanding of Romans 9? No, so yet another false and slanderous charge.

Yes he showed he did not grasp why paul used that language, trying to explain it away, instead of grasping How paul was making what was spoken of as national is now being explained as individual

falsehoods Van 4.....Icon 0

5) Did the Pastor stretch common grace? No, so yet another false and slanderous charge.

The question was about the love of God...not the goodness of God.There is a difference...so the "Pastor" was twisting it to try and get it to fit.

falsehood Van 5...Icon 0

6) Did the Pastor make God dependent upon Man? No, so yet another false and slanderous charge.

Yes he did. The biblical God made the Covenant before man was created.he does not wait until he sees what man will do , then choose man..backwards and sinful in that it describes a god who would have to learn what man does.

Falsehood Van 6.....Icon 0

7) Does the Bible teach you can be saved without receiving the reconciliation? No, so yet another false and slanderous charge.

The work of reconciliation also belongs to God.God reconciled all the elect worldwide when he accomplished redemption...

Falsehood Van 7...Icon 0

8) Did the Pastor leave the child without hope? No, so yet another false and slanderous charge.

Sure he did when he told the boy...Jesus only makes salvation available, but does not actually save....potential salvation rather than actual....Like an open heart surgeon opening up the patient, then handing the patient the scapel and saying I have done all i can, now the rest is up to you:laugh:

Falsehoods Van 8...Icon 0.....a shutout:wavey:

Folks, this is all they have, vilify, misrepresent, and make strawman arguments, one fallacy after another.

But alas we see where the falsehoods have come from...lol

Lets deal with the premise Christ did not die for us while we were yet sinners, i.e. Did Christ lay down his life as a ransom for all, or just the elect. Romans 5:6 says Christ died for the ungodly.

No...the context is those justified.They were ungodly, but are now justified.
They did not believe first, get cleaned up, then get chosen or any other nonsense.There was nothing in them that was good....no...Christ died for them while they were ungodly....he is not talking about all men everywhere.
he is talking about those who are now justified.

This would include those who have been justified, and those who were never justified.

If Romans 5 only had the one verse in it...you might be able to suggest this.
Since the context is given you have no leg to stand upon....

Otherwise you must rewrite the verse to say Christ died for the elect rather than the ungodly.

You could say that and be true, but the point being made is that the elect were ungodly before God had mercy on them.

You have had a bad day VAN TM....hopefully a better one tomorrow.

 

[Van]

Interesting how I don't see proof of YOUR statements here. Just your assertion that it was wrong - and yet no support for what you are saying.

If a person makes an avalanche of charges, as Iconoclast did, without evidence, to then find fault with simply denying those manufactured and false slanders is without merit.

So Christ died for all. Why do people go to hell?

Why did you not quote the response from the OP. Why simply ask question and not provide answers supported from scripture.

 

[Van]

Next we have the Calvinist denying the false and manufactured charges he made. LOL None of it addressed the topic, but all of it addressed the character and behavior of an opponent, i.e. a continued effort at harassment and vilification. This is all Calvinism has to offer, change the subject, vilifiy those holding alternate views, misrepresent the opponents views and insert strawman arguments into the thread.

 

[Van]

If you ask a question, i.e. Is Iconclast a vilifier?, you do not actually say Iconoclast is a vilifier, but the implication sure does. The use of clever ways of implying something and letting others infer a falsehood is of the world. Vantwaddle implies Van who uses the term twaddle. Shuck and jive, and denial of vilification. Strike one.

Did Van take Romans 5:8 out of context? No, Iconoclast did. So here, from the Calvinist playbook is charging others with whatever malfeasence the defense of Calvinism is employing. The propaganda term for this is inoculation. Strike two.

When was the book of Romans written by Paul? AD 57, give or take a little? Yes. So the audience in Roman had not been elected individually when Christ died. Therefore, in context, the audience was among the unholy when Christ died, Romans 5:8. Therefore Christ demonstrated His love us, [when we were unholy] when He died for us. Thus in context, this verse shows God's love for the world.

The Calvinist claim really is I was using the verse outside the context given the verse by Calvinism. LOL Next, in verse 9, Paul tells us having been justified, not when Christ died, but by faith, Romans 5:1, i.e. when God accepted our faith, we shall be saved, looking to the future salvation from the wrath of God, because we are now holy and sinless in Christ, thus saved through or by the power of Christ, having been made alive, i.e. reconciled to God, and made alive together with Christ, thus saved by His life.

So, in this charge from Iconclast, we see continued denial of context and continued appeal to the mistaken view of Calvinism. Strike three.

 

[Van]

Next, after twisting scripture to conform to the mistaken views of Calvinism, I am again charged with twisting scripture. More propaganda, more inoculation, more vilification, and devoid of any discussion of the actual views presented in the OP. Thus an effort to derail the thread.

Next, Calvinism's view of Romans 9 is absurd, mistaken, and without merit. Thus, the correct view of Esau was presented in the OP.

Next, the question was how does God show His love to fallen mankind, and common grace is part of that answer. No stretching was done. So yet another false and manufactured charge.

Next, we have the false charge that the man that wills to be saved makes God dependent upon man. This is a straight up denial of Romans 9:16. So yet another false and manufactured charge.

Next, Iconoclast again misrepresents reconciliation, but when God puts individuals in Christ, they receive, i.e. are washed by His blood, the reconciliation. God does this, puts individuals spiritually in Christ, when He credits their faith as righteousness. So yet another mistaken and false charge.

Next, Iconoclast says the OP says Jesus does not actually save. However, here is the quote, "Everyone that is saved is saved by Jesus," so yet another utterly false charge. This is all Calvinism has to offer, folks.

No matter how much effort they put into vilification of opponents, their man-made doctrine does not fit with scripture.

 

[Van]

Could Romans 5:8 being saying in context that Christ died for the elect, those individually chosen before creation, when they were ungodly? Does this view not bring a charge of ungodliness against the elect, thus a denial of Romans 8:33, who condemns the elect if justified by God. No, that twisted view does not work either. Calvinism's view is unbiblical as well as out of context. Christ died for us, the ungodly, the world of fallen mankind, while we were still sinners. Christ became the propitiation or means of salvation, not only for us, those who had been chosen during their lifetime, but also for the whole world, those who had not been chosen. QED

 

[Mexdeaf]

fuggedaboutit

 

[Van]

Mexdeaf excels at posting posts that actually say nothing, but leave it to the audience to infer a meaning.

Read Romans 5 and see if the context does not teach God demonstrated His love for us, when while we were yet sinners, and thus not elect, Christ died for us. Read 1 John 2:2 and see if Christ became the propitiation or means of salvation not only for us, but also for the whole world. Christ laid down His life as a ransom for all because God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son.

Rather than feeling "fugged" whatever that might mean, we should be filled with joy because no matter our circumstance Christ died for us, making salvation available, and providing salvation to all who receive the reconciliation through faith in Christ.

 

[annsni]

Mexdeaf excels at posting posts that actually say nothing, but leave it to the audience to infer a meaning.

Read Romans 5 and see if the context does not teach God demonstrated His love for us, when while we were yet sinners, and thus not elect, Christ died for us. Read 1 John 2:2 and see if Christ became the propitiation or means of salvation not only for us, but also for the whole world. Christ laid down His life as a ransom for all because God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son.

Rather than feeling "fugged" whatever that might mean, we should be filled with joy because no matter our circumstance Christ died for us, making salvation available, and providing salvation to all who receive the reconciliation through faith in Christ.

Yes, praise God that Christ died while we were still sinners and was our propitiation. But if He was the propitiation for the whole world, why do people go to hell?

 

[Mexdeaf]

Mexdeaf excels at posting posts that actually say nothing, but leave it to the audience to infer a meaning.

I posted something then thought better of it, and I am thankful for His salvation and grace that helped me change my mind as to posting it. I pray for your heart and mind to be opened to the truth and turned away from your pride and vainglory.

You may commence with your criticism. God is judge.

 

[Van]

Hi Ann, what did the OP say? Why now have you asked two questions, both answered in the OP. What is the purpose of your post? To suggest God did not so love the world. That Christ did not become the propitiation not only for us, but also for the whole world. It is hard to answer a question when you do not address the prior answer to the same question.

Does, not all people receive the reconciliation ring a bell?

 

[Van]

I posted something then thought better of it, and I am thankful for His salvation and grace that helped me change my mind as to posting it. I pray for your heart and mind to be opened to the truth and turned away from your pride and vainglory.

You may commence with your criticism. God is judge.

More holier than thou vilification, devoid of on topic content. You sound like the Pharisee praying he is glad he is not as bad as the poor sinner next to him. You have your reward.

 

[Mexdeaf]

More holier than thou vilification, devoid of on topic content. You sound like the Pharisee praying he is glad he is not as bad as the poor sinner next to him. You have your reward.

Exactly what I expected. Thanks for not disappointing me.

 

[saturneptune]

Mexdeaf excels at posting posts that actually say nothing, but leave it to the audience to infer a meaning.

Wrong again, Chevy Van breath. Mexdeaf is quite precise and accurate in his theology. He posts based on Scripture, where yours are an editorial based on your opinion.

Read Romans 5 and see if the context does not teach God demonstrated His love for us, when while we were yet sinners, and thus not elect, Christ died for us. Read 1 John 2:2 and see if Christ became the propitiation or means of salvation not only for us, but also for the whole world. Christ laid down His life as a ransom for all because God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son.

Why don't you narrow it down to a verse or group of verses. Romans 5 covers a multitude of issues. For example, Romans 5:6 says, "You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly." Did you get that? It says we were powerless. We are created beings, powerless. God is all powerful, the Creator. The salvation process is all about the power of God and Jesus Christ. He chose us. Again, we were powerless. If we are powerless, how did you decide to follow the Lord Jesus Christ in your sin? You have got to be kidding. 1 John 2:2 does not teach universalism. The whole world means that all groups are included, not everyone. One receives salvation by faith, which is impossible to do without the work of the Holy Spirit. What on earth makes you think that you have it within you, a sinful, fallen, created being, to conjure up such power on your own? He chose us, we did not choose Him. Every post you make is a new fairy tale.

Rather than feeling "fugged" whatever that might mean, we should be filled with joy because no matter our circumstance Christ died for us, making salvation available, and providing salvation to all who receive the reconciliation through faith in Christ.

That part of your post makes absolutely no sense, like the rest of your authorship. I really get tired of you reducing our Savior and Creator to a half powerful, leaderless being.

 

[Tom Bryant]

Rather than feeling "fugged" whatever that might mean, ....

Van,
his phrase is new yorkese for "forget about it"