-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Bobby talks to his Pastor about God.
- Thread starter Van
- Start date
- Status
Yes, this is an actual sign when you leave Brooklyn.
Ok so I misspelled it. I'm a Yankee, but from Indiana.
Tom Bryant
Well-Known Member
Yes, this is an actual sign when you leave Brooklyn.
only in Brooklyn! love it!
saturneptune
New Member
Good place for it. Keep it out of the South.
Why do you think not all receive reconciliation means all receive reconciliation? Are you trying to manufacture a charge of universalism, or is it you simply misread the quote?
saturneptune
New Member
Calvinists post according to their playbook, start with an insult.
Make generalized assertions and charges, without any support.
I was addressing the false charge I had taken Romans 5:8 out of context.
Misrepresentation by implication, pretty slick, because in actuality, the forgoing is totally true. Except by implication it suggest that it does not represent the view presented in the OP.
First, I happened to be born into a Christian home with believing parents. I was taken to Sunday school and learned the Bible story and that Jesus loved me from an early age. When I was a teen, I was presented with the example of a man who treated others with compassion and love, rather than malice and holier than thou judgment. I wanted to have that "love of Christ" in my heart, and so after two days of prayer and meditation, I came forward after a service.
Yet another misrepresentation, I did not say or suggest 1 John 2:2 teaches universalism. But Calvinists love to make that charge over and over and over.
You have added "all kinds" into the text to change the whole world, meaning all of fallen mankind, to mean some of fallen mankind. LOL
True and not in dispute. Again by including it, you imply your opponent holds another view.
Did I say we come to saving faith by our own power? Nope, so yet another false and manufactured charge. Does not the Holy Spirit bring the gospel to the world through scripture and born again believers as witnesses? Of course He chose us for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth, 2 Thessalonians 2:13.
You mean where I said this: "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."
Let me number the points for your edification and understanding:
1) When we hear the gospel, including Christ died for us, we should be filled with joy. So great a salvation, so wretched the person being saved.
2) Christ laying down His life as a ransom for all provides the opportunity for salvation for all who believe. But it is God who either credits our faith as righteousness, or not. Christ's death provides salvation for everyone who receives the reconciliation, all those God chooses, and sets apart in Christ based on crediting their faith as righteousness.
Van
This does not even make sense,of course they were ungodly before they were saved...
They were not chosen during their lifetime, they were chosen before the world was. You deny scripture all the time.
This does not even make sense,of course they were ungodly before they were saved...
It seems that way to you because you have it all wrong.
They were not chosen during their lifetime, they were chosen before the world was. You deny scripture all the time.
Van
the elect were chosen before they were born.They were sinners ,even as others....
2 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.
Stop posting and read your bible!
how many scriptures can you deny in one day?
the elect were chosen before they were born.They were sinners ,even as others....
2 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.
Stop posting and read your bible!
Shall we number some scriptures Calvinism rewrites:
Romans 8:33 Instead of who can bring a charge against God's elect, it is rewritten to say, who can bring a charge against those God has saved. Strike one.
God desires all men to be saved (1 Timothy 2:4) becomes God desires some men to be saved. Strike two
Christ gave His life as a ransom for all (1 Timothy 2:6) becomes, Christ gave His life as a ransom for some. Strike three.
Calvinism must rewrite 2 Thessalonians 2:13, claiming the verse does not say what it says.
So what do they have left, why tell opponents they need to stop posting and read their bible. That is all they have, LOL.
Romans 8:33 Instead of who can bring a charge against God's elect, it is rewritten to say, who can bring a charge against those God has saved. Strike one.
God desires all men to be saved (1 Timothy 2:4) becomes God desires some men to be saved. Strike two
Christ gave His life as a ransom for all (1 Timothy 2:6) becomes, Christ gave His life as a ransom for some. Strike three.
Calvinism must rewrite 2 Thessalonians 2:13, claiming the verse does not say what it says.
So what do they have left, why tell opponents they need to stop posting and read their bible. That is all they have, LOL.
Last edited by a moderator:
Are the elect chosen for salvation before creation, or after they have lived without mercy, 1 Peter 2:9-10.
When are people who are dead in their sins made alive, before they are put in Christ, or are they made alive together with Christ, Ephesians 2:5.
Bottom line, Christ died for sinners before they were individually elected for salvation, while they were ungodly and by nature children of wrath. Instead of saying Calvinism gets the cart before the horse, here we must say Calvinism gets a team of Clydesdale's hitched behind the beer wagon.
When are people who are dead in their sins made alive, before they are put in Christ, or are they made alive together with Christ, Ephesians 2:5.
Bottom line, Christ died for sinners before they were individually elected for salvation, while they were ungodly and by nature children of wrath. Instead of saying Calvinism gets the cart before the horse, here we must say Calvinism gets a team of Clydesdale's hitched behind the beer wagon.
Inspector Javert
Active Member
Oh yes, I am sure that is the case. Ann misread one of your posts.
That's PRECISELY what happened S.N. Why don't you sslllowwwww doowwwwn and read them both again:
Van said:
Ann replied (as Calvies do):
So.....let's make this as EASY as possible:
Van said:
-A.............or......it's NOT the case.....or NOT-A
and ANN responded like this, as a perfectly conditioned pre-programmed Calvie without even bothering to read what Van said:
A.............or.......it IS the case.......or A
So, Yeah.....dude............she ABSOLUTELY mis-read what Van said.
More accurately, she didn't "mis-read" it.............
She assumed already what Van was going to say (because she has already been conditioned to respond to what Van has to say by her husband and other Calvinists who've never spoken to Van in their life)................and she only heard what she thought she was supposed to hear. (Which is literally the OPPOSITE of what Van said).
She has been beautifully conditioned to assume that any time a non-Calvinist opens their mouths they are preaching Universalism or blah blah blah or whatever lies she's been told....and so even though Van said PRECISELY THE OPPOSITE of what she responded to...........
She saw only what she already "knew" he meant:
You have done PRECISELY the same thing.
Last edited by a moderator:
Inspector Javert
Active Member
She as apparently S.N. did........completely mis-read the quote because many Calvies are simply a baggage of conditioned responses:
They are often like Pavlovian dogs....who only know a single response:
To salivate at what they assume was the ring of a brass bell.
The didn't (strictly-speaking) "READ" what you said....they simply saw something vaguely akin to what they thought was the ringing of a bell....................and salivated in perfect conditioned response.
Thus, this scenario plays out before you:
1.) You say ONE thing:
2.) Ann responds to PRECISELY the OPPOSITE premise
3.) You call Ann on it.
4.) S.N. doubles-down on Ann's complete reversal of the initial intent....
End result:
NEITHER OF THEM actually realize what just occurred. :laugh:
Hi Inspector, many times I cry foul because some Calvinist has misrepresented the view I expressed. And yes I think part of the problem is they have these "off the shelf" arguments, aimed at Arminianism, and they post them as if they were addressing my views.
Others, however, may know my position and misrepresent it to portray me as advocating something unscriptural. The old, "so you are saying... and then some ungodly position is presented." I would have to be a mind reader to know....
All of it is simply diversion from the doctrines of Calvinism which are clearly inconsistent with scripture.
In all candor, I am susceptible of making similar mistakes. As everyone knows, I took what I thought
was a piece written by an atheist, and parodied it, providing biblical answers instead of atheistic answers. However, when Rippon suggested the source was not atheistic, I re-looked at the matter and did indeed conclude it was written by a Calvinistic leaning fellow who apparently believes non-Cals believe in "another gospel."
But our difference, is when we make a mistake, we simply admit it and try to prevent a recurrence, hopefully growing less errant.
Others, however, may know my position and misrepresent it to portray me as advocating something unscriptural. The old, "so you are saying... and then some ungodly position is presented." I would have to be a mind reader to know....
All of it is simply diversion from the doctrines of Calvinism which are clearly inconsistent with scripture.
In all candor, I am susceptible of making similar mistakes. As everyone knows, I took what I thought
was a piece written by an atheist, and parodied it, providing biblical answers instead of atheistic answers. However, when Rippon suggested the source was not atheistic, I re-looked at the matter and did indeed conclude it was written by a Calvinistic leaning fellow who apparently believes non-Cals believe in "another gospel."
But our difference, is when we make a mistake, we simply admit it and try to prevent a recurrence, hopefully growing less errant.
Last edited by a moderator:
quantumfaith
Active Member
:laugh::laugh::thumbsup:
saturneptune
New Member
Personally, I think it comes to them before that in a dream.
I have been thinking about this pithy question, and frankly I am stumped. Not saying something means nothing was said, about anything even the sky color. Saying a person said the sky was blue, when he said it was not blue, does not change the color of the sky. Best I can do Ann.
- Status