Bye TULIP, Hi GRACE

[Dale-c]

Apparently Paul never read Calvin.

I hope Calvin read Paul
(if not he might have missed something)

Have I accused anyone here of being a follower of Jacob Arminius?
I think not.
Please stop referring to us as calvin followers.
I have never read Calvin.
I don't follow a man.
I believe as I do because I read the Bible.

Calvinism is nothing more than a nickname.
Just like Baptist is a nickname for a general set of beliefs.

Please do not resort to ad hominem.

Thank you.

 

[LeBuick]

Apparently Paul never read Calvin.

I hope Calvin read Paul
(if not he might have missed something)

:thumbs: :applause: :applause:

 

[LeBuick]

Calvinism is nothing more than a nickname.
Just like Baptist is a nickname for a general set of beliefs.


Thank you.

Calvinism is more than a nickname around here, it has become an entire system of belief to the point where you are labeled as either being one or you're not. There is no in between.

I have to believe some around here were baptized by Calvin as they defend him dispite scripture.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Now I Will get on Your Case
If you would read my post
and your post you will see that
If it took me two minutes to type
my post (and it did) then
I had NO CHANGE TO READ
your post before I posted my post.
So there is NO WAY that I could
have used an ad hominem directed to you
or any other follower of Calvin
for that matter.

Anyway, I didn't start this topic to find about about
Calvin nor his followers nor Arminis nor his followers.

I am interested in finding out about GRACE as found
in the OP.

It sounded pretty good to me.

 

[Ed Edwards]

I was really interested in
Resistible Grace
which I never did figure out about Calvin.
I resisted God's Grace when I was just
eight years old. But after I accepted Jesus
as my Savior I stayed saved not cause
i was on His list and hand no choice but
because of what Jesus had done to save
me. 'Jesus Saves' refers to Scantification Salvation
and Glorification Salvation as well as
initial Justification Salvation. Amen -- Jesus Saves!

 

[Dale-c]

Calvinism is more than a nickname around here, it has become an entire system of belief to the point where you are labeled as either being one or you're not. There is no in between.

As I said, it is a nickname for a system of beliefs.
Is there really no in between? I don;t think there is a consistent belief in between but I acknowledge that many do fall in that category.

I have to believe some around here were baptized by Calvin as they defend him dispite scripture.

Again, more false witness and ad hominem.
Please refrain from such and discuss as a Christian gentlemen.

I have not called PK a follower of Arminius because I know he is not.
He and I both are trying to best follow the scripture.
One of us has to be wrong.

Through study and discussion we should sharpen our understanding of the Bible.

 

[LeBuick]

As I said, it is a nickname for a system of beliefs.
Is there really no in between? I don;t think there is a consistent belief in between but I acknowledge that many do fall in that category.

How about those of us who follow Christ and believe His word? Don't we fall in between? But as you said, "I don;t think there is a consistent belief in between" You can deny it but the common view around here is one has to be Calvinist or Arminius. If this is not true then Calvinist should cease calling people who disagree with Calvinism or the tulip Arminium's.

Again, more false witness and ad hominem.
Please refrain from such and discuss as a Christian gentlemen..

When I read a statement like this I believe what I said is fact and not personal opinion.

I'm not about to part with TULIP for that Arminianized construct .

Notice it is the tulip they are concerned about parting with, not truth or the Word of God. One can only read so many of these type statements before we think there must be a baptism to Calvin and the tulip has replaced the bible???

Certian grades of steel can't be sharpened no matter how hard you try. The properties of the steel must be in a state willing to accept change. So it is with scripture and Christians, some are so content in being what they are that the word can't sharpen them no matter how hard it tries.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Amen,

Brother LeBuick --

Preach it! :thumbs:




​

 

[Rippon]

I have to believe some around here were baptized by Calvin as they defend him dispite scripture.[/quote]

You are getting rather low in your characterizations LB . That is absurd . BTW , he died 443 years ago . It's rather hard to say that you are reporting facts .

 

[Rippon]

Notice it is the tulip they are concerned about parting with, not truth or the Word of God. One can only read so many of these type statements before we think there must be a baptism to Calvin and the tulip has replaced the bible???

LB , I do not see any conflict between the truths of what T-U-L-I-P represents and the tenor of Scripture . We support the propositions of T-U-L-I-P with the Word of God . And we do it in a straightforward manner . There is no twisting of God's Word .

Besides , Calvin did not invent T-U-L-I-P . He never systematized that . It was formulated in response to the 5 propositions of the Remonstrants . At this point I don't know if you are feigning ignorance or perhaps are really unaware of basic Church History .

I do not want to part with any of God's Word . If you dare to suggest that the elements of T-U-L-I-P are not supported by God's Word -- you need a Bible refresher course .

 

[Rippon]

Amen,​

Brother LeBuick --​

Preach it!

:thumbs:


E.E. I am disappointed in you . Many times I have joined with your AMENS. But not this time . For you to endorse LB's sentiments is worthy of a rebuke . You need to rethink things a bit . Give me something I can AMEN you about !



​

 

[Rippon]

Apparently Paul never read Calvin.

I hope Calvin read Paul
(if not he might have missed something)

Of course Paul never read Calvin ( silly rabbit ) . You are displaying your unfamiliarity with the writings of John Calvin . Dr. Calvin was quite Pauline in his theolgy . The terms Calvinist and Pauline are interchageable . Calvin didn't miss much of what Paul wrote in the New Testament . He knew more about Paul's theology than most Christians do today . We can learn more about Paul's writings by seeing how Calvin explained them .

 

[Allan]

One of us has to be wrong.

Let us not forget the possibility that both could be wrong or both could be partially right.

This is where you have to be ready to conform to scripture even when it is contrary to your current theological position. That is no easy matter but we must hold the Word of God higher than any theological system which is set forth as mans understanding of Gods divine plan and purpose.

Through study and discussion we should sharpen our understanding of the Bible.

Agreed, but are you (and others from either side) REALLY going to presume you could be potentially wrong and ACTUALLY look with the intention of considering the other side as though it to could be potentially right? THAT is true study and where discussion sharpens our understanding of the scriptures.

That is where we find either we are right, wrong, of half right. And if we are wrong or half right it is then we find one must either disort and or twist scripture to fit back into our theological frame work so they can maintain their right-ness.

I love Spurgeons words on this, which is something like:
I find it no great thing to be inconsistant with my own theology but I find it a great matter to be inconsistant with the Word of God.

He was speaking of those places in scripture which do not maintain his theological view and he does not preach them as though they do. This was from the sermon regarding the passage about God 'who will have all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of truth'. And he contends the word 'all' here means all of the whole or all of mankind. I forget the name of the sermon but I can find it if it is necessary.

 

[Jarthur001]

Apparently Paul never read Calvin.

I hope Calvin read Paul
(if not he might have missed something)

Ed,

Of all people on this board, I never expected this from you. This just shows that once again those that are against Calvinism, don't even know the facts. John Calvin is not Calvinism. Calvinism is not based on John Calvin, but based on the Word of God. Look at this list of names...

Genesis: 1-23, 24-50
Harmony of the Law: Vol 1, Vol 2, Vol 3, Vol 4
Joshua
Psalms: 1-35, 36-66, 67-92, 93-119, 119-150
Isaiah: 1-16, 17-32, 33-48, 49-66
Jeremiah: 1-9, 10-19, 20-29, 30-47, 48-52
Lamentations
Ezekiel: 1-12, 13-20
Daniel: 1-6, 7-12
Hosea
Joel
Amos
Obadiah
Jonah
Micah
Nahum
Habakkuk
Zephaniah
Haggai
Zechariah
Malachi
Harmony of the Gospels: Vol 1, Vol 2, Vol 3
John: 1-11, 12-21
Acts: 1-13, 14-28
Romans
1 Corinthians: 1-14, 15-16
2 Corinthians
Galatians
Ephesians
Philippians
Colossians
1 Thessalonians
2 Thessalonians
1 Timothy
2 Timothy
Titus
Philemon
Hebrews
James
1 Peter
2 Peter
1 John
Jude

This is a list of books found in the Bible. These are also a list of Calvin's Commentaries that Calvin wrote.

Please take note......PAUL was the writer of many of these books. John Calvin did read Paul, and for any one to say he has not read paul only shows that person has not a clue.

Yes I know you said "you hope he read Paul". Well...you could know he read paul, or make no such statement.

 

[Jarthur001]

Calvinism is more than a nickname around here, it has become an entire system of belief to the point where you are labeled as either being one or you're not. There is no in between.

I have to believe some around here were baptized by Calvin as they defend him dispite scripture.

Funny thing.....

I hardly ever see John Calvin quoted. I do see Paul quoted.

humm


here you go. Please show me the last 10 quotes by John Calvin by a Calvinist. I think you find non-Calvinist quoting him more then Calvinist.

 

[Jarthur001]

Now I Will get on Your Case
If you would read my post
and your post you will see that
If it took me two minutes to type
my post (and it did) then
I had NO CHANGE TO READ
your post before I posted my post.
So there is NO WAY that I could
have used an ad hominem directed to you
or any other follower of Calvin
for that matter.

Anyway, I didn't start this topic to find about about
Calvin nor his followers nor Arminis nor his followers.

I am interested in finding out about GRACE as found
in the OP.

It sounded pretty good to me.

Please give me a list of John Calvin followers that post on this board. I know of no one that prays to John Calvin. Most have never read John Calvin. Yet in the last 3 post you made such statements that you need to back your words. I know of none, but I could be wrong. So...lets see the list.

Now if you claim Calvin followers and they are on the list, we must go to that person and ask them if indeed they are a follower of John Calvin. If they say they are not, this would mean you have made false statements about that person and you need to ask forgiveness.

But for now...lets see that list.

 

[Jarthur001]

How about those of us who follow Christ and believe His word? Don't we fall in between? But as you said, "I don;t think there is a consistent belief in between" You can deny it but the common view around here is one has to be Calvinist or Arminius. If this is not true then Calvinist should cease calling people who disagree with Calvinism or the tulip Arminium's.

I hardly see the lable" Arminium." Maybe you can help and post the last 10 times someone has used this to lable another. I have seen the lable.."free-willer"...which makes some happy, but others mad. Some like the words..."non-Calvinist"....but I have never seen the words..."non Arminiumist" which kinda tells you something.

How about those of us who follow Christ and believe His word?

You mean Calvinist? For you must know this is in fact what all Calvinist do. Believe His Word? Yes....bound to believe His Word.

 

[Ed Edwards]

One of us has to be wrong.

Let us not forget the possibility that both could be wrong or both could be partially right.

This is where you have to be ready to conform to scripture even when it is contrary to your current theological position. That is no easy matter but we must hold the Word of God higher than any theological system which is set forth as mans understanding of Gods divine plan and purpose.

Amen, Brother Allan -- Preach it! :thumbs:

 

[Ed Edwards]

"Stupid Topic Slayer"

means NOT "Slayer of Stupid Topics"
Rather 'Stupid' modifies 'Slayer':
i.e. my trailer means:
"Stupid Slayer of Topics".

Sorry, I can't control my topic slaying urge.
It seems a shame though to slay my
own topics, eh?

 

[Ed Edwards]

IMHO this is correct (100% = A+):

Jesus saved me by GRACE not by TULIP:

G iven through Christ (Election)
R ejected through rebellion (Resistible Grace)
A accepted though faith (Freedom of the Will)
C hrist died for all (Unlimited Attonement)
E verlasting life (Security of the Believer)