Can We Talk?

[TCassidy]

Another ploy is to change the subject.

Another one of Van's "snowflake" replies because he doesn't want to discuss the actual subject.

 

[Yeshua1]

Yet another bunny trail. Paul taught that men of flesh could understand spiritual milk, 1 Corinthians 2:14-3:3

Paul refers to carnal Christians, babes, and mature believers, but NEVER refers to lost/unsaved receiving with understanding the scriptures!

 

[Yeshua1]

How can we talk when you offer obfuscation, no one claimed Calvinism teaches people do not exercise faith.
How can we talk when gifts are not bribes with strings attached. More obfuscation
How can we talk when you deny God credits our faith in Christ as righteousness, not faith He instilled?

All these Calvinist chestnuts have been asked and answered many times before, whereas Calvinists do not respond to the scripture teaching fallen men can understand spiritual milk, can seek God, and can have their faith credited as righteousness. Total Spiritual Inability has been shown to be bogus based on Matthew 23:13, 1 Corinthians 2:14-3:3, and Romans 4:4-5, 4:23-24.

We Calvinists agree that a sinner must come to faith in Jesus to gets saved, ut we hold that God causes that to happen to us, as he gives the gift of saving faith, and the Spirit Himself enables us to trust in Jesus.

 

[Yeshua1]

Van, you seem confused concerning what Paul meant by "carnal." He is talking to Christians, saved people, who walk after the flesh rather than after the Spirit. You have based your entire soteriology on a mistaken understanding of how Paul uses a single word.

Paul makes it very clear what he means by "carnal."

1 Corinthians 3:1 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.

The "carnal" are "in Christ." Paul uses a completely different word, with a completely different meaning, in 1 Corinthians 2:14.

σαρκικοις in 3:1 and ψυχικος 2:14.

That just exploding his wrong theology in this area!

 

[Felipe Rios]

William Craig lane is very smart, but he had adopted the philosophy of this world, as he really denies that God is sovereign!

Not true! That's your opinion just because he is not Calvinist. That mean that everyone who is not a Calvinists denies God's sovereignty. And you know that is not true.

 

[thatbrian]

Another one of Van's "snowflake" replies because he doesn't want to discuss the actual subject.

No one (from the other side) does. They are all whipped up into a lather, but none are calm enough, willing to read carefully enough, use their intellect enough, read texts within their contexts. . .

Because they are so fearful of what they think the DoG teach, they just create strawmen and beat up on them.

 

[Yeshua1]

Not true! That's your opinion just because he is not Calvinist. That mean that everyone who is not a Calvinists denies God's sovereignty. And you know that is not true.

He denies that God is sovereign though, as he would hold that God is blind to sinners saving jesus until they decide to do that!

 

[Van]

Van, you seem confused concerning what Paul meant by "carnal." He is talking to Christians, saved people, who walk after the flesh rather than after the Spirit. You have based your entire soteriology on a mistaken understanding of how Paul uses a single word.
Paul makes it very clear what he means by "carnal."
1 Corinthians 3:1 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.
The "carnal" are "in Christ." Paul uses a completely different word, with a completely different meaning, in 1 Corinthians 2:14.
σαρκικοις in 3:1 and ψυχικος 2:14.

TC, I know what it says. You know what it says. Paul spoke to new Christs as men of flesh, therefore men of flesh can understand spiritual milk.

 

[Van]

He denies that God is sovereign though, as he would hold that God is blind to sinners saving jesus until they decide to do that!

Pay no attention to those that do not provide quotes for their characterizations of the views of others.
God is sovereign. God is not blind. Again pay no attention to those who misrepresent others to hide their false theology.

 

[Van]

Another one of Van's "snowflake" replies because he doesn't want to discuss the actual subject.

The subject is the T of the Tulip, and the Cal's want to change the subject to Van's flaws. Go figure.

 

[Van]

Paul refers to carnal Christians, babes, and mature believers, but NEVER refers to lost/unsaved receiving with understanding the scriptures!

Another false claim, devoid of any citation from scripture. Men of flesh can understand spiritual milk.

 

[TCassidy]

The subject is the T of the Tulip,

Yes. The "T" of TULIP stands for "Total Depravity." But you tried to move the post to "Total Inability" which is false. And when I tried to get the discussion back on "Total Depravity" you ran away from the thread.

 

[TCassidy]

TC, I know what it says. You know what it says. Paul spoke to new Christs as men of flesh, therefore men of flesh can understand spiritual milk.

Yes, saved people can be carnal. That is the point. Those people were SAVED. You can't use that verse to say that LOST people can understand spiritual things.

 

[utilyan]

Yes, saved people can be carnal. That is the point. Those people were SAVED. You can't use that verse to say that LOST people can understand spiritual things.

John 20

31but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name.


The aim of the gospel is pretty clear. Doesn't say its written for people who do believe. Its directed to someone who doesn't believe with the purpose that they will.

A Calvinist Jesus would never have preached what Jesus preached. The sermon on the mount would have been one line long "God either picks you or not."

All that advice and teaching would is indeed believed meaningless just as the same folks who claim even now it is meaningless.

I can tell anyone that if they do as Christ commands they will be saved. Never is the backwards formula given. Jesus could have easily taught, well if you are saved then you will love God and love neighbor. Backwards.

 

[thatbrian]

Yes, saved people can be carnal. That is the point. Those people were SAVED. You can't use that verse to say that LOST people can understand spiritual things.

What is often missed by these folks is that God uses "means" to bring about His purpose. He doesn't zap people saved. He uses the preaching of the gospel to accomplish His will.

 

[Mr. Davis]

What is often missed by these folks is that God uses "means" to bring about His purpose. He doesn't zap people saved. He uses the preaching of the gospel to accomplish His will.

There is the outward Call (preaching of the Gospel) and the inward Call (God giving the gift of faith to the elect.)

Many will hear the Gospel. But it is effective only in the elect.

 

[Van]

Yes. The "T" of TULIP stands for "Total Depravity." But you tried to move the post to "Total Inability" which is false. And when I tried to get the discussion back on "Total Depravity" you ran away from the thread.

More change the subject deflection, the Reformed definition posted in this thread presents the T doctrine of the Tulip.

 

[Van]

Yes, saved people can be carnal. That is the point. Those people were SAVED. You can't use that verse to say that LOST people can understand spiritual things.

Yet another change of subject, Paul spoke to new believers as men of flesh, therefore men of flesh can understand spiritual milk. Ask yourselves, why does Calvinism deny the obvious?

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Six Hour Warning
This thread will be closed sometime after 2 PM Pacific.

 

[Yeshua1]

Pay no attention to those that do not provide quotes for their characterizations of the views of others.
God is sovereign. God is not blind. Again pay no attention to those who misrepresent others to hide their false theology.

So you see Calvinism as false theology, so are Calvinist teaching/preaching another Gospel? Are we even saved?