Doctrinal View

[Van]

Van
Why do you clearly have disdain for the Word of God.
Let truth be truth man
You clearly have a bias against letting the WOG speak for itself.
When I was struggling w the Bible, I always stayed the position of scripture being true and that God would open my heart to the WOG
You have no ground to stand upon for most of what you profess. Instead of Isogeting passages, you need to:
1. Understand them in their context proper hermaneutic
2. Allow Scripture to actually mean what it says and understand it in totality. Embrace the WOG AS THE WOG

The Word is good man even to the saving of the soul

I agree, the Word of God means what it says:
Ephesians 2:8-9 says the gift of God is salvation, not our faith.
1 Corinthians 2:14 says "the things" not "all the things."
Romans 3:11 says no one seeks God, not no one ever seeks God. We all have turned aside, sinned, so we are all under sin.
John 6:29 says the work God requires of us, not the work God does.
Scripture does not say all people drawn by the gospel are compelled to believe.

One of us does seem to have "disdain" for the Word of God, by my view and yours differ.

 

[Van]

Yes, you did.
Right here:

I gave you an alternating view and made no disparaging comments in your direction.
Nevertheless, you've proceeded to make disparaging comments towards me and my views.

Would you like me to run through your posts above again?
Shall we go to other threads where you complain about being attacked, but don't feel the need to stop attacking others?

Van, I pray to God that He shows you what your conduct is to others that you disagree with.
In the meantime, I will make every effort to be mindful of my conduct towards those who disagree with me.

Yes, you did.
Right here:

I gave you an alternating view and made no disparaging comments in your direction.
Nevertheless, you've proceeded to make disparaging comments towards me and my views.

Would you like me to run through your posts above again?
Shall we go to other threads where you complain about being attacked, but don't feel the need to stop attacking others?

Van, I pray to God that He shows you what your conduct is to others that you disagree with.
In the meantime, I will make every effort to be mindful of my conduct towards those who disagree with me.

This whole post is personally disparaging me.
I addressed the alternate views provided.
Calvinism is as bogus as a three dollar bill.

If God predestines whatsoever comes to pass, God is the author of sin.

 

[Dave G]

This whole post is personally disparaging me.

That was never my intention.

I addressed the alternate views provided.

From my perspective?
Not without making damaging and disparaging comments of your own, you didn't.

Van,
It is Biblical to correct those who profess Christ, about their conduct.
You may call it what you will, but I'm only trying to direct you to the word of God:

Romans 12:9-21.
1 Corinthians 13:4-7
Ephesians 4:25-32.
Colossians 3:12-17.
Titus 3:1-2.


Again, I urge you to take a good look at what you are doing when you make posts, and to see it from the point of the person you are talking to...
As well as what God's word is stating about our conduct as believers towards them that are outside of the body of Christ, as well as inside it.

Finally, be assured that I admit to needing to take my own advice here as well.



Good afternoon to you sir.

 

[Van]

Van,
It is Biblical to correct those who profess Christ, about their conduct.
You may call it what you will, but I'm only trying to direct you to the word of God:

Romans 12:9-21.
1 Corinthians 13:4-7
Ephesians 4:25-32.
Colossians 3:12-17.
Titus 3:1-2.

Again, I urge you to take a good look at what you are doing when you make posts, and to see it from the point of the person you are talking to...
As well as what God's word is stating about our conduct as believers towards them that are outside of the body of Christ, as well as inside it.

Finally, be assured that I admit to needing to take my own advice here as well.
Good afternoon to you sir.

Once again my behavior and not my positions are being addressed. The use of fallacy (ad hominem) shows contempt for those reading to gain alternate understandings of scripture.

The cited verses omit our behavior toward false teaches, who introduce destructive heresies.
2 Peter 2:17
These men are waterless springs and mists driven by a storm, for whom the utter depths of darkness have been reserved.
2Peter2:18
For by speaking high-sounding but empty words they are able to entice, with fleshly desires and with debauchery, people who have just escaped from those who reside in error.
2Peter2:19
Although these false teachers promise such people freedom, they themselves are enslaved to immorality. For whatever a person succumbs to, to that he is enslaved.
2Peter2:20
For if after they have escaped the filthy things of the world through the rich knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they again get entangled in them and succumb to them, their last state has become worse for them than their first.

 

[Van]

Of the Fall of Man, of Sin, and of the punishment thereof – Adam volitionally sinned, knowing God said not to eat of the fruit of the tree of good and evil. This resulted in Adam being separated from God, i.e. kicked out of the garden, and his corruption, i.e. his eyes were opened. Genesis 3:7; 17-24

And as a consequence of Adam's sin, each person is conceived in sin, thus "made sinners." Since we are separated from God, our spiritual condition is that we are dead in our sins. The Good News is that when and if God places us into Christ, we are made spiritually alive together with Christ, our rebirth in Christ as a new creation created for good works. Before God puts us in Christ, all our works of righteousness are as filthy rags to God, but as a born anew new creation our good works can earn rewards such that we enter the kingdom "abundantly," provided we build on the foundation of Christ with service resulting in "eternal rewards."

 

[Dave G]

Once again my behavior and not my positions are being addressed. The use of fallacy (ad hominem) shows contempt for those reading to gain alternate understandings of scripture.

The cited verses omit our behavior toward false teaches, who introduce destructive heresies.
2 Peter 2:17
These men are waterless springs and mists driven by a storm, for whom the utter depths of darkness have been reserved.
2Peter2:18
For by speaking high-sounding but empty words they are able to entice, with fleshly desires and with debauchery, people who have just escaped from those who reside in error.
2Peter2:19
Although these false teachers promise such people freedom, they themselves are enslaved to immorality. For whatever a person succumbs to, to that he is enslaved.
2Peter2:20
For if after they have escaped the filthy things of the world through the rich knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they again get entangled in them and succumb to them, their last state has become worse for them than their first.

I've addressed your positions in previous threads, Van, but I think it prudent, in the best interests of building you up in the faith and encouraging you to follow the Lord's commands, to address your behavior.
Which brings me to a question:

**Are you telling me that because I am a false teacher ( and not saved ), then that gives you a reason to act anyway that you like, post anything that you like, and otherwise treat people that you disagree with badly ( and break the agreed-upon rules of this forum )...as long as you think that they are not saved? **

That is not what God's word teaches, Van.
We as believers are not to speak evil of men ( Titus 3:1-10 ), period.

False teachers are known by their fruits ( Matthew 7:15-20 ) of which a list of them can be found here ( Galatians 5:19-23 ), they are described here ( 2 Timothy 3:1-9, 2 Peter 2 ) as well as other places in God's word, and are to be marked and avoided ( Romans 16:17, 1 Timothy 6:3-5 )...
Heretics are to be rejected after the first and second admonition;
Not disparaged, railed upon, castigated, lambasted, vilified or otherwise treated in any other way than graciously and with patience...
In the hope that God will grant them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth ( 2 Timothy 2:25-26 ).

Rather, we are to follow His commandments here:

" Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.
44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
45 that ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?
47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more [than others?] do not even the publicans so?
48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." ( Matthew 5:43-48 ).



In addition,

Are you telling me that because I am a false teacher ( and not saved ), then that gives you a reason to act anyway that you like, post anything that you like, and otherwise treat people that you disagree with badly ( and break the agreed-upon rules of this forum )...as long as you think that they are not saved?

Please clarify where you stand on my above question, Van.

 

[Van]

I've addressed your positions in previous threads,

Please clarify where you stand on my above question, Van.

Sir, you have copy and pasted Calvinist screed over and over, but you have not engaged in discussion.

 

[Dave G]

Sir, you have copy and pasted Calvinist screed over and over, but you have not engaged in discussion.

Van,
From my perspective, we have engaged in plenty of discussion... especially in other threads.
In this thread alone, I have presented my position, relative to yours, in-depth and in a very detailed way.
For now, please answer the question if you are so inclined.

Here it is again:

Are you telling me that because I am a false teacher ( and not saved ), then that gives you a reason to act anyway that you like, post anything that you like, and otherwise treat people that you disagree with badly ( and break the agreed-upon rules of this forum )...as long as you think that they are not saved?

 

[Van]

Answer the question Van, if you are so inclined.

Here is is again:

Which position in the OP does the question address?

Did I say any specific poster was a false teacher? Nope
Did I say any specific poster was unsaved? Nope
Did I say I can treat others differently than the way I want to be treated? Nope

So what is the purpose of the question? To change the subject from Biblical doctrine to my behavior. Calvinists engage in this sort of deflection because they cannot actually defend their bogus doctrine.

1) If the "T" of the TULIP were valid, God would not have needed to harden hearts in Romans 11. Therefore the T is bogus.
2) If the "U" of the TULIP were valid, God would not have chosen individuals through or on the basis of faith. The U is bogus.
3) If the "L" of the TULIP were valid, Christ would not have laid down His life as a ransom for all, nor bought with His blood those heading to destruction. Therefore the L is bogus.
4) If the "I" of the TULIP were valid, the men of Matthew 23:13 could not have been prevented from entry. The I is bogus.

 

[Van]

Of Free Will – We make plans but God directs our steps, thus God allows us autonomous thoughts and actions, but only so far as He allows. He can and does intervene and restrict our options, such as hardening hearts to cause some to continue to reject Christ for a time. Proverbs 16:9, Romans 11:7

Thus the biblical doctrine is limited autonomous will, predisposed to sin due to the consequences of Adam's sin and corruption. But does being predisposed to sin mean the fallen are totally unable to seek God or trust fully in Christ? Nope. Since God credits our faith, that faith represents our ability to seek God and trust in Christ to some degree. Matthew 13 tells of various folks who hear and understand and accept to a degree, the gospel of Christ. If soils 2, 3 and 4 were unable to seek God and trust in Christ, they would have rejected the gospel from the get go.

 

[Dave G]

Which position in the OP does the question address?

Van,
I give up.

To me, not only will you not take biblical correction, you keep trying to avoid my questions.
That is, of course, your prerogative.
But if you don't think that the comments I've quoted constitute being disrespectful of others, then that is between you and the Lord.

I'll simply have to pray that He gets a hold of you for your comments towards the "Calvinists" on this board, and helps you to see that it is best to treat others without calling everything that they say as "bogus", "pathetic", and...well, I'll simply let you speak for yourself:

Calvinists pathetically try to redefine "adoption" which refers to our future bodily redemption at Christ's second coming as also referring to our new birth in Christ. Utter nonsense. They try this abuse of truth to be able to claim our salvation was predestined. as I said, pathetic.

Still don't see it?
OK.

Let's move on to something I identified during the exchange of doctrinal beliefs...

The cited verses omit our behavior toward false teaches, who introduce destructive heresies.

So, here I see you making the statement that our behavior as believers is somehow "modified" to bash false teachers who introduce destructive heresies.
Is that an accurate evaluation?
If not, then please help me to understand how it is not.

Because that is what I see you stating...

That the Lord's commands regarding Christian conduct are somehow "suspended" when it comes to false teachers;
And then we can rail on them and belittle them all that we want to.

Is that what you believe?
Please tell me that I'm not understanding this correctly.

 

[Dave G]

Finally,

Did I say any specific poster was a false teacher? Nope
Did I say any specific poster was unsaved? Nope
Did I say I can treat others differently than the way I want to be treated? Nope

Huh?

So what is the purpose of the question? To change the subject from Biblical doctrine to my behavior.

No, Van.
It's to address a long-standing problem that I've observed in both you and a handful of others here, since I first came to this board almost two years ago...
and that is this:

For a Christian forum, this place has a real problem with some of its members ( on both "sides" ) constantly belittling people for what they hold to in their beliefs...
And never learning to be gracious nor to ask forgiveness for their offenses.

It's easy for me to spot, and far too tolerated from my perspective.
But since you don't seem to be able to see what you're doing ( even when someone points it out to you repeatedly ), then there's little I can do but to simply put you on "ignore".

Van, I wish you well...
I really do.
But similar to a few others that I have had to reluctantly do this for, I will do my best to avoid replying to your threads or comments from here on out.
This will be my last reply to you in this thread.


May God bless you in the coming years with good health and many good gifts.

 

[Yeshua1]

Finally,


Huh?

No, Van.
It's to address a long-standing problem that I've observed in both you and a handful of others here, since I first came to this board almost two years ago...
and that is this:

For a Christian forum, this place has a real problem with some of its members ( on both "sides" ) constantly belittling people for what they hold to in their beliefs...
And never learning to be gracious nor to ask forgiveness for their offenses.

It's easy for me to spot, and far too tolerated from my perspective.
But since you don't seem to be able to see what you're doing ( even when someone points it out to you repeatedly ), then there's little I can do but to simply put you on "ignore".

Van, I wish you well...
I really do.
But similar to a few others that I have had to reluctantly do this for, I will do my best to avoid replying to your threads or comments from here on out.
This will be my last reply to you in this thread.


May God bless you in the coming years with good health and many good gifts.

Van always seems to ignore when any of us go against His doctrines, and just say that its not so!

 

[Van]

It is really hard to engage in discussion of biblical doctrine. The last 4 posts by Calvinists all are ad hominems, addressing the poster and not the positions, clearly violating forum guidance. They are filled with "you, you, you" statements directed at me by name.
Here is some of the posted guidance, such that we avoid similar behavior:

• "You are just too stubborn to see things any other way"
• "Your hatred for me and my view is clouding your judgement"
• "Do you even know how to read?"
• "Clearly you are just obsessed with this topic."
• "Obviously you don't believe in the God of the bible."
• "You are a liar."
• "You are a heretic."
• "Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries."

And here is just one snippet from an ad hominem post:

To me, not only will you not take biblical correction, you keep trying to avoid my questions.
That is, of course, your prerogative.
But if you don't think that the comments I've quoted constitute being disrespectful of others, then that is between you and the Lord.

I'll simply have to pray that He gets a hold of you for your comments towards the "Calvinists" on this board, and helps you to see that it is best to treat others without calling everything that they say as "bogus", "pathetic", and...well, I'll simply let you speak for yourself:​

And here is what I say, the Calvinist doctrines TULI of the TULIP are bogus, and attempts to defend these bogus doctrines by use of misrepresentation, ad hominems, and subject change efforts are pathetic.

And here is where I addressed the TULI:
1) If the "T" of the TULIP were valid, God would not have needed to harden hearts in Romans 11. Therefore the T is bogus.
2) If the "U" of the TULIP were valid, God would not have chosen individuals through or on the basis of faith. 2 Thessalonians 2:13 The U is bogus.
3) If the "L" of the TULIP were valid, Christ would not have laid down His life as a ransom for all, nor bought with His blood those heading to destruction. 1 Timothy 2:6, 2 Peter 2:1 Therefore the L is bogus.
4) If the "I" of the TULIP were valid, the men of Matthew 23:13 could not have been prevented from entry. The I is bogus.

 

[Van]

Of Effectual Calling – I deny the doctrine of Irresistible Grace, men of flesh, unless hardened, can hear and understand and respond to the milk of the gospel, 1 Corinthians 2:14 – 3:3.

Here the central verse is 1 Corinthians 3:1 where Paul spoke to new Christians "as to men of flesh." Clearly the idea is that "men of flesh" can hear and understand and respond appropriately to "spiritual milk" the fundamentals of the gospel. Of course men of flesh cannot understand some of the things of the Spirit, i.e. "spiritual solid food (meat)" because a person must be indwelt and have matured to a degree to grow on "solid food."

And without "total spiritual inability" there is no need for "effectual calling" because the call of the gospel of Christ accomplishes that purpose.

 

[Van]

What is the scriptural guidance for our treatment of false teachers?

Revelations 2:2
‘I know your deeds and your toil and perseverance, and that you cannot tolerate evil men, and you put to the test those who call themselves apostles, and they are not, and you found them to be false;

Revelations 2:20
‘But I have this against you, that you tolerate the woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, and she teaches and leads My bond-servants astray so that they commit acts of immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols.

Note that this guidance is directed toward local assemblies of believers, rather than toward individuals acting alone. So in a gathering of believers, we should stand firm for our understanding of the Word of God, and not tolerate those teaching against the word of God.

 

[atpollard]

Once saved, always saved
And behold the Calvinist fiction that future believers were placed in Christ at the cross.
On and on they copy and paste false doctrine.

Good grief.

• You open by posting your beliefs.
• When asked if you are looking for discussion, you lament that posters on this board don’t discuss, they just criticize what you say.
  
• When someone actually addresses your post with scripture and reason, you respond with the very empty attacks that you started out complaining about.

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger. [Proverbs 15:1 NASB]

 

[atpollard]

Ephesians 2:8-9 says the gift of God is salvation, not our faith

[Ephesians 2:8 NASB] For by grace you have been saved [G4982] through faith; and that not of yourselves, [it is] the gift [G1435] of God;

“saved” (σεσῳσμένοι) in that sentence is in the Masculine gender.
“gift” (δῶρον) in that sentence is in the Neuter gender.

In Greek grammar, for the “gift” to be “saved” and only “saved” in that sentence, then “gift” should have been in the Masculine gender. Ephesians 2:8-9 does not say, and cannot say, what you claim it says.

 

[Yeshua1]

[Ephesians 2:8 NASB] For by grace you have been saved [G4982] through faith; and that not of yourselves, [it is] the gift [G1435] of God;

“saved” (σεσῳσμένοι) in that sentence is in the Masculine gender.
“gift” (δῶρον) in that sentence is in the Neuter gender.

In Greek grammar, for the “gift” to be “saved” and only “saved” in that sentence, then “gift” should have been in the Masculine gender. Ephesians 2:8-9 does not say, and cannot say, what you claim it says.

Careful, you are appealing to what the Greek text states here!

 

[Van]

[Ephesians 2:8 NASB] For by grace you have been saved [G4982] through faith; and that not of yourselves, [it is] the gift [G1435] of God;

“saved” (σεσῳσμένοι) in that sentence is in the Masculine gender.
“gift” (δῶρον) in that sentence is in the Neuter gender.

In Greek grammar, for the “gift” to be “saved” and only “saved” in that sentence, then “gift” should have been in the Masculine gender. Ephesians 2:8-9 does not say, and cannot say, what you claim it says.

Did I say the pronoun referred to the Greek word translated "saved?" Nope, I said the gift was "salvation." So more deflection on display.