Freewill religion is the Man of Sin !

[Dr. Walter]

dw:



I do not believe the man of sin is a historical person, no more as the phrase the Man of God is a historical person as here 2 Tim 3:17

That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

Man of God here denotes all that are in a special relation to God and called for the teaching ministry, its not one individual.

So likewise, the man of sin, denotes all the ministers of satan in a special relation to satan as his messengers as per 2 Cor 11:

14And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.

15Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.

So, I take this as a "yes" that you do believe no one can be saved if they hold to a particular DOCTRINE about the human will?

The "man of God" in 2 Timothy 3:17 does not refer to a RELIGION but to an actual PERSON for whom the Scriptures provide "profitable" authority to determine doctrine, correction, etc.

So your analogy is false. "the ministers of Satan" are INDIVIDUAL PERSONS not religions just as Satan is an INDIVIDUAL being not a religion. The man of sin is described throughout the scriptures and typified throughout the scriptures as an INDIVIDUAL BEING not a religion.

He may be the head of a state, head of a religion but he is not religion - he is an actual historical being. There may be a "spirit" of antichrist then, now and tomorrow but the antichrist is an actual historical being that all other antichrists are types.

 

[Dr. Walter]

dw:



I do not believe the man of sin is a historical person, no more as the phrase the Man of God is a historical person as here 2 Tim 3:17

That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

Man of God here denotes all that are in a special relation to God and called for the teaching ministry, its not one individual.

So likewise, the man of sin, denotes all the ministers of satan in a special relation to satan as his messengers as per 2 Cor 11:

14And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.

15Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.

What is your scriptural foundation for asserting that no one can be truly saved unless they hold to a particular "doctrine" about the will?

 

[savedbymercy]

What is your scriptural foundation for asserting that no one can be truly saved unless they hold to a particular "doctrine" about the will?

How does that question have anything to do with the comment of mine you just quoted ? Please stick to the topic. If you have question about anything I have quoted or posted, please quote the exact terminology and present it to me and ask for clarification if you like. But it has to be what I posted, and not what someone assumes.

 

[Dr. Walter]

How does that question have anything to do with the comment of mine you just quoted ? Please stick to the topic. If you have question about anything I have quoted or posted, please quote the exact terminology and present it to me and ask for clarification if you like. But it has to be what I posted, and not what someone assumes.

You make an excellent politician but not a good theologion. You are the one that chose the terminology for this thread. You have failed to explain that terminology in connection with people who believe in the doctrine of free will? You are the one responsible for raising assumptions by the very title you chose. How do you expect anyone reading that title who believes in the doctrine of free will not to conclude you believe they are lost and of the devil?

Your very title warrants this question and your continual refusal to address this direct question speaks volumes about you and your theology. Your procedure here has more to do with Satan than with God. You asked for precise words and I have given you the precise words of the title you chose for this thread. If freewill is the religion of antichrist are you saying that all who hold to the doctrine of free will are in the religion of the antichrist?? Such a simple direct question that only a deceiver would keep on avoiding to give a clear and explicit answer!!!!

 

[savedbymercy]

dw:

You are the one that chose the terminology for this thread.

If you want to debate something I stated in presenting my view in the thread, then find the quote or quotes and I will comment on it, if not, then I have nothing else to say to you about it. I am not accepting any questions about me personally in what you oppose in my view. Now, since the outset I have systematically gave my reasons for what and why I entitled this thread what it is, if you don't understand them, maybe you should not participate in the thread. I am open to answer anything I have posted in the thread, be specific, quote it, and I will defend it. That does not mean you will agree nor that you see the same thing in any given verse, but thats ok, in a debate all that can be done is to present ones view and give reason why, then you give your rebuttal and why, and maybe perhaps in so doing, you may win a person over to your view if that is your goal. My goal is not that, if it happens .bless the Lord, if not bless the Lord.

 

[DHK]

Let's examine your postion.

The man of sin is the Antichrist--a definite person, who in the future will manifest himself at the beginning of the Tribulation. He has nothing to do with those who believe in free will. So even the title of this thread is misleading. The man of sin (if you want a true comparison) is more like a Calvinist who demands all to worship him like God, a sovereign God, demanding all to bow down and worship him. He will not allow any free will but will require all to to take the mark of the beast. They, like all good Calvinists, will worship him, and him alone. If anything your analogy backfires on yourself.

You avoided this post. You avoid it for good reason. If you are to give a "religion" the title "________religion is the Man of Sin", then Calvinism fits best, as the above shows. When the Antichrist appears all will follow him as deity, consider him sovereign, bow down and worship him and him alone, and they won't all do it of their own free will. He will choose them to do it. And if they won't do it, they will bear the punishment for not worshiping him. It is basic Calvinism. There is no freewill when one has to follow the Antichrist in the Tribulation.

 

[Dr. Walter]

dw:



If you want to debate something I stated in presenting my view in the thread, then find the quote or quotes and I will comment on it,

I explicitly referred to your chosen exact words that you gave to this thread did I not?

"Freewill religion is the man of sin"

Did you not choose those exact words? Now I am asking you about your choice of words and what you mean by them? I am not asking you to quote me a scripture to guess what your interpretation of that text is. I am asking you directly to define the very terms you used in that thread subject title.

What do you mean by "freewill religion" and what do you mean that it "IS" the man of sin. What are the characteristics of this "freewill religion" so that one may identify what it is versus what it is not? Does it mean that those who merely hold to the DOCTRINE of free will are part of this religion? Does this "freewill religion" contain saved people????

I can't get more explicit than this and I can't get any more explicit with YOUR WORDS then this

 

[savedbymercy]

dw:

What do you mean by "freewill religion"

I go into that in posts # 41,and 64.

what do you mean that it "IS" the man of sin.

See post 102 where you quoted me.

Now.if this is going to be a debate, then you must not just ask questions, but present your view and show why you disagree with my view. Asking a bunch of questions is not debating.

 

[DHK]

dw:
Now.if this is going to be a debate, then you must not just ask questions, but present your view and show why you disagree with my view. Asking a bunch of questions is not debating.

Avoiding questions asked is avoiding debate. Debate is not all one-sided.

 

[Dr. Walter]

dw:



I go into that in posts # 41,and 64.



See post 102 where you quoted me.

Now.if this is going to be a debate, then you must not just ask questions, but present your view and show why you disagree with my view. Asking a bunch of questions is not debating.

You did not answer all my questions! You did not answer the most important of my questions and your other posts do not answer those questions.

Again, What are the characteristics of this "religion" and are there any saved persons involved in this religion?

 

[savedbymercy]

dw:

You did not answer all my questions!

I dont have to, thats not debate. Asking me a bunch of questions is not how you debate. Is this a debate forum or a question asking forum ?

I have presented my views, and defended them. Now if you are going to debate them, it is on you to prove my views wrong and show why by a presentation of your opposing view. Asking questions about ones personal salvation is not debating. I am presenting a view. A Person can be a follower of a false religion and later , because they are elect, be converted to the Truth, and that is all I have to say on that. Now are you going to debate the evidences I have presented for my view or just ask questions ? If you want to just ask questions, then perhaps you need to start a thread whereby you get to ask all the questions.

 

[savedbymercy]

Avoiding questions asked is avoiding debate. Debate is not all one-sided.

Debate is not asking questions. Thats being one sided. If you have a opposing view, that is the main element of debate and your presentation. The opponents must give their views in order that there is a square playing field. Then each opponent has reference points to ask for clarification. So Far,I am the only one that has went into any detail on my view. Now present your opposing view, and we will take it from there.

 

[DHK]

Debate is not asking questions. Thats being one sided. If you have a opposing view, that is the main element of debate and your presentation. The opponents must give their views in order that there is a square playing field. Then each opponent has reference points to ask for clarification. So Far,I am the only one that has went into any detail on my view. Now present your opposing view, and we will take it from there.

Questions on your view have been asked and gone unanswered and they are not defended by yourself. You don't want debate. You want to use this forum as a platform for your "religion." This thread is now closed.