GOD'S OPERATIONS OF GRACE BUT NO OFFERS OF HIS GRACE

[JonC]

The one general solution to the question is this, we must preach the doctrine of Salvation to all sinners openly within the hearing; and must preach Salvation included in the doctrine, which is the gift of God, to the elect alone, who are hid among them.

Here is an issue.

Scripture teaches us to spread the gospel to all men.

We may have our understanding about election, but we could be wrong.

If the early church was correct then Calvinism is wrong (and vice versa). But if we simply preach the gospel then we would be sharing the exact same Christ.

 

[SavedByGrace]

Iconoclast is a mainstream Calvinist and any Calvinist would know it from miles away.
Enemies of Calvinism classify a mainstream Calvinist as extreme to try and deflect away from truth.
The list of mainstream Calvinists is to long to list.

dude, you have just shown the ERRORS and CONTRADICTIONS of "Calvinistic theology!"

 

[Iconoclast]

JonC,

I was a Calvinist for a long time (I probably am more knowledgeable about Calvinism than you).

it is obvious to every Calvinist that you do not now, or ever understood the teaching. You make a claim to it, which you can do, but you also suggested Finney was a Calvinist. so you have no credibility there.

Hyper-Calvinism is Calvinism taken to an extreme. But it is still Calvinism.

No it is not. Such a foolish statement is like saying the RC church is the same as evengelicalism because they believe in the trinity.

You make the error (again) of pretending all Calvinists believe as you.

Another accusation

Johnathan Edwards was a Calvinist (just not a Calvinist like you). R.C. Sproul was a Calvinist (just not a Calvinist like you). Tim Keller is a Calvinist, so is John Piper (just not Calvinists like you).

I never said any Calvinist has to be like me. What does this have to do with anything?

 

[Iconoclast]

dude, you have just shown the ERRORS and CONTRADICTIONS of "Calvinistic theology!"

I do not think you are understanding the thread.

 

[Iconoclast]

Here is an issue.

Scripture teaches us to spread the gospel to all men.

We may have our understanding about election, but we could be wrong.

If the early church was correct then Calvinism is wrong (and vice versa). But if we simply preach the gospel then we would be sharing the exact same Christ.

This is another off topic post.

 

[SavedByGrace]

I do not think you are understanding the thread.

Show how

 

[Iconoclast]

No. I was interacting with the article. Again you chose disruption.

No,,,not even close my post 43 answered your comment from post 40..any interested reader can read posts 35-43...
you once again put the JonC twist on it,lol

[QUOTE]I was a Calvinist for a long time (I probably am more knowledgeable about Calvinism than you).[/QUOTE]

Every one knows better by now, but you can claim whatever you want.

Hyper-Calvinism is Calvinism taken to an extreme. But it is still Calvinism.

We do not need non calvinists trying to explain what they do not understand.

You make the error (again) of pretending all Calvinists believe as you.

I am mainstream, again you do not know the difference...You are here to accuse and disrupt. WAS it yesterday you were saying no need for professed brothers to be accusing one another???
Maybe that was just for yesterday, lol

23 Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil.

Johnathan Edwards was a Calvinist (just not a Calvinist like you). R.C. Sproul was a Calvinist (just not a Calvinist like you). Tim Keller is a Calvinist, so is John Piper (just not Calvinists like you).

Never said any such thing....keep your off topic accusations to yourself.

 

[Iconoclast]

You quoted me arguing my position in 35.

I was saying that the article makes an error by relying on philosophy (that our understanding of election is of more importance than sharing the gospel).

On post 43 you addressed it by posting "That is only so in your mind and understanding."

But it isn't. Most Calvinists (and non-Calvinists) would probably agree that the guy is wrong, that he is engaging philosophy in how he categories importance.

No
post 35 was answered in post 37

your post 40 was answered in post 43...
a false twist by you yet again JonC

 

[Iconoclast]

TYNDALE 1946,
Where did your post go?
I went back to respond to it.
JN 6:37-44 was the first passage i have ever remembered.

Yes Election takes place before time was;
2tim1:9
Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,

 

[SavedByGrace]

This thread is lacking GRACE

 

[Iconoclast]

JonC,

Don't get me wrong. I enjoy reading many authors who had poor theology

Yes , you enjoy reading Wesley , Barth, and Finney...you said that in the other thread. it is of topic here.

 

[Iconoclast]

I said


You replied


I think you did not grasp my post. It looks like you mistook my comment about the authors philosophy in his method to mean our ideas of election is philosophy. Some may be, some may not. I was not talking about election but about prioritizing election over sharing the gospel.

Enough of your nonsense. I did not misunderstand a thing. You were caught twisting my words once again. From now on I will expose when you do this as I said I would. Your word does not mean a thing evidently. I warned you, but you have made your choice.

 

[JonC]

This is another off topic post.

How so? Did you not read the article you posted?

The writer implies excluding men (not in the hearing but in the intended audience).

Look again at the article.

 

[JonC]

JonC,



Yes , you enjoy reading Wesley , Barth, and Finney...you said that in the other thread. it is of topic here.

I am not sure why you insist on making false accusations as if they were insults. It was as a side comment that you make a big deal (hijacking your own thread).

I don't enjoy reading Wesley and Finney. I have never read Finney and only excerpts of Wesley. I also don't read Barth with the exclusion of Romans (which is the Hallmark of Reformed scholarship on the epistle).

For future reference (for your edification to keep you from making such huge mistakes) I primarily read John MacArthur's sermons (available on the grace to you website), John Piper, J.I. Packer and Tim Keller. I like Leon Morris as well. As far as older writings I like Charles Spurgeon (his sermons and I have a volume of his notes). I read John Knox and John Owen's. I like the Valley of Vision. I also like CS Lewis.

 

[JonC]

[bla blah blah] (mis-formatted post.... no t fixing your error)

Brother,

I am not twisting anything.

I am telling you that you misunderstood my post. I was not posting about election but about elevating one's view of election to the point it is more important than sharing the gospel.

You have a bad habit of mishandling other people's words. I'm sure it is a simple error as you are a busy man. But you have no right to tell other members what they believe.

When I say you misunderstood I mean you misunderstood. If you want to talk about election then start a thread. I was talking about the article in the OP.

 

[Iconoclast]

Let's get back to the thread after these off topic disruptions;
So the Jews had it preached to them, Acts 28:31, and the elect of God among the Gentiles had it preached thus to them, openly, in the face of the times, as it was preaching of the kingdom of God, or God's will, who would have the election to obtain it, Rom.11:7, though the rest were blinded; and it should be done, whether the world would or no. “And now, behold, I know that ye all, among whom,” says he, to them at Ephesus, “preaching the kingdom of God.” Acts 20:25. Oh! This kingdom of God, this sovereignty, this same I will, and ye shall, among the people, makes man's free-will to buckle, and puts Satan's kingdom under daily contribution. When men were sent forth by the Holy Ghost, Acts 13:4, they preached the Word of God to hearers of whom they might be morally confident would oppose, instead of receive the truth as it is in Jesus.

When Paul and Barnabas were set forth by the Church at Antioch, they went each of them to Salamis, among the zealous enemies of the Gospel, yet, Acts 13:5, “they preached the word of God in the synagogues of the Jews.” The Jews everywhere, elect and non-elect, must hear of this Man's sceptre, and the record that God hath given of His Son, I Jn.5:10, though they had no right to His blood; and that in an especial manner, as Christ was the King of the Jews, Jn.19:19, though they impudently derided him with the title. Christ is a special King to crush gainsayers, as well as a special King to defend the Church, or all those who by virtue of His blood believe on Him, and regard His pure worship entirely.

The Holy Ghost saith that “he shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David; and he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.” Luke 1:32. Well then, shall not enemies hear of his kingdom, as well as the elect of God hear of his Salvation? He shall be called the Son of the Highest.

Here he displays no concern for Gospel proclamation or offers to all the hearers. He is consistent with hyper calvinism.

 

[Iconoclast]

Brother,

I am not twisting anything.

I am telling you that you misunderstood my post. I was not posting about election but about elevating one's view of election to the point it is more important than sharing the gospel.

You have a bad habit of mishandling other people's words. I'm sure it is a simple error as you are a busy man. But you have no right to tell other members what they believe.

When I say you misunderstood I mean you misunderstood. If you want to talk about election then start a thread. I was talking about the article in the OP.

Any reader can view posts 35-43 to discover the truth.

 

[JonC]

it is obvious to every Calvinist that you do not now, or ever understood the teaching.

This is a very foolish post. I am not calling you a fool, but you made a foolish comment.

You have made the false claim I (and others) do not understand Calvinism and were never really Calvinists. But you never have taken the time to see if your claims were true. I have posted my former belief. You were unable then (as you are now) to point to EVEN ONE "misunderstanding" I have regarding Calvinism.

All you do is linger among Reformed brothers looking for scraps and "atta boys". But when challenged you tuck your tail beneath your legs and look for another member to fight your battles.

You do this to me. You do this to @SavedByGrace . You do this to @Silverhair .

Sometimes you need to "man up". Stop looking through past threads to try and "expose" people, or "defeat" them. Stop trying to "trap" them. Stop trying to harm the breathen.

Just use your big boy words and ask questions. If you make a claim seek clarification.

Provide one aspect of Calvinism I do not understand. You can't, but ask anyway. The claim shows you are ignorant of your own theology as a whole.

Iron sharpens iron, but all you seem to want to do is post books without understanding, make comments without engagement, and falsely accuse the brethern without being challenged.

 

[JonC]

Any reader can view posts 35-43 to discover the truth.

They do not need to. I wrote the post. I can tell them EXACTLY what I meant.

I was saying that the writer was allowing his understanding of election to be of more importance than sharing the gospel. That s is a poor philosophy (this is not how we witness).

Period.

You do not get to define my words, Icon. I'm not sure why you ever thought otherwise.

 

[SavedByGrace]

Galatians 5

14 For the whole law can be summed up in this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” 15 But if you are always biting and devouring one another, watch out! Beware of destroying one another"