Semi-Calvinism

[MB]

Think even the founder of so calle classic Armianism himself was not totally sure could lose salvation, but was positive had a chance to do that!

I'm not Arminian I know who he was and I disagree with him nearly completely Just as I do Calvinism. Calvinist have a tendency to lump all those who disagree with them under some name of some man who hasn't anything to do with what they believe.
I do not believe in Total Depravity. Depraved yes but there is no such thing as total depravity in scripture for all men. I believe the atonement is available to every one. I believe in being chosen by Christ but not elected, and their is a difference. I believe Grace is resistible, because men do reject Christ as does most Jews. I do not believe men have to persevere to keep their Salvation, because we are sealed by the Holy Spirit. Once we are saved we are always saved. This is not rare there are many who preach what I believe.
MB

 

[JonC]

It's always nice to hear people talk about me behind my back. Some on this board are so convinced they know what I believe.

I'm not really sure what you are talking about here, MB. If you are referring to my post, then you are mistaken. I have not talked behind your back. I quoted your post and responded right here, publicly. That is generally what is done on a discussion board.

Some on this board are so convinced they know what I believe.

Again, not really sure what to make of this. Generally when people quote others it is because what they are saying applies to the quote. I never claimed to even know what you believed, much less have an opinion about it. I was not responding to your beliefs, but to what you posted.

You said "I just do not believe that we are forced into salvation". You also said "being willing to be saved is in scripture, being saved against our will is not." Whether you actually believe that is no concern of mine. But you did post it. And my point is that absolutely no one on this forum has even remotely indicated that they hold a belief that we are "forced into Salvation" or that we even can be "saved against our will".

Is there a difference between people falsely claiming that those in the free-will camp believe salvation is not completely of God and people falsely claiming that Calvinists present men being forced into salvation or saved against their wills? Is one lie really less a sin than the other?

Every Calvinist I ever met believes they were just regenerated with out faith so they could believe which also is not scriptural. They claim regeneration is all about understanding, but this isn't scriptural either..

Can anyone say that the Jailer who had Paul locked up wasn't willing to be saved. The Jailer just wanted to be saved and asked how.. The answer is;

Act 16:31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

Being saved being dragged off kicking and screaming is what many Calvinist have told me. I don't believe them even for a moment.
MB.

I don't care if every Calvinist you met believes in the Easter Bunny. If you are being honest, and every Calvinist you have met has told you that God saves men against their will, that God forces men into salvation, then this has more bearing on your discernment than it does with Calvinism. Since this is not even close to what Calvinism teaches, this means that those "calvinists" you hang with are ignorant of the theology they claim to hold. Since it takes very little effort to find people like John Gill, John MacArthur, Spurgeon, John Piper, and Tim Keller (all Calvinists) denying that men are saved against their wills....also that regeneration is all about understanding (every Calvinist I've met thinks regeneration is a supernatural work of God in recreating a man)...this brings into question either your honesty or your discernment.

 

[JonC]

Every Calvinist I ever met believes ...

MB,

I apologize for pointing out your errors without pointing you to the evidence of those errors. It was late and we had just come in from Nashville (it’s less crowded to see Christmas lights after Christmas).

The Canons of Dort specifically addresses the error of believing that God saves men against their will.

“just as by the fall humans did not cease to be human, endowed with intellect and will, and just as sin, such has spread through the whole human race, did not abolish the nature of the human race …..also this divine grace of regeneration does not act in people as if they were blocks and stones; nor does it abolish the will and its properties or coerce a reluctant will by force…”

The Canons also address the error that “regeneration is all about understanding”. Regeneration is God making men into new beings (spiritually). God forgives us and He gives us a new spirit and a new heart. God puts His Spirit in us. Yes, this is the only way that we can understand. But that does not mean it is “all about understanding.” It is, rather, all about God.

Addressing errors, the Canons argue against those who “teach that grace by which we are converted to God is nothing but a gentle persuasion, or ..that which happens by persuasion…that God does not produce the assent of the will except in this manner of moral persuasion”. Calvinism instead holds “as Ezekiel 36:26 puts it: ‘I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you, and I will remove your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh.’”

The “Calvinists” you have listened to are probably not Calvinists at all as they deny the Canons of Dort (they deny Calvinistic soteriology). But there is room for disagreement even with those who would affirm the Canons as expressing their belief.

My suggestion to you is that you take the time to learn what those you are opposing really believe instead of just arguing your position. I am not picking on you because we disagree on the subject of free-will. We had a few “Calvinists” on this board from time to time who have made the same error of arguing out of ignorance. It is far to easy, if people would, to take the time and learn what others believe. I think that this would benefit you on this topic.

These links may help you understand what Calvinists (keep in mind most here are Baptist “Calvinists”) do believe.

https://www.crcna.org/welcome/beliefs/confessions/canons-dort

http://www.esvbible.org/resources/c...article-the-canons-of-the-synod-of-dort-1619/

I wish you well, should you endeavor to legitimately engage the topic. When you do learn what those people actually believe (and how they understand God’s work in salvation) then maybe we can have a more honest discussion on the topic. I look forward to it, brother.

 

[Yeshua1]

MB,

I apologize for pointing out your errors without pointing you to the evidence of those errors. It was late and we had just come in from Nashville (it’s less crowded to see Christmas lights after Christmas).

The Canons of Dort specifically addresses the error of believing that God saves men against their will.

“just as by the fall humans did not cease to be human, endowed with intellect and will, and just as sin, such has spread through the whole human race, did not abolish the nature of the human race …..also this divine grace of regeneration does not act in people as if they were blocks and stones; nor does it abolish the will and its properties or coerce a reluctant will by force…”

The Canons also address the error that “regeneration is all about understanding”. Regeneration is God making men into new beings (spiritually). God forgives us and He gives us a new spirit and a new heart. God puts His Spirit in us. Yes, this is the only way that we can understand. But that does not mean it is “all about understanding.” It is, rather, all about God.

Addressing errors, the Canons argue against those who “teach that grace by which we are converted to God is nothing but a gentle persuasion, or ..that which happens by persuasion…that God does not produce the assent of the will except in this manner of moral persuasion”. Calvinism instead holds “as Ezekiel 36:26 puts it: ‘I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you, and I will remove your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh.’”

The “Calvinists” you have listened to are probably not Calvinists at all as they deny the Canons of Dort (they deny Calvinistic soteriology). But there is room for disagreement even with those who would affirm the Canons as expressing their belief.

My suggestion to you is that you take the time to learn what those you are opposing really believe instead of just arguing your position. I am not picking on you because we disagree on the subject of free-will. We had a few “Calvinists” on this board from time to time who have made the same error of arguing out of ignorance. It is far to easy, if people would, to take the time and learn what others believe. I think that this would benefit you on this topic.

These links may help you understand what Calvinists (keep in mind most here are Baptist “Calvinists”) do believe.

https://www.crcna.org/welcome/beliefs/confessions/canons-dort

http://www.esvbible.org/resources/c...article-the-canons-of-the-synod-of-dort-1619/

I wish you well, should you endeavor to legitimately engage the topic. When you do learn what those people actually believe (and how they understand God’s work in salvation) then maybe we can have a more honest discussion on the topic. I look forward to it, brother.

We would not hold to God programming us as robots, but tat we in our sin natures cannot come to Christ by ourselves, but need to have God grant us a new heart/mind in order to do that!

 

[Yeshua1]

I'm not Arminian I know who he was and I disagree with him nearly completely Just as I do Calvinism. Calvinist have a tendency to lump all those who disagree with them under some name of some man who hasn't anything to do with what they believe.
I do not believe in Total Depravity. Depraved yes but there is no such thing as total depravity in scripture for all men. I believe the atonement is available to every one. I believe in being chosen by Christ but not elected, and their is a difference. I believe Grace is resistible, because men do reject Christ as does most Jews. I do not believe men have to persevere to keep their Salvation, because we are sealed by the Holy Spirit. Once we are saved we are always saved. This is not rare there are many who preach what I believe.
MB

All who get savd were elected by God from eternity past, and being totally depraivd does not mean all act as a Hitler, but that we no longe have real free wills, and our sin natures prevent us from coming to Christ fo salvation in and by ourselves! Sinners keep resisiting Gre, but those elected will accept Him!

 

[TCassidy]

Calvinist have a tendency to lump all those who disagree with them under some name of some man who hasn't anything to do with what they believe.

You mean like you calling Particular Baptists "Calvinists?"

I do not believe in Total Depravity. Depraved yes but there is no such thing as total depravity in scripture for all men.

So, which part of man, body, soul, or spirit do you think avoided the consequences of the fall and remains in perfect holiness and merits God's grace?

I believe the atonement is available to every one.

Sufficient for all, efficient only for believers. And I am not sure what you mean by "available." The atonement is not "available" to us as it is not offered to us. The atonement was offered to God by the Lord Jesus Christ. The atonement is offered to the injured party. Our sin, as David says, is "Against you (God), and you only, I have sinned" (Psalm 51:4). It is the results of the Atonement, the forgiveness of our sins, that is applied to us by the Lord.

I believe in being chosen by Christ but not elected, and their is a difference.

They are the same thing.

Matthew 20:16 So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few are chosen (εκλεκτος).

Ephesians 1:4 even as he has chosen (εκλεκτος) us in him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and without defect before him in love;

Matthew 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect (εκλεκτος).

Colossians 3:12 Put on therefore, as the elect (εκλεκτος) of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering.

I believe Grace is resistible, because men do reject Christ as does most Jews.

Which, of course, has nothing at all to do with the bible doctrine of "irresistible grace" (which I admit is a poor way of stating it, probably invented by a Baptist Preacher so the letter fit the TULIP acronym). The better word would be "efficacious" grace. When the regenerating grace of God is applied to the sinner it always accomplishes what God intended it to accomplish. The Grace of God never fails, but is always efficacious. It always accomplished what God intended it to accomplish.

I do not believe men have to persevere to keep their Salvation, because we are sealed by the Holy Spirit. Once we are saved we are always saved.

And, of course, no Calvinist believes a person must persevere in order to be saved. They believe that the saved are "preserved" in Christ until the end.

Jude 1 "Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called."

We are not saved because we persevere. We persevere because we are preserved in Christ.

This is not rare there are many who preach what I believe.

Yes, it is a sad fact that many preach against the Grace of God, the Sovereignty of God, the Election of God, the very Gospel itself out of ignorance as displayed above.

 

[Yeshua1]

You mean like you calling Particular Baptists "Calvinists?"

So, which part of man, body, soul, or spirit do you think avoided the consequences of the fall and remains in perfect holiness and merits God's grace?

Sufficient for all, efficient only for believers. And I am not sure what you mean by "available." The atonement is not "available" to us as it is not offered to us. The atonement was offered to God by the Lord Jesus Christ. The atonement is offered to the injured party. Our sin, as David says, is "Against you (God), and you only, I have sinned" (Psalm 51:4). It is the results of the Atonement, the forgiveness of our sins, that is applied to us by the Lord.

They are the same thing.

Matthew 20:16 So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few are chosen (εκλεκτος).

Ephesians 1:4 even as he has chosen (εκλεκτος) us in him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and without defect before him in love;

Matthew 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect (εκλεκτος).

Colossians 3:12 Put on therefore, as the elect (εκλεκτος) of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering.

Which, of course, has nothing at all to do with the bible doctrine of "irresistible grace" (which I admit is a poor way of stating it, probably invented by a Baptist Preacher so the letter fit the TULIP acronym). The better word would be "efficacious" grace. When the regenerating grace of God is applied to the sinner it always accomplishes what God intended it to accomplish. The Grace of God never fails, but is always efficacious. It always accomplished what God intended it to accomplish.

And, of course, no Calvinist believes a person must persevere in order to be saved. They believe that the saved are "preserved" in Christ until the end.

Jude 1 "Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called."

We are not saved because we persevere. We persevere because we are preserved in Christ.

Yes, it is a sad fact that many preach against the Grace of God, the Sovereignty of God, the Election of God, the very Gospel itself out of ignorance as displayed above.

Think that he really misunderstands calvinism, as he seems to be against what someone told him that it is!

 

[MB]

MB,

I apologize for pointing out your errors without pointing you to the evidence of those errors. It was late and we had just come in from Nashville (it’s less crowded to see Christmas lights after Christmas).

The Canons of Dort specifically addresses the error of believing that God saves men against their will.

“just as by the fall humans did not cease to be human, endowed with intellect and will, and just as sin, such has spread through the whole human race, did not abolish the nature of the human race …..also this divine grace of regeneration does not act in people as if they were blocks and stones; nor does it abolish the will and its properties or coerce a reluctant will by force…”

I have no reason to read the cannons of Dort. What they have to say doesn't concern me. As I said I'm not Arminian or Calvinist. I'm a born again Christian and what writers of different doctrines have to say does not affect my faith at all. I do not rely on there writings for my faith I rely on Jesus Christ the Father and the Holy Spirit, I'm led through the Bible by the Holy Spirit just as anyone who believes in Jesus Christ.
Calvinist don't like hearing what I believe.
The Fall as Calvinist claim did not cause men to loose there ability to Hear God, The reason men do not hear is because they don't want to hear. Nor did affect their ability to understand.

The Canons also address the error that “regeneration is all about understanding”. Regeneration is God making men into new beings (spiritually). God forgives us and He gives us a new spirit and a new heart. God puts His Spirit in us. Yes, this is the only way that we can understand. But that does not mean it is “all about understanding.” It is, rather, all about God.

For me regeneration is all about being Saved. Being made new is being saved. Having a new spirit is the results of being regenerated. Regeneration is Salvation.
Regeneration is about God saving man. It has nothing to do with understanding the simple message of the gospel. Anyone is capable of understanding the milk of the word. Scripture could support you on this but it does not. This is why you have not included any.

Addressing errors, the Canons argue against those who “teach that grace by which we are converted to God is nothing but a gentle persuasion, or ..that which happens by persuasion…that God does not produce the assent of the will except in this manner of moral persuasion”. Calvinism instead holds “as Ezekiel 36:26 puts it: ‘I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you, and I will remove your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh.’”

Of course you know this was a prophesy to the Jews. It's not about Christianity.

The “Calvinists” you have listened to are probably not Calvinists at all as they deny the Canons of Dort (they deny Calvinistic soteriology). But there is room for disagreement even with those who would affirm the Canons as expressing their belief.
[/QOUTE]
I respect your beliefs, I just disagree with the words of the men who were involved in these cannons as you call them. It seems if you apply Ezekiel 36:26 to your self then you would have to be Jewish to realize this applying to you. It does not apply to Gentiles. The Cannons of Dort have no influence on me at all. The Only word I rely on for truth is the Bible. Men lie, God's word does not. Please present a reason for your belief with scripture.

My suggestion to you is that you take the time to learn what those you are opposing really believe instead of just arguing your position. I am not picking on you because we disagree on the subject of free-will. We had a few “Calvinists” on this board from time to time who have made the same error of arguing out of ignorance. It is far to easy, if people would, to take the time and learn what others believe. I think that this would benefit you on this topic.

No thanks I've read some of Calvinism I got enough from here of what people believe. What the truth really is, for them is what they want to make it. I'm not interested in becoming a Calvinist. I don't argue Calvinism I argue what scripture actually says. I am sure what you may believe and what another who embraces Calvinism differs.

These links may help you understand what Calvinists (keep in mind most here are Baptist “Calvinists”) do believe.

https://www.crcna.org/welcome/beliefs/confessions/canons-dort

http://www.esvbible.org/resources/c...article-the-canons-of-the-synod-of-dort-1619/

I wish you well, should you endeavor to legitimately engage the topic. When you do learn what those people actually believe (and how they understand God’s work in salvation) then maybe we can have a more honest discussion on the topic. I look forward to it, brother.

I realize you trying to tell me in a nice way that I don't know what I'm talking about. However you could not be more wrong. I've been well educated about Calvinism especially sense being a member here. I ask for scripture not for some opinion of some men 2 or 300 years ago. It's only what scripture actually says that counts not Calvinism or what they believe. If a Calvinist can't explain what they mean with scripture then it doesn't mean much. Does it?
MB

 

[MB]

All who get savd were elected by God from eternity past, and being totally depraivd does not mean all act as a Hitler, but that we no longe have real free wills, and our sin natures prevent us from coming to Christ fo salvation in and by ourselves! Sinners keep resisiting Gre, but those elected will accept Him!

If this were true Scripture would say that Gentiles are elect. No one has ever proved this with scripture.
Just show me with scripture one Gentile who was elect. Not even Luke made such claims who was a Gentile. Oh you will show where Paul called a group of people elect but you can't prove there was even one gentile in their midst.
MB

 

[MB]

You mean like you calling Particular Baptists "Calvinists?"

So, which part of man, body, soul, or spirit do you think avoided the consequences of the fall and remains in perfect holiness and merits God's grace?

Sufficient for all, efficient only for believers. And I am not sure what you mean by "available." The atonement is not "available" to us as it is not offered to us. The atonement was offered to God by the Lord Jesus Christ. The atonement is offered to the injured party. Our sin, as David says, is "Against you (God), and you only, I have sinned" (Psalm 51:4). It is the results of the Atonement, the forgiveness of our sins, that is applied to us by the Lord.

They are the same thing.

Matthew 20:16 So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few are chosen (εκλεκτος).

Ephesians 1:4 even as he has chosen (εκλεκτος) us in him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and without defect before him in love;

Matthew 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect (εκλεκτος).

Colossians 3:12 Put on therefore, as the elect (εκλεκτος) of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering.

Which, of course, has nothing at all to do with the bible doctrine of "irresistible grace" (which I admit is a poor way of stating it, probably invented by a Baptist Preacher so the letter fit the TULIP acronym). The better word would be "efficacious" grace. When the regenerating grace of God is applied to the sinner it always accomplishes what God intended it to accomplish. The Grace of God never fails, but is always efficacious. It always accomplished what God intended it to accomplish.

And, of course, no Calvinist believes a person must persevere in order to be saved. They believe that the saved are "preserved" in Christ until the end.

Jude 1 "Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called."

We are not saved because we persevere. We persevere because we are preserved in Christ.

Yes, it is a sad fact that many preach against the Grace of God, the Sovereignty of God, the Election of God, the very Gospel itself out of ignorance as displayed above.

Out of ignorance is where this whole post came from.
MB

 

[TCassidy]

Out of ignorance is where this whole post came from.
MB

So, you are admitting you can't respond to any of my questions or statements?

 

[TCassidy]

Of course you know this was a prophesy to the Jews. It's not about Christianity.

So do you believe there is more than one way to be saved?

Regeneration is Salvation.

So, you believe regeneration is progressive over time?

I have no reason to read the cannons of Dort.

Ignorance is bliss?

 

[JonC]

I have no reason to read the cannons of Dort. What they have to say doesn't concern me.

As you have chosen to tell us what Calvinists believe, their actual beliefs should concern you. This is called integrity. Given your comments when you thought I spoke of your beliefs you seem to expect it of others so I don't think it unreasonable to expect it of you.

For me regeneration is all about being Saved.

I am not arguing against your belief, but questioning why you chose to misrepresent the views if others to "win" your argument. There are enough legitimate disagreements (even within Calvinism itself) to argue a lifetime. Straw-man arguments are, essentially, nothing but lies fabricated to puff up one’s own position. If your view is legitimate, and you understand the position that you hold, then it should be able to stand on its own. But when you misrepresent others to prove your view right, it typically has the opposite effect.

Regeneration is about God saving man. It has nothing to do with understanding the simple message of the gospel. Anyone is capable of understanding the milk of the word. Scripture could support you on this but it does not. This is why you have not included any.

I do not know what you are speaking of insofar as my not providing Scripture to support my claim, but Exodus 20:16 should take care of that.

Of course you know this was a prophesy to the Jews. It's not about Christianity.

It does not matter what I know (or think) of the passage. I was telling you that Calvinism does not teach what you said that it taught. I did not say that they were right, or that they were wrong. Only that you were engaging in a dishonest representation of their beliefs. You claimed that Calvinists viewed regeneration as applying only to an understanding when in fact the Canons of Dort prove you wrong by applying regeneration to being “born again”. And then to cover the lie you address a verse Calvinists use to support their view you claim they do not even hold.

 

[MB]

As you have chosen to tell us what Calvinists believe, their actual beliefs should concern you. This is called integrity. Given your comments when you thought I spoke of your beliefs you seem to expect it of others so I don't think it unreasonable to expect it of you.I am not arguing against your belief, but questioning why you chose to misrepresent the views if others to "win" your argument. There are enough legitimate disagreements (even within Calvinism itself) to argue a lifetime. Straw-man arguments are, essentially, nothing but lies fabricated to puff up one’s own position. If your view is legitimate, and you understand the position that you hold, then it should be able to stand on its own. But when you misrepresent others to prove your view right, it typically has the opposite effect. I do not know what you are speaking of insofar as my not providing Scripture to support my claim, but Exodus 20:16 should take care of that.It does not matter what I know (or think) of the passage. I was telling you that Calvinism does not teach what you said that it taught. I did not say that they were right, or that they were wrong. Only that you were engaging in a dishonest representation of their beliefs. You claimed that Calvinists viewed regeneration as applying only to an understanding when in fact the Canons of Dort prove you wrong by applying regeneration to being “born again”. And then to cover the lie you address a verse Calvinists use to support their view you claim they do not even hold.

Calvinist them selves have told me what they believe. I've read the so called doctrines of grace and none of them are scriptural I have read and studied Calvinist trying to figure out where they get what they believe for more than 10 years none of what I have learned about them is scriptural. They get there doctrines from men not God. Like you they want to talk more about Calvinistic writers and the things they have written as if their books are as right as scripture. I see Calvinism just as you see what I believe. Wrong.
Sure there are things that Calvinist believe that are true. Although they have missed the boat on how they interpret scripture. Not all of them think alike.I have met few if any that believe the exact same things. Yet according to you they are wrong. My own brother was a Calvinist and tried his best to change my mind but only made me more sure that I would never be one because what he believe wasn't from the Bible. He'd show me scriptures to prove what he believed and I'd show him where he was missing the true meaning of what those scriptures actually say. He took scriptures out of context to prove what he was saying. I put them back.
You must think I'm ignorant of Calvinism. In some ways you're right in thinking this. How ever it doesn't take complete knowledge to know when something is way off base. It simply does not line up with scripture. That is bottom line. Show me Calvinism in scripture and I'll show you where something is wrong with it.

It is God almighty that interprets scripture not men
MB

 

[MB]

So do you believe there is more than one way to be saved?

There is only one way to be sure and that is to submit to the will of God confessing Him as Lord of our lives. There certainly is no such thing as saved before Faith.

So, you believe regeneration is progressive over time?
Ignorance is bliss?

I believe a new believer is just as saved as one who has been saved for 60 years. Babes in Christ will be in the same heaven as the fully grown Christians. Once saved is always saved.
MB

 

[MB]

So, you are admitting you can't respond to any of my questions or statements?

No But I know you hoped this was the case. Why should I respond to someone who takes what I say and spins around trying to make me say what I did not. You do the same with scripture you put your spin on it.
Nothing you've written is written with good intentions. I've lost interest in what you have to say because you are always accusing me of trying to say what your spin is saying. This is being deceitful.
MB

 

[TCassidy]

There is only one way to be sure and that is to submit to the will of God confessing Him as Lord of our lives. There certainly is no such thing as saved before Faith.

So, your answer is "I don't know?"

I believe a new believer is just as saved as one who has been saved for 60 years. Babes in Christ will be in the same heaven as the fully grown Christians. Once saved is always saved.
MB

Which has nothing to do with the topic or my questions. Is this another diversion?

 

[TCassidy]

Why should I respond to someone who takes what I say and spins around trying to make me say what I did not

How can I spin your answers when you refuse to answer?

Nothing you've written is written with good intentions.

So, asking you to clarify what you believe is not well intended? Why not?

I've lost interest in what you have to say because you are always accusing me of trying to say what your spin is saying. This is being deceitful.

How can I spin an answer you refuse to give?

Here they are again:
You said:

Of course you know this was a prophesy to the Jews. It's not about Christianity.

To which I asked:
So do you believe there is more than one way to be saved?

You refuse to answer.

MB said: ↑
Regeneration is Salvation.

Which begs the question:
So, you believe regeneration is progressive over time?

You refuse to answer.

MB said: ↑
I have no reason to read the cannons of Dort.

To which I replied:
Ignorance is bliss?
You insist you are an expert on the teachings or Dort but admit you have never read them?

How does that work?

Or will you refuse to answer again?

 

[TCassidy]

Show me Calvinism in scripture and I'll show you where something is wrong with it.

You will show me something is wrong in the scriptures? I don't think so.

Let's start at the beginning:

Article 1: God’s Right to Condemn All People
Since all people have sinned in Adam and have come under the sentence of the curse and eternal death, God would have done no one an injustice if it had been his will to leave the entire human race in sin and under the curse, and to condemn them on account of their sin. As the apostle says: “The whole world is liable to the condemnation of God” (Rom. 3:19), “All have sinned and are deprived of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:23), and “The wages of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23).

Now show me where Romans 3:19 is wrong.

Then show me where Romans 3:23 is wrong.

Then show me where Romans 6:23 is wrong.

 

[MB]

You will show me something is wrong in the scriptures? I don't think so.

That's because you can't show proof for Calvinism in scripture.
Let's start at the beginning:

Article 1: God’s Right to Condemn All People

We all know this. Maybe you think you have no right to condemn to.

Since all people have sinned in Adam and have come under the sentence of the curse and eternal death, God would have done no one an injustice if it had been his will to leave the entire human race in sin and under the curse, and to condemn them on account of their sin. As the apostle says: “The whole world is liable to the condemnation of God” (Rom. 3:19), “All have sinned and are deprived of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:23), and “The wages of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23).

Now show me where Romans 3:19 is wrong.

Then show me where Romans 3:23 is wrong.

Then show me where Romans 6:23 is wrong.

Your still trying to make it seem as if I said something I didn't. It's Calvinism is wrong and you are as well.
MB