Sovereign Election

[robustheologian]

Just by your reply, it is easy to conclude that your behavioral flaws are not supposed.

I have clearly and plainly shown how this passage doesn't refute the doctrine of irresistible grace.

The actual reality is Calvinism cannot be understood as scriptural and logical AGAINST unbiblical and irrational opponents (such as yourself). Proverbs 18:2; Matthew 7:6; Proverbs 29:9

...a common hypocritical theme in Van's posts.

You are absolutely right. If he had any good arguments his arrogance would overshadow them. Doctrinal truth is the result of bible study AND prayer. His arrogance shows that there is obviously a lack of prayer...which then explains why he is unable to see his bad theology.

You lack the exegetical ability to determine what is unbiblical.

Such views are certainly in oppostion to the Bible. And, even most non-Calvinists can join in with the Calvinists here to declare that Van's views are not in accord with Historical Theology.

Men have corrected him in the English , in the greek, and he keeps going like a timex watch

That's what happens when one strays off the freeway we call the bible. You end up crashing into a rockcliff, in a river, in a ditch, crashed into a telephone pole, on your top over the hill in the brush, &c...

Of course, you're adding "some of the time." The verse neither says nor implies a "sometime" time-frame.

So this guy's wrong theology has been corrected but he insists on being wrong. Of course his view on Matt. 23:13 is wrong and out of context.

Van if your view is right then you would be able to prove it with synthetic exegesis. So can you? *expecting an uneducated reply or the absence of one*

 

[Van]

You have got to love them folks, post #101 is simply putting forth a logical fallacy to change the subject.

No one seeks God all the time because we all sin some of the time. That is Paul's argument in Romans 3 in context, that we are all under sin.

1 Corinthians 2:14-3:3 teaches that fallen unregenerate people cannot understand spiritual meat, but they can understand spiritual milk.

Matthew 23:13 teaches that fallen unregenerate men were actually entering heaven, and therefore seeking God effectively.

Taken together, they prove to any objective reader that Total Spiritual Inability is unbiblical and that the doctrine of Limited Spiritual Ability is what the Bible actually teaches.

Having no response, they resort to logical fallacies, saying I am often wrong, I take things out of context, and so forth and so on.

 

[convicted1]

Van, I posted this in another thread you were involved in, yet got no response...

One can not get the Spiritual milk unless they are sucking on the 'breast of consolation' as a new born babe...




--Before she is pained she hath brought forth, Before a pang cometh to her, She hath delivered a male. Who hath heard anything like this? Who hath seen anything like these? Is earth caused to bring forth in one day? Born is a nation at once? For she hath been pained, Zion also hath borne her sons. `Do I bring to the birth, And not cause to bring forth?' saith Jehovah, `Am not I He who is causing to beget? I have also restrained,' said thy God. Rejoice ye with Jerusalem, And be glad in her, all ye loving her, Rejoice ye with her for joy, All ye are mourning for her, So that ye suck, and have been satisfied, From the breast of her consolations, So that ye wring out, and have delighted yourselves From the abundance of her honour. For thus said Jehovah: `Lo, I am stretching out to her peace as a river, And as an overflowing stream the honour of nations, And ye have sucked, on the side ye are carried, And on the knees ye are dandled. As one whom his mother comforteth, so do I comfort you, Yea, in Jerusalem ye are comforted.(Isa. 66:7-13 YLT)

Here is an picture of salvation. Once Christ and His bride, the church, 'come together', they conceive their children. Then the new birth takes place and the new born babe sucks Mother Jerusalem's breast. A baby can't get any of it's mother's milk until after a birth has taken place. It's the same way Spiritually. No one can get the 'sincere milk of the gospel' until the birth from above has taken place...

 

[robustheologian]

Van if your view is right then you would be able to prove it with synthetic exegesis. So can you? *expecting an uneducated reply or the absence of one*

I'm giving you a chance to finally to put to rest all other arguments? Can you use synthetic exegesis to support the view of Matt. 23:13?

 

[Van]

Folks, I have addressed three passages or verses, Romans 3:10-11, 1 Corinthians 2:14-3:3 and Matthew 23:13. These scriptures demonstrate to any objective reader, that Total Spiritual Inability is mistaken doctrine, and that the Biblical Doctrine actually is Limited Spiritual Ability.

Paul teaches (1 Corinthians 2:14-3:3) that men of flesh can understand spiritual milk. Therefore the mistaken claim that men of flesh cannot understand spiritual milk simply ignores the passage.

Matthew 23:13 says fallen unregenerate men were entering heaven. Now the Calvinists want me to prove it. LOL God inspired every word of scripture, and Matthew 23:13 is scripture, therefore my "proof" is the truth of God's inspired word.

 

[robustheologian]

Folks, I have addressed three passages or verses, Romans 3:10-11, 1 Corinthians 2:14-3:3 and Matthew 23:13. These scriptures demonstrate to any objective reader, that Total Spiritual Inability is mistaken doctrine, and that the Biblical Doctrine actually is Limited Spiritual Ability.

Paul teaches (1 Corinthians 2:14-3:3) that men of flesh can understand spiritual milk. Therefore the mistaken claim that men of flesh cannot understand spiritual milk simply ignores the passage.

Matthew 23:13 says fallen unregenerate men were entering heaven. Now the Calvinists want me to prove it. LOL God inspired every word of scripture, and Matthew 23:13 is scripture, therefore my "proof" is the truth of God's inspired word.

This is the third time I asked you to show me in the word using synthetic exegesis. So obviously you don't know the word because you would have shown me by now OR you don't know what synthetic exegesis is and so we're back to you lacking the exegetical ability to determine what the words says and doesn't say. Tisk tisk.

 

[Yeshua1]

You have got to love them folks, post #101 is simply putting forth a logical fallacy to change the subject.

No one seeks God all the time because we all sin some of the time. That is Paul's argument in Romans 3 in context, that we are all under sin.

1 Corinthians 2:14-3:3 teaches that fallen unregenerate people cannot understand spiritual meat, but they can understand spiritual milk.

Matthew 23:13 teaches that fallen unregenerate men were actually entering heaven, and therefore seeking God effectively.

Taken together, they prove to any objective reader that Total Spiritual Inability is unbiblical and that the doctrine of Limited Spiritual Ability is what the Bible actually teaches.

Having no response, they resort to logical fallacies, saying I am often wrong, I take things out of context, and so forth and so on.

he Holy Spirit plainly said to us that the inconverted/unsaved CANNOT receive the things of God, as they would be foolish to him, and yet you are able to say that you know something about sinners that he did not?

And that Matthew passage teaches the opposite of what you keep claiming that it does...
So t

 

[Van]

I see the RT likes to change the subject to my qualifications! So yet another logical fallacy argument. This is all they have folks.

And Yeshua1, you failed to say whether the verse says "all spiritual things" or "some spiritual things?" Contextually it says some spiritual things, i.e. spiritual meat. Why did you not address the issue?

Bottom line, scripture teaches fallen unregenerate people have "Limited Spiritual Ability" because they cannot understand, before they are indwelt, spiritual meat. But as men of flesh, they can understand spiritual milk. Just read 1 Corinthians 2:14-3:3 folks.

 

[robustheologian]

You lost this argument a long time ago. Daniel 5:27

 

[Van]

LOL, RT now declares his side "won" the argument! You have got to love them.

Because men were able to be entering heaven they were seeking God effectively, thus Total Spiritual Inability is mistaken doctrine, and Limited Spiritual Ability is the actual biblical doctrine. To say the opponents, whose argument was "taint so" won is to be disingenuous.

No one seeks God all the time because we all sin. But no verse says we never seek God at any time, because that would conflict with Matthew 23:13, which tells us of men seeking God effectively without being enabled with Irresistible Grace. To claim the "deniers" won this argument by saying "taint so" is disingenuous.

Natural men, unregenerate men of flesh, cannot understand some spiritual things (spiritual meat) is true, but because Paul taught folks as men of flesh, using milk, demonstrates to any objective reader, that men of flesh can understand some spiritual things. To say the "deniers" won this argument by saying "taint so" is disingenuous.

Four points of the Calvinist TULIP, i.e. TULI are mistaken doctrines with no actual support in scripture. They have poured Calvinism into the text by selectively choosing verses out of context and adding a little here and taking a little away there.

How were we chosen, unconditionally or through faith in the truth? Through faith!!

Did God desire all men to be saved or just some? All men!!

Did Jesus die for the church or all mankind? Both!!

Were the men entering heaven blocked? Yes, thus the grace was not irresistible.

 

[robustheologian]

Sigh...some people just don't get it.

 

[Van]

Some people just deny the obvious. Calvinism has no answer to the straightforward teaching of these three passages. So they (1) declare victory, (2) insinuate their opponents are dullards, and (3) hide from addressing scripture.

Total Spiritual Inability has been demonstrated as mistaken doctrine as follows:
1) No one seeks God does not say as Calvinism claims, no one seeks God at any time while unregenerate. This is an example of adding to the text to pour Calvinism into the text. Contextually, Paul is saying since no one seeks God all the time, we all sin, therefore everyone is under sin.

2) The passage 1 Corinthians 2:14 to 3:3 teaches that fallen natural men cannot understand some spiritual things, spiritual meat, because they are not indwelt. But men of flesh can understand spiritual milk, the fundamentals of the gospel.

3) Matthew 23:13 teaches some men were entering heaven, and thus seeking God effectively, while unregenerate and not under the compulsion of irresistible grace, because they were blocked. This verse teaches both Total Spiritual Inability and Irresistible Grace are mistaken doctrines.

Collectively, we find that these three verses provide objective evidence Calvinism is in error.

Four points of the Calvinist TULIP, i.e. TULI are mistaken doctrines with no actual support in scripture. They have poured Calvinism into the text by selectively choosing verses out of context and adding a little here and taking a little away there.

How were we chosen, unconditionally or through faith in the truth? Through faith!!

Did God desire all men to be saved or just some? All men!!

Did Jesus die for the church or all mankind? Both!!

Were the men entering heaven blocked? Yes, thus the grace was not irresistible.

 

[robustheologian]

Proverbs 26:4

 

[Van]

Note that the Calvinist continues to run from any discussion of the three verses.

What next, will he try to justify hiding from the truth by calling me a fool? But that would just be another logical fallacy offered by Calvinists.

You have got to love them.

Total Spiritual Inability has been demonstrated as mistaken doctrine as follows:
1) No one seeks God does not say as Calvinism claims, no one seeks God at any time while unregenerate. This is an example of adding to the text to pour Calvinism into the text. Contextually, Paul is saying since no one seeks God all the time, we all sin, therefore everyone is under sin.

2) The passage 1 Corinthians 2:14 to 3:3 teaches that fallen natural men cannot understand some spiritual things, spiritual meat, because they are not indwelt. But men of flesh can understand spiritual milk, the fundamentals of the gospel.

3) Matthew 23:13 teaches some men were entering heaven, and thus seeking God effectively, while unregenerate and not under the compulsion of irresistible grace, because they were blocked. This verse teaches both Total Spiritual Inability and Irresistible Grace are mistaken doctrines.

Collectively, we find that these three verses provide objective evidence Calvinism is in error.

Four points of the Calvinist TULIP, i.e. TULI are mistaken doctrines with no actual support in scripture. They have poured Calvinism into the text by selectively choosing verses out of context and adding a little here and taking a little away there.

How were we chosen, unconditionally or through faith in the truth? Through faith!!

Did God desire all men to be saved or just some? All men!!

Did Jesus die for the church or all mankind? Both!!

Were the men entering heaven blocked? Yes, thus the grace was not irresistible.

 

[savedbymercy]

Note that the Calvinist continues to run from any discussion of the three verses.

What next, will he try to justify hiding from the truth by calling me a fool? But that would just be another logical fallacy offered by Calvinists.

You have got to love them.

Total Spiritual Inability has been demonstrated as mistaken doctrine as follows:
1) No one seeks God does not say as Calvinism claims, no one seeks God at any time while unregenerate. This is an example of adding to the text to pour Calvinism into the text. Contextually, Paul is saying since no one seeks God all the time, we all sin, therefore everyone is under sin.

2) The passage 1 Corinthians 2:14 to 3:3 teaches that fallen natural men cannot understand some spiritual things, spiritual meat, because they are not indwelt. But men of flesh can understand spiritual milk, the fundamentals of the gospel.

3) Matthew 23:13 teaches some men were entering heaven, and thus seeking God effectively, while unregenerate and not under the compulsion of irresistible grace, because they were blocked. This verse teaches both Total Spiritual Inability and Irresistible Grace are mistaken doctrines.

Collectively, we find that these three verses provide objective evidence Calvinism is in error.

Four points of the Calvinist TULIP, i.e. TULI are mistaken doctrines with no actual support in scripture. They have poured Calvinism into the text by selectively choosing verses out of context and adding a little here and taking a little away there.

How were we chosen, unconditionally or through faith in the truth? Through faith!!

Did God desire all men to be saved or just some? All men!!

Did Jesus die for the church or all mankind? Both!!

Were the men entering heaven blocked? Yes, thus the grace was not irresistible.

None by nature seeks after God and none by nature understands God Rom 3:11 !

 

[Protestant]

That is right, Romans 3:10-11 does not say none seek God at any time, it is just a statement that none seek God at some time. Man by his nature does seek God some of the time.

This is the first time viewing this thread and I find it incredulous how Van is able to pervert what is so clearly stated in Scripture:

As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.

12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

The universal negative employed in all these propositions refutes the possibility that:

1. There are some righteous.

2. There are some that understand.

3. There are some who seek God.

4. There are some not gone out of the way.

5. There are some that are profitable.

6. There are some that do good.

The double negative, "no, not one" refutes the possibility of "some" doing otherwise.

Van would have Paul teach, "there is none who seek after God, but there are some who seek after God some of the time.

This is a logical contradiction.

But alas, logic is not Van's strong suit.

I would that God grant him the limited spiritual ability he covets so dearly.

 

[Robert William]

:thumbs::thumbs:

Sigh...some people just don't get it.

I'll be in touch, I forgot to subscribe to this thread.

 

[Van]

Hi SBM, you can continue to present non-scriptural rewrites till the cows come home, but your assertions are not how scripture reads. Your additions are bogus.

 

[Van]

Hi Protestant, thanks for attempting to defend your beliefs!

1) We all sin at some time or another, for all have fallen short of the glory of God. Therefore there are none that are righteous. This truth does not support your Total Spiritual Inability doctrine.

2) The universal negative relates to being righteous. However some men some of the time do seek after God, Matthew 23:13. So the universal negative does not preclude some understanding some of the time. Valid doctrine must be consistent with all scripture.

3) Logically there are none who seek after God all the time, or there are none who seek after God when they are sinning. That does not contradict that some seek after God, i.e. Matthew 23:13.

4) Efforts to bolster your argument using logical fallacies demonstrates the inherent weakness of your argument.

Just for grins, folks, open your Bibles to Psalm 14. Note how the none refers not to all mankind, but to wicked fools who say there is no God. Keep reading to verse 5, and note that some seek God as a refuge. So the premise, no one ever seeks God, is unbiblical.

Total Spiritual Inability has been demonstrated as mistaken doctrine as follows:
1) No one seeks God does not say as Calvinism claims, no one seeks God at any time while unregenerate. This is an example of adding to the text to pour Calvinism into the text. Contextually, Paul is saying since no one seeks God all the time, we all sin, therefore everyone is under sin.

2) The passage 1 Corinthians 2:14 to 3:3 teaches that fallen natural men cannot understand some spiritual things, spiritual meat, because they are not indwelt. But men of flesh can understand spiritual milk, the fundamentals of the gospel.

3) Matthew 23:13 teaches some men were entering heaven, and thus seeking God effectively, while unregenerate and not under the compulsion of irresistible grace, because they were blocked. This verse teaches both Total Spiritual Inability and Irresistible Grace are mistaken doctrines.

Collectively, we find that these three verses provide objective evidence Calvinism is in error.

Four points of the Calvinist TULIP, i.e. TULI are mistaken doctrines with no actual support in scripture. They have poured Calvinism into the text by selectively choosing verses out of context and adding a little here and taking a little away there.

How were we chosen, unconditionally or through faith in the truth? Through faith!!

Did God desire all men to be saved or just some? All men!!

Did Jesus die for the church or all mankind? Both!!

Were the men entering heaven blocked? Yes, thus the grace was not irresistible.

 

[DHK]

This is the first time viewing this thread and I find it incredulous how Van is able to pervert what is so clearly stated in Scripture:

As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.

12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

The universal negative employed in all these propositions refutes the possibility that:

1. There are some righteous.

2. There are some that understand.

3. There are some who seek God.

4. There are some not gone out of the way.

5. There are some that are profitable.

6. There are some that do good.

The double negative, "no, not one" refutes the possibility of "some" doing otherwise.

Van would have Paul teach, "there is none who seek after God, but there are some who seek after God some of the time.

This is a logical contradiction.

But alas, logic is not Van's strong suit.

I would that God grant him the limited spiritual ability he covets so dearly.

And does it say:
Romans 3:15 Their feet are swift to shed blood:
or,
Some feet were swift to shed blood.

Before you came to Christ, how much blood did you shed? How many people have you killed by your own hand? Was it well thought out and swift? Did you use a sword or a gun? Tell us about it.

Or do you think, that just perhaps, this is a general statement describing the heart of the unregenerate and that some of mankind do indeed act like this. This is typical of some men who do represent all of mankind. And no man is above committing murder, especially in their unsaved state. Even David's hands were "swift to shed blood," were they not?