The Freewill Invitation system is a False Gospel

[Winman]

Winman a Calvinist?????:BangHead: You got to be kidding me! Winman did use scripture to support his position and explained it. You simply did what your buddy Moriah did - assert he was wrong but avoid dealing with the evidence he placed before you.

Yes, this is laughable. Do you know how many times I have been called a Pelagian?

I simply showed that when repentance is spoken of, if you keep reading, this repentance is explained.

In the case of John the Baptist and the Pharisees/Sadducees, John told them they need to "think not" that they were the children of Abraham. These folks believed they were saved by inheritance from their fathers. They needed to understand salvation cannot be inherited, and that a person must see themselves as a lost sinner and depend on God's mercy for salvation.

Jesus showed those persons who believed they were righteous that they were no more righteous than those killed by Pilate and those killed when a tower fell on them. They needed to repent or change their view that calamity was a sign of God's displeasure with a person, and that because they had not experienced calamity that they were in right standing with God.

Peter showed the Jews that they had crucified the Christ. He told them they needed to change their view of Jesus and believe he was the Christ and depend upon him as Saviour.

In none of these instances were the people told they needed to stop sinning to be saved. They were all told they need to turn from a false view and see themselves as sinners and depend on God for forgiveness.

I am no Calvinist. I believe Jeremiah was elect, but not in the way Biblicist sees it. I believe God in his foreknowledge knows who will trust in him and elected these persons.

 

[Moriah]

Yes, this is laughable. Do you know how many times I have been called a Pelagian?

I guess you want to keep laughing at a misunderstanding by Biblicist, because HP said or those leaning hard towards Calvinism.

I simply showed that when repentance is spoken of, if you keep reading, this repentance is explained.

You do not explain it correctly.

In the case of John the Baptist and the Pharisees/Sadducees, John told them they need to "think not" that they were the children of Abraham. These folks believed they were saved by inheritance from their fathers. They needed to understand salvation cannot be inherited, and that a person must see themselves as a lost sinner and depend on God's mercy for salvation.

That is about believing in Jesus. Where do you get that it means they do not have to repent of sins? The Pharisees and teachers of the law were the only ones who were not baptized with John’s baptism! That means they did not repent of their sins.

Jesus showed those persons who believed they were righteous that they were no more righteous than those killed by Pilate and those killed when a tower fell on them. They needed to repent or change their view that calamity was a sign of God's displeasure with a person, and that because they had not experienced calamity that they were in right standing with God.

How does this prove that we do not have to repent of sins, as you say we do not have to?

Peter showed the Jews that they had crucified the Christ. He told them they needed to change their view of Jesus and believe he was the Christ and depend upon him as Saviour.

How does this prove that we do not have to repent of sins?

In none of these instances were the people told they needed to stop sinning to be saved. They were all told they need to turn from a false view and see themselves as sinners and depend on God for forgiveness.

Preaching Christ crucified is teaching that we have to stop sinning. First, one has to believe in Jesus though! Nothing you said here supports not repenting of sins. Everything you spoke of supports believing in Jesus, it is not supportive of not repenting of sins. When we believe in Jesus, we are believing in the fact that Jesus died for our sins, and that sins are wrong.
Whom better than the devil and those not wanting to give up sins do you preach to when you preach the way you do? What injustice are you doing to those who want to be saved but are being hindered when you preach we do not have to confess our sins and repent?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Winman: Repentance is the realization that we are sinners in danger of perishing. ....

If so, it is natural that we should desire never to repeat these actions again. We will fail of course, but overall we will have a new attitude that desires never to sin against God again.

HP: The common drunk may fully realize that he is a sinner and in danger of perishing. That is NOT repentance until he has a change of heart towards his sin, exercises what Scripture denotes as 'godly sorrow,' asks God for forgiveness and purposes to end such a life forever.

If it is so natural that we do not desire to repeat those actions again as you express it is, why is it that we even have preachers on this list that testify to sinning every day as believers? Tell us Winman, how is that showing repentance for ones sins or a desire to stop sinning when one has already decided they are going to fail before one ever begins to trust God to keep one from falling? You said 'we will fail of course,' did you not? How does that show a repentant heart or a change of attitude towards ones sins? That sounds more like a plan for designed failure than a change of heart and attitude towards sin.

 

[DHK]

How does this prove that we do not have to repent of sins?

Preaching Christ crucified is teaching that we have to stop sinning.

That is not the "Christ crucified" that I preach.
What you are preaching is a gospel of works. It is entire sanctification which no one can reach this side of heaven. Have you stopped sinning? I know the answer, but will you admit to it? If you have to stop sinning to get to heaven then you will never get there.