What Is Reformed Theology?

[37818]

May it's your Calvinist upbringing.
MB

I am not Calvinist. An you start with a "strawman" argument, "It means you have to work to keep your Salvation." Which is not even Christian, and is not even Calvinist. Which means you do not know what you are talking about,

 

[atpollard]

I've tried to get Calvinist to prove these things exist and not one has ever done that. Oh they show scripture and then ad there interpretation.

Forgive me if I have confused you with another rabid ‘anti-Calvinist’ but aren’t you the person that likes to add words to the middle of verses to explain why they don’t say what Calvinists read? If so, then accusing others of doing what in reality you are the one doing is more than a little hypocritical.

 

[atpollard]

I have presented Jn 3:16 and they try to tell me that world means the elect.

So what? Even if God loves every person in the world without exception, John 3:16 still says that WHOSOEVER BELIEVES shall not perish, so all of the unbelievers WILL perish!

John 6:44 explains who the “WHOSOEVER BELIEVES” of John 3:16 that will not perish is ... those the Father draws to the Son. John 10 offers an extended explanation on the difference between those that the Father has GIVEN to the Son (His sheep) and those that are not His sheep (and DO NOT BELIEVE BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT HIS SHEEP).

Go look it up. There is no interpretation in what I have presented. I have simply told you what the Bible says. Read the verses for yourself. Quote them and prove me wrong. You will not because you cannot. You can only offer a different INTERPRETATION of those verses and try to explain to me why they do not mean what they say.

It will not work ...

• WHOSOEVER BELIEVES is Biblical
• THE FATHER DRAWS is Biblical
• DO NOT BELIEVE BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT MY SHEEP is Biblical
• (My sheep) WHOM THE FATHER HAS GIVEN ME is Biblical

so you cannot prove that the Bible does not say what it says.

 

[AustinC]

I do not agree with the Alexandrian text. It's a Jehovah's Witness Bible.
MB

I don't care. I share from the ESV as it is closest to the original. I take your complaint as a cop-out.

 

[Barry Johnson]

This is a cop-out that misses one central point of biblical theology, biblical interpretation, etc. It isn't so much "what it says" that matters, but "what does what it says mean" matters greatly.

In Nehemiah 8 we have the Levites helping the people to understand the Law that was being read to them. Notice that v. 8 shows that the reading from the book was not sufficient; the leaders explained the text to the people ("gave the sense") so that they would understand what was being read.

So, it isn't quite as simple as "what the bible actually says."

What is more, to look at this verse or that verse, or even this passage or that passage, while ignoring the over-arching themes of biblical theology (Creation-Fall-Redemption-Glorification) is to ignore the meaning of the entirety of the Bible. So singling out verses and demanding a verse for this concept or that concept is really a quite superficial way to go about the things of Scripture.

The Archangel

We have a complete bible . We can't understand Leviticus properly without Hebrews.

 

[Barry Johnson]

This is a cop-out that misses one central point of biblical theology, biblical interpretation, etc. It isn't so much "what it says" that matters, but "what does what it says mean" matters greatly.

In Nehemiah 8 we have the Levites helping the people to understand the Law that was being read to them. Notice that v. 8 shows that the reading from the book was not sufficient; the leaders explained the text to the people ("gave the sense") so that they would understand what was being read.

So, it isn't quite as simple as "what the bible actually says."

What is more, to look at this verse or that verse, or even this passage or that passage, while ignoring the over-arching themes of biblical theology (Creation-Fall-Redemption-Glorification) is to ignore the meaning of the entirety of the Bible. So singling out verses and demanding a verse for this concept or that concept is really a quite superficial way to go about the things of Scripture.

The Archangel

As a Calvinist it is no longer possible to read what the bible says. The system has to be dropped first .

 

[Barry Johnson]

I don't care. I share from the ESV as it is closest to the original. I take your complaint as a cop-out.

Esv = calvinist bible .

 

[AustinC]

Esv = calvinist bible .

LOL
Barry, you just jumped the shark.

 

[The Archangel]

As a Calvinist it is no longer possible to read what the bible says. The system has to be dropped first .

This is an incredibly idiotic and ignorant statement!

Also, you are failing to realize that many Calvinists (such as myself) have never read Calvin at length. Additionally, you fail to realize that all of us read the Bible according to some system. The proper reading of Scripture is done according to biblical theology, which is what most Calvinists I know strive to do.

What you’ve demonstrated is a commitment to a system of sorts that exalts man as a self-determining automaton on the level of the Creator who can interfere with or thwart the plans of God. It doesn’t take much reading of Scripture to see your system is vapid nonsense.

The Archangel


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[37818]

@MB, @Barry Johnson,

First off, I like both you gus because you want to take a stand agains Calvinism.

Second, the purpose of this thread is to first understand the Biblical texts that Calvinists use which gives them the reasons for what they believe.

Third, give correct Biblical understandings of the texts where needed. In other words, identify incorrect presuppositions.that the Calvinist actually hold.

 

[Barry Johnson]

This is an incredibly idiotic and ignorant statement!

Also, you are failing to realize that many Calvinists (such as myself) have never read Calvin at length. Additionally, you fail to realize that all of us read the Bible according to some system. The proper reading of Scripture is done according to biblical theology, which is what most Calvinists I know strive to do.

What you’ve demonstrated is a commitment to a system of sorts that exalts man as a self-determining automaton on the level of the Creator who can interfere with or thwart the plans of God. It doesn’t take much reading of Scripture to see your system is vapid nonsense.

The Archangel


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A jehovah witness can still be a jw without ever reading Charles taze Russell. The devil makes sure to decieve those who give themselves over to an ' ism '

 

[The Archangel]

A jehovah witness can still be a jw without ever reading Charles taze Russell. The devil makes sure to decieve those who give themselves over to an ' ism '

Are you really intending to say Calvinists are deceived by the devil?

The Archangel


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Barry Johnson]

Are you really intending to say Calvinists are deceived by the devil?

The Archangel


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Are you really intending to say Calvinists are deceived by the devil?

The Archangel


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. 2 cor 11.3

 

[The Archangel]

But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. 2 cor 11.3

Hmmm... just because you can’t seem to grasp the deep things of God and His word does not mean that those who do are of the devil.

The Archangel


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Barry Johnson]

Hmmm... just because you can’t seem to grasp the deep things of God and His word does not mean that those who do are of the devil.

The Archangel


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. If there ever was a system that this verse applies ,Calvinsm is it.

 

[The Archangel]

corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. If there ever was a system that this verse applies ,Calvinsm is it.

You just keep on digging your hole deeper, don’t you?

The Archangel


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Barry Johnson]

You just keep on digging your hole deeper, don’t you?

The Archangel


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Augustine already dug it for the calvinists

 

[MB]

Let’s test that Hypothesis:

[Rom 3:10-12 KJV] 10 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.

How many are righteous?
How many understand?
Who seeks after God?
Who does good?

What does scripture say without any “interpretation”?
(Let the backpedaling contradictions begin.)

Just look at who originally said this nonsemse.
Psa 14:1 To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David. The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
I know you think this is total depravity but the fool also says there is no God. Do you still want to believe the rant of a fool Not to mention no where in or near this passage does it say this is the condition of all men in there natural state. The fool is saying this about the righteous.IMHO

I do not deny that before Salvation man is evil. I just do not believe it has disabled all men from understanding the milk of the word.
MB

 

[MB]

I don't care. I share from the ESV as it is closest to the original. I take your complaint as a cop-out.

From a Jehovah witness bible. It is at best a commentary of the least likely to be true.
MB

 

[atpollard]

Just look at who originally said this nonsemse.
Psa 14:1 To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David. The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
I know you think this is total depravity but the fool also says there is no God. Do you still want to believe the rant of a fool Not to mention no where in or near this passage does it say this is the condition of all men in there natural state. The fool is saying this about the righteous.IMHO

I do not deny that before Salvation man is evil. I just do not believe it has disabled all men from understanding the milk of the word.
MB

As predicted, you do not just let scripture speak for itself but have INTERPRETED Romans 3 to change the plain meaning of what Paul wrote. Your claim of being free of personal interpretation is proven utter nonsense.

Whether or not I want to believe a fool is irrelevant. The question was “What did Paul write in Romans 3?” The plain, simple meaning without any interpretation.