why I am not a Calvinist

"JonC,

Yes, I referenced Grasping God's Word.

Words have meaning and that meaning is different from commentary about concepts.

I never said that. Where did I say this is what it means to me? I said the biblical use is what is important.

None were given.This itself is a false accusation.

This is the problem...I do not care for what you think, I seem to suggest. I will say what I want to say. I will say it directly, I do not need you to say what you think I seem to suggest. no thanks

Believe it or not, I can live without you calling me biblically illiterate of foolish, insulting ,or anything else.

Great glad you know that. Now try and practice that with those you post to. Once again, I would request you avoid interacting with me. Thanks in advance.

 

But, how good a preacher was he? Did he stick strictly to Scripture? Did he actually lead people to Jesus? Or was he merely an entertaining demagogue?

The man I wrote of above was a GENUINE PREACHER OF THE GOSPEL. I never heard one unbiblical thing in his preaching, & never heard anyone else who'd listened to him more often than I mention any false preaching, either.

 

Good , so stop posting that way to me, Stop posting to me at all. I will get along just fine.

 

As for some of the "faith" discussions above - Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

That should end all argument about what BIBLICAL faith is.

 

I didn't hear him but Church members who seemed genuine spoke of the situation. I did a search trying to find more into to share. But in the process I found several bank robbing pastors who had buffaloes their congregations.

 

Not sure really how you can ask that? Haven't you seen many through the years which didn't deny it was true but said they don't want to give up their ungodly ways? Some have said perhaps when they get old they'll turn to God. I see nothing in cases like that which suggests they don't believe it's true.

 

Well I'd challenge your statement "would not be true". If they understand what's being offered to them and what's expected of them you can't say in an absolute sense the gospel was hidden from them. If you're in a dark room you might understand there's light on the other side. One can yield however to seducing thoughts which blinds you to the significance of your wrong actions.

I could say it even in regard to one engaged in theological discussions. You might be Calvinistic but I could say Calvinsitic teachers have blinded you as to the truth of scripture. Such doesn't mean though you don't have the capacity to make a stand and consider other things. Generally the human race has yielded to seduction which appeals to their flesh but such doesn't mean they can't assess information and decide otherwise.

So I'd say my point still stands. People can see as you call it the genuine gospel and still understand it but also reject it. As I mentioned it happens all the time with people that say when I get older I'll get saved. There's nothing there which says they didn't understand the gospel.

 

Well Jon I'm not sure how they could have sound doctrine and believe they're saved by works. and at least what the other poster and I were talking about was can someone actually understand the gospel....yes that it's not by works, and they even understand grace but still reject it. I'd suggest they can as I've seen it through the years. I'm sure maybe you have as well.

 

So, ya didn't hear him preach? Well, we don't know how genuine his ministry was, do we? But I remember that Hebrews 6:4-6 isn't included in Scripture just to fill space. I have no reason not to believe the man I mentioned wasn't saved at all, but still preached successfully before giving in to the temptations of hookers, booze, & dope again, 3 things he useta do before his ministry & after.

The founder of the snake-handlers' cult, George W. Hensley, was a drunk who married 4 times, & died in 1955 as the result of a rattlesnake bite he received while conducting one of his cultic services. Now, I seriously doubt he was ever saved, but his falsehood was apparent from the gitgo.

 

3/4 of the seeds in the soils wash out in the parable of the sower. Only 1/4 remain planted in "good soil". I've seen way too much to trust any pastor anytime based on their profession.

 

You need to remember there was an entire thread started excusing that kind posting and blaming the recipients as feeling guilty as to why they were offended by it. Now in response to your questioning that antagonism they are guilty of the:

"tu quoque"
You avoided having to engage with criticism by turning it back on the accuser - you answered criticism with criticism.
Pronounced too-kwo-kwee. Literally translating as 'you too' this fallacy is also known as the appeal to hypocrisy. It is commonly employed as an effective red herring because it takes the heat off someone having to defend their argument, and instead shifts the focus back on to the person making the criticism.

Your logical fallacy is tu quoque