R. C. Sproul Jr.

[wretched]

 

Generalize much? Faith comes by hearing......

 

Do you have Scriptural evidence for your "hunch"?

 

 

Certainly I generalize just as anyone who has been around a day or two does. The longer you live the more you realize everyone is 99% the same. Minor personality differences and minor appearance difference make up the remaining 1% IMO.

Jesus said He needs no one to testify of man because He knew what was in man. No one needs to hear your excuses for following your flesh into Calvinism. You did it for the same reasons everyone else did it; it makes your life a lukewarm, fleshly and easy existence.

You as with your lazy friends now never will pick up your cross, forsaking your pride and dignity and suffer reproach for Him. You talked yourselves out of it by lying to yourselves over Calvinism. You don't fool anyone guy. You certainly don't fool the Lord.

Now for your second fleshly question: Check out Ezekiel :

Eze 3:18, When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand.
Eze 3:19, Yet if thou warn the wicked, and he turn not from his wickedness, nor from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul.

Look friend, all false teachings originates in the flesh of man, calvin is among the worst of them. It turns what could have been a reproductive servant of God bearing much fruit into a useless theologian, full of intellectual pride. I am sure that rings a bell with several "intellectuals" on here

 

 

[Standing Firm In Christ]

Of course free willer's are saved. it is Jesus that saves, not that you a monergistic or synergistic belief. 

There is a false assumption that people who are monergistic do not evangelize. Google quotes from Calvin on the subject, you'll be surprised what he taught on the subject.

so, which Jesus is it that saves?  The one who died only for an elect few? or the one who died for even the one that denies Him?

 

they are not the same.

[Leonard Sylvia]

in other words,.."I have no idea how Calvinism/Monergism/Covenant Theology works, I have never really studied it outside of what I have been told so I paint a broadbrush over people to erect strawmen arguments.

Again, where is your Scriptural support for your attendance in watching people to whom you should have witnessed to?

 

I dont know how I did that, but I was replying to wretched's comment. I wasnt putting words in his mouth or making it appear as he was saying something he wasnt

so, which Jesus is it that saves?  The one who died only for an elect few? or the one who died for even the one that denies Him?

 

they are not the same.

the Jesus of the Bible. The Jesus who lays his life down for the sheep, not the goats.

No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
John 6:44

[Standing Firm In Christ]

 

the Jesus of the Bible. The Jesus who lays his life down for the sheep, not the goats.

No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
John 6:44

and, which Jesus do you believe that to be?  The one that died that only the elect could be saved? or the one that died so that every human being would have the opportunity to receive Salvation?

[Leonard Sylvia]

 I answered that, did you see that? Many are called but few are chosen, do you believe that?

Edited August 1, 2015 by Leonard Sylvia

[wretched]

 

the Jesus of the Bible. The Jesus who lays his life down for the sheep, not the goats.

No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
John 6:44

Sure guy, sure. Whatever makes you feel better but mark these words because you will hear them again.

Have fun at satan's disposal down here.

Edited August 3, 2015 by wretched

[Leonard Sylvia]

Seeing that God takes no pleasure in the wicked's demise; this is a very telling comment from you. I admitted my mistake,yet,you don't even see to show any compassion to excuse?

 Very telling. I hope sincerely I am miss reading you.

[Alimantado]

Seeing that God takes no pleasure in the wicked's demise; this is a very telling comment from you. I admitted my mistake,yet,you don't even see to show any compassion to excuse?

 Very telling. I hope sincerely I am miss reading you.

Leonard, to put you in the picture: there are a number of folk on here, Hearstrings being one of them, who do not only believe that a person who holds to reformed teachings is mistaken. They also maintain that such a person is necessarily unsaved. So to them, talking to you (or any so-called 'Calvinist') is like talking to a hindu or a muslim or whatever.

SFIC goes a step further and holds that any person who is mistaken about anything in scripture is unsaved. He makes that point very clear in this thread.

[Leonard Sylvia]

Leonard, to put you in the picture: there are a number of folk on here, Hearstrings being one of them, who do not only believe that a person who holds to reformed teachings is mistaken. They also maintain that such a person is necessarily unsaved. So to them, talking to you (or any so-called 'Calvinist') is like talking to a hindu or a muslim or whatever.

SFIC goes a step further and holds that any person who is mistaken about anything in scripture is unsaved. He makes that point very clear in this thread.

So these people are right and 2,000 years of teaching from then till now, everyone has been mistaken?That is just plain sad, that is behavior that doesn't reflect Christ. To be honest, that is reflective more of a cult-type personality.

[John81]

Leonard, to put you in the picture: there are a number of folk on here, Hearstrings being one of them, who do not only believe that a person who holds to reformed teachings is mistaken. They also maintain that such a person is necessarily unsaved. So to them, talking to you (or any so-called 'Calvinist') is like talking to a hindu or a muslim or whatever.

SFIC goes a step further and holds that any person who is mistaken about anything in scripture is unsaved. He makes that point very clear in this thread.

We do need to be cautious in these matters. If a person hears the Gospel of Christ and they yield to the prompting of the Holy Ghost to receive Christ, they are born again in Christ. There is no litmus test requiring a person have a particular stance upon "Calvinism", "Arminianism", or other competing points in this area; or to even know such exist. In my own case, I was saved for years before I ever even heard of these things.

If a person is born again in Christ, then later studies Scripture and comes to the conclusion "Calvinism" is correct, that doesn't mean they are lost and they don't lose their salvation. Likewise, if a born again person later studies Scripture and comes to the conclusion "Calvinism" is wrong , that doesn't make them saved at that point or make them somehow more saved.

A person can be mistaken, ignorant of, or plain outright wrong about many things beyond the Gospel of salvation and yet be born again. Most folks actually know very little of Scripture before they are saved, but that doesn't prevent them from being saved. What they learn later, the particular views they come to believe later on a host of other issues, doesn't determine the state of their salvation. I've even heard a few folks claim if a person doesn't believe in the pre-trib rapture, with some requiring belief even to various details, that's evidence they aren't saved. That's wrong.

[Alimantado]

Huge Amen to that, John.

[Alimantado]

So these people are right and 2,000 years of teaching from then till now, everyone has been mistaken?That is just plain sad, that is behavior that doesn't reflect Christ. To be honest, that is reflective more of a cult-type personality.

No. More than just mistaken--that was my exact point. Simply holding that a belief contrary to one's own is mistaken is pretty much the definition of having a belief, isn't it? We all do that. After all, you yourself believe that all the Christians over the past 2,000 years who have been interpreting the verses you've just been arguing about differently to you have been mistaken, right?

[Leonard Sylvia]

No. More than just mistaken--that was my exact point. Simply holding that a belief contrary to one's own is mistaken is pretty much the definition of having a belief, isn't it? We all do that. After all, you yourself believe that all the Christians over the past 2,000 years who have been interpreting the verses you've just been arguing about differently to you have been mistaken, right?

yes, you are correct. But I believe that Arminians are believers, though they are wrong how they came to their conclusions, I don't doubt or not break fellowship with them because of that. To hold otherwise is just plain ignorance.

i read that post you linked to, and my jaw dropped many times reading that. There seems to be no context to any historical orthodoxy. Where do people get this from?

 

[wretched]

Sure guy, sure. Whatever makes you feel better but mark these words because you will hear them again.

Have fun at satan's disposal down here.

Hey, look at me, I am quoting myself now.

Just to be clear, my opposition to calvin worship is that it renders what could be a fruitful servant of God into a lukewarm and useless waste of God's Gift. Which it does and every person reading this knows it does but you quench the Spirit to continue lies about its "theology". One of Impy's better tricks on believers because it feeds the flesh. Satan has nothing to fear from a calvin worshipper.

[heartstrings]

Leonard, to put you in the picture: there are a number of folk on here, Hearstrings being one of them, who do not only believe that a person who holds to reformed teachings is mistaken. They also maintain that such a person is necessarily unsaved. So to them, talking to you (or any so-called 'Calvinist') is like talking to a hindu or a muslim or whatever.

SFIC goes a step further and holds that any person who is mistaken about anything in scripture is unsaved. He makes that point very clear in this thread.

The basic Gospel is Christ Crucified with conviction coming by hearing the Word of God, and the power of the Holy Ghost dealing with a person's sin, God's righteousness and God's judgment. A person can get saved without knowing anything about Arminianism, Calvinism or any other ism. I had never heard of any of those things myself when I got saved.  But as you get in the Word and grow in knowledge, the Holy Spirit living inside you can let you know if something you hear isn't quite right.  We had a pastor who taught strange stuff like "Noah's son Ham was a homosexual" and "God cursed all black people to be slaves because of Ham" and "a baby gets his blood from his father and his body from his mother", "angels cohabited with women" and on I could go. But, thankfully, he was sound on the important things and not everything he taught was wrong. He did teach us that Arminianism and Calvinism are wrong. What if he had taught the other way, that God elected some for heaven and others for Hell? Or that one could lose their salvation? I would have rejected it just like I did the other wacky stuff mentioned above. I'm not going to say that every brother "sitting on the pew" who swallows everything he hears from the pulpit as truth, shrugs it off, and goes on about his daily life without a second thought, is not saved. But I do have a serious problem with those who have studied a serious false doctrine such as Calvinism, defend it as truth, and teach it to others. Methinks that person must not have the witness of the Holy Ghost and Jesus in his heart. Because, when I got saved, and was full of the love of God, I just believed that Jesus could save anybody and was willing to save everybody; and I found that is exactly what the King James Bible teaches.

Edited August 5, 2015 by heartstrings