Jump to content
Online Baptist

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 307
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

You know, my observation of Calvinism is that a) it isn't learned from the Bible - it comes from the teaching of men - many books and 'much learning' - and b) it presents itself as an intellectual doc

OK, if Bro. Dave will not "rag on MacArthur" I will. I will also disagree with Bro. Dave where he said that MacArthur needs to be taken very carefully. I don't think he should be "taken" at all. MacAr

Deserves a double "like" in my opinion. ;)

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
7 minutes ago, D-28 Player said:

Yes You managed to be civil for two whole posts We might have had a nice conversation if not for your behavior in this thread 

Ah...perhaps I sense a bit of supramisleadingism here...

I well remember your ORIGINAL response to DaveW's question; in which, you later edited out all of your non-civil rhetoric. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
2 minutes ago, No Nicolaitans said:

Ah...perhaps I sense a bit of supramisleadingism here...

I well remember your ORIGINAL response to DaveW's question; in which, you later edited out all of your non-civil rhetoric. 

New words is fun :) maybe I shall reform myself.....NOT

It wouldn't surprise me a bit if your creatively invented words in this thread show up in the next reformed merchandise someone writes as new "doctrines" to intellectualize over.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
22 minutes ago, D-28 Player said:

First you know that it's a lie to say "[Reformed theology] teaches a belief in a system for salvation".

Second given that some of the most prolific evangelists today are Reformed and that Reformed and Confessional churches are growing I think it's safe to say that quite a few people are saved in Reformed churches (and no I don't care whether or not you believe that)

Third any Baptists are Reformed in their theology

Third my "personal method of evangelism" is to present the Gospel and call sinners to repent and receive Christ

Fourth I've witnessed to hundreds of people Our church has an evangelism team of about eighty people 

Fifth I've never led anybody to Christ and neither have you That's the Holy Spirit's job and not ours But I have seen any people repent and receive Christ by faith including any in our own church who are producing good fruit unlike the people here 

Sixth I don't debate "my system of belief" in witnessing because Christ is the focus not my beliefs 

There Consider yourself shocked 

Yes You managed to be civil for two whole posts We might have had a nice conversation if not for your behavior in this thread 

Just trying to fit in with the rest of you 

So have you used your infinite knowledge of Calvinism to correct any of your fellows' lies Or do you support their lies because you're fighting a perceived common enemy? 

This is why you get so little respect here - you first ignore then attack people who are consistently trying to engage you respectfully.

In fact, this is what you and your type do - slyly attack and prod until you get a reaction, then cry that people are rude to you.

You show no respect and only come here with one intent - to cause strife and division.

 

What exactly was the last name you registered here with?

Or the one before that?

Dr James would be able to find out, if he was still here........

Edited by DaveW
Phone spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
6 minutes ago, D-28 Player said:
11 minutes ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Well then, Brother "D-28 Player,"

Since you have earlier indicated that I DID understand the Calvinistic system correctly and that I did NOT have any misconceptions thereof, would you please refrain from including me with the phrase "you ALL" when you make the accusation concerning misconceptions?  Technically, the phrase "you ALL" for that accusation would present a FALSE accusation against me, as per your own acknowledgement of my accuracy.

So have you used your infinite knowledge of Calvinism to correct any of your fellows' lies Or do you support their lies because you're fighting a perceived common enemy? 

Brother "D-28 Player,"

You and I BOTH know full well that NO man has an "infinite knowledge" of anything.  Furthermore, I have NOT claimed "infinite knowledge" concerning the Calvinistic system.  Rather, I have only claimed ACCURATE knowledge thereof, an accurate knowledge that you yourself have acknowledged.  Therefore, I am compelled to conclude that your use of the phrase "infinite knowledge" was intended with sarcasm.  I now wonder if such sarcasm is included within your definition for the sin of "rudeness"?  If it is, then I would have you to consider that you may have now committed that sin against me, and thus also against the Lord our God.  As such, I would humbly challenge you as a dear brother in Christ to make that sin right.

Concerning your question itself --

1.  I do NOT support falsehood in any regard, even when it is falsehood against a doctrinal "opponent."

2.  The other members of this forum were able to observe my accurate presentations concerning the system of Calvinism just as well as you were.  Therefore, if they possessed a misconception concerning one of those points about which I spoke, my presentations certainly had the ability to correct them thereof.  Indeed, if any of them were to ask me questions or respond to me directly, I would certainly be willing to correct any misconceptions.  However, I am not the resident Calvinist in the this thread discussion.  Rather, you are.  Thus it would be better if you the Calvinist would engage in thorough correction and explanation concerning your own system of belief, than if I who am an "opponent" of that belief system should do it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

By the way - I am not referring to myself in my first paragraph above..... I  have no respect for you and expect none from you - because of your manner, not your doctrine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members
24 minutes ago, DaveW said:

This is why you get so little respect here - you first ignore then attack people who are consistently truing to engage you respectfully.

In fact, this is what you are your type do - slyly attack and prod unril you get a reaction, the cry that people are rude to you.

You show no respect and only come here with one intent - to cause strife and division.

 

What exactly was the last name you registered here with?

Or the one before that?

Dr James would be able to find out, if he was still here........

And this is precisely why I said it would be a waste of time trying to talk to you in the other thread 

21 minutes ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

1.  I do NOT support falsehood in any regard, even when it is falsehood against a doctrinal "opponent."

Then I look forward to your posts rebuking your fellows here for their lies 

 

20 minutes ago, DaveW said:

By the way - I am not referring to myself in my first paragraph above..... I  have no respect for you and expect none from you - because of your manner, not your doctrine.

Nor I you and that's why I'm putting you on ignore 

Incidentally you came out swinging fro the beginning not because of my behavior but because of the doctrines you assumed I hold because I corrected a false claim about Calvinism 

 

Edited by D-28 Player
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

...and where is "Fundamental Faith" in all of this? I thought he wanted to have some intellectual discussions. Oh wait...I forgot. He supramisrepresentedismed himself when he joined the board. Feigning one who had concerns about Calvinism and his son's involvement in said Calvinism...all the while, being an actual proponent of Calvinism himself.

Them Calvies are a sneaky bunch...

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Brother "D-28 Player,"

With your usage of the phrase "you all," you have encompasses me also under the accusation concerning many "misconceptions about Reformed theology." 

Unless "you all" really means a subset of "you all"... ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
On ‎4‎/‎4‎/‎2017 at 1:55 PM, Alimantado said:

Orval, I've interpreted your argument here as being that if a person believes there is something necessarily prior to the finished work of Christ, then it follows that the person can only be placing their faith in that thing or things but not in the finished work of Christ itself. Is that your argument? If so then it makes me wonder about my own faith in Jesus Christ, since I also believe there are things necessarily prior to the finished work of Christ, for example God's love for the world and his desire for all to be saved. On the same basis, could someone say that I'm not putting my faith in the finished work of Christ?

"When you place God's desire for all to be saved as a prerequisite for salvation you are placing your faith in a system that begins with God's desire for all to be saved.  If you remove God's desire for all to be saved, then there is no purpose for the death of Christ for without God's desire for all to be saved why would Christ need to die for no one could go to heaven."

 

Hello my brother,

 

Thanks for the message to remind me I had not answered you.  I wrote out a response, did not post it and then forgot about it. Lol

 

I want to first point out two things about the post.

 

1st I do believe that the Reformed position teaches a system and that the launching point of the system is election.  My point being that God, in his sovereignty, has chosen to use election as the cause of salvation.  Of course, this is from the Reformed understanding and not my personal belief.

 

2nd To answer your question directly yes, I do believe the Reformed place their faith in God’s election.  As a continuation to this statement I must also add, that what a person believes currently does not always match up with what he believed aforetime.  Since an extremely high percentage of those in Reformed Theology converted to the Calvinistic system after they were saved their current belief is inconsistent with their practice. 

 

Very few people understand anything about theology when they get saved other than they are convicted of their need to be saved and respond accordingly by belief that Christ died for them and confession that they need salvation.  I do not believe this process changes no matter if you are Reformed or Arminian.  The point of my illustration to D-28 is that if he truly looks at his system of belief it does not hold up in regards to where his faith is placed now as opposed to when he got saved.  If he believed, then what he believes now he could not be saved because his view on sovereignty and election in relation to salvation.  His own theology teaches he cannot be saved unless he is elected to salvation.  This means he cannot come to Christ and if he comes to Christ it is because he is elect.  Therefore, salvation is all about Sovereignty and election and not about Christ.  I am saved because I am elected is a far stretch from I am saved because Christ died for me.  I am not saying D28 is not saved I am saying he could not be saved in the Reformed system because his faith would not have been in Christ but in election.     

 

To answer your second question concerning God’s desire. I freely admit this question is a bit perplexing. When we enter a discussion about God and asking if God’s desire is prerequisite to faith we are dealing with an unknown.  While God’s attributes are knowable how can we know God’s thoughts, for they are above our thoughts. While God’s sovereignty is part of his attributes election is not an attribute.  Because man puts a high value on election, predestination etc. does not mean they are part of God’s core being, his attributes. 

 

If I understand your post, your concern lies in the fact that God has a criterion (based on all of God’s attributes) for offering salvation to all and if you understand an aspect of that criteria that makes your salvation invalid.  That is not what I was implying when I wrote the post.  God is not subject to what man believes, if our faith is placed in Christ and his finished work our salvation is secured in what Christ has done, is currently doing and will do in the future. 

 

Once again, my point was that D-28 could not be saved if he believed in the system he supports at the time of salvation.  I am not challenging he is saved, but his salvation was based on choice and after salvation he chose to believe in the Reformed system.  The reformed system would not have allowed him to get saved.  How can they know they are elect prior to salvation?

 

I hope I have not muddied the waters.

    

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members
45 minutes ago, Orval said:

The point of my illustration to D-28 is that if he truly looks at his system of belief it does not hold up in regards to where his faith is placed now as opposed to when he got saved.  If he believed, then what he believes now he could not be saved because his view on sovereignty and election in relation to salvation.  His own theology teaches he cannot be saved unless he is elected to salvation.  This means he cannot come to Christ and if he comes to Christ it is because he is elect.  Therefore, salvation is all about Sovereignty and election and not about Christ.  I am saved because I am elected is a far stretch from I am saved because Christ died for me.  I am not saying D28 is not saved I am saying he could not be saved in the Reformed system because his faith would not have been in Christ but in election.     

 

You are a liar. Just a flat out unrepentant liar and are of your father the Father of Lies.

No matter how any times you deceitfully misrepresent my views, I will continue to believe and to preach Christ crucified for the forgiveness of sins and salvation by repentance and faith alone in Christ alone.

CHRIST A-LONE!!!! Do you understand that, liar? 

 

54 minutes ago, Orval said:

Once again, my point was that D-28 could not be saved if he believed in the system he supports at the time of salvation.  I am not challenging he is saved, but his salvation was based on choice and after salvation he chose to believe in the Reformed system.  The reformed system would not have allowed him to get saved.  How can they know they are elect prior to salvation?

 

    

If you don't believe that one is not saved by repentance and faith alone in Christ alone then it's you who are not saved not we Christians 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
4 minutes ago, D-28 Player said:

You are a liar. Just a flat out unrepentant liar and are of your father the Father of Lies.

No matter how any times you deceitfully misrepresent my views, I will continue to believe and to preach Christ crucified for the forgiveness of sins and salvation by repentance and faith alone in Christ alone.

CHRIST A-LONE!!!! Do you understand that, liar? 

 

If you don't believe that one is not saved by repentance and faith alone in Christ alone then it's you who are not saved not we Christians 

Good grief man...you know not of what you speak.

Shame on you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
8 minutes ago, D-28 Player said:

You are a liar. Just a flat out unrepentant liar and are of your father the Father of Lies.

No matter how any times you deceitfully misrepresent my views, I will continue to believe and to preach Christ crucified for the forgiveness of sins and salvation by repentance and faith alone in Christ alone.

CHRIST A-LONE!!!! Do you understand that, liar? 

 

If you believe I am a liar then defend your system.  Prove that I misrepresented the Reformed system.  You said yourself you were not saved in a Reformed church, you were saved in a free will church.  I contend that if you believed when you were saved what you believe now your faith would not have not been in Christ but in the system you propagate.  Calling me names will not convince me to disbelieve what I believe to be true. 

Edited by Orval
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members
1 minute ago, Orval said:

If you believe I am a liar then defend your system.  Prove that I misrepresented the Reformed system.  You said yourself you were not saved in a Reformed church, you were saved in a free will church.  I contend that if you believed now what you believed when you got saved your faith would not have not been in Christ but in the system you propagate.  Calling me names will not convince me to disbelieve what I believe to be true. 

Another lie! I never said I was saved in a "Free Will church"! I said that wasn't saved in any church but only became a member of a church after I was saved;

Like I said if you don't believe that repentance and faith alone in Christ alone is what saves then it's you who aren't saved and your fruit of dishonesty shows this to be the case 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
35 minutes ago, Orval said:

Hello my brother,

 

Thanks for the message to remind me I had not answered you.  I wrote out a response, did not post it and then forgot about it. Lol

 

I want to first point out two things about the post.

 

1st I do believe that the Reformed position teaches a system and that the launching point of the system is election.  My point being that God, in his sovereignty, has chosen to use election as the cause of salvation.  Of course, this is from the Reformed understanding and not my personal belief.

 

2nd To answer your question directly yes, I do believe the Reformed place their faith in God’s election.  As a continuation to this statement I must also add, that what a person believes currently does not always match up with what he believed aforetime.  Since an extremely high percentage of those in Reformed Theology converted to the Calvinistic system after they were saved their current belief is inconsistent with their practice. 

 

Very few people understand anything about theology when they get saved other than they are convicted of their need to be saved and respond accordingly by belief that Christ died for them and confession that they need salvation.  I do not believe this process changes no matter if you are Reformed or Arminian.  The point of my illustration to D-28 is that if he truly looks at his system of belief it does not hold up in regards to where his faith is placed now as opposed to when he got saved.  If he believed, then what he believes now he could not be saved because his view on sovereignty and election in relation to salvation.  His own theology teaches he cannot be saved unless he is elected to salvation.  This means he cannot come to Christ and if he comes to Christ it is because he is elect.  Therefore, salvation is all about Sovereignty and election and not about Christ.  I am saved because I am elected is a far stretch from I am saved because Christ died for me.  I am not saying D28 is not saved I am saying he could not be saved in the Reformed system because his faith would not have been in Christ but in election.     

 

To answer your second question concerning God’s desire. I freely admit this question is a bit perplexing. When we enter a discussion about God and asking if God’s desire is prerequisite to faith we are dealing with an unknown.  While God’s attributes are knowable how can we know God’s thoughts, for they are above our thoughts. While God’s sovereignty is part of his attributes election is not an attribute.  Because man puts a high value on election, predestination etc. does not mean they are part of God’s core being, his attributes. 

 

If I understand your post, your concern lies in the fact that God has a criterion (based on all of God’s attributes) for offering salvation to all and if you understand an aspect of that criteria that makes your salvation invalid.  That is not what I was implying when I wrote the post.  God is not subject to what man believes, if our faith is placed in Christ and his finished work our salvation is secured in what Christ has done, is currently doing and will do in the future. 

 

Once again, my point was that D-28 could not be saved if he believed in the system he supports at the time of salvation.  I am not challenging he is saved, but his salvation was based on choice and after salvation he chose to believe in the Reformed system.  The reformed system would not have allowed him to get saved.  How can they know they are elect prior to salvation?

 

I hope I have not muddied the waters.

    

Grateful for this, Orval. I responded to your post because I was interested in a particular argument that it seemed to me you were making about why a hypothetical Calvinist who professes faith in Jesus Christ may not actually have a saving faith, which is that their particular beliefs mean that the object of their faith is wrong. More particularly, that because Calvinists belief in a system, it must necessarily follow that they are putting their faith in the first 'step' in that system, or in the 'cause' as you call it above (bolded orange), which is Election, rather than in Jesus on the cross. I outlined a general form of the argument in my first post to you and asked you whether I'd got it right but you didn't address my outline nor my question directly in your answer.

That's the discussion point I was interested in and I'd be happy to talk more about it, the reason being that, if I'm understanding you correctly, it's an argument I've heard often and at times in my walk with Christ hearing it has had an affect on my own assurance of salvation.

As to the other things you bring up, I don't have any argument with these ones (paraphrased for brevity so correct me if I've got any wrong):

--Calvinism isn't your own belief;

--A person may get saved believing one thing and then go on to believe another, thus still being saved but having a different faith to the saving faith they once had;

--Lots of Calvinists have got saved before becoming Calvinists, and therefore are saved in spite of being Calvinists;

--You aren't saying D28 isn't saved;

The two paras in blue: I don't think I understand them but they don't appear to address what I was bringing up. If we talk some more maybe those points will 'come out in the wash' so to speak.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
12 minutes ago, D-28 Player said:

Another lie! I never said I was saved in a "Free Will church"! I said that wasn't saved in any church but only became a member of a church after I was saved;

Like I said if you don't believe that repentance and faith alone in Christ alone is what saves then it's you who aren't saved and your fruit of dishonesty shows this to be the case 

My apologies for misrepresenting you.  None-the-less you were saved and then joined an Arminian church (which is free will) and it was in this Arminian church that you began your theological trip down the road to being a full blown Calvinist.  But you were saved when you chose to come to Christ you were not saved by believing in election nor in predestination nor in the Sovereignty of God.  You were convicted of sin and responded to that conviction and came to Christ.  Not because you were elected but because you were convicted by the Holy Spirit.  Had you believed your present system of soteriology when you got saved your salvation, in my mind would not have been based the work of Christ but on the election of God.  Now instead of calling me names please defend your own positon and prove me wrong.

Edited by Orval
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
17 minutes ago, D-28 Player said:

Another lie! I never said I was saved in a "Free Will church"! I said that wasn't saved in any church but only became a member of a church after I was saved;

Like I said if you don't believe that repentance and faith alone in Christ alone is what saves then it's you who aren't saved and your fruit of dishonesty shows this to be the case 

Hmmm...let's see who's being deceitful....

4 hours ago, Orval said:

D-28,

Would you be willing to answer a simple question from me?  Did you get saved in a Reformed church, or were you saved elsewhere and then became a member of a Reformed church? 

 

4 hours ago, D-28 Player said:

This is a little like asking, "Do you still beat your wife", as it assumes that I'm a member of a Reformed church. 

But in answer to your question, not only was I not saved in a Reformed church, the church I joined after I got saved was Arminian and when the one Reformed guy in that church tried to explain Reformed theology to me, I was almost as hateful and antagonistic toward him as you all are toward Calvinists.

I had so any of the same misconceptions about Reformed theology that you all have about Calvinism that it's safe to say I didn't really even know what it was until I had been a Christian for about ten years. 

It would appear that no one is being deceitful, yet your answer gave a certain impression. You never said whether you were saved in a church or not...so your own words defy you. Surely...as someone who holds to Calvinist doctrines, words mean something to you. Orval's assumption that you were saved in a "free-will church" are completely understandable, yet your constant accusations toward him (or her) are completely out of line.

Shame on you.

Edited by No Nicolaitans
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members
31 minutes ago, Orval said:

None-the-less you were saved and then joined an Arminian church (which is free will) and it was in this Arminian church that you began your theological trip down the road to being a full blown Calvinist.  But you were saved when you chose to come to Christ you were not saved by believing in election nor in predestination nor in the Sovereignty of God.  You were convicted of sin and responded to that conviction and came to Christ.  Not because you were elected but because you were convicted by the Holy Spirit.  Had you believed your present system of soteriology when you got saved your salvation, in my mind would not have been based the work of Christ but on the election of God.  Now instead of calling me names please defend your own positon and prove me wrong.

I love the way you "apologize" for lying about what I said and then call me a "full blown Calvinist". 

Yes I was saved the same way everybody who is saved is saved: By repentance and faith in Christ Not by believing in election or predestination 

I've never believed otherwise and unless someone can show me definitively from the Word of God that one is saved by believing in election or predestination will never believe otherwise 

 

 

Edited by D-28 Player
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
20 minutes ago, D-28 Player said:

I love the way you "apologize" for lying about what I said and then call me a "full blown Calvinist". 

Yes I was saved the same way everybody who is saved is saved: By repentance and faith in Christ Not by believing in election or predestination 

I've never believed otherwise and unless someone can show me definitively from the Word of God that one is saved by believing in election or predestination will never believe otherwise 

What absolute moron would read anything I've said and interpret it to mean "--A person may get saved believing one thing and then go on to believe another, thus still being saved but having a different faith to the saving faith they once had;

--Lots of Calvinists have got saved before becoming Calvinists, and therefore are saved in spite of being Calvinists"

 

 

If you are not Calvinist then why would you defend Calvinism?  Secondly if you are not Calvinist then what are you? 

Edited by Orval
edited because the original post was edited.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
9 minutes ago, D-28 Player said:

Like I said if you don't believe that repentance and faith alone in Christ alone is what saves then it's you who aren't saved and your fruit of dishonesty shows this to be the case 

Actually, I believe that the Calvinistic system would emphatically declare (according to its monergistic viewpoint) that GOD HIMSELF is the ONE WHO saves, but that He saves through "repentance and faith alone in Christ alone."  Indeed, I believe that the Calvinistic system would declare that it is GOD HIMSELF ALONE in that He first predestinated and irresistibly regenerates those whom HE has predestinated, such that those irresistibly regenerated individuals will have both the ability and the inevitable desire to repent and believe toward Christ alone.

As such, the Calvinistic system requires the following in the life events of the lost sinner:

1.  God's irresistible grace of regeneration.
2.  The sinner's divinely created repentance and faith toward Christ.

___________________________________

Now, I myself have a conflict with the manner in which Brother "D-28 Player" continues to employ the words "saved" and "salvation" (in their various forms).  In my system of belief, the words "saved" and "salvation" (in their various forms and in relation to eternal salvation) encompass such aspects of eternal salvation as regeneration, adoption, redemption, forgiveness, cleansing, imputation, justification, reconciliation, etc.  As such, I would find the Calvinistic system to be accurate in claiming that eternal salvation is through repentance and faith alone toward Christ, at least in regard to the majority of these aspects of eternal salvation.  However, when the Calvinistic system claims that regeneration is NOT through repentance and faith alone toward Christ alone because it is actually BEFORE and UNTO repentance and faith alone toward Christ alone, then I must contend that the Calvinistic system does actually deny (what I believe to be) one of the aspects of eternal salvation from being through repentance and faith alone toward Christ alone.  As such, it would appear to me that Calvinistic system teaches that MOST of the aspects of eternal salvation are through repentance and faith alone in Christ alone, but not ALL of the aspects of eternal salvation are through repentance and faith alone toward Christ alone.

Now, the Calvinistic system does indeed have the option to deny this claim by simply declaring within its system that REGENERATION is actually NOT an aspect of eternal salvation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members
22 minutes ago, No Nicolaitans said:

 

 

22 minutes ago, No Nicolaitans said:

Hmmm...let's see who's being deceitful....

 

It would appear that no one is being deceitful, yet your answer gave a certain impression. You never said whether you were saved in a church or not...so your own words defy you. Surely...as someone who holds to Calvinist doctrines, words mean something to you. Orval's assumption that you were saved in a "free-will church" are completely understandable, yet your constant accusations toward him (or her) are completely out of line.

Shame on you.

No actually I was very clear that I got saved and then joined a church The word "after" denotes an order of events In this case getting saved and then joining an Arminian church. 

Sorry if using polysyllabic words like "after" confused you. 

9 minutes ago, Orval said:

This in my opinion has become somewhat funny.  If you are not Calvinist then why would you defend Calvinism?  Secondly if you are not Calvinist then what are you?  Thirdly your comment "lots of Calvinists have got saved before becoming Calvinist, and therefore are saved in spite of being Calvinist" actually supports the same point you called me a liar on.  LOL

Actually those were aliantado's words that were edited into y post by mistake and have since been removed 

Edited by D-28 Player
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
32 minutes ago, D-28 Player said:

 

No actually I was very clear that I got saved and then joined a church The word "after" denotes an order of events In this case getting saved and then joining an Arminian church. 

No...you actually said that after you were saved, you joined a church. You said nothing about being saved in a church or not. To which, you responded to Orval; in which, you explicitly said...

1 hour ago, D-28 Player said:

I said that wasn't saved in any church

...which you didn't actually say.

37 minutes ago, D-28 Player said:

Sorry if using polysyllabic words like "after" confused you. 

LOL!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
6 hours ago, D-28 Player said:

Can't wait to share this comment with the group on Facebook. The Calvinists in that group already think you guys are a hoot. 

By the way, I hope you've given them the link to the thread(s) from which you're "quoting" us so that they can see everything for themselves. It wouldn't be very nice to only give one side of the situation. 

Whether you did or not though doesn't matter in the end...

Matthew 12:36 But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
1 minute ago, D-28 Player said:

And I would just as easily quote Revelation 21:8 to you and Orval and 1 Tim and DaveW

I will assume you're referring to us being liars...myself included.

Could you please point me to where I lied so that I can make it right between the Lord and yourself?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
6 minutes ago, D-28 Player said:

Yeah because you've been so conciliatory up to now 

 

Let's just be clear though...

From all that I've read, you're the only one who has voluntarily told a falsehood. Orval may have innocently misinterpreted what you said, but you (in turn) lied about what you said. Since you refuse to show me where I have lied, I will assume that you were just lashing out. I completely understand. The flesh can make us do things that are contrary to what the indwelling Holy Spirit would have us do. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

If D-28 is a product and example of the Calvinist system of religion...I don't know who would want it. The sarcasm he seethes is exactly what the world has to offer.

"He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself." 1 Timothy 6:4-5

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
3 hours ago, D-28 Player said:

And I would just as easily quote Revelation 21:8 to you and Orval and 1 Tim and DaveW

To the mods: My personal opinion is that with his current tirade of false accusations and petsonal attacks, it is time to grant his wish and get rid of him.

He is ramping up his attacks until you do just that, then he can brag to his friends how badly treated he has been.

Slandering Pastor Markle the way he has is totally unjustified, calling Orval a liar is unjust, and his general abusive nature is uncalled for.

And it is surely innappropriate to be copying posts (no doubt selectively) to use to make sport of anyone on other sites.

He has revealed his purpose and intent, and it is not to contribute in any way, but simply to cause strife. 

Pro 28:25 He that is of a proud heart stirreth up strife: but he that putteth his trust in the LORD shall be made fat.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Members
1 minute ago, DaveW said:

calling Orval a liar is unjust, and his general abusive nature is uncalled for.

And it is surely innappropriate to be copying posts (no doubt selectively) to use to make sport of anyone on other sites.

He has revealed his purpose and intent, and it is not to contribute in any way, but simply to cause strife. 

Pro 28:25 He that is of a proud heart stirreth up strife: but he that putteth his trust in the LORD shall be made fat.

 

1 Actually Orval admitted that he lied and offered an apology 

2 If my intention was to "simply cause strife" then why did "The Real Bob Hutton" and I have a very nice conversation about history And why did I answer your question about Calvin's conversion in another thread even though I knew you weren't sincere Where was the "strife" when I was offering suggestions on a radio app or witnessing to Mormons

The only "strife" is by four specific posters in one thread and one poster in another thread who chose to stalk e to another thread and initiate an argument based on a book I said I was reading Not even a book I recommended or an author I recommended just a book I said I am reading  

The only "strife" isn't by e it's by you and three other posters because of your hatred of beliefs I hold to But you guys are so blinded by your hatred for Calvinists and Calvinism you didn't even attack a Calvinist You attacked somebody who has much in common with you who simply said "This isn't what Calvinism teaches"

My only sin here is believing that Calvinists are my brothers and sisters in Christ and not objects of contempt 

3 Are you equally outraged about the poster who stated outright that I am not saved siply because he believes I'm a Calvinist or the posters who have repeatedly labeled e a Calvinist even though I have explained several times that I am not or the poster who has repeatedly accused me of believing one must follow a "system" to be saved even though I've explained numerous ties that salvation is only by repentance and faith alone in Christ alone 

4 Nothing I've said on the Facebook group I've referred to has made you look bad They're reading the thread for themselves So it's your words they're shaking their heads at not merely what I tell them The only negative feedback I've gotten in that group is that I shouldn't have taken the bait and that I shouldn't have lost my temper when lied about repeatedly You guys on the other hand are not exactly doing yourselves any favors 

But don't worry I don't blame the rest of the posters on the board for the behavior of your four 

5 You say I'm proud and I am If I wasn't a sinner I wouldn't need a Savior But I have to ask who's ore proud: the man who admits he is powerless to save himself and must rely on the Lord to reach out to Hi or the an who says he can decided to be saved 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
2 hours ago, D-28 Player said:

1 Actually Orval admitted that he lied and offered an apology 

2 If my intention was to "simply cause strife" then why did "The Real Bob Hutton" and I have a very nice conversation about history And why did I answer your question about Calvin's conversion in another thread even though I knew you weren't sincere Where was the "strife" when I was offering suggestions on a radio app or witnessing to Mormons

The only "strife" is by four specific posters in one thread and one poster in another thread who chose to stalk e to another thread and initiate an argument based on a book I said I was reading Not even a book I recommended or an author I recommended just a book I said I am reading  

The only "strife" isn't by e it's by you and three other posters because of your hatred of beliefs I hold to But you guys are so blinded by your hatred for Calvinists and Calvinism you didn't even attack a Calvinist You attacked somebody who has much in common with you who simply said "This isn't what Calvinism teaches"

My only sin here is believing that Calvinists are my brothers and sisters in Christ and not objects of contempt 

3 Are you equally outraged about the poster who stated outright that I am not saved siply because he believes I'm a Calvinist or the posters who have repeatedly labeled e a Calvinist even though I have explained several times that I am not or the poster who has repeatedly accused me of believing one must follow a "system" to be saved even though I've explained numerous ties that salvation is only by repentance and faith alone in Christ alone 

4 Nothing I've said on the Facebook group I've referred to has made you look bad They're reading the thread for themselves So it's your words they're shaking their heads at not merely what I tell them The only negative feedback I've gotten in that group is that I shouldn't have taken the bait and that I shouldn't have lost my temper when lied about repeatedly You guys on the other hand are not exactly doing yourselves any favors 

But don't worry I don't blame the rest of the posters on the board for the behavior of your four 

5 You say I'm proud and I am If I wasn't a sinner I wouldn't need a Savior But I have to ask who's ore proud: the man who admits he is powerless to save himself and must rely on the Lord to reach out to Hi or the an who says he can decided to be saved 

Quoting it before he changes it as he has done with many of his posts, deleting the worst of the false accusations and abusive comments.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist
On 04/04/2017 at 5:59 AM, D-28 Player said:

I really hope you're not implying that Calvinists don't believe salvation is by grace through faith in Christ because, if you are, that would be bearing false witness. 

 

On 04/04/2017 at 6:25 AM, DaveW said:

I really hope you have not joined this forum to call a member a liar - because that would be bearing false witness..... among other things.

 

On 04/04/2017 at 6:35 AM, D-28 Player said:

I didn't call you a liar. I said that implying that Calvinists do not believe or preach salvation is by grace through faith in Christ would be bearing false witness as they absolutely do believe and clearly preach that salvation is by grace through faith in Christ. 

This was our first discourse of this thread.

You resurrected a thread that had been dead for over a month for the express purpose of accusing me of bearing false witness. That is the way that you meant it, for when I COPIED YOUR WORDING, you immediately protested my post. Even though ti was your wording with the "implied accusation" changed.

As you can see, your first post in this thread, which had run its course until you brought it back, was to attack me and accuse me of lying - which is what false witness is - let's not make bones about it.

 

So there is no way that you can "Take the high moral ground" in this when you attacked first and then protested my use of your own phrasing turned back on you.

And then to accuse me as you have about my other thread, in which I was entirely civil - AS YOU ADMITTED - and then proceeded to accuse my motives WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE, making this an entirely UNFOUNDED accusation or should I say "False witness" against me, is the height of Pharisaical hypocrisy.

Then to attack time and again Pastor Markle, after first ignoring his posts entirely, until you were pressed, is entirely unjustified, and nothing if not a false witness against him.

Then to accuse Orval for what he admitted was a mistake, not a deliberate misrepresentation is simply mean spirited, and also bearing false witness.

Accusing various others here of being liars in their statements here, is once again bearing false witness by your slander.

And associating Rev 21:8 with myself and others here is simply abhorrent.

You sir, as noted in this post, are absolutely bearing false witness in multiple ways and on multiple occasions, and have absolutely condemned yourself by your own accusations and words.

You have consistently either refused to answer questions at all, or given evasive answers, and used belittling language and sarcasm in response to questions INSTEAD of answering them.

You are not here to defend your system of belief, or else you would do that. Instead you are here to cause strife, to cause division, and to cause trouble.

This is evidenced by your own words, and particularly by the fact that you post (as you originally said) or at least refer others (as you changed your statement) to this thread FOR THE PURPOSES OF RIDICULE.

This then is your purpose in being here - not the reasons you stated.

 

I will ask you directly, and would be exceptionally surprised if you answer - WHAT WAS YOUR PREVIOUS USERNAME ON THIS SITE?

If you have indeed been registered on this site before and been banned for just this sort of activity, then that makes you also guilty of deceit, to add to the rest.

I am done now, apologies to the Mods for the rant, no apologies to D-28 who has set out to offend and cause division in any way that he can, as evidenced by his actions and statements in this thread in particular, as outlined above. These are no shallow accusations but evidenced statements.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

To D-28,

I have waited all day for you to respond to my presupposition that Reformed place their faith in their election.  You have called me a liar on two occasions and yet you have not refuted in any way my reasoning for saying what I do.  So I will ask again this simple question can you be saved without election or God sovereignty? You say you get saved by Christ alone through faith alone yet you (the reformed) also believe you cannot be saved apart from election.  If as you say it is Christ alone through faith alone then admit you do not need election and I will walk away from this thread.  I do not believe you can say election is not necessary thereby proving you place faith in the election of God more than the Christ.  I know this angers you, but this is the only way I can show you that Calvinism is a system of believe and is inconsistent in light of scripture.  Each point of Calvinism needs, in fact has to have, the support of the other four points.   

By the way you have not, to this point answered my questions.  Are you a Calvinist and what is your church affiliation? 

My intent in this post, is for you to seriously consider what I am saying and respond in a gracious manner.  Regardless of what you might believe I do not hate Calvinists.   Also I know I am saved, I know the date, the year and the time I was saved, I know exactly where I was when I got saved so being accused of not being saved does not offend me at all Satan has accused me of that many times over the forty plus years I have served my Savior.  

Try to enjoy the challenges presented to you by the posters on this forum, if truth is the desired end why not take the time to express your rebuttals with the Word of God.  I think you will be received much better even if folks believe you are wrong in your doctrine.  Just a suggestion. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...