[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Romans Chapter 7 (Page 1 of 3)
Posted: 8/6/2016 7:37:00 PM EDT
|
14-25: We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.
So I find this law at work: Although I want to do good, evil is right there with me. For in my inner being I delight in God’s law; but I see another law at work in me, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within me. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to death? Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in my sinful nature a slave to the law of sin. |
|
Quoted: 14-25: We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do—this I PRACTICE. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it. So I find this law at work: Although I want to do good, evil is right there with me. For in my inner being I delight in God’s law; but I see another law at work in me, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within me. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to death? Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in my sinful nature a slave to the law of sin. Also notice Paul is talking about the two natures of a born-again Christian here. Co-texts are John 3:3-8, 1 Corinthians 15:44-50, Galatians 5:16-26, 1 John 3:4-10, and there's a few others I can't remember atm, lol. There is a chiasm between Romans 6 and 8. Six deals with how born-again Christians should deal with the old nature, 8 encourages us in the new, and Ch.7 is the main idea. |
|
Romans 8:26-30
Likewise the Spirit also helps in our weaknesses. For we do not know what we should pray for as we ought, but the Spirit Himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. Now He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He makes intercession for the saints according to the will of God. And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose. For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified. |
|
Quoted: Romans 8:26-30 Likewise the Spirit also helps in our weaknesses. For we do not know what we should pray for as we ought, but the Spirit Himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. Now He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He makes intercession for the saints according to the will of God. And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose. For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified. Otherwise you contradict Ephesians 1: 13 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.
Notice here the order is hearing, believing, sealing by the Spirit. |
|
If you get tired of the constant struggle against sin, your flesh, and satan, consider reading these verses. That was the point of this thread. I hate my sin and sinful nature. It disgusts me.
Have you been disciplined by the Lord? I have and I knew it afterwards. He made sure he I knew it. I am thankful for it. I know He loves me. Hebrews 12:1-12 Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles. And let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us, fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith. For the joy set before Him He endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. Consider him who endured such opposition from sinners, so that you will not grow weary and lose heart. In your struggle against sin, you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your blood. And have you completely forgotten this word of encouragement that addresses you as a father addresses his son? It says, “My son, do not make light of the Lord’s discipline, and do not lose heart when He rebukes you, because the Lord disciplines the one He loves, and He chastens everyone He accepts as His son.” Endure hardship as discipline; God is treating you as His children. For what children are not disciplined by their father? If you are not disciplined—and everyone undergoes discipline—then you are not legitimate, not true sons and daughters at all. Moreover, we have all had human fathers who disciplined us and we respected them for it. How much more should we submit to the Father of spirits and live! They disciplined us for a little while as they thought best; but God disciplines us for our good, in order that we may share in His holiness. No discipline seems pleasant at the time, but painful. Later on, however, it produces a harvest of righteousness and peace for those who have been trained by it. Therefore, strengthen your feeble arms and weak knees. “Make level paths for your feet,” so that the lame may not be disabled, but rather healed. |
|
Quoted:
Just keep in mind that 28-30 isn't about salvation, it's about sanctification and service. Otherwise you contradict Ephesians 1:13 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory. Notice here the order is hearing, believing, sealing by the Spirit. Quoted:
Quoted:
Romans 8:26-30 Likewise the Spirit also helps in our weaknesses. For we do not know what we should pray for as we ought, but the Spirit Himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. Now He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He makes intercession for the saints according to the will of God. And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose. For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified. Otherwise you contradict Ephesians 1:13 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory. Notice here the order is hearing, believing, sealing by the Spirit. M- you can't read Ephesians 1:13 without first reading Ephesians 1:4-5. Eph. 1:4: For He chose us in Him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in His sight, In love, 5: He predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with His pleasure and will. Remember that as sinners we can't even seek Him. |
|
Quoted: M- you can't read Ephesians 1:13 without first reading Ephesians 1:4-5. Eph. 1:4: For He chose us in Him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in His sight, In love, 5: He predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with His pleasure and will. Remember that as sinners we can't even seek Him. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Romans 8:26-30 Likewise the Spirit also helps in our weaknesses. For we do not know what we should pray for as we ought, but the Spirit Himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. Now He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He makes intercession for the saints according to the will of God. And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose. For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified. Otherwise you contradict Ephesians 1:13 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory. Notice here the order is hearing, believing, sealing by the Spirit. M- you can't read Ephesians 1:13 without first reading Ephesians 1:4-5. Eph. 1:4: For He chose us in Him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in His sight, In love, 5: He predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with His pleasure and will. Remember that as sinners we can't even seek Him. You're assuming "predestined' = means God actively MADE you believe in Him, when in fact, Paul is simply saying that God knew who would believe and who wouldn't, and it was Him who saves us after faith, not before. That's reading Calvin's philosophy into the text. BTW Calvin got this from Augustine's writings, who got it from Valentinian Gnosticism in order to win an argument he was having. It's not Biblical at all. What betrays this is twofold. First, the Greek grammar, "faith" is not the gift in Ephesians 2:8-9, "you have been saved" is, due to the word "faith" being in the feminine, and "gift" being neuter. Second, the word for faith/believe (pisteuo) in Greek is always in the active voice, not the passive, when salvation/eternal life is the context; meaning it originates from the believer, and wasn't given to them. God draws all people (John 12:32), then we who respond in faith are saved by Him. Then we are given the Holy Spirit as a guarantee of our redemption. We are not forced in, we can choose to reject it. What's ironic is that Calvinist preachers betray their belief in predestination when they berate the world (and their own congregations) for their lack of faith, which they claim that God has to give, and that God has already chosen some for hell. |
|
You still don't understand reformed theology. You are saying what your tradition tells you we believe. You are wrong in your assumption.
I personally don't care what your beliefs are as far as predestination. It doesn't matter to me or God. Faith in Christ is what matters. But it is bothersome for you to watch slanted you tubes by people who claim they have the answers and everyone else is wrong, because THEY know what everyone else is wrong about. If you want to know what we believe about predestination look at the WCF...or the London Baptist Confession of 1689. Both lay it out, with scripture. Wanna know what Calvin taught? Read the institutes. Not some web page. I can search on the web and find many sites telling me what you believe and how wrong and heretical you are. But that's worth what I paid for it. Nothing because it isn't what you said. It's what someone says you say and mean. If you want to tell someone what they believe, then take the time to learn from non biased sources. And if you don't have the want or time to do that, your presuppositions will direct your line of thinking. |
|
Quoted:
You still don't understand reformed theology. You are saying what your tradition tells you we believe. You are wrong in your assumption. I personally don't care what your beliefs are as far as predestination. It doesn't matter to me or God. Faith in Christ is what matters. But it is bothersome for you to watch slanted you tubes by people who claim they have the answers and everyone else is wrong, because THEY know what everyone else is wrong about. If you want to know what we believe about predestination look at the WCF...or the London Baptist Confession of 1689. Both lay it out, with scripture. Wanna know what Calvin taught? Read the institutes. Not some web page. I can search on the web and find many sites telling me what you believe and how wrong and heretical you are. But that's worth what I paid for it. Nothing because it isn't what you said. It's what someone says you say and mean. If you want to tell someone what they believe, then take the time to learn from non biased sources. And if you don't have the want or time to do that, your presuppositions will direct your line of thinking. Ayup!!! 
The Scripture is so clear, but tradition and presupposition seem to get in the way of Catholics and Arminians. 
I have to edit this post. I am in no way comparing Arminians to Catholics. Romes religion is heretical. Arminians simply have a wrong theology but I believe are truly brothers in Christ. Sorry those who venerate Mary and the Saints. It all gets back to the Bible. Sola Scriptura and all that jazz.
|
|
Quoted: You still don't understand reformed theology. You are saying what your tradition tells you we believe. You are wrong in your assumption. I personally don't care what your beliefs are as far as predestination. It doesn't matter to me or God. Faith in Christ is what matters. But it is bothersome for you to watch slanted you tubes by people who claim they have the answers and everyone else is wrong, because THEY know what everyone else is wrong about. If you want to know what we believe about predestination look at the WCF...or the London Baptist Confession of 1689. Both lay it out, with scripture. Wanna know what Calvin taught? Read the institutes. Not some web page. I can search on the web and find many sites telling me what you believe and how wrong and heretical you are. But that's worth what I paid for it. Nothing because it isn't what you said. It's what someone says you say and mean. If you want to tell someone what they believe, then take the time to learn from non biased sources. And if you don't have the want or time to do that, your presuppositions will direct your line of thinking. Calvin and his supporters in Geneva burnt people at the stake (and not just Severus), exiled and imprisoned people because they didn't believe in their theology, and that's historical fact. His successors also did it to the Anabaptists. Modern Reformed preachers run around calling Biblical salvation "cheap grace" and a false gospel. So please, you're not on as high of a horse you think you are. If you have a theological objection, let's discuss it, but don't run around making personal attacks and trying to hold me to a standard you don't even hold those you follow to. And of course the WCF and the LBC don't address the fact that Calvin had more in common theologically with Augustine and Valentinus than he did with the Bible; it's embarrassing. LOL at you bringing up "slanted you tubes (YouTube?)" when I didn't do any of the sort in this thread. Seems you just wanted to unload because I dared show how Reformed theology is wrong. You should take that plank out. |
|
Quoted: Ayup!!! The Scripture is so clear, but tradition and presupposition seem to get in the way of Catholics and Arminians. I have to edit this post. I am in no way comparing Arminians to Catholics. Romes religion is heretical. Arminians simply have a wrong theology but I believe are truly brothers in Christ. Sorry those who venerate Mary and the Saints. It all gets back to the Bible. Sola Scriptura and all that jazz. Quoted: Quoted: You still don't understand reformed theology. You are saying what your tradition tells you we believe. You are wrong in your assumption. I personally don't care what your beliefs are as far as predestination. It doesn't matter to me or God. Faith in Christ is what matters. But it is bothersome for you to watch slanted you tubes by people who claim they have the answers and everyone else is wrong, because THEY know what everyone else is wrong about. If you want to know what we believe about predestination look at the WCF...or the London Baptist Confession of 1689. Both lay it out, with scripture. Wanna know what Calvin taught? Read the institutes. Not some web page. I can search on the web and find many sites telling me what you believe and how wrong and heretical you are. But that's worth what I paid for it. Nothing because it isn't what you said. It's what someone says you say and mean. If you want to tell someone what they believe, then take the time to learn from non biased sources. And if you don't have the want or time to do that, your presuppositions will direct your line of thinking. Ayup!!! The Scripture is so clear, but tradition and presupposition seem to get in the way of Catholics and Arminians. I have to edit this post. I am in no way comparing Arminians to Catholics. Romes religion is heretical. Arminians simply have a wrong theology but I believe are truly brothers in Christ. Sorry those who venerate Mary and the Saints. It all gets back to the Bible. Sola Scriptura and all that jazz. One group is trying to maintain their salvation, the other is trying to prove they were saved via perseverance (and often other things); either way, their both trying to accomplish something - like the Catholics do. The Bible says that salvation is based on Christ's work and His faithfulness, not ours. |
|
Quoted:
I hope you realize that Calvinists and Arminians are functionally the same thing - the only difference is the "how and why". One group is trying to maintain their salvation, the other is trying to prove they were saved via perseverance (and often other things); either way, their both trying to accomplish something - like the Catholics do. The Bible says that salvation is based on Christ's work and His faithfulness, not ours. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You still don't understand reformed theology. You are saying what your tradition tells you we believe. You are wrong in your assumption. I personally don't care what your beliefs are as far as predestination. It doesn't matter to me or God. Faith in Christ is what matters. But it is bothersome for you to watch slanted you tubes by people who claim they have the answers and everyone else is wrong, because THEY know what everyone else is wrong about. If you want to know what we believe about predestination look at the WCF...or the London Baptist Confession of 1689. Both lay it out, with scripture. Wanna know what Calvin taught? Read the institutes. Not some web page. I can search on the web and find many sites telling me what you believe and how wrong and heretical you are. But that's worth what I paid for it. Nothing because it isn't what you said. It's what someone says you say and mean. If you want to tell someone what they believe, then take the time to learn from non biased sources. And if you don't have the want or time to do that, your presuppositions will direct your line of thinking. Ayup!!!
The Scripture is so clear, but tradition and presupposition seem to get in the way of Catholics and Arminians.
I have to edit this post. I am in no way comparing Arminians to Catholics. Romes religion is heretical. Arminians simply have a wrong theology but I believe are truly brothers in Christ. Sorry those who venerate Mary and the Saints. It all gets back to the Bible. Sola Scriptura and all that jazz.
One group is trying to maintain their salvation, the other is trying to prove they were saved via perseverance (and often other things); either way, their both trying to accomplish something - like the Catholics do. The Bible says that salvation is based on Christ's work and His faithfulness, not ours. I suggest you bone up on Calvinism. Unless you're trolling and I'm too stupid to recognize it. 
To compare Arminians to Catholics to Calvinists shows an utter and total lack of theology my friend. You may believe what you believe, however what you believe has no basis in theology and theological differences.
ETA: The description "Calvinist" in no way indicates that "Calvinists" worship a man named John Calvin. I much prefer the description of "Reformed". Calvin was a great theologian; he was however just a man. The BIBLE speaks for itself M. It's worthy of a read someday. 
|
|
Quoted: I suggest you bone up on Calvinism. Unless you're trolling and I'm too stupid to recognize it. To compare Arminians to Catholics to Calvinists shows an utter and total lack of theology my friend. You may believe what you believe, however what you believe has no basis in theology and theological differences. ETA: The description "Calvinist" in no way indicates that "Calvinists" worship a man named John Calvin. I much prefer the description of "Reformed". Calvin was a great theologian; he was however just a man. The BIBLE speaks for itself M. It's worthy of a read someday. Quoted: Quoted: I hope you realize that Calvinists and Arminians are functionally the same thing - the only difference is the "how and why". One group is trying to maintain their salvation, the other is trying to prove they were saved via perseverance (and often other things); either way, their both trying to accomplish something - like the Catholics do. The Bible says that salvation is based on Christ's work and His faithfulness, not ours. I suggest you bone up on Calvinism. Unless you're trolling and I'm too stupid to recognize it. To compare Arminians to Catholics to Calvinists shows an utter and total lack of theology my friend. You may believe what you believe, however what you believe has no basis in theology and theological differences. ETA: The description "Calvinist" in no way indicates that "Calvinists" worship a man named John Calvin. I much prefer the description of "Reformed". Calvin was a great theologian; he was however just a man. The BIBLE speaks for itself M. It's worthy of a read someday. I'm just pointing out where all three converge. You can argue on the reasoning, but you really can't argue much on the very basic foundation, and what those who follow them end up basing their salvation on. All three teach some sort of perseverance. Yes there are differences in how and/or why, but they all teach it. So there is a foundational similarity between all three. I didn't say you worshiped Calvin; however, he is the man that started the whole club. Call it what you want but the facts are the facts. And it's ironic you throw out an ad hominem in response to Biblical teaching. If you read your Bible why must you resort to that instead of having a thoughtful response? You can criticize my theology, but until you explain how I am wrong in saying that salvation is based on Christ's work and faithfulness and not ours, or how the gift of God is faith and not salvation in Ephesians 2:8, you're just wasting bandwidth. |
|
Quoted:
I'm just pointing out where all three converge. You can argue on the reasoning, but you really can't argue much on the very basic foundation, and what those who follow them end up basing their salvation on. All three teach some sort of perseverance. Yes there are differences in how and/or why, but they all teach it. So there is a foundational similarity between all three. I didn't say you worshiped Calvin; however, he is the man that started the whole club. Call it what you want but the facts are the facts. And it's ironic you throw out an ad hominem in response to Biblical teaching. If you read your Bible why must you resort to that instead of having a thoughtful response? You can criticize my theology, but until you explain how I am wrong in saying that salvation is based on Christ's work and faithfulness and not ours, or how the gift of God is faith and not salvation in Ephesians 2:8, you're just wasting bandwidth. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I hope you realize that Calvinists and Arminians are functionally the same thing - the only difference is the "how and why". One group is trying to maintain their salvation, the other is trying to prove they were saved via perseverance (and often other things); either way, their both trying to accomplish something - like the Catholics do. The Bible says that salvation is based on Christ's work and His faithfulness, not ours. I suggest you bone up on Calvinism. Unless you're trolling and I'm too stupid to recognize it.
To compare Arminians to Catholics to Calvinists shows an utter and total lack of theology my friend. You may believe what you believe, however what you believe has no basis in theology and theological differences.
ETA: The description "Calvinist" in no way indicates that "Calvinists" worship a man named John Calvin. I much prefer the description of "Reformed". Calvin was a great theologian; he was however just a man. The BIBLE speaks for itself M. It's worthy of a read someday.
I'm just pointing out where all three converge. You can argue on the reasoning, but you really can't argue much on the very basic foundation, and what those who follow them end up basing their salvation on. All three teach some sort of perseverance. Yes there are differences in how and/or why, but they all teach it. So there is a foundational similarity between all three. I didn't say you worshiped Calvin; however, he is the man that started the whole club. Call it what you want but the facts are the facts. And it's ironic you throw out an ad hominem in response to Biblical teaching. If you read your Bible why must you resort to that instead of having a thoughtful response? You can criticize my theology, but until you explain how I am wrong in saying that salvation is based on Christ's work and faithfulness and not ours, or how the gift of God is faith and not salvation in Ephesians 2:8, you're just wasting bandwidth. For one M, Calvin didn't start anything. Calvin was a Catholic that finally got recognition for reading the Bible as opposed to Romes "teaching". If you simply go back to many of the early Church fathers, (yes M, the early church was catholic), you will find many "reformed theologians". If you go back to the Old Testament you will find nothing but "reformed theology". As to the bolded part above. If you truly knew what reformed theology was all about you would recognize that your bolded statement above is straight out of reformed theology. |
|
Quoted: For one M, Calvin didn't start anything. Calvin was a Catholic that finally got recognition for reading the Bible as opposed to Romes "teaching". If you simply go back to many of the early Church fathers, (yes M, the early church was catholic), you will find many "reformed theologians". If you go back to the Old Testament you will find nothing but "reformed theology". As to the bolded part above. If you truly knew what reformed theology was all about you would recognize that your bolded statement above is straight out of reformed theology. Quoted: Quoted: I'm just pointing out where all three converge. You can argue on the reasoning, but you really can't argue much on the very basic foundation, and what those who follow them end up basing their salvation on. All three teach some sort of perseverance. Yes there are differences in how and/or why, but they all teach it. So there is a foundational similarity between all three. I didn't say you worshiped Calvin; however, he is the man that started the whole club. Call it what you want but the facts are the facts. And it's ironic you throw out an ad hominem in response to Biblical teaching. If you read your Bible why must you resort to that instead of having a thoughtful response? You can criticize my theology, but until you explain how I am wrong in saying that salvation is based on Christ's work and faithfulness and not ours, or how the gift of God is faith and not salvation in Ephesians 2:8, you're just wasting bandwidth. For one M, Calvin didn't start anything. Calvin was a Catholic that finally got recognition for reading the Bible as opposed to Romes "teaching". If you simply go back to many of the early Church fathers, (yes M, the early church was catholic), you will find many "reformed theologians". If you go back to the Old Testament you will find nothing but "reformed theology". As to the bolded part above. If you truly knew what reformed theology was all about you would recognize that your bolded statement above is straight out of reformed theology. Please explain, from scripture, how I am wrong in saying that faith itself is not the gift of God, and that our salvation is not based on our faithfulness (i.e. perseverance), but Christ's...be sure to address 2 Timothy 2:13, and the examples of Saul, Samson, and Solomon. |
|
That was not a personal attack. If taken that way, and I really don't know how it could be, I apologize. I have never made a personal attack on here and never will. Yep, Calvin and I disagree on some stuff. I didn't bring him up. I'm just saying that you are wrong in your suggestions of what I believe. I pointed out multiple locations where it is easy to see what I believe. If you have read the Institutes or the WCF or 1689, then again I apologize. I brought up videos, not because they were posted in this thread, but because in the past you have posted them to show how you find reformed theology wrong. I made the statement that I feel like you got your information from the Internet and YouTube. If you have spoken with pastors or seminary grads, or even members of a reformed denomination they would not agree with what you accuse us of believing. You have not shown how anything is wrong. Except your understanding of reformed people. I don't hold you to any different standard than I hold anyone else to. Please show me where I have ever done that. Quoted:
Planks and splinters. Calvin and his supporters in Geneva burnt people at the stake (and not just Severus), exiled and imprisoned people because they didn't believe in their theology, and that's historical fact. His successors also did it to the Anabaptists. Modern Reformed preachers run around calling Biblical salvation "cheap grace" and a false gospel. So please, you're not on as high of a horse you think you are. If you have a theological objection, let's discuss it, but don't run around making personal attacks and trying to hold me to a standard you don't even hold those you follow to. And of course the WCF and the LBC don't address the fact that Calvin had more in common theologically with Augustine and Valentinus than he did with the Bible; it's embarrassing. LOL at you bringing up "slanted you tubes (YouTube?)" when I didn't do any of the sort in this thread. Seems you just wanted to unload because I dared show how Reformed theology is wrong. You should take that plank out. Quoted:
Quoted:
You still don't understand reformed theology. You are saying what your tradition tells you we believe. You are wrong in your assumption. I personally don't care what your beliefs are as far as predestination. It doesn't matter to me or God. Faith in Christ is what matters. But it is bothersome for you to watch slanted you tubes by people who claim they have the answers and everyone else is wrong, because THEY know what everyone else is wrong about. If you want to know what we believe about predestination look at the WCF...or the London Baptist Confession of 1689. Both lay it out, with scripture. Wanna know what Calvin taught? Read the institutes. Not some web page. I can search on the web and find many sites telling me what you believe and how wrong and heretical you are. But that's worth what I paid for it. Nothing because it isn't what you said. It's what someone says you say and mean. If you want to tell someone what they believe, then take the time to learn from non biased sources. And if you don't have the want or time to do that, your presuppositions will direct your line of thinking. Calvin and his supporters in Geneva burnt people at the stake (and not just Severus), exiled and imprisoned people because they didn't believe in their theology, and that's historical fact. His successors also did it to the Anabaptists. Modern Reformed preachers run around calling Biblical salvation "cheap grace" and a false gospel. So please, you're not on as high of a horse you think you are. If you have a theological objection, let's discuss it, but don't run around making personal attacks and trying to hold me to a standard you don't even hold those you follow to. And of course the WCF and the LBC don't address the fact that Calvin had more in common theologically with Augustine and Valentinus than he did with the Bible; it's embarrassing. LOL at you bringing up "slanted you tubes (YouTube?)" when I didn't do any of the sort in this thread. Seems you just wanted to unload because I dared show how Reformed theology is wrong. You should take that plank out. |
|
Quoted: That was not a personal attack. If taken that way, and I really don't know how it could be, I apologize. I have never made a personal attack on here and never will. Yep, Calvin and I disagree on some stuff. I didn't bring him up. I'm just saying that you are wrong in your suggestions of what I believe. I pointed out multiple locations where it is easy to see what I believe. If you have read the Institutes or the WCF or 1689, then again I apologize. I brought up videos, not because they were posted in this thread, but because in the past you have posted them to show how you find reformed theology wrong. I made the statement that I feel like you got your information from the Internet and YouTube. If you have spoken with pastors or seminary grads, or even members of a reformed denomination they would not agree with what you accuse us of believing. You have not shown how anything is wrong. Except your understanding of reformed people. I don't hold you to any different standard than I hold anyone else to. Please show me where I have ever done that. You also act like I don't know what TULIP is. Yes I have looked at Reformed theology, yes I have read reformed theologians that claim that perseverance is necessary, and that faith is the gift in Ephesians 2:8. I also know enough to see that they often contradict their own theology in later statements and actions, and sometimes on the very same page. I also know where the Bible contradicts TULIP. You defend Calvinism, then when called on it, you shift to a personal defense as if that was the argument all along. It wasn't. The issue is the misunderstanding of predestination, and the origin of faith. And you attack the posting of vids, but haven't actually addressed which vids you're talking about, nor what was wrong in them. As far as different standards, I bolded it. You complained about people attacking Calvinism, while ignoring Calvinists attacking non-Calvinists (as they have done for 500 years), while attacking me, lol. It's amazing how many Calvinists will claim their critics "don't understand Calvinism", yet they fail to explain where the misunderstanding is. All the the while TULIP is on the front page of Reformed sites, which is the issue here. |
|
Quoted:
The ad hominem is obvious, I even bolded it. I am not attacking you. I question the reliability and validity of a case based on YouTube and Internet, with no want to understand what is really said, by easily going to the WCF or 1689. That is not against you, but the whole of your reasoning. You also act like I don't know what TULIP is. Yes I have looked at Reformed theology, yes I have read reformed theologians that claim that perseverance is necessary, and that faith is the gift in Ephesians 2:8. I also know enough to see that they often contradict their own theology in later statements and actions, and sometimes on the very same page. I also know where the Bible contradicts TULIP. I have no doubt you have heard of tulip. Most everyone has...except Calvin...he never heard of it. It was thought up later. However I know that you don't understand it. For example, your statement that " theologians who claim that perseverience is necessary" Since you won't go to the WCF I will do it for you. Chapter XVII Of the Perseverance of the Saints I. They, whom God has accepted in His Beloved, effectually called, and sanctified by His Spirit, can neither totally nor finally fall away from the state of grace, but shall certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved.[1] II. This perseverance of the saints depends not upon their own free will, but upon the immutability of the decree of election, flowing from the free and unchangeable love of God the Father;[2] upon the efficacy of the merit and intercession of Jesus Christ,[3] the abiding of the Spirit, and of the seed of God within them,[4] and the nature of the covenant of grace:[5] from all which arises also the certainty and infallibility thereof.[6] III. Nevertheless, they may, through the temptations of Satan and of the world, the prevalency of corruption remaining in them, and the neglect of the means of their preservation, fall into grievous sins;[7] and, for a time, continue therein:  whereby they incur God's displeasure,[9] and grieve His Holy Spirit,[10] come to be deprived of some measure of their graces and comforts,[11] have their hearts hardened,[12] and their consciences wounded;[13] hurt and scandalize others,[14] and bring temporal judgments upon themselves.[15]
That contradicts what you claim we say. You defend Calvinism, then when called on it, you shift to a personal defense as if that was the argument all along. It wasn't. The issue is the misunderstanding of predestination, and the origin of faith. I don't follow the above... And you attack the posting of vids, but haven't actually addressed which vids you're talking about, nor what was wrong in them. I'm not discussing specific videos. I am talking about YouTube theology. As far as different standards, I bolded it. You complained about people attacking Calvinism, while ignoring Calvinists attacking non-Calvinists (as they have done for 500 years), while attacking me, lol. That is your opinion. I have posted on here for years and I am willing to bet that the people reading this post have never seen me attack anyone on here. I'm not complaining about people attacking Calvinism. I really don't care. What I tried to get across is that if you are going to try to debate, at least have the decency to learn the facts. It's amazing how many Calvinists will claim their critics "don't understand Calvinism", yet they fail to explain where the misunderstanding is. All the the while TULIP is on the front page of Reformed sites, which is the issue here. It's not amazing. It is obviously the case here. Look, debate it all you want. I honestly don't care. That is good and I have enjoyed the debates on this board. I have learned a lot about different beliefs, and in most cases by learning, and debating, my own faith has grown. I will not get into an argument on here though. I have respect for everyone here. We all have the same standard we are judged by. And that is the standard of God, not man. No one here can live up to that standard, so our only chance is to have Jesus cover our failings and sin for us. Luckily He did that for me 2000 years ago. That is what matters. Not all this other distraction. This thread has been hijacked and I will no longer be Participating in it. Quoted:
Quoted:
That was not a personal attack. If taken that way, and I really don't know how it could be, I apologize. I have never made a personal attack on here and never will. Yep, Calvin and I disagree on some stuff. I didn't bring him up. I'm just saying that you are wrong in your suggestions of what I believe. I pointed out multiple locations where it is easy to see what I believe. If you have read the Institutes or the WCF or 1689, then again I apologize. I brought up videos, not because they were posted in this thread, but because in the past you have posted them to show how you find reformed theology wrong. I made the statement that I feel like you got your information from the Internet and YouTube. If you have spoken with pastors or seminary grads, or even members of a reformed denomination they would not agree with what you accuse us of believing. You have not shown how anything is wrong. Except your understanding of reformed people. I don't hold you to any different standard than I hold anyone else to. Please show me where I have ever done that. I am not attacking you. I question the reliability and validity of a case based on YouTube and Internet, with no want to understand what is really said, by easily going to the WCF or 1689. That is not against you, but the whole of your reasoning. You also act like I don't know what TULIP is. Yes I have looked at Reformed theology, yes I have read reformed theologians that claim that perseverance is necessary, and that faith is the gift in Ephesians 2:8. I also know enough to see that they often contradict their own theology in later statements and actions, and sometimes on the very same page. I also know where the Bible contradicts TULIP. I have no doubt you have heard of tulip. Most everyone has...except Calvin...he never heard of it. It was thought up later. However I know that you don't understand it. For example, your statement that " theologians who claim that perseverience is necessary" Since you won't go to the WCF I will do it for you. Chapter XVII Of the Perseverance of the Saints I. They, whom God has accepted in His Beloved, effectually called, and sanctified by His Spirit, can neither totally nor finally fall away from the state of grace, but shall certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved.[1] II. This perseverance of the saints depends not upon their own free will, but upon the immutability of the decree of election, flowing from the free and unchangeable love of God the Father;[2] upon the efficacy of the merit and intercession of Jesus Christ,[3] the abiding of the Spirit, and of the seed of God within them,[4] and the nature of the covenant of grace:[5] from all which arises also the certainty and infallibility thereof.[6] III. Nevertheless, they may, through the temptations of Satan and of the world, the prevalency of corruption remaining in them, and the neglect of the means of their preservation, fall into grievous sins;[7] and, for a time, continue therein: whereby they incur God's displeasure,[9] and grieve His Holy Spirit,[10] come to be deprived of some measure of their graces and comforts,[11] have their hearts hardened,[12] and their consciences wounded;[13] hurt and scandalize others,[14] and bring temporal judgments upon themselves.[15]
That contradicts what you claim we say. You defend Calvinism, then when called on it, you shift to a personal defense as if that was the argument all along. It wasn't. The issue is the misunderstanding of predestination, and the origin of faith. I don't follow the above... And you attack the posting of vids, but haven't actually addressed which vids you're talking about, nor what was wrong in them. I'm not discussing specific videos. I am talking about YouTube theology. As far as different standards, I bolded it. You complained about people attacking Calvinism, while ignoring Calvinists attacking non-Calvinists (as they have done for 500 years), while attacking me, lol. That is your opinion. I have posted on here for years and I am willing to bet that the people reading this post have never seen me attack anyone on here. I'm not complaining about people attacking Calvinism. I really don't care. What I tried to get across is that if you are going to try to debate, at least have the decency to learn the facts. It's amazing how many Calvinists will claim their critics "don't understand Calvinism", yet they fail to explain where the misunderstanding is. All the the while TULIP is on the front page of Reformed sites, which is the issue here. It's not amazing. It is obviously the case here. Look, debate it all you want. I honestly don't care. That is good and I have enjoyed the debates on this board. I have learned a lot about different beliefs, and in most cases by learning, and debating, my own faith has grown. I will not get into an argument on here though. I have respect for everyone here. We all have the same standard we are judged by. And that is the standard of God, not man. No one here can live up to that standard, so our only chance is to have Jesus cover our failings and sin for us. Luckily He did that for me 2000 years ago. That is what matters. Not all this other distraction. This thread has been hijacked and I will no longer be Participating in it. |
|
Yes I understand TULIP was a term coined after Calvin; however, Calvinists still claim he taught it, and it's taught by modern Reformed preachers. BTW: "By predestination we mean the eternal decree of God, by which he determined with himself whatever he wished to happen with regard to every man. All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestinated to life or to death.” - John Calvin, Institutes, 3.21.1 (3,5) Link. Which is not what Jesus taught in John 3:18. BTW Double Predestination was not taught by the early church: "1. This expression [of our Lord], How often would I have gathered your children together, and you would not, Matthew 23:37 set forth the ancient law of human liberty, because God made man a free [agent] from the beginning, possessing his own power, even as he does his own soul, to obey the behests (ad utendum sententia) of God voluntarily, and not by compulsion of God. For there is no coercion with God, but a good will [towards us] is present with Him continually. And therefore does He give good counsel to all. And in man, as well as in angels, He has placed the power of choice (for angels are rational beings), so that those who had yielded obedience might justly possess what is good, given indeed by God, but preserved by themselves. " Irenaeus, Against Heresies (Book IV, Chapter 37) Link. BTW that was written against the Valentinian Gnostic belief in Double Predestination. As for the WCF, the issue is #1: "I. They, whom God has accepted in His Beloved, effectually called, and sanctified by His Spirit, can neither totally nor finally fall away from the state of grace, but shall certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved." Yet we have the example of Solomon, who we know had the Spirit, since he wrote scripture, yet fell away with no repentance mentioned before his death. We also have Hymenaus and Alexander (1 Timothy 1:19-20), whom Paul did not doubt their salvation (with similar wording as the sinner in 1 Cor. 5:5). We also have the example of Saul, who had the Spirit (1 Samuel 10:9-10, 15:35, 28:19), yet died of suicide in a disobedient attack on the Philistines, after trying to murder David, and conferring with familiar spirits. Now #3 doesn't excuse #1, because they maintain that someone may fall away for a time, but will always repent before death, which ignores the examples above. The Bible teaches that once someone believes and receives the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, they are sealed (Ephesians 1:13-14, 4:30, Romans 8:38-39, John 10:27-28, etc), and while they may lose rewards in heaven for disobedience, faithlessness, etc., they cannot become un-saved. |
|
Quoted:
A lot of claims here, but no Biblical references. Please explain, from scripture, how I am wrong in saying that faith itself is not the gift of God, and that our salvation is not based on our faithfulness (i.e. perseverance), but Christ's...be sure to address 2 Timothy 2:13, and the examples of Saul, Samson, and Solomon. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm just pointing out where all three converge. You can argue on the reasoning, but you really can't argue much on the very basic foundation, and what those who follow them end up basing their salvation on. All three teach some sort of perseverance. Yes there are differences in how and/or why, but they all teach it. So there is a foundational similarity between all three. I didn't say you worshiped Calvin; however, he is the man that started the whole club. Call it what you want but the facts are the facts. And it's ironic you throw out an ad hominem in response to Biblical teaching. If you read your Bible why must you resort to that instead of having a thoughtful response? You can criticize my theology, but until you explain how I am wrong in saying that salvation is based on Christ's work and faithfulness and not ours, or how the gift of God is faith and not salvation in Ephesians 2:8, you're just wasting bandwidth. For one M, Calvin didn't start anything. Calvin was a Catholic that finally got recognition for reading the Bible as opposed to Romes "teaching". If you simply go back to many of the early Church fathers, (yes M, the early church was catholic), you will find many "reformed theologians". If you go back to the Old Testament you will find nothing but "reformed theology". As to the bolded part above. If you truly knew what reformed theology was all about you would recognize that your bolded statement above is straight out of reformed theology. Please explain, from scripture, how I am wrong in saying that faith itself is not the gift of God, and that our salvation is not based on our faithfulness (i.e. perseverance), but Christ's...be sure to address 2 Timothy 2:13, and the examples of Saul, Samson, and Solomon. M...... You are preaching CALVINISM, ie: REFORMED THEOLOGY!!!!! What part of this don't you understand M? The reformed message is saying, to quote you: "Faith itself IS INDEED A GIFT OF GOD. OUR SALVATION IS BASED UPON CHRIST"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! M-1975........... You are speaking the reformed message. Please bone up on Calvin and Spurgeon and Warfield. Please M, you are so close to understanding reformed theology but your traditions are getting in the way of understanding. Yes M, you understand the heretical teachings of Rome. M, you do not worship Mary or the Saints. M, You don't believe in purgatory or the infallibility of a man in Rome known as the "pope". M, you are so close to recognizing that our LORD is indeed our LORD AND SAVIOR. We should and must recognize Him as such. M, Our salvation is NOT through WORKS but through GRACE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! M, Please understand that Regeneration is real. Regeneration means a change in our HEART. Not works but a change of HEART. M, It's what His Word commands. M, I will pray for understanding. I Love you Brother. M, I'm going to edit this post by saying this: I don't believe you are a Universalist. If you are such than we have major theological differences. I just don't get that vibe however. M, I'm going to be praying for you, as I hope you do for me.
|
|
Quoted: M...... You are preaching CALVINISM, ie: REFORMED THEOLOGY!!!!! What part of this don't you understand M? The reformed message is saying, to quote you: "Faith itself IS INDEED A GIFT OF GOD. OUR SALVATION IS BASED UPON CHRIST"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! M-1975........... You are speaking the reformed message. Please bone up on Calvin and Spurgeon and Warfield. Please M, you are so close to understanding reformed theology but your traditions are getting in the way of understanding. Yes M, you understand the heretical teachings of Rome. M, you do not worship Mary or the Saints. M, You don't believe in purgatory or the infallibility of a man in Rome known as the "pope". M, you are so close to recognizing that our LORD is indeed our LORD AND SAVIOR. We should and must recognize Him as such. M, Our salvation is NOT through WORKS but through GRACE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! M, Please understand that Regeneration is real. Regeneration means a change in our HEART. Not works but a change of HEART. M, It's what His Word commands. M, I will pray for understanding. I Love you Brother. M, I'm going to edit this post by saying this: I don't believe you are a Universalist. If you are such than we have major theological differences. I just don't get that vibe however. M, I'm going to be praying for you, as I hope you do for me. Faith is not the gift of God; salvation is. Calvinist theology is wrong, and has it's roots in Gnosticism. Since I made that clear, I'm going to assume you're trolling. And you are being condescending in your implication that I am not saved because I don't agree with Reformed theology. BTW, Lordship Salvation is works-salvation, since all those Reformed false-preachers claim that we must do all manner of works as evidence of salvation, which is back-loading the Gospel. Why tell people they must judge salvation by works they claim don't have to be met in the first place to be saved? Because the actually believe that works prove faith, which is to say that works are what saves, not faith. Nevermind this flies completely in the face of the verse they twist to claim that faith is the gift of God. Sorry, I must not be predestined to believe that junk.
|
|
Quoted:
Are you trolling or purposefully not reading what I post? Faith is not the gift of God; salvation is. Calvinist theology is wrong, and has it's roots in Gnosticism. Since I made that clear, I'm going to assume you're trolling. And you are being condescending in your implication that I am not saved because I don't agree with Reformed theology. BTW, Lordship Salvation is works-salvation, since all those Reformed false-preachers claim that we must do all manner of works as evidence of salvation, which is back-loading the Gospel. Why tell people they must judge salvation by works they claim don't have to be met in the first place to be saved? Because the actually believe that works prove faith, which is to say that works are what saves, not faith. Nevermind this flies completely in the face of the verse they twist to claim that faith is the gift of God. Sorry, I must not be predestined to believe that junk. Quoted:
Quoted:
M...... You are preaching CALVINISM, ie: REFORMED THEOLOGY!!!!! What part of this don't you understand M? The reformed message is saying, to quote you: "Faith itself IS INDEED A GIFT OF GOD. OUR SALVATION IS BASED UPON CHRIST"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! M-1975........... You are speaking the reformed message. Please bone up on Calvin and Spurgeon and Warfield. Please M, you are so close to understanding reformed theology but your traditions are getting in the way of understanding. Yes M, you understand the heretical teachings of Rome. M, you do not worship Mary or the Saints. M, You don't believe in purgatory or the infallibility of a man in Rome known as the "pope". M, you are so close to recognizing that our LORD is indeed our LORD AND SAVIOR. We should and must recognize Him as such. M, Our salvation is NOT through WORKS but through GRACE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! M, Please understand that Regeneration is real. Regeneration means a change in our HEART. Not works but a change of HEART. M, It's what His Word commands. M, I will pray for understanding. I Love you Brother. M, I'm going to edit this post by saying this: I don't believe you are a Universalist. If you are such than we have major theological differences. I just don't get that vibe however. M, I'm going to be praying for you, as I hope you do for me.
Faith is not the gift of God; salvation is. Calvinist theology is wrong, and has it's roots in Gnosticism. Since I made that clear, I'm going to assume you're trolling. And you are being condescending in your implication that I am not saved because I don't agree with Reformed theology. BTW, Lordship Salvation is works-salvation, since all those Reformed false-preachers claim that we must do all manner of works as evidence of salvation, which is back-loading the Gospel. Why tell people they must judge salvation by works they claim don't have to be met in the first place to be saved? Because the actually believe that works prove faith, which is to say that works are what saves, not faith. Nevermind this flies completely in the face of the verse they twist to claim that faith is the gift of God. Sorry, I must not be predestined to believe that junk. Take care M. I will pray for you as I pray for Catholics and other unsaved persons. Have a good evening. ETA: M.... A man that claims to be a Christian yet denies the "LORDSHIP' of Jesus the Christ is truly a lost soul. I just prayed for you M. Until such time as you declare our LORD and SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST, you are simply heretical. May the Lord Jesus Christ work in your soul. |
|
Quoted: Take care M. I will pray for you as I pray for Catholics and other unsaved persons. Have a good evening. ETA: M.... A man that claims to be a Christian yet denies the "LORDSHIP' of Jesus the Christ is truly a lost soul. I just prayed for you M. Until such time as you declare our LORD and SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST, you are simply heretical. May the Lord Jesus Christ work in your soul. Jesus IS Lord and He IS Savior; that's who He is. We don't make Him either one. What we do is put our faith in Him and He saves us. The issue with Lordship Salvation is one where the means to salvation is in the work of men, not in the work of Christ on the cross. Lordship Salvation gives lip-service to the Lordship of Christ but in denies it in application. All you've done here is show that you can't discuss the Bible, only act in condescension and intellectual dishonesty. Sorry, puffing yourself up doesn't prove your case. It proves you have no case. ETA a quote that you have proven true: "Calvinism today seems to appeal mostly to a certain sort of personality, and that personality is not always healthy… (it is) intellectually arrogant, argumentative, insecure (and therefore intolerant), and prone to constructing straw-man arguments. In order for the typical Calvinist’s faith to remain secure, he seems to feel the need to imagine all others outside his theological box as evil, uninformed, or just plain stupid. I have seen this in men of all ages, some Baptist, some Presbyterian, some laymen, some ordained ministers… People are sometimes surprised to hear me speak of the TULIP cult. What do I mean when I speak this way? By a cult, I mean a sect within the broad landscape of Christianity which takes as its operating center some principle other than Christ crucified. This is certainly the case for the Young, Restless and Reformed. It is obvious that the operating center which holds this movement together is TULIP, not the gospel of the cross. One gets the impression that their sense of identity is inseparable from their sense of superiority.” -Dr. Paul Owen |
|
Quoted:
Please explain, from scripture, how I am wrong in saying that faith itself is not the gift of God, and that our salvation is not based on our faithfulness (i.e. perseverance), but Christ's...be sure to address 2 Timothy 2:13, and the examples of Saul, Samson, and Solomon. Faith is the gift of God: Galatians 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, 23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. Perseverance of faith: Colossians 1:21 And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled 22 In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight: 23 If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister; Perseverance of faith is guaranteed because saving faith is the perfect gift of God. Philippians 1:6 Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ: |
|
Quoted:
Faith is the gift of God: Galatians 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, 23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. Perseverance of faith: Colossians 1:21 And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled 22 In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight: 23 If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister; Perseverance of faith is guaranteed because saving faith is the perfect gift of God. Philippians 1:6 Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ: Quoted:
Quoted:
Please explain, from scripture, how I am wrong in saying that faith itself is not the gift of God, and that our salvation is not based on our faithfulness (i.e. perseverance), but Christ's...be sure to address 2 Timothy 2:13, and the examples of Saul, Samson, and Solomon. Faith is the gift of God: Galatians 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, 23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. Perseverance of faith: Colossians 1:21 And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled 22 In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight: 23 If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister; Perseverance of faith is guaranteed because saving faith is the perfect gift of God. Philippians 1:6 Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ: Thank you GST. And to add: Romans 3:10-12: 10: As it is written: "There is no one righteous, not even one; 11: there is no one who understands; there is no one who seeks God. 12: All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one. M, the Bible is so very clear that we as creatures can do nothing to please our Lord and Savior. Even our best attempt, our best work is garbage to our Lord. Yes, even FAITH is a GIFT from God. |
|
Quoted:
I love this thread! You love this thread because you think Protestants are eating each other. Sorry Twire, not one Arminian, Calvinist, Reformed or any other worships Mary. Not one of us believes that Mary is key to our Salvation. Not one of us believes in the heretical construct of the assumption of Mary. Not one of us believes in the "immaculate conception" hereticial teaching of Rome. Not one of us believes in the man made "tradition" of purgatory. Not one of us believes, dogmatically, that the only route to heaven is through baptism and works. Not one of us believes that if you don't bow down to a man in Rome that you are anathema. Not one of us believes that your "holy father", the priest, can "call down from heaven Jesus Christ" to be sacrificed all over again, in direct contradiction to Hebrews. Not one of us believes that our "pastor"/"priest" is an "ALTER CHRISTUS" {another CHRIST} Twire, read the Bible with an open mind and heart. Leave your church "tradition" at the door and simply read His Word. You may just have an epiphany. Twire, your religion anathematizes us protestants. Your religion claims that if any person does not adhere to and believe in your dogmas, may they, (we) be anathematized. Twire, that means "ACCURSED". According to your religion, I am going to hell. 'Fraid not Twire. ETA: Twire, I would urge you to not only read Galatians, but study it in depth. Paul "ANATHEMATIZED" them for only adding one little thing to the Gospel. If you read Galatians, it's a quick read, and simply for kicks substitute the Judaizers for Catholics, you will be astounded at what Paul is preaching. Catholics have not only "added one little thing" to the Gospel, they have added a huge BOATLOAD of things. If Paul was pissed off at the Churches of Galatia, he would be ROYALLY PISSED OFF with the religion of Rome. |
|
Quoted: You love this thread because you think Protestants are eating each other. Yes, yes you are. Sorry Twire, not one Arminian, Calvinist, Reformed or any other worships Mary. Nor does any Catholic Not one of us believes that Mary is key to our Salvation. Nor does any Catholic Not one of us believes in the heretical construct of the assumption of Mary. Its heretical because biblically no one has been assumed into heaven body and soul...oh, wait, they have. Not one of us believes in the "immaculate conception" hereticial teaching of Rome. Lol! Not one of us believes in the man made "tradition" of purgatory. Its all through the Bible, why can't you see it? Perhaps you have 'special knowledge' or have some source, more authoritative than the Church that Christ founded on earth, that says otherwise Not one of us believes, dogmatically, that the only route to heaven is through baptism and works. Nor does any Catholic. Not one of us believes that if you don't bow down to a man in Rome that you are anathema. Really? Should we bow to you instead? Not one of us believes that your "holy father", the priest, can "call down from heaven Jesus Christ" to be sacrificed all over again, in direct contradiction to Hebrews. Nor does any Catholic. Not one of us believes that our "pastor"/"priest" is an "ALTER CHRISTUS" {another CHRIST} You mean like in the case of where a priest grants absolution, because its not in the Bible? Oh wait...it actually is. Twire, read the Bible with an open mind and heart. Leave your church "tradition" at the door and simply read His Word. What, to follow your novel interpretation of the Bible and history, which really didn't come into vogue for some 1500-1800 years after the apostles? Nah, I'll stick with the Church that Christ founded on earth, the one that follows scripture and sacred tradition, just like it instructs us to in Thess. You may just have an epiphany. Every time some ignorant fundamentalist posts this type of hatred and stupidity, I do have an epiphany. Twire, your religion anathematizes us protestants. BS. And how many ecumenical councils has your faith led or sponsored? Your religion claims that if any person does not adhere to and believe in your dogmas, may they, (we) be anathematized. Twire, that means "ACCURSED". According to your religion, I am going to hell. 'Fraid not Twire. ETA: Twire, I would urge you to not only read Galatians, but study it in depth. Paul "ANATHEMATIZED" them for only adding one little thing to the Gospel. If you read Galatians, it's a quick read, and simply for kicks substitute the Judaizers for Catholics, you will be astounded at what Paul is preaching. Catholics have not only "added one little thing" to the Gospel, they have added a huge BOATLOAD of things.  If Paul was pissed off at the Churches of Galatia, he would be ROYALLY PISSED OFF with the religion of Rome. Quoted: Quoted: I love this thread! You love this thread because you think Protestants are eating each other. Yes, yes you are. Sorry Twire, not one Arminian, Calvinist, Reformed or any other worships Mary. Nor does any Catholic Not one of us believes that Mary is key to our Salvation. Nor does any Catholic Not one of us believes in the heretical construct of the assumption of Mary. Its heretical because biblically no one has been assumed into heaven body and soul...oh, wait, they have. Not one of us believes in the "immaculate conception" hereticial teaching of Rome. Lol! Not one of us believes in the man made "tradition" of purgatory. Its all through the Bible, why can't you see it? Perhaps you have 'special knowledge' or have some source, more authoritative than the Church that Christ founded on earth, that says otherwise Not one of us believes, dogmatically, that the only route to heaven is through baptism and works. Nor does any Catholic. Not one of us believes that if you don't bow down to a man in Rome that you are anathema. Really? Should we bow to you instead? Not one of us believes that your "holy father", the priest, can "call down from heaven Jesus Christ" to be sacrificed all over again, in direct contradiction to Hebrews. Nor does any Catholic. Not one of us believes that our "pastor"/"priest" is an "ALTER CHRISTUS" {another CHRIST} You mean like in the case of where a priest grants absolution, because its not in the Bible? Oh wait...it actually is. Twire, read the Bible with an open mind and heart. Leave your church "tradition" at the door and simply read His Word. What, to follow your novel interpretation of the Bible and history, which really didn't come into vogue for some 1500-1800 years after the apostles? Nah, I'll stick with the Church that Christ founded on earth, the one that follows scripture and sacred tradition, just like it instructs us to in Thess. You may just have an epiphany. Every time some ignorant fundamentalist posts this type of hatred and stupidity, I do have an epiphany. Twire, your religion anathematizes us protestants. BS. And how many ecumenical councils has your faith led or sponsored? Your religion claims that if any person does not adhere to and believe in your dogmas, may they, (we) be anathematized. Twire, that means "ACCURSED". According to your religion, I am going to hell. 'Fraid not Twire. ETA: Twire, I would urge you to not only read Galatians, but study it in depth. Paul "ANATHEMATIZED" them for only adding one little thing to the Gospel. If you read Galatians, it's a quick read, and simply for kicks substitute the Judaizers for Catholics, you will be astounded at what Paul is preaching. Catholics have not only "added one little thing" to the Gospel, they have added a huge BOATLOAD of things. If Paul was pissed off at the Churches of Galatia, he would be ROYALLY PISSED OFF with the religion of Rome. I still love this thread. |
|
We are all brothers in Christ.
Matthew 22:36-40 Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.” |
|
Quoted:
You sir, are a priceless charicature, made in the image and likeness of Jack Chick. I still love this thread. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I love this thread! You love this thread because you think Protestants are eating each other. Yes, yes you are. Sorry Twire, not one Arminian, Calvinist, Reformed or any other worships Mary. Nor does any Catholic Not one of us believes that Mary is key to our Salvation. Nor does any Catholic Not one of us believes in the heretical construct of the assumption of Mary. Its heretical because biblically no one has been assumed into heaven body and soul...oh, wait, they have. Not one of us believes in the "immaculate conception" hereticial teaching of Rome. Lol! Not one of us believes in the man made "tradition" of purgatory. Its all through the Bible, why can't you see it? Perhaps you have 'special knowledge' or have some source, more authoritative than the Church that Christ founded on earth, that says otherwise Not one of us believes, dogmatically, that the only route to heaven is through baptism and works. Nor does any Catholic. Not one of us believes that if you don't bow down to a man in Rome that you are anathema. Really? Should we bow to you instead? Not one of us believes that your "holy father", the priest, can "call down from heaven Jesus Christ" to be sacrificed all over again, in direct contradiction to Hebrews. Nor does any Catholic. Not one of us believes that our "pastor"/"priest" is an "ALTER CHRISTUS" {another CHRIST} You mean like in the case of where a priest grants absolution, because its not in the Bible? Oh wait...it actually is. Twire, read the Bible with an open mind and heart. Leave your church "tradition" at the door and simply read His Word. What, to follow your novel interpretation of the Bible and history, which really didn't come into vogue for some 1500-1800 years after the apostles? Nah, I'll stick with the Church that Christ founded on earth, the one that follows scripture and sacred tradition, just like it instructs us to in Thess. You may just have an epiphany. Every time some ignorant fundamentalist posts this type of hatred and stupidity, I do have an epiphany. Twire, your religion anathematizes us protestants. BS. And how many ecumenical councils has your faith led or sponsored? Your religion claims that if any person does not adhere to and believe in your dogmas, may they, (we) be anathematized. Twire, that means "ACCURSED". According to your religion, I am going to hell. 'Fraid not Twire. ETA: Twire, I would urge you to not only read Galatians, but study it in depth. Paul "ANATHEMATIZED" them for only adding one little thing to the Gospel. If you read Galatians, it's a quick read, and simply for kicks substitute the Judaizers for Catholics, you will be astounded at what Paul is preaching. Catholics have not only "added one little thing" to the Gospel, they have added a huge BOATLOAD of things.
If Paul was pissed off at the Churches of Galatia, he would be ROYALLY PISSED OFF with the religion of Rome. I still love this thread. Well said TWIRE.... great post. |
|
Twire, you simply do not know the teachings and dogmas of Rome.
Maybe at some point I will point out every single claim I made above, through your own teachings. I'm only going to mention one tonight. Yes Twire, the Religion of Rome has accursed protestants. Read up on the council of trent, further agreed upon by vatican II. Twire, this stuff is common knowledge. Please study your own religion.
|
|
Okay Twire, here are just a few.
You won't read them however. I know that going in. Twire, if you do read these quotes from your popes; from your "apostolic succession:", then perhaps you will begin to see what we protestants see in the religion of rome. Simply a man made religion. Good luck Twire. Pope Pius V blasphemed, “The Pope and God are the same, so he has all power in Heaven and earth.” (2) Pope Innocent III said “We may according to the fullness of our power, dispose of the law and dispense above the law. Those whom the Pope of Rome doth separate, it is not a man that separates them but God. For the Pope holdeth place on earth, not simply of a man but of the true God.” (3) Pope Leo XIII declared, “We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty.” (4) And More: Pope Boniface VIII said “We declare, assert, define and pronounce to be subject to the Roman Pontiff is to every creature altogether necessary for salvation… I have the authority of the King of Kings. I am all in all, and above all, so that God Himself and I, the Vicar of Christ, have but one consistory, and I am able to do almost all that God can do. What therefore, can you make of me but God?” (5) I especially like this gem: Pope Pius IX said, “I alone… am the successor of the apostles, the vicar of Jesus Christ. I am the way, the truth, and the life…” (6) Pope Pius X declared, “The Pope is not simply the representative of Jesus Christ. On the contrary, he is Jesus Christ Himself, under the veil of the flesh. Does the Pope speak? It is Jesus Christ who is speaking, hence, when anyone speaks of the Pope, it is not necessary to examine but to obey.” (7) Twire, you will really like this one. This is one that anathematizes us poor slovenly Protestants!!! Pope Pius XII said, “…recognize the Holy, Catholic, Roman Church to be the only true Church of Jesus Christ, outside of which neither sanctity nor salvation can be found. Call them to the unity of the one fold, granting them the grace to believe every truth of our holy faith and to submit themselves to the Supreme Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Jesus Christ on earth.” (8) Yet another abomination: “God has committed to her the treasury of all good things, in order that everyone may know that through her are obtained every hope, every grace, and all salvation. For this is his will, that we obtain everything through Mary.” (Pope Pius IX: Encycl., Ubi primum, February 2, 1849.) — [p. 12, number 12] A real doozy: “O Virgin most holy, none abounds in the knowledge of God except through thee; none, O Mother of God, obtains salvation except through thee, none receives a gift from the throne of mercy except through thee.” (Pope Leo XIII: Encycl., Adiutricem populi, September 5, 1895.) — [p. 12, no. 13] This is a real winner: “If it is impossible to separate what God has united, it is also certain that you cannot find Jesus except with Mary and through Mary.” (Pope Pius X: Allocution to the Franciscans, November 12, 1910.) — [p. 14, no. 20] Do you want me to continue with this blasphemy Twire or will this give you enough to study upon? I will wait patiently. Whew!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm beat. That took all of 5 minutes to google the doozies of Rome. 
There are literally thousands of other heretical teachings of Rome. Twire, if you don't believe the interwebs on this stuff, than please study Trent. Vatican II, you own Catechism. It's all there twire. It only takes a few hours of study. ETA: And Twire, I really don't have any interest in debating what YOU think or what I think. If you would like to address the above quotations, the above teachings of your religion, then I would love to respond. I have no interest in you claiming that I am taking the above quotations out of context or am attempting to raise a strawman. The above are direct quotes from your popes, tradition and magisterium.. If you don't agree with them, then that's fine. |
|
Quoted: Twire, you simply do not know the teachings and dogmas of Rome. Maybe at some point I will point out every single claim I made above, through your own teachings. I'm only going to mention one tonight. Yes Twire, the Religion of Rome has accursed protestants. Read up on the council of trent, further agreed upon by vatican II. Twire, this stuff is common knowledge. Please study your own religion.  |
|
Quoted: Okay Twire, here are just a few. <snip> And Twire, I really don't have any interest in debating what YOU think or what I think. If this is an example of your debating skills, I can see why you would have no interest. But remember you were the one who took a relatively benign thread which had some debate between Protestants and inserted hate filled condemnation of Catholics in no less than three posts. You changed the timbre of the thread, not me. Why you hate the Church so much is beyond me. |
|
Quoted: For one M, Calvin didn't start anything. Calvin was a Catholic that finally got recognition for reading the Bible as opposed to Romes "teaching". If you simply go back to many of the early Church fathers, (yes M, the early church was catholic), you will find many "reformed theologians". If you go back to the Old Testament you will find nothing but "reformed theology". As to the bolded part above. If you truly knew what reformed theology was all about you would recognize that your bolded statement above is straight out of reformed theology. I win the internets. |
|
Quiz time!! Which pope said the following: (internet search frowned upon): "Christ committed adultery first of all with the women at the well about whom St. John tell’s us. Was not everybody about Him saying: ‘Whatever has He been doing with her?’ Secondly, with Mary Magdalen, and thirdly with the women taken in adultery whom He dismissed so lightly. Thus even, Christ who was so righteous, must have been guilty of fornication before He died." I look upon God no better than a scoundrel” "If Moses should attempt to intimidate you with his stupid Ten Commandments, tell him right out – chase yourself to the Jews” If you are a preacher of grace, then preach a true and not a fictitious grace; if grace is true, you must bear a true and not a fictitious sin. God does not save people who are only fictitious sinners. Be a sinner and sin boldly, but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly . . . as long as we are here [in this world] we have to sin. . . . No sin will separate us from the Lamb, even though we commit fornication and murder a thousand times a day" |
|
From an evangelical website: Calvin is one of the founding fathers of Protestantism and someone who still has countless followers today. Hailed as being a master theologian, the French Reformer’s writings still live and breathe in the 21st century. Calvin was a second-generation Reformer, being 26 years younger than Luther. He was a lawyer by training, possessing a keen analytical mind. By all counts, Calvin was an intellectual. He wrote the original version of his famous Institutes of the Christian Religion when he was a mere 27 years old, updating it throughout his entire life. (Some regard the Institutes to be the single most influential theological work in history.) Calvin left the Roman Catholic Church around 1530 and joined the Reformation in 1537. Whether you agree with Calvin’s theological system or not, there’s no question that John Calvin has made an indelible mark on today’s Christianity, especially American evangelicalism. And like all highly influential Christians, Calvin has been hailed and hammered, loved and loathed, adored and abhorred. For example . . . "Among all those who have been born of women, there has not risen a greater than John Calvin; no age, before him ever produced his equal, and no age afterwards has seen his rival. In theology, he stands alone, shining like a bright fixed star, while other leaders and teachers can only circle round him, at a great distance — as comets go streaming through space — with nothing like his glory or his permanence” . . . "the longer I live the clearer does it appear that John Calvin’s system is the nearest to perfection.” ~ Charles Spurgeon "Calvin was the cruel and unopposed dictator of Geneva.” ~ The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church "Taking into account all his failings he must be reckoned as one of the greatest and best of men whom God raised up in the history of Christianity.” ~ Philip Schaff "The famous Calvin whom we regard as the apostle of Geneva raised himself up to the rank of pope of the Protestants.” ~ Voltaire Calvin labored 12-18 hours a day as a preacher, administrator, professor of theology, superintendant of churches and schools, advisor, and regulator of public morality and worship. He died at age 54. But he was incredibly productive. Prolific since his early 20s, Calvin preached an average of five sermons a week and wrote a commentary on nearly every book of the Bible. What follows is not intended to debate the ethics or theological veracity of Calvin. Instead, it’s to (I’m repeating myself here) show that everyone who influenced the church of Jesus Christ has held to some surprising, albeit, even shocking beliefs. Consequently, we Christians should be much more tolerant toward those with whom we may disagree. Meaning, those who admire Calvin, Wesley, C.S. Lewis, Luther, or Jonathan Edwards, etc. should be far more gracious and patient about theological differences in light of some of the shocking stuff all of these men believed along with the good things they contributed. Caution: If you dare to read further, please read the entire post. Especially the "Don’t Miss the Point” section at the bottom. 1. Calvin believed that executing unrepentant heretics was justified. The best known example of this is when Calvin consented to the execution of Michael Servetus, a man who denied the Trinity and infant baptism. Servetus burned for one hour simply because of his theological views. Calvin supporters are quick to point out that the great Reformer didn’t directly execute the man. He even tried to persuade Servetus not to come to Geneva. Calvin also tried to get Servetus to repent and sought for him to be granted a more humane execution (which was beheading instead of burning). Even so, Calvin made this remark regarding Servetus, showing that he believed death for heresy was justifiable. "But I am unwilling to pledge my word for his safety, for if he shall come [to Geneva], I shall never permit him to depart alive, provided my authority be of any avail.” [1] During Servertus’ trial, Calvin remarked: "I hope that the verdict will call for the death penalty.” [2] Nine years after the execution, Calvin made this comment in answering his critics: "Servetus suffered the penalty due his heresies, but was it by my will. Certainly his arrogance destroyed him not less than his impiety.” [3] Calvin is also quoted as saying, "Whoever shall now contend that it is unjust to put heretics and blasphemers to death will knowingly and willingly incur their very guilt. This is not laid down on human authority; it is God who speaks and prescribes a perpetual rule for his Church.” [3a] Whether you agree with Calvin’s view or defend his actions because he was "a man of his times,” many Christians find the idea of executing heretics to be shocking. This brings up another point for another post, but consider for a moment if murder was legal in our time. If it were, I think we’d have a lot of dead Christians who lost their lives to other Christians over doctrinal trespasses. If you think I’m wrong, just watch the vitriol and hatred in many "Christian” online forums as they verbally bludgeon one another over theological interpretations. In addition to Servetus, Jerome Bolsec was arrested and imprisoned for challenging Calvin during a lecture, then banished from the city. Calvin wrote privately about the matter saying that he wished Bolsec were "rotting in a ditch.” [4] Jacques Gruet was also a man who disagreed with Calvin. He called Calvin an ambitious and haughty hypocrite. The administrations of Geneva tortured Gruet twice daily until he confessed, and with Calvin’s concurrence, Gruet was tied to a stake, his feet were nailed to it, and his head was cut off for blasphemy and rebellion. Pierre Ameaux was charged with slandering Calvin at a private gathering. He was to pay a fine, but Calvin wasn’t satisfied with the penalty, so Ameaux spent two months in prison, lost his job, and was paraded through town kneeling to confess his libel, also paying for the trial expense. [5] 2. Calvin believed that the Eucharist provides an undoubted assurance of eternal life. Resembling the Roman Catholic view, Calvin stated that the sacrament of the Eucharist provided the "undoubted assurance of eternal life to our minds, but also secures the immortality of our flesh.” [6] 3. Calvin believed that the Reformed Church (his church) was the true Church and there was no salvation outside of it. Calvin persuaded an Anabapist named Herman to leave the Anabaptists (which he considered a sect), and join the Reformed church. He wrote the following, which sounds strikingly similar to the way the Catholics of that time spoke of the Roman Catholic Church: "Herman has, if I am not mistaken, in good faith returned to the fellowship of the Church. He has confessed that outside the Church there is no salvation, and that the true Church is with us. Therefore, it was defection when he belonged to a sect separated from it.” [7] 4. Calvin believed it was acceptable to lambast his opponents with vicious names. Calvin treated his critics with contempt, calling them "pigs,” "asses,” "riffraff,” "dogs,” "idiots,” and "stinking beasts.” In this vein, Calvin said this of the great Anabaptist leader, Menno Simons: "Nothing could be prouder, nothing more impudent than this donkey.” 5. Calvin believed that the Old Testament capital offenses should be enforced today. The city of Geneva was ruled by the clergy, which was composed of five pastors and twelve lay elders chosen by Geneva’s Council. But Calvin’s voice was the most influential in the city. Here are some laws and facts about Geneva under Calvin’s authority: * Each household had to attend Sunday morning services. If there was preaching on weekdays, all had to attend also. (There were only a few exceptions, and Calvin preached three to four times a week.) * If a person came to the service after the sermon had begun, he was warned. If he continued, he would have to pay a fine. * Heresy was regarded as an insult to God and treason to the state and was punished by death. * Witchcraft was a capital crime. In one year, 14 alleged witches were sent to the stake on the charge that they persuaded satan to afflict Geneva with the plague. * Clergy were to abstain from hunting, gambling, feasting, commerce, secular amusements, and had to accept annual visitations and moral scrutiny by church superiors. * Gambling, card-playing, frequenting taverns, dancing, indecent or irreligious songs, immodesty in dress were all prohibited. * The allowable color and quantity of clothing and the number of dishes permissible at a meal were specified by law. * A woman was jailed for arranging her hair to an "immoral height.” * Children were to be named after Old Testament characters. A rebellious father served four days in prison for insisting on naming his son Claude instead of Abraham. * To speak disrespectfully of Calvin or the clergy was a crime. A first violation was punished by a reprimand. Further violations with fines. Persistent violations were met with imprisonment or banishment. * Fornication was punished by exile or drowning. * Adultery, blasphemy, and idolatry was punished with death. * In the year 1558-1559, there were 414 prosecutions for moral offenses. * As everywhere in the 16th century, torture was often used to obtain confessions or evidence. * Between 1542-1564, there were 76 banishments. The total population of Geneva then was 20,000. * Calvin’s own step-daughter and son-in-law were among those condemned for adultery and executed. * In Geneva, there was little distinction between religion and morality. The existing records of the Council for this period reveal a high percentage of illegitimate children, abandoned infants, forced marriages, and sentences of death. [9] * In one case, a child was beheaded for striking his parents. [10] (Following Old Testament Mosaic law, Calvin believed it was scriptural to execute rebellious children and those who commit adultery.) [10a] * During a period of 17 years when Calvin was leading Geneva, there were 139 recorded executions in the city. [11] Sabastian Castellio, a friend of Calvin’s who urged him to repent of his intolerance, made the shocking remark, "If Christ himself came to Geneva, he would be crucified. For Geneva is not a place of Christian liberty. It is ruled by a new pope [John Calvin], but one who burns men alive while the pope at Rome strangles them first.” [12] Castellio also made this remark: "Can we imagine Christ ordering a man to be burned alive for advocating adult baptism? The Mosaic laws calling for the death of a heretic were superceded by the law of Christ, which is one of mercy not of despotism and terror.” [12a] 6. Calvin believed that Jewish people were impious, dishonest, lacked common sense, were greedy, and should die without pity. Calvin wrote, "I have had much conversation with many Jews: I have never seen either a drop of piety or a grain of truth or ingenuousness – nay, I have never found common sense in any Jew.” [13] Calvin is also quoted as calling Jews "profane dogs” who "under the pretext of prophecy, stupidly devour all the riches of the earth with their unrestrained cupidity.” [14] He also stated that "their rotten and unbending stiffneckedness deserves that they be oppressed unendingly and without measure or end and that they die in their misery without the pity of anyone.” [15] 7. Calvin believed that God did not create all humans on equal terms, but created some individuals for eternal damnation. This idea is known as "double predestination.” According to this view, God predestines some to salvation and others to destruction. While this idea will not be shocking to some Christians, particularly Calvinists, the idea that God would knowing create some individuals so as to destroy them eternally in the end is shocking to many believers. According to Calvin, "The predestination by which God adopts some to the hope of life, and adjudges others to eternal death, no man who would be thought pious ventures simply to deny . . . By predestination we mean the eternal decree of God, by which he determined with himself whatever he wished to happen with regard to every man. All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestinated to life or to death.” [16] Chapter 21 of Book III of John Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion is called "Of the eternal election, by which God has predestinated some to salvation, and others to destruction.” |
|
Twire,
In response to the first post, you make your point that cut and paste without context can make one say whatever you want. I know where those are from, and know that Catholic apologist have even said don't seriously use them. That said, the point that because someone said a sentence, and that's all the information we have, doesn't mean we can know what they truly meant. Score one for you. As to Calvin. He was a man, he sinned, as all of us do. Doesn't mean everything he said was wrong. I am not saying you did this, but I alway find it funny when people say Calvinism is wrong because he ordered a man burned alive.  . What does one have to do with the other? This is a clear example of why I rely on the Bible instead of man. We have teachers and scholars, but to follow someone blindly just shows that one is blind. That's not directed at you. That's true for everyone.
|
|
Quoted: Twire, In response to the first post, you make your point that cut and paste without context can make one say whatever you want. I know where those are from, and know that Catholic apologist have even said don't seriously use them. That said, the point that because someone said a sentence, and that's all the information we have, doesn't mean we can know what they truly meant. Score one for you. As to Calvin. He was a man, he sinned, as all of us do. Doesn't mean everything he said was wrong. I am not saying you did this, but I alway find it funny when people say Calvinism is wrong because he ordered a man burned alive. . What does one have to do with the other? This is a clear example of why I rely on the Bible instead of man. We have teachers and scholars, but to follow someone blindly just shows that one is blind. That's not directed at you. That's true for everyone.Statements gotten off the internet, unless backed by copious other documentation, are worth what you pay for them. Nada. Second post, not meant to smear Calvin. In fact, the website I took that from has a nice prelude and postlude explaining the entire post. But again, as an example of context, I ripped it out as a 'proof.' |
|
Twire, all of the posts that I made were directly from your church, your religion of Rome.
You did not refute nor even address even one of them. If you would care enough to even address one of the above quotations I would be happy to "debate" you. You, I am certain, realize that the above quotations are indeed from your religion, however you do not choose to face them head on. The big difference between your religion and mine is I don't put all of my hope and faith in a man, neither Calvin nor the Pope. I can read Calvin, Luther or Spurgeon and understand that they are all failed sinners just as I am. You, however, can't read the traditions of your religion and make the claim that they are simply sinners and could very well be wrong. Your traditions do not allow for that. Twire, I'm pleased that you feel you "won the internets". Sadly that may be the only thing you win.
|
|
Twire:
Let's just take one of the above quotations from my above post. Namely the bodily assumption of Mary. It is indeed DOGMA within your church that one must believe in the assumption of Mary. Can you please cite the first mention of the belief in the assumption. Was it not Epiphanius in roughly 377 who FIRST made this somewhat innocuous statement: "In a later passage, he [Epiphanius] says that she [Mary] may have died and been buried, or been killed--as a martyr. 'Or she remained alive, since nothing is impossible with God and he can do whatever he desires; for her end no one knows.'" 5 Was it not until the 700's that it actually gained traction with St John Damascene? Yet the religion of Rome teaches this as Dogma and anathematizes anyone who doesn't believe in the assumption? Catholics love to state, and may even believe that all of their traditions go back 2000 years. Few of those traditions go back more than a few hundred years at most. This is only one of many. Twire, if there is some other dogma that you'd like to discuss I'd be happy to entertain it. Take Care. |
|
I'm really impressed with your spontaneous outpouring of intrinsic knowledge about Catholicism, my personal beliefs, my personal thought patterns, etc. Its truly incredible. Its almost like you have special insight or knowledge of what is true and what is not. You want to debate? Don't ruin this thread. Start your own. But be sure that you list specifically the believe system and denomination that you identify with. It's no big deal to me, I've been arguing with your ilk since the pre-eminance of EricTheHun. I'll be along directly to join the scrap, despite knowing the outcome. Have you seen my outline of how these things go? Let me refresh your memory 80FL: 'Catholics believe _______.' (insert subject) TWIRE: 'No, they believe this, ______.' (insert quote from the catechism with additional notes by the Church fathers, who were Catholic by your own admission earlier in this thread.) 80FL: 'That's not the Bible.' TWIRE: Replies with biblical citation. 80FL: 'You have interpreted that wrong and your church has interpreted that wrong for the last 2,000 years, let me tell you the correct interpretation.' OR ' Oh yeah, well what about _______ (insert new subject).' All these debate threads go like this, and it gets to be old hat. And at no time will you address the utter inconsistency of your own belief, even when I ask you directly. And I will. So its an absolute waste of time. But I will not let your stone throwing go unchecked. |