Jesus Christ is God's Predestinated, Elected Man

[Ask Mr. Religion]

You have to believe that there is something seriously wrong with the Bible.

How do you justify all of the scriptures that say "All" "Anyone" "Everyone" "Whosoever" that hears and believes the Gospel shall be saved, Romans 10:13.

There is not one scripture in the whole Bible about anyone being predestinated to heaven or to hell.

When it suits you, "all" means each and every person who ever lived. Try imposing that more reasonably. See also John 12:32; 6:37; Luke 11:42; Acts 2:17; 10:12; Rom 14:2; 1 Cor 1:5; 2 Peter 3:9; 1 Tim 2:1-2, 4, 8; Matt 9:35. Cherry-picking Scripture to suit your purposes is not exegesis at all. :AMR1:

Proponents of general atonement like yourself cite general terms in three groups of texts to prove that God intended for Jesus to die for all humans without exception and that Jesus’ death is ineffective for some for whom He died.

(1) Texts containing the word “world”: John 3:16; 1 John 2:1-2; John 6:51; 2 Cor 5:19; John 1:9, 29; 3:17; 4:42; 1 John 4:14; John 12:46
(2) Texts containing the word “all”: 1 Tim 2:4-6; 2 Pet 3:9; Heb 2:9; 2 Cor 5:14-15; 1 Cor 15:22; Rom 5:18
(3) Texts allegedly depicting the perishing of those for whom Christ died: Rom 14:15; 1 Cor 8:11; 2 Pet 2:1; Heb 10:29

None of these texts substantiates general atonement. To the contrary, these texts uphold definite atonement without any contradiction. Proponents of general atonement cite John 3:16, for example, but a right understanding of God’s love, τὸν κόσμον, and πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων perfectly harmonizes with particular atonement; as David used Goliath’s own sword to sever Goliath’s head, so proponents of particular atonement may use John 3:16 to refute general atonement. The same is true of the other passages, such as ἱλασμός and ὅλου τοῦ κόσμου in 1 John 2:2, οἱ πάντες in 2 Cor 5:14-15, ὁ ἀδελφός in Rom 14:15 and 1 Cor 8:11, and τὸν ἀγοράσαντα αὐτοὺς δεσπότην ἀρνούμενοι in 2 Pet 2:1.

1Tim.2:4 is spoken immediately after vv1-3. V1 also refers to "all men," and then explains immediately, v2, what that phrase means: "kings and all who are in authority." v5 right afterward speaks of the "only Mediator between God and men."

The latter cannot be referring to ALL men without exception, but surely means that Jesus is the ONLY mediator there is. Those for whom he intercedes, he is effectual, Rom.8:34; Heb.7:25; Jn.17:9. Hence, the proper subject of that term (men) is the elect.

The former term, by means of the qualification, is properly understood as "all kinds of men," kings and authorities being a significant example. Therefore, in the following use of the same term, it is not only contextually proper, but theologically consistent to interpret v4 once again as "all kinds of men."

2Pet.3:9 tells exactly who Peter has in mind in the verse itself. "The Lord... is longsuffering toward us (some Gk texts say "you") not willing that any of [us or you] should perish, but that all [us or you] should come to repentance."

Again, we understand the apostle is speaking to the gathered church (which could contain half-hearted members), and refers even to those who have yet to join "us" but shall in due time. Them, the Lord is also concerned to save.

Ezk.18:32 & 33:11 say only that God is neither capricious in his judgments, nor delighted by the penalty justly received by those persons who refuse all his gracious inducements to turn from their self-ruining ways. Of course, it is still possible to speak of the fact that God is "pleased" to do justice where it is appropriate, and where mercy (on his terms) is refused. "Pleased" is being used in equivocal terms.

And—it should be noted—most Arminians and other universal-love proponents will consent to this reality when pressed. Virtually all evangelicals (not flirting with universalism) agree with us that God will impose the final death sentence, being his last preference in regard to the obstinate. He is "pleased" to do so, and is not pleased to refrain, or grant further or indefinite stays.

When we want to discover what was meant by our Lord's sacrifice for the "whole world" or "all men", we need only look to the final book of Scripture, which explains what "all" and "world" mean as relates to salvation: And they sang a new song, saying, "Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation[/i], (Rev 5:9). Trying to force this clear teaching to read "each and every person" is just plain entrenchment in a view read into what Scripture is clearly not teaching.

Indeed, Christ’s life, death, and resurrection was not an attempt by God to make men savable, if they fulfilled certain conditions, even INCLUDING FAITH. It was His actual accomplishment of the justification of EVERY ELECT SINNER who Christ represented by His obedience unto death at Calvary.

Our Lord's High Priestly prayer in John 17 makes it clear that not "all" (each and every person) are the subject of His prayer. Jn.17:20-21, "I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me."

Without particular atonement Jesus prays for the salvation of some who will not be saved. This is even more problematic than the idea that the death of Christ was not only sufficient for the sins of the world, but also somehow efficient for all without exception either. Our Lord dies for some who won't be saved? How could divine efficiency and intention be divided?

Simply put: if some for whom Jesus prays for salvation yet aren't saved, how can we be assured that his prayers for us will deliver our souls from death? The matter is once more put into doubt. Either something more must yet be done for the saved by God; or else the responsibility falls to the individual soul to make Christ's prayers effectual, making God a debtor.

Our Lord either:
1. Made full atonement for sin once and for all
or
2. Something needs to be added to that sacrifice.

This may be thought of as the power of Christ's atonement.

IF, as some claim, Christ has died for all people then let's consider condition 1 above:

Christ made full atonement for sin once and for all (power)
That atonement was made for all men (population)
Therefore, all men are saved (effect)

The Scriptures teach:

Christ made full atonement for sin once and for all (power)
The atonement was made for the elect (population)
Therefore, the elect are saved (effect)

So now we turn to what the Arminian insists. He still wants to limit the effect of what happened because he realizes that all are not saved but what does he go after? The power of the atonement:

The atonement made salvation possible for men to be saved (power)
The atonement was made for all men (population)
Therefore, those who add some condition to the atonement will be saved (effect)

Essentially the great sin of this position is to deny what Christ actually accomplished. Arminians well know that if we are to take Hebrews 10:1-18 on its face then the only way to avoid universalism is that Christ died only for the elect. The only other option is to deny what Hebrews 10 teaches.

It is a recurring fact of historical theology that those who universalize the atonement make faith something more than a receiving and resting upon Christ alone for salvation.

AMR

 

[musterion]

You emphasize the wrong parts.

Ephesians 1:3-10 3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, 4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love, 5 having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will, 6 to the praise of the glory of His grace, by which He has made us accepted in the Beloved. 7 In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace 8 which He made to abound toward us in all wisdom and prudence, 9 having made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His good pleasure which He purposed in Himself, 10 that in the dispensation of the fullness of the times He might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth -- in Him.

Paul wrote the passage primarily about what God had done through Christ. You make it primarily about us; it's a very humanistic reading you posted.

 

[Robert Pate]

When it suits you, "all" means each and every person who ever lived. Try imposing that more reasonably. See also John 12:32; 6:37; Luke 11:42; Acts 2:17; 10:12; Rom 14:2; 1 Cor 1:5; 2 Peter 3:9; 1 Tim 2:1-2, 4, 8; Matt 9:35. Cherry-picking Scripture to suit your purposes is not exegesis at all. :AMR1:

Proponents of general atonement like yourself cite general terms in three groups of texts to prove that God intended for Jesus to die for all humans without exception and that Jesus’ death is ineffective for some for whom He died.

(1) Texts containing the word “world”: John 3:16; 1 John 2:1-2; John 6:51; 2 Cor 5:19; John 1:9, 29; 3:17; 4:42; 1 John 4:14; John 12:46
(2) Texts containing the word “all”: 1 Tim 2:4-6; 2 Pet 3:9; Heb 2:9; 2 Cor 5:14-15; 1 Cor 15:22; Rom 5:18
(3) Texts allegedly depicting the perishing of those for whom Christ died: Rom 14:15; 1 Cor 8:11; 2 Pet 2:1; Heb 10:29

None of these texts substantiates general atonement. To the contrary, these texts uphold definite atonement without any contradiction. Proponents of general atonement cite John 3:16, for example, but a right understanding of God’s love, τὸν κόσμον, and πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων perfectly harmonizes with particular atonement; as David used Goliath’s own sword to sever Goliath’s head, so proponents of particular atonement may use John 3:16 to refute general atonement. The same is true of the other passages, such as ἱλασμός and ὅλου τοῦ κόσμου in 1 John 2:2, οἱ πάντες in 2 Cor 5:14-15, ὁ ἀδελφός in Rom 14:15 and 1 Cor 8:11, and τὸν ἀγοράσαντα αὐτοὺς δεσπότην ἀρνούμενοι in 2 Pet 2:1.

1Tim.2:4 is spoken immediately after vv1-3. V1 also refers to "all men," and then explains immediately, v2, what that phrase means: "kings and all who are in authority." v5 right afterward speaks of the "only Mediator between God and men."

The latter cannot be referring to ALL men without exception, but surely means that Jesus is the ONLY mediator there is. Those for whom he intercedes, he is effectual, Rom.8:34; Heb.7:25; Jn.17:9. Hence, the proper subject of that term (men) is the elect.

The former term, by means of the qualification, is properly understood as "all kinds of men," kings and authorities being a significant example. Therefore, in the following use of the same term, it is not only contextually proper, but theologically consistent to interpret v4 once again as "all kinds of men."

2Pet.3:9 tells exactly who Peter has in mind in the verse itself. "The Lord... is longsuffering toward us (some Gk texts say "you") not willing that any of [us or you] should perish, but that all [us or you] should come to repentance."

Again, we understand the apostle is speaking to the gathered church (which could contain half-hearted members), and refers even to those who have yet to join "us" but shall in due time. Them, the Lord is also concerned to save.

Ezk.18:32 & 33:11 say only that God is neither capricious in his judgments, nor delighted by the penalty justly received by those persons who refuse all his gracious inducements to turn from their self-ruining ways. Of course, it is still possible to speak of the fact that God is "pleased" to do justice where it is appropriate, and where mercy (on his terms) is refused. "Pleased" is being used in equivocal terms.

And—it should be noted—most Arminians and other universal-love proponents will consent to this reality when pressed. Virtually all evangelicals (not flirting with universalism) agree with us that God will impose the final death sentence, being his last preference in regard to the obstinate. He is "pleased" to do so, and is not pleased to refrain, or grant further or indefinite stays.

When we want to discover what was meant by our Lord's sacrifice for the "whole world" or "all men", we need only look to the final book of Scripture, which explains what "all" and "world" mean as relates to salvation: And they sang a new song, saying, "Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation[/i], (Rev 5:9). Trying to force this clear teaching to read "each and every person" is just plain entrenchment in a view read into what Scripture is clearly not teaching.

Indeed, Christ’s life, death, and resurrection was not an attempt by God to make men savable, if they fulfilled certain conditions, even INCLUDING FAITH. It was His actual accomplishment of the justification of EVERY ELECT SINNER who Christ represented by His obedience unto death at Calvary.

Our Lord's High Priestly prayer in John 17 makes it clear that not "all" (each and every person) are the subject of His prayer. Jn.17:20-21, "I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me."

Without particular atonement Jesus prays for the salvation of some who will not be saved. This is even more problematic than the idea that the death of Christ was not only sufficient for the sins of the world, but also somehow efficient for all without exception either. Our Lord dies for some who won't be saved? How could divine efficiency and intention be divided?

Simply put: if some for whom Jesus prays for salvation yet aren't saved, how can we be assured that his prayers for us will deliver our souls from death? The matter is once more put into doubt. Either something more must yet be done for the saved by God; or else the responsibility falls to the individual soul to make Christ's prayers effectual, making God a debtor.

Our Lord either:
1. Made full atonement for sin once and for all
or
2. Something needs to be added to that sacrifice.

This may be thought of as the power of Christ's atonement.

IF, as some claim, Christ has died for all people then let's consider condition 1 above:

Christ made full atonement for sin once and for all (power)
That atonement was made for all men (population)
Therefore, all men are saved (effect)

The Scriptures teach:

Christ made full atonement for sin once and for all (power)
The atonement was made for the elect (population)
Therefore, the elect are saved (effect)

So now we turn to what the Arminian insists. He still wants to limit the effect of what happened because he realizes that all are not saved but what does he go after? The power of the atonement:

The atonement made salvation possible for men to be saved (power)
The atonement was made for all men (population)
Therefore, those who add some condition to the atonement will be saved (effect)

Essentially the great sin of this position is to deny what Christ actually accomplished. Arminians well know that if we are to take Hebrews 10:1-18 on its face then the only way to avoid universalism is that Christ died only for the elect. The only other option is to deny what Hebrews 10 teaches.

It is a recurring fact of historical theology that those who universalize the atonement make faith something more than a receiving and resting upon Christ alone for salvation.

AMR

I believe what the Bible says, not what some heretic said back in the 1500's.

The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus atoned for the sins of the whole world, 1 John 4:14. To deny that is to call John a liar.

You seem to think that if you post a refutal of 2000 words that fact will go away. It is not going away. Your Calvinist doctrine questions the Lordship of Jesus Christ. I am glad that it is you and not me that will have to explain your anti-Gospel and anti-Christ religion to the Lord. You are most certainly going to be in the Lord, Lord, didn't we group.

 

[Samie]

. . .

Our Lord either:
1. Made full atonement for sin once and for all
or
2. Something needs to be added to that sacrifice.

This may be thought of as the power of Christ's atonement.

IF, as some claim, Christ has died for all people then let's consider condition 1 above:

Christ made full atonement for sin once and for all (power)
That atonement was made for all men (population)
Therefore, all men are saved (effect)
. . .

Correct. When people are "in Christ" they are in the saved condition. Unless detached from His body, one remains in the saved condition.

When Christ died, the "population" died (2 Cor 5:14, 15; Heb 2:9), having been fashioned into His body (Eph 2:11-19). When He resurrected, the "population" was made alive TOGETHER with Him (Eph 2:4-6; Col 2:13). Being alive and attached to His Body, the "population" has His power (Phil 4:13) to overcome evil with good (Rom 12:21). And overcomers will not be blotted out from the book of life (Rev 3:5).

Blotting out from the book of life signifies removal from the body of Christ, dismembering one from the family of God. The good news is judgment to blot out a name or not is rendered only AFTER one dies (Heb 9:27). There's hope while alive. And God through Christ decides who the overcomers are.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

When it suits you, "all" means each and every person who ever lived. Try imposing that more reasonably. See also John 12:32; 6:37; Luke 11:42; Acts 2:17; 10:12; Rom 14:2; 1 Cor 1:5; 2 Peter 3:9; 1 Tim 2:1-2, 4, 8; Matt 9:35. Cherry-picking Scripture to suit your purposes is not exegesis at all. :AMR1:

Proponents of general atonement like yourself cite general terms in three groups of texts to prove that God intended for Jesus to die for all humans without exception and that Jesus’ death is ineffective for some for whom He died.

(1) Texts containing the word “world”: John 3:16; 1 John 2:1-2; John 6:51; 2 Cor 5:19; John 1:9, 29; 3:17; 4:42; 1 John 4:14; John 12:46
(2) Texts containing the word “all”: 1 Tim 2:4-6; 2 Pet 3:9; Heb 2:9; 2 Cor 5:14-15; 1 Cor 15:22; Rom 5:18
(3) Texts allegedly depicting the perishing of those for whom Christ died: Rom 14:15; 1 Cor 8:11; 2 Pet 2:1; Heb 10:29

None of these texts substantiates general atonement. To the contrary, these texts uphold definite atonement without any contradiction. Proponents of general atonement cite John 3:16, for example, but a right understanding of God’s love, τὸν κόσμον, and πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων perfectly harmonizes with particular atonement; as David used Goliath’s own sword to sever Goliath’s head, so proponents of particular atonement may use John 3:16 to refute general atonement. The same is true of the other passages, such as ἱλασμός and ὅλου τοῦ κόσμου in 1 John 2:2, οἱ πάντες in 2 Cor 5:14-15, ὁ ἀδελφός in Rom 14:15 and 1 Cor 8:11, and τὸν ἀγοράσαντα αὐτοὺς δεσπότην ἀρνούμενοι in 2 Pet 2:1.

1Tim.2:4 is spoken immediately after vv1-3. V1 also refers to "all men," and then explains immediately, v2, what that phrase means: "kings and all who are in authority." v5 right afterward speaks of the "only Mediator between God and men."

The latter cannot be referring to ALL men without exception, but surely means that Jesus is the ONLY mediator there is. Those for whom he intercedes, he is effectual, Rom.8:34; Heb.7:25; Jn.17:9. Hence, the proper subject of that term (men) is the elect.

The former term, by means of the qualification, is properly understood as "all kinds of men," kings and authorities being a significant example. Therefore, in the following use of the same term, it is not only contextually proper, but theologically consistent to interpret v4 once again as "all kinds of men."

2Pet.3:9 tells exactly who Peter has in mind in the verse itself. "The Lord... is longsuffering toward us (some Gk texts say "you") not willing that any of [us or you] should perish, but that all [us or you] should come to repentance."

Again, we understand the apostle is speaking to the gathered church (which could contain half-hearted members), and refers even to those who have yet to join "us" but shall in due time. Them, the Lord is also concerned to save.

Ezk.18:32 & 33:11 say only that God is neither capricious in his judgments, nor delighted by the penalty justly received by those persons who refuse all his gracious inducements to turn from their self-ruining ways. Of course, it is still possible to speak of the fact that God is "pleased" to do justice where it is appropriate, and where mercy (on his terms) is refused. "Pleased" is being used in equivocal terms.

And—it should be noted—most Arminians and other universal-love proponents will consent to this reality when pressed. Virtually all evangelicals (not flirting with universalism) agree with us that God will impose the final death sentence, being his last preference in regard to the obstinate. He is "pleased" to do so, and is not pleased to refrain, or grant further or indefinite stays.

When we want to discover what was meant by our Lord's sacrifice for the "whole world" or "all men", we need only look to the final book of Scripture, which explains what "all" and "world" mean as relates to salvation: And they sang a new song, saying, "Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation[/i], (Rev 5:9). Trying to force this clear teaching to read "each and every person" is just plain entrenchment in a view read into what Scripture is clearly not teaching.

Indeed, Christ’s life, death, and resurrection was not an attempt by God to make men savable, if they fulfilled certain conditions, even INCLUDING FAITH. It was His actual accomplishment of the justification of EVERY ELECT SINNER who Christ represented by His obedience unto death at Calvary.

Our Lord's High Priestly prayer in John 17 makes it clear that not "all" (each and every person) are the subject of His prayer. Jn.17:20-21, "I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me."

Without particular atonement Jesus prays for the salvation of some who will not be saved. This is even more problematic than the idea that the death of Christ was not only sufficient for the sins of the world, but also somehow efficient for all without exception either. Our Lord dies for some who won't be saved? How could divine efficiency and intention be divided?

Simply put: if some for whom Jesus prays for salvation yet aren't saved, how can we be assured that his prayers for us will deliver our souls from death? The matter is once more put into doubt. Either something more must yet be done for the saved by God; or else the responsibility falls to the individual soul to make Christ's prayers effectual, making God a debtor.

Our Lord either:
1. Made full atonement for sin once and for all
or
2. Something needs to be added to that sacrifice.

This may be thought of as the power of Christ's atonement.

IF, as some claim, Christ has died for all people then let's consider condition 1 above:

Christ made full atonement for sin once and for all (power)
That atonement was made for all men (population)
Therefore, all men are saved (effect)

The Scriptures teach:

Christ made full atonement for sin once and for all (power)
The atonement was made for the elect (population)
Therefore, the elect are saved (effect)

So now we turn to what the Arminian insists. He still wants to limit the effect of what happened because he realizes that all are not saved but what does he go after? The power of the atonement:

The atonement made salvation possible for men to be saved (power)
The atonement was made for all men (population)
Therefore, those who add some condition to the atonement will be saved (effect)

Essentially the great sin of this position is to deny what Christ actually accomplished. Arminians well know that if we are to take Hebrews 10:1-18 on its face then the only way to avoid universalism is that Christ died only for the elect. The only other option is to deny what Hebrews 10 teaches.

It is a recurring fact of historical theology that those who universalize the atonement make faith something more than a receiving and resting upon Christ alone for salvation.

AMR

How you or any other Calvinist cannot see any free will in God's Holy written word is, totally unimaginable?

I realize you've been indoctrinated by your church. However, do you ever take it
upon yourself to sit down and pray to God the Father, that He will give you wisdom
and knowledge for what you're about to read/study?

That's even more important, than following the mandates of your particular denomination.

You write copious amounts of fancy words and phrases that I can't even get up
the gumption to read. On the basis of your ability to come off as an ingenious
"Wordsmith," one might tend to take your words at face value? I mean, how can
one argue with the way you present your arguments? They would need to be able to,
decipher all those intricate word and phrase choices? I for one, look at
a post and if it's longer than a football field, I pass it by.


You're obviously; intelligent, well learned, and capable of structuring a decent and worthy debate. However, why not converse with posters and not, at them?


I honestly don't believe, that most of the posters on TOL are anywhere near the higher echelon of intelligentsia?

It's just one man's opinion, take it for what it's worth.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

How you or any other Calvinist cannot see any free will in God's Holy written word is, totally unimaginable?

I realize you've been indoctrinated by your church. However, do you ever take it
upon yourself to sit down and pray to God the Father, that He will give you wisdom
and knowledge for what you're about to read/study?

That's even more important, than following the mandates of your particular denomination.

You write copious amounts of fancy words and phrases that I can't even get up
the gumption to read. On the basis of your ability to come off as an ingenious
"Wordsmith," one might tend to take your words at face value? I mean, how can
one argue with the way you present your arguments? They would need to be able to,
decipher all those intricate word and phrase choices? I for one, look at
a post and if it's longer than a football field, I pass it by.


You're obviously; intelligent, well learned, and capable of structuring a decent and worthy debate. However, why not converse with posters and not, at them?


I honestly don't believe, that most of the posters on TOL are anywhere near the higher echelon of intelligentsia?

It's just one man's opinion, take it for what it's worth.

GM,

Recall that this started with your usual one-liners and my wondering if you actually think that you are actually putting forth an argument that could be engaged. You also asked a few questions afterwards and I happily responded. You then remarked about how your experience with Calvinists is usually one of angry exchanges and I suggested that you might be dealing with the overly energetic sorts and that you send them my way for correction. GM, at every turn I have given you the benefit of the doubt, responded in full to questions, made myself available to answer sincere inquiries.

Yet, from your response above, it seems you prefer to just hold on to your views of the "typical Calvinist" so much so as to even insult me on several levels when I take the time to explain in detail that which I hold dear. No matter, brother, I will leave you to it. I only hope that just maybe before you post one of your sweeping negative generalizations directed at Calvinists, that you consider that some of us are willing to actually engage you when you are willing to do so.

AMR

 

[Crucible]

You seem to think that if you post a refutal of 2000 words that fact will go away. It is not going away.

You should try reading it more thoroughly. It would at least help you understand where you err in your arguments.

 

[Robert Pate]

You should try reading it more thoroughly. It would at least help you understand where you err in your arguments.

I view and interpret everything in the light of the "Historical Gospel" of Jesus Christ. Since the whole Bible is about Christ and his Gospel, I feel confident that this is the proper way to interpret the scriptures. Calvinist like your self, interpret everything in the light of what John Calvin says. What the Bible says is of secondary importance to what John Calvin says. There are about 75 to 100 scriptures in the Bible that are in direct conflict with Calvinism. There are no scriptures in the Bible that are in conflict with the "Historical Gospel" of Jesus Christ.

 

[flintstoned]

You have to believe that there is something seriously wrong with the Bible.

How do you justify all of the scriptures that say "All" "Anyone" "Everyone" "Whosoever" that hears and believes the Gospel shall be saved, Romans 10:13.

There is not one scripture in the whole Bible about anyone being predestinated to heaven or to hell.

You answered your own question (in red above). God only saves those who believe. If a person believes (with their heart) it is because God had elected them from the foundation of the world and predestined that they would believe. Those who think they can just will themselves into believing in God, rather than as a result of the work of God, are called false believers. They profess belief (mental assent) but still have a stony heart (unchanged by God). These are the ones Jesus says that he "never knew."

Nobody but you is suggesting that the bible specifically says that anyone is predestined to heaven or hell. God predestined that his elect (chosen), would (eventually)be saved through faith in Jesus. Those he predestined, he ends up glorifying. Where do you think glorified believers eventually end up? I'll let you put two and two together. As for the rest, God doesn't have to predestine anyone to hell because they easily send themselves there.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

You emphasize the wrong parts.



Paul wrote the passage primarily about what God had done through Christ. You make it primarily about us; it's a very humanistic reading you posted.

Amen.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

You answered your own question (in red above). God only saves those who believe. If a person believes (with their heart) it is because God had elected them from the foundation of the world and predestined that they would believe. Those who think they can just will themselves into believing in God, rather than as a result of the work of God, are called false believers. They profess belief (mental assent) but still have a stony heart (unchanged by God). These are the ones Jesus says that he "never knew."

Nobody but you is suggesting that the bible specifically says that anyone is predestined to heaven or hell. God predestined that his elect (chosen), would (eventually)be saved through faith in Jesus. Those he predestined, he ends up glorifying. Where do you think glorified believers eventually end up? I'll let you put two and two together. As for the rest, God doesn't have to predestine anyone to hell because they easily send themselves there.

I see that, Fred Flintstone is a Calvinist, as well.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

I view and interpret everything in the light of the "Historical Gospel" of Jesus Christ. Since the whole Bible is about Christ and his Gospel, I feel confident that this is the proper way to interpret the scriptures. Calvinist like your self, interpret everything in the light of what John Calvin says. What the Bible says is of secondary importance to what John Calvin says. There are about 75 to 100 scriptures in the Bible that are in direct conflict with Calvinism. There are no scriptures in the Bible that are in conflict with the "Historical Gospel" of Jesus Christ.

Calvin is definitely their mentor, in spite of what they say.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

GM,

Recall that this started with your usual one-liners and my wondering if you actually think that you are actually putting forth an argument that could be engaged. You also asked a few questions afterwards and I happily responded. You then remarked about how your experience with Calvinists is usually one of angry exchanges and I suggested that you might be dealing with the overly energetic sorts and that you send them my way for correction. GM, at every turn I have given you the benefit of the doubt, responded in full to questions, made myself available to answer sincere inquiries.

Send them to you? Pardon me, you sure have a lot of confidence in yourself.

 

[beloved57]

I believe what the Bible says, not what some heretic said back in the 1500's.

The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus atoned for the sins of the whole world, 1 John 4:14. To deny that is to call John a liar.

You seem to think that if you post a refutal of 2000 words that fact will go away. It is not going away. Your Calvinist doctrine questions the Lordship of Jesus Christ. I am glad that it is you and not me that will have to explain your anti-Gospel and anti-Christ religion to the Lord. You are most certainly going to be in the Lord, Lord, didn't we group.

You teach salvation by works, by what a person does, that is heresy!

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Send them to you? Pardon me, you sure have a lot of confidence in yourself.

GM,

I assume you meant this in the best of ways and not merely to ridicule me.

I do have success in calming the rabid newcomer to the doctrines of grace. They will take my counsel to heart, as "cage stagers" are a common phenomena for the newbees. Those newly coming to understanding of the doctrines of grace are a hungry sort, as they should be, and I have yet to encounter one who did not welcome advice, pointers, and discussion with an old and long-time, Reformed guy like myself. And as providence will have it, the experience is paid forward by these folks in their later years, too, as they kindly counsel those that remind them of themselves of years gone by.

AMR

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Delete

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Delete

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Your Misunderstanding Of the WORD - "WORLD", Gets You (( NO Where in Christ ))!! - The Word "WORLD" Means "A-G-E"; - "That AGE", NOT The Whole EARTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(( Watch Your N-E-W-S ))!!!!!!!!

PAUL, DAVID -- 022316

Great post. how do you do it?

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Hi Glorydaz.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

I have respect for you AMR, I just have absolutely no respect for your "Calvinist belief system." I place my faith in the Grace Gospel. (Paul's Gospel) I do not believe that God chose a certain "elect" of people before the foundation of the world. Furthermore, these so called elect were chosen for eternal life and the rest were chosen for eternal damnation. The Bible states that, we are saved by Grace. Grace being a free gift to those who hear the Gospel and place their faith in Christ as their Savior.

Calvinists claim to see no free will in the Bible and yet, those of us who believe the Grace Gospel see free will throughout the entire Old and New Testament?