Featured Arminian...Calvinist....Must one decide?

You offer no proof that the Scriptures presented refute Reformed Theology. My bet is that you can't. That, and you're just being blatant. :wavey: :laugh: :love2:

 

And here is my response of 2/2012 ....the last time someone tried to button hole me.

This is funny......why should I as a believer have any allegiance to any side...It is amusing to think I would ever even consider it. Its not that I was any object of anyones ferocity as some in here claim, never made to suffer at anyones hands like this weakling is saying, therefore I am not vengeful. I choose my way of life, my understanding of scripture etc., very calmly without any concern about what anyone thinks & immensely enjoy being that way. Does that answer your question?
__________________

 

You've only seen the tip of the iceberg - in this thread, at least.

 

The only identifier I use in conversation regarding me is "evangelical christian"

I am not an arminion, or Calivinst

I guess I could create an identity for me. :wavey:

Hmmm. tick...tock...tick tock...

I know!

I am a "scripturist" :thumbs:

 

You are also a "Banjo oligist" :laugh:

 

Three cheers for you!!! It is like having to choose between Obama and Romney. I choose neither. I have read Scripture for years, and have followed thread after thread until I want to throw up. Each side enters the thread with an agenda. Each side uses isolated Scripture to boost their opinion. It then degenerates to heretic, you are not saved, etc. The 100% truth is only the Lord knows the mysteries of how free will and His sovereignty work together. It is not told in explicit detail in the Bible. One thing I do know, neither side with all their theological genuises have any idea what they are talking about. I believe the Bible calls it mindless babble. It enriches no ones walk with the Lord, brings no one into the family of God, and it sure does not help the poor.

To be honest, I wish you one issue Calvinists had election up one nostril, and wish you one issue free willers had "my choice" up the other.

 

(See bold) I agree with you on that.

 

HP: I certainly hope everyone is paying close attention to this statement by Biblicist. He is expressing the very fundamental and false philosophical basis of the fatalistic theological position he holds to. The problem is he is trying to reason from that which he does not know, (i.e, the nature and mind of God and how it works) and in the process denies that which we with certainty know. He assumes without proof and begs the question as to the nature of an Infinite God. While assuming without proof that which he does not know, he tries to foist his philosophical views of God and his nature upon man, in direct contradiction to the God given testimony to man via consciousness. Who said God's will is a servant of his nature? Who said God's will is not free?

If there was one fact that we could gain from the clear testimony of our own conscience, it would be that man is free, not simply to do as one wills, ( the meaningless Calvinistic sophism used by Calvinists to try to soften the absurdity of their position on the will of man) but free to actually be the first cause of one's formed intentions. If man's actions were nothing more than the product of one's nature, no moral blame or praise could be predicated of anything man could or might do. If what Biblicist theorizes in the philosophy he sets forth was actually true, all praise or blame for anything God or man could or would do, would be centered on one's necessitated nature, and not on God or the individual themselves.

Such a philosophical position is absolutely contrary to Scripture, reason, and experience. God directly holds man personally accountable, upon pain of eternal separation from Himself, for sin. That is living proof that man is justly blamed as a first cause of his moral intents, and is not simply the product of a necessitated nature as Bibliocist falsely sets forth.

The philosophical notions set forth in this one paragraph by Biblicist is in fundamental error and lies at the heart of the false necessitated system of Calvinism. If one is desiring to distance themselves from such a system of pure necessity, precisely in lockstep with rank Calvinism, such a one would of necessity need to understand that the heart of the system they so detest is the very one presented here by Biblicist and should be avoided at all cost.

 

Eat enough cabbage, and you can be you own "gas pump". Just stay in New Joisey if/when you do....:laugh:

 

There are places in Joisey that smell that way if I were here or not......kinda like your local sewer authority before 9am. Pleasant thoughts, right? :laugh:

 

I understand that is what you asked, and I gave my answer.

If you are teaching someone that they cannot believe in Jesus, and to wait to see if God saves them, as Calvinists believe, then yes, it will have a bearing on your witnessing to others.

I do not think that one should ever stop speaking the Truth and correcting error.

Calvinists and Arminians both believe that the Holy Spirit causes one to believe. If you tell unbelievers that they cannot believe, then again, that could interfere with them knowing the truth and being saved.

If you believe that you can keep sinning and still be saved, then I do believe that that could interfere with being able to deal with sin in your life.

Jesus tells us that when we follow man’s commands, then we nullify God’s word.

Calvinists teach a Jesus who only died for the sins of some, so I debate Calvinists to show that the Son of God died for the whole world's sins. So, I am debating on who Jesus is. Contending for the faith is, well, contending for the faith.

It does not sound like you are convinced that a person can know the Truth from the scriptures. I disagree with you.

The Bible says that people who teach false doctrines are doing the devil’s work. I am trying to help people from doing the devil's work.

You mean, as you are doing to me right now. Be careful how you judge, it is probably the very thing that you are guilty of. I have done nothing wrong by correcting, refuting, and rebuking.

You have falsely judged me, and that is sin.

 

I was explaining how Calvinists and Arminian beliefs could interfere with someone being saved. You asked.

You just said, “I don’t know how I may have communicated this.” Then you said, “I do not assume that I have arrived and am 100% right…” I said that you did not sound like you believed a person could know the truth. Again, you admit that at least you do not know for yourself. If you do not think you know the truth, and if you make a post questioning others who believe they know the truth, then how is that NOT communicating you do not believe the truth can be known?

I do not know how you can say you did not accuse me. Maybe you were accusing the Calvinists I have debated. Could that be the case?

So are you now admitting accusing me? I have only called people accuser of the brethren when they have falsely accused me of sins. You, however, have accused me of being an accuser of the brethren for debating and showing from scripture false doctrines. You must prove first that what I say the Bible says is false, before you can accuse me of such a sin.

Get Jesus’ teachings and obey them. See John 14:23.

 

Thank you for saying this to me.

 

:thumbsup: good one! :laugh:

 

Absolutly!

The Banjo ROCKS!

and on a serious note, the most influential banjo player of all time died 3 days ago, and was buried today.

Rest in peace, Earl Scruggs

 

I just did. See post 40.

And yes, i am being very blatant about the false teachings of Reformed Theology, intentionally.

In every case the scripture you use to prove Reformed Theology is misinterpreted by Cals. And in almost every scripture you cite, if you read the whole passage, you would find references to words like "whosoever", "believe", belief, ect.

Which brings us back to the truth:

God "predestined" the establishment of the church. The 'elect" are the saved members of the church. They dont become one of the "elect" until they ask for and recieve salvation. Yes, God has the foreknowledge to know who will choose salvation, but, it is still our choice. After all, God created time so He is not confined by it.

And yes, the HS must minister to a person in order for him to be saved, but the HS dosent deny anyone that seeks Him. And yes, it is our nature to reject the spiritural things of God, and seek the pleasures of the world. But, we are NOT totally inable to go against that nature if we choose to.

There are many who hear the call of the HS and still reject God. Grace is not irresistable, man still has a choice to reject it.

These things are what I was talking about when i said that I am closer to being Reformed than I am Arminian. There is just enough truth in Calvinism to make it sound reasonable to a lot of folks. However, Calvinism takes these truths to such an extreme that they turn truth into false teaching.

Man is still required to make a choice. Preacher, if you were being absolutely honest with yourself, you would have to admit that when you got saved, that you had to make a choice to do so.

John

 

seeking

Thats a false statement since individuals comprise the Body of Christ, therefore each member, or individual was predestinated to the conformity of Christ Rom 8:29

29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

1 Cor 12:27

Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.

The word particular is the greek word meros and means:

one of the constituent parts of a whole