Featured Smashing the "T" out of TULIP

Steaver, did you read the post above???? Apparently not!

 

I mistakenly attributed the preposition "dia" instead of "en" to the word "through" in 2 Thes. 2:13. I was depending on memory and confused it with another text.

However, the preposition "eis" translated "to" defines the cause of salvation to be in subject of the preposition "eis" ("to") while the MEANS or SPHERE of salvation identified by the preposition "en" ("through").

 

I never read where He had to double dam them, that is just your rhetoric ! They are born damned !

 

Well, I guess the next question would be did you understand it? Do you recognize the progressive stages of condemnation of those born condemned already? Do you see those progressive stages spelled out in Romans 1:24-29? Do you the see the stage in 2 Thessalonians 2:10 that precedes the stage in verse 11?

Do you understand that no man enters this world as a believer but as unbelievers and thus condemned already because of unbelief (Jn. 3:17-18)?

Do you understand that John 3:16 adds to that initial condemnation when confronted with the truth of the gospel??

Do you understand the biblical principle more light more responsibility, more light rejected greater the condemnation?

 

Please read what I said again as it is obvious you did not understand what I said.

Since there is progression in condemnation there must be progression in exposure to truth and with each exposure additional condemnation. In the text, they are already condemned before they were exposed to the truth of the gospel. When they additionally rejected the truth of the gospel God handed them over to an additional condemnation described in verse 11. It is not they were additionally damned, but additionally were condemned. God gave them over unto another lie because they rejected the truth exposed to them in verse 10.

 

progress is always a good thing:godisgood:

 

The non elect are born damned? That is a hideous belief. But it fits right in with Islam.

 

Think about it. Are not all men born in unbelief? Are human being naturally born into the world as a believer with no need of regeneration or conversion?

Jesus said he did not come into the world to condemn man because man was already condemned and the condemnation is due to unbelief. Hence, man kind is born condemned as they are born in unbelief which is the grounds for condemnation.

 

What you are saying is different from saying that the non-elect are born damned.

 

SBM has a warped hyper-calvinistic point of view. All men are born condemned under sin - the sin of unbelief at minimum and no man is eternally damned until they die without Christ.

 

Oh boy...

Talk of double talk. Quit adding words to me that I didn't say or as if I've misrepresented you, OK?

Thanks.

Here's what you said and where I use 'must' as synonymous enough:

Seriously your whole entire problem is with what is happening in the text, with what God is doing, and somehow without rationalization nor reason on your part you blame this on Calvinism???

You're the one who brough up double damned, not me. You implied it in the text right off the bat then continued this diatribe, and make attempts to lay this charge on others, specifically me. Your accusation is untrue and unnecessary.

Nothing you've said has established that the T in Tulip concludes these needed double damnation, again, you brought that up and nothing in total depravity suggests this. It's all based on what you see in the text and have added to it.

See? :wavey: :laugh:

Wresting Scripture? Where? You really should apologize here as none of this happened from my side. Quit pretending. I provided you Scripture, and there was no wresting of it whatsoever, yet you bring in another false accusation.

Is this how you play steaver?

The thing that is obvious is that you've eisegeted Scripture to come up with an illogical fallacy, blaming calvinists and tiotal depravity as being Gods hand in sending strong delusion to those who are lost. That's just what the Scriptures happen to say, dragging total depravity through the mud has NOTHING to do with double damnation whatsoever, and your conclusions and illogical arrival at such a misnomer is bewildering to say the least.

Talk about twitsing and wresting and adding to things, as unfortunately it perfectly describes what you're doing in this thread. Why not put an end to your twisting and turning and attempts to make total depravity something it isn't, something it doesn't say nor teach, and making as if others came up with 'double damnation' OK?

You've brought it up, now you're trying to clean up your mess and blame it all on others. Wow. :wavey: :thumbsup:

 

Think that our brother is having problems reconcilling God free will and ours...

Its goes away when one accepts the Biblical truth that the Lord ONLY is Sovereign in the sense that He can freely and always exercise His Will, we are sinners, and as such, cannot!

 

They are already damned, and such is also the state of the elect until they come to the knowledge of the truth, which they most certainly will, 2 Timothy 2:8-10. It is only your illogical fallacy coupled with your eisegetical 'interpretation' that makes it 'double damned'. This is something you've come up with and has nothing to do with Calvinism nor with total depravity. It's a total misnomer on your part, and I am not the only one seeing your problem with what God is doing in this passage.

Not one person can come to God without Gods enabling, gift of faith and gift of repentance, so it's not a free will issue as you thought, instead it is all God.

He saves, He chooses, He knows all and His plan will come to fruition. Many have 'made a choice' and there is no change in their lives and no new creation, and we see the poor results of 'free will choosing' in the church today.

I'll take it you're skipping over your false accusations upon me for a reason. I really don't appreciate your false accusations thrust upon me throughout this thread, nor your misrepresentation of total depravity, nor of the Calvinist brethren. Not one thing in either the text nor of your argument indicts Calvinists whatsoever. You're way off track and your OP is a 'gotcha' that fell flat on its face.

An apology on your part is in order. Not once did I wrest Scripture per your charge. You cannot show one instance where I've wrested Scripture, yet others have shown you your error.

I forgive you, but you should own up to your accusation. It's becoming of those professing Christ.