Featured Arminianism and Calvinism are not that different

"His Will to Have all sinners Repent" is a miss reading.

They isn't really a Declaration of that, by God.

2 Peter 3:9; is going to State that God is Patient and Longsuffering Toward His children,

... and that Peter is Speaking about God's children, there, and God Wills His children to Repent of their Temporal sins, after they are Saved,

... as opposed to them continuing to sin and perish, from their Temporal life.

In order to see that that is what God would have us to understand, from the verse,

... we must be cognisent of the word, "usward".

"The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

This is who God is talking about.

but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any ( us-ward ) should perish, but that all ( us-ward ) should come to repentance."

The "perish" and "repentance" are referencing the Temporal Reality of Believers ( us-ward )

... and is making no allusion to 'Salvation' in this verses usage of those words.

 

In the verses you quoted, God Reveals that a lost soul has a condition from which they Must Be Born Again.

In the second verse, The Word from God starts with the letter, "u".

Roman's 4:4 "Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.

5 "But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness."

In this verse from Roman's 11, God's Word to you, starts with a, "d".

Roman's 11:15 "For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?"

 

Others post scripture and present truth. You deny they are speaking truth. Do you see the circular argument?
You reject their interpretation of the same verses you use. You call them false, but that is merely your opinion. Consider that God, who has the final say, may not agree with your opinion.

 

Still waiting for Y1 to answer the questions.

1) Why is it difficult for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God? If unconditional election were true, all people chosen would enter without difficulty.

2) Why did Paul speak to the newborn Christians as to men of flesh, using spiritual milk, if men of flesh could not understand spiritual milk?

Having no interest in comparing the bogus views of Calvinism and Arminianism, they change the subject to my qualifications. Deflection once again on display.

 

Yet another pointless post. Adding to the length of the thread in order to get it closed.

Is the fact that we must be born anew in order to enter the kingdom in dispute? Nope - so non-germane fluff.

Does the beginning letter of a word matter? Nope - so non-germane fluff.

What matters is that God credits a person's faith as righteousness, rather than the fiction of instilling the gift of faith.

 

Did I deny the truth of scripture? Nope
Did I say your faith means your faith and not your God gifted faith? Yep
And note the effort to claim we cannot discern the truth of scripture, because it is just an opinion.
Is "Jesus is God" an opinion? Is "God is love" an opinion?

What is actually being peddled is deflection, pay no attention to the truth of scripture because it is just an opinion, no better than false doctrine.

First they say we cannot have faith in God because we hate God at all times. Then they say we can have "vain faith" not instilled by irresistible grace. Wheels within wheels, folks, nonsense to hide nonsense. Our faith could not be in vain if it was instilled by irresistible grace. The only answer possible is that the gift of faith is bogus because (1) we can put our faith in Christ, and (2) God could credit that faith as righteousness.

 

"ungodly"

"dead"

Pointless.

 

Did you ever consider that God doesn't agree with what you post. He certainly does not agree with the notions of man.
MB

 

1 Timothy 2:4

 

These?

God Reveals that a lost soul has a condition from which they Must Be Born Again.

In the second verse, The Word from God starts with the letter, "u".

Roman's 4:4 "Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.

5 "But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness."

In this verse from Roman's 11, God's Word to you, starts with a, "d".

Roman's 11:15 "For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?"

"ungodly"

"dead"

 

The statement is this:
God graciously chooses to give faith to those whom he also chooses to make alive with Christ.
God does not give spiritually dead person's the gift of faith.
The Bible is clear on this and much scripture has been shown to you.
Why you reject this truth is the mystery.

 

Of course I consider it. This is why I read and study the Bible. I could be wrong.
For example, I was once a promoter of mostly Arminian views about salvation. I argued the position and I was shown, by scripture, to be wrong. I changed my view.
God certainly doesn't endorse every notion of man. I suspect you are a human. This applies equally to you.

 

Hey, you know what?

Lost Arminians and Lost Calvinists
are not that different.

 

This is a typical usage of a word to mean something.

A word may be plucked up out of The Bible and assumed to have a certain meaning, and yet, by comparing Scriptures and observing the context, the Expression of Truth by God that He would have us to understand, from the standpoint of His Spiritual Revelation to Mankind, may be more than we think, at first glance:


I Timothy 2;1 "I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;"

"all sorts of men, ( Note: "all kinds of men") agreeably to the use of the phrase,
above, in ( 1 Timothy 2:1 ) are here intended,

"kings and peasants, rich and poor, bond and free,
male and female, young and old, greater and lesser sinners;

and therefore all are to be prayed for,
even all sorts of men," ( Note: "all kinds of men").

...

There is a transition, here, from "praying" for "all kinds of men",
in I Timothy 2:1,

to God, "will have all "kinds of" men to be saved", in I Timothy 2:4;


"I Timothy 2;4 "Who will have all men to be saved,
and to come unto the knowledge of the truth."

because God will have all men,
or all sorts of men, saved; ( Note: "all kinds of men")

and particularly the Gentiles may be designed,
who are sometimes called the world, the whole world,

and every creature ( Note: from among "all kinds of men"); whom God would have saved,

as well as the Jews, and therefore Heathens,
and Heathen magistrates were to be prayed for
as well as Jewish ones. ( Note: "all kinds of men")

Moreover, the same persons God would have saved,
( Note: "all kinds of men")
he would have also

"come to the knowledge of the truth":

of Christ, who is the truth, and to faith in him,
and of all the truth of the Gospel, as it is in Jesus. (Gill)

That is God's Will for the Saved.

...

God's "ordaining, purposing, and determining will, which is never resisted, so as to be frustrated, but is always accomplished: the will of God, the sovereign and unfrustrable will of God, has the governing sway and influence in the salvation of men;

it (the salvation of men) rises from (the sovereign and unfrustrable will of God), and (the salvation of men) is according to it (the sovereign and unfrustrable will of God);


and all who are saved God wills they should be saved;

nor are any saved, but whom he wills they should be saved:

hence by all men, whom God would have saved,
cannot be meant every individual of mankind,

since it is not his will that all men,
in this large sense, should be saved,

unless there are two contrary wills in God;" (Gill)

 

How can scripture be the notions of man?
MB

 

If I may, 'usages', is an example.

When Jesus Says, "God so loved the World...", and then The Bible says, "love not the World..."

Does "World" mean the same in both verses?

...

Figures of speech.

Is Jesus a theif?

He's Coming "as a theif".

There are 126 Figures of speech, in The Bible(?) something like that...

...
Spelling.

Holy Rollers say, "Sanctified wholly", means, "Sanctified Holy".

So, you can get whole religions in cases where:

"scriptures be the notions of men".
...
Jeopardy has 'answers' on their board under "Bible" topics and the 'question' might be some totally weird Catholic heresy that somebody invented along the way, "from The Bible".
...
So, misgivings by men can royally screw up a Good Book and it's Teachings.

Even though they 'think' their notion is Scriptural.

If I have a Miraculous Gift, I need to hit the local hospital up for a visit.

The Charismatics think The Holy Spirit Baptised something, when there is nothing in The Bible saying He did....

And the video Camara is never around when they raise the dead or walk on water.

Or they fix their own eyes, where they are wearing glasses... (?)

On and on.

Hermeneutics is a vast subject.

 

Because this fiction is found nowhere in scripture.
Where is the verse that says God gives faith. Nowhere.
God does give salvation by grace through faith, meaning our faith, if credited by God gives us access to His grace.
God does not give the gift of faith, repeating the fiction is a waste.
Scripture says your faith, his faith, my faith and never says God's gifted faith instilled by irresistible grace. That view is simply a man-made fiction.

First they say we cannot have faith in God because we hate God at all times. Then they say we can have "vain faith" not instilled by irresistible grace. Wheels within wheels, folks, nonsense to hide nonsense. Our faith could not be in vain if it was instilled by irresistible grace. The only answer possible is that the gift of faith is bogus because (1) we can put our faith in Christ, and (2) God could credit that faith as righteousness.

 

I can only imagine you don't read the Bible if you think what I shared is fiction and if you think the Bible doesn't teach it. Not only me, but many others have shared many passages with you. You reject all of them. Why? From my perspective, it is purely because you are willfully rejecting God's teaching in his word.

 

Abraham couldn't, from Roman's 4:3, or Genesis 15:6.

Roman's 4:3 "For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.

Genesis 15:6:" Abram believed the LORD, and it was credited to him as righteousness."

Abraham couldn't 'put his faith in God'.

Abraham believed God.

What did Abraham believe God about?

Roman's 4: 5 "But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness."

Abraham was Taught by The Word of God that he was "ungodly"

... AND(?)... that it is God Who Justifies.

Abraham was a blind, dead, ungodly sinner against God with his own 'righteousness' exactly like every other child of Adam, as "filthy rags".

Abraham was Given Belief that his own righteousnesses were as filthy rags, just like every other lost sinner God Saves.

Abraham believed he was "ungodly".

Abraham did not have, nor claim to have, nor does The Bible Say Abraham had, "faith", prior to God Convicting him of his Natural "ungodly" condition, for which God Mercifully Granted him Repentance of his "ungodly" righteousness as filthy rags and GOD GAVE ABRAHAM Faith in JESUS.

God Gave Abraham FAITH IN JESUS, Who Obtained Righteousness, by Living a Perfect Life under a God's Law.

The Law would send Abraham's Natural sin-cursed, deceived 'faith' to Hell and Abraham didn't pretend it wouldn't.

God Justified Abraham, Giving him Repentance of his "ungodliness" and Faith in JESUS.

JESUS IS ABRAHAM'S SAVIOR, FROM ABRAHAM'S UNGODLINESS.

Abraham DID NOT HAVE "FAITH" of any kind that God Accepts or Credits, other than God Giving Abraham FAITH HE WAS UNGODLY, BY THE WORD OF THE LORD.

Abraham was Given belief in The Word of The Lord, about his ungodliness.

Abraham did not have faith IN JESUS, prior to being Given The New Birth, when it was GOD WHO JUSTIFIES THE UNGODLY.

NOT Abraham, as ungodly doing beans.

He wasn't qualified.

 

Yet another off topic attack on me personally. Thus to defend the indefensible they use the logical fallacy of ad hominems. Note the change of subject, from comparing Cal/Arm to disparaging me.

Any time you see such behavior, see it as the Calvinists waving the white flag of surrender. They are admitting they cannot defend their bogus doctrines from scripture, so they change the subject, post absurdities and ad hominens.

Both Arminianism and Calvinism contain obvious errors.

1) No answer provided for the reason why it is more difficult for a rich man to enter the kingdom. The fact that we must be chosen to enter is not in dispute, but why it would be harder for a rich man to be chosen. Answer, unconditional election is bogus.

2) First they say we cannot have faith in God because we hate God at all times. Then they say we can have "vain faith" not instilled by irresistible grace. Wheels within wheels, folks, nonsense to hide nonsense. Our faith could not be in vain if it was instilled by irresistible grace. Therefore, the gift of faith is bogus.

3) Paul spoke as to men of flesh using spiritual milk, therefore logical necessity dictates men of flesh can understand and respond to spiritual milk. Any other answer is twaddle. ​