Could God have saved everyone?

johnp, no I am not a follower of J. Calvin as you, I am a follower of J. Christ.

 

Hello Tim.

You see that is why I said I'd see you around man. You expect others not to use such tactics while you are free to do so?

john.

 

Hello Tim.

We all err. Sometimes it's difficult to talk to another if the other is prickly and likely to take offence. Labling people is normal procedure. A man that believes his faith is original and has no label is only kidding himself. Whatever you believe has a label. If a person comes onto a Calvinist/Arminian debate forum and he is not a Calvinist then he will be regarded as an Arminian not because he is an Arminian but because he is not a Calvinist. It ain't a personal slur nor does it mean you are slavishly following a man.
Again, it is unusual for a Calvinist to hold a person to Arminius as the Arminians try to box in a Calvinists. Surely the difference between Calvinists and others is the fact that Calvinists know that it is God who says who's to share His love and the others who says anyone can. The 'anyone cans' are Arminian to us, we can't call them anything else unless they give us their label. Christian encompasses us all don't it?

As I said, having an ism attached to your name is not a slur nor does it define a person. If a person does not listen don't go from that point until it is resolved. If it is not resolvable go round it or stop talking. Simple enough.

That's what I thought you said but your next posts seem to deny it. I made you the offer but all I got back was the same thing you say you don't like? If you continue to re-define terms, label people wrongly, and tell them what they believe then you make it very hard to have an honest debate. The charge you laid against me is lacking evidence. Where have I done this and if I haven't why complain to me but I don't mind only you complain about the same thing you complain about is what I see.

So what Arminius did or did not believe a thing? I'm sure that if you wanted to know what Calvin believed you can read his stuff but that won't tell you what I believe or how I understand a thing exactly. I understand your point. We don't have a ten point plan or anything and we know Arminians don't but that is not being said. What's being said is you are not Calvinist and if you are not Calvinist you are Arminian. We don't follow Calvin but in order of history and that goes for Arminians as well.

Since you believe in everlasting security then some might call you a 1 point Calvinist. Is that better? It is neither better or worse but a place to come from and explain yourself. You're still be called what you will be called because you see where you are different than and we see where you are similar to. I think that unavoidable.

It is easier for all of us to lump the enemy in one camp and attack what the leader of that camp says. It's more difficult to remember everyone's diversities and mistakes can be made. We have to be a bit thick skinned not only because of that but because this is a difficult medium to work in anyway. An innocent remark made often comes across as sarcasm so easily yet it is very difficult to look gentle and patient. The spelling don't help either. Touchy doesn't help.

How about Timism? Timist? But it will still bring in from someone that Timists are a sub set of Arminianism or 1 point Calvinism. There is no way around it I don't think but put up with it.

Yes but was that me? HaHa! Wasn't me was it? Of course it wasn't. Call me anything you want man just don't forget to call me for dinner. Friends overcome problems.

john.

 

Man that is quite a response. Maybe we should start another thread on just this. I really don't want to argue this, I am tired from my last bout. Just wanted to see if I could make a pt. and it looks like not. So call me a biblicist then and if you don't like that then cal it Timism. I guess I don't care enough to argue over it. when you are talking about ariminism the I will just condsider that you are not refering to me.

Tim

 

Tim -- that is "good a good Arminian statement"

Welcome!

Here is a "hint" on this board.

NEVER take JohnP's word for what is "Arminianism". AND ALSO don't take his word on what is "Calvinism" in every case - since even he will argue himself into a corner where he then claims that his own wild arguments should not be attributed to Calvinism.

Go to the Arminians for an Arminian statement (and as I said - you yourself just made a good one in that post above) and go to Calivnists who will ADMIT that they are posting Calvinism - for Calvinist statements.

I actually like to use JohnP quotes since few Calvinists on this board will correct him even though they really should be cleaning their own house on this one instead of leaving it up to Arminians to do it for them.

But that is just a personnal joy of mine. Don't confuse that with a real debate.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Hey BobRyan

Your personal joy is an announcment of confusion.

That you can make a Calvinist squirm is nothing compared to the blindness of denying Christ through a works centered system of death.

I would talk about a God-fearing Calvinist seeking to glorify God with carefully guarded words. It doesn't seem right to have a Christ-denying Arminian criticizing a God-fearing Calvinist.

Lloyd

 

Tim - another hint. Distinguish between "pure ranting" and actual "substantive posts".

You will see both kinds on this board.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Tim.

Took me all flipping day man. I've been standing up and sitting down all day. Everytime I sit down someone gets me to stand up and perform some task?

Cool man.

john.

 

Hello Bluster Bob.

I should be very concerned if anyone ever took my word for anything Bob it would probably shut me up. I've enough trouble with me I can't handle any others.

Now we should not say things we can't back up Bob boy.

Ok I'll call your bluff, I'm in. Winner takes the pot man, peace and love. What I said was that my beliefs of Calvinism are not shared universaly with other Calvinists because I'm right and they are wrong now prove me wrong for a point. Let's see how good your filing system is or how smart you are in setting me up. Put up man. Silence will win it for me and you don't win by winning.

He's old enough man let him alone. I'm sure he can tell the difference more than you can. Oh the cut and thrust of intellectual dueling.

Strange how you join pure with ranting.

john.

 

I don't hear anything

 

Hello James.

Mercifully short James boy. I looked at your post and had images of showing Bob how to write voluminously. Bit quiet ain't it? Yes they get me to drone on about God's hate as if to make me stink but God's glory will be seen in His hate as in His love so I don't really mind. We can't lose anyway. Salvation is certain because He says He has an everlasting love for us. Does He say this to all?

Sovereignity and love are at the heart of our difference. Sovereignity is not an attribute like love and hate, it is His very nature. Sovereign LORD you say, in His Sovereignty, allows men to do as they like when He chooses. Right? That sinners will be sinners and God allows them their way? Altough you do say He can do as He pleases and He does sometimes cause a sinner to sin which must mean you don't fear saying God gets His Hands dirty sometimes.

If you think that God allows men their sin, not like me who believes God directs and controls everything a man does regardless of who they are, all the time, if you think that God allows men to sin by themselves then why does God still blame us for who resists His will? As the question appears in Romans 9:19?

Love is a many splendid thing. 1 Cor 13:8. Love never fails. If love fails then it can't be love can it? Because scripture says love never fails. Can it?

To let me have the will to choose the color of tie i would like to wear, does not mean I have over taken Gods power. Yes it destroys His Sovereignty because Sovereignty resides in the choice. 57 ties? HaHa! Great man. You have a blessed neck? I think I've got two and I think one of them might be yellow with some dots. But it is Him that chooses your tie you should thank Him, maybe, depends on the tie, for His choice. He comes close then. When you know that everything you are doing and hearing and smelling and seeing is coming directly from God to your senses then you are close there with Him. You don't think He would expose you to vagaries do you? So every input into you comes from God for your good. Ever before our face He is.

435,876,432 kinds of ties that are out there... A bit precise isn't it?

The Puppet Master Rules.

john.

 

If God directly controls absolutely everything everyone ever does (including sin), I guess God enjoys making people on this forum argue with each other? I guess God saves people and makes them think with theological error so that he can make you argue with them back and forth?

 

That's what I said, answer the question, why does He still blame us?

john.

 

If God is the author of our sin, why does He blame us? Is this what you are asking? If it is, this makes God a bipolar monster!

 

Hey Webdog

Nice wording. All I can think of to use is "capricious tyrant."

Yet, for all the criticism, Calvinists get justification right.
Lloyd

 

Hello John,

I will try to reply later. I have more work to address 1st. That seems to happen at my job a lot.

In Christ..James

 

Hey Johnp

The Calvinist holds that God, as a capriciously deterministic sovereign, can sovereignly be a bipolar monster. He can dictate our next sin all the while holding us to blame for His determined will.

Everything in theology is like a two dimensional matrix in which the rows and columns add to pre-determined totals. If one errors in any one cell, then the related rows and columns change forcing changes in other rows and columns to accomodate that one error. Theology is coherent and must be tested at every level.

While Calvinism was a noble to glorify God, it was neverthless nonbiblical in that it makes God to be that caprious bipolar monster Who dictates sin. Yet Calvinism is still within the Christian domain for it gets justification right. Most Arminians (such as Catholics or CoCers) who fail the OSAS test of justification must be considered borderline compromised Christianity at best, cult at the worst.

Lloyd

 

Cool James take it easy man we ain't in haste.

Lloyd old chap?

Absolutely.

Theology is coherent if you don't use the bible like you don't. HaHa! The rest of us struggle a bit at times with the real thing.

Let me put your mind to rest: Eph 1:8 that he lavished on us with all wisdom and understanding. Caprious He is not by scripture which scripture testifies to the fact that He is The Despot. Absolute Tyrant. The Sovereign Lord.

Be terrified.

john.