Is it really synergism?

pure scripture.

 

Nothing you have said in this thread is.

 

Think of it this way. IF Calvin was right, how many hate God with a vengeance? And worship idols instead?

 

Luke 5

31And Jesus answered and said to them, “It is not those who are well who need a physician, but those who are sick. 32“I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance.”


Well that rules out born again, regenerated folks repenting. Who's left?

 

No, both verses are absolutely true. But the falsehood comes in when folks interpret the verse to say "There is none that understand at any time, and there is none that seeks after God at any time."

There is no actual support for the TULI of the Tulip anywhere in scripture. It has been added as above. If you consider Paul's argument in the passage, the most likely interpretation is that Paul is saying we are all under sin, because none understands when sinning and none seeks after God when sinning. Therefore, scripture teaches we are all under sin.

Now if look back at Psalm 14, verse 5 & 6 you see that the statement applied to those who say there is no God. But in the same passage, you see some seek God as a refuge, totally refuting your view.

 

Come on Dave, Calvin burned people for being what he considered heretical.

 

The State burned heretics for treason in time of war. Calvin pleaded for Servetus' life.

 

The lost do not know they are lost. They think it is foolishness. Only the born again can know of their depravity and how it relates to Christ.

 

That is only according to your Calvinist Tradition®.

“I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance.”

According to Jesus Christ the RIGHTEOUS are disqualified from the CALL.

Only a wet person can be told to dry themselves.


Luke 18

9And He also told this parable to some people who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and viewed others with contempt: 10“Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11“The Pharisee stood and was praying this to himself: ‘God, I thank You that I am not like other people: swindlers, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. 12‘I fast twice a week; I pay tithes of all that I get.’ 13“But the tax collector, standing some distance away, was even unwilling to lift up his eyes to heaven, but was beating his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, the sinner!’ 14“I tell you, this man went to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted.”


who trusted in themselves that they were righteous

The Pharisees would agree thank God I'm not a sinner or like this filthy Tax Collector.

But the Tax Collector is not reborn, He doesn't even know he is forgiven. He actually recognizes his wrongful heart.


The problem here is you can't accept God's means by the gospel.

When Jesus does miracles to CONVINCE people like with the Resurrection Lazarus SO THEY MIGHT BELIEVE.

We say well that's silly if Calvinism is true.

That's like if you have a button on your head is the only way to convince you the earth is round, is to press it.

But instead of pressing it, I'm going to show you photos, science books, movie clips ect.

Why waste time with sign's and miracles.....Just press the button. Do the internal conversion.

And we are told "no, God can use whatever means he wants".

But when it comes to repentance. Put the hand cuffs on God.

When Jesus Christ tells a person to repent, that is not valid.

Its a bunch of nonsense.

You guys go out of the way to defend philosophy rather then the scriptures. And every time a bible verse doesn't work out you make up two definitions for every word.


Look at what Jesus said:

“I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance.”

I'm waiting for the butchery of words, maybe its the effectual repentance, the diet righteous, or the pony call.

He tells you plainly he does not CALL THE RIGHTEOUS.

So if you think only the righteous can respond, YOU HAVE MESSED UP.




One of the statements has to go, What Jesus said, or what Calvinist Tradition®. teaches.

 

No he did not! He pleaded a case fo him to be beheaded vs a tortured burning. Those are two different things. I have read the case.

 

"For what particular act of mine you accuse me of cruelty I am anxious to know. I myself know? not that act, unless it be with reference to the death of your great master, Servetus. But that I myself earnestly entreated that he might not be put to death his judges themselves are witnesses, in the number of whom at that time two were his staunch favourers and defenders. But I have said quite enough about myself." Calvin's Calvinism Translated Henry Cole P-346

 

“For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.” (1 Corinthians 1:18)

 

I don’t see the translation being correct.

 

I don't think we should judge based on information provided by his accusers.

 

EWF is of course correct here.
Looks like 1689Dave's second-hand so-called translation/quote inserts a phrase that greatly distorts the truth regarding this:

Contrast that with:

Google Books • John Calvin The Secret Providence of God

Interceding in favor of a different form of execution is totally different than 'entreating that he might not be put to death', or as 1689Dave is characterizing it, that "Calvin pleaded for Servetus' life"!

 

Fair enough... then who gets the blame;)

 

Two preachers present the Scriptures. These two preachers both declare Christ as the only redeemer. These two declare sin was forgiven by the blood of Christ. Both declare that only those who believe have eternal life and those who do not are already condemned. Both earnestly plead that souls be saved. They both see the work of God in “adding to the church such as should be saved.”

Does the saved really care that the process was right?

An Air Force officer lay by the road. Heart stopped, not breathing, dead. An airman came by, did cpr, the officer lived.

Did the officer have any say in how long cpr was given or by what method it was delivered?

Or was the officer thankful an airman who was also a cpr instructor happened by?

My point is that to the dead it really does not matter.

Just as cpr is not done on the living but on the dead, our Savior came to seek the lost. Those dead. Those who of no self authority to be brought back to life.

That those of His choosing have life is not obligatory that He resuscitate all. That ultimately is the issue.

Some may consider that the right hand should be placed on the chest first, others suggesting the left, but unless there is actual cpr done, nothing is accomplished.

With out the shedding of blood death remained.

The blood was shed before it was placed on the door posts, before being splashed in the holiest, so blood was shed prior to staining the cross.

By the Savior’s death and resurrection believers pass from death to life.

It is not how CPR is done that results in resuscitations, it is that it is done.

May the Father continue to “addi(ing) to their number day by day those who were being saved.”

 

God controls all for his ends. So the buck stops there. But the State killed the heretics for his purposes.

 

We all get back what we dole out. So be careful how you judge.