My thoughts on Calvinism.

It's obvious you have no desire to truly study these churches, but would rather spread vitriol. Go troll somewhere else.

Don't call me boy. One only stoops to name calling in the instance of ignorance, or being shown where they are wrong...both aptly apply to you.

 

So you got nothing, huh?

OK.

 

Enjoy your study :wavey:

 

... on authorities who know the condition of the church of Laodicaea (none), or on prooftexting with unrelated texts (of which thousands of examples abound, including yours)?

 

Getting back to Rev 3---

Here Christ gives the rejected status of those who at one time were IN Christ but who then deceived themselves and lost that in-Christ status - spewed out - due to their own faulty choices. The group is described as being composed of church members that are “claiming to be rich” in spiritual things – but are in fact spiritually “wretched, miserable, poor, blind and spiritually naked” rather than spiritually clothed in Christ. With Christ on the OUTSIDE “knocking”. And this is never – ever – said to be the description of the “saved condition” in scripture. No escaping it.

The text does NOT say to Laodicea “SOME of YOU are spiritually blind”. The instruction is defining the group AS BEING spiritually blind. (As much as Calvinism needs this not to be the case).

Calvinists sometimes imagine that this message identifies a “good group of Christians” INSIDE Laodicea that are “really” the ones being asked to “take action”. They insist on bifurcating the “YOU” specified so that it magically switches between saved and lost people Inside the church as “Calvinism” needs the case to be.

The urgent need of Calvinism is to split the “you” that is spit out from the “you” that must “take action” and is being given instruction: But the SAME “you” that is condemned in Rev 3:17 is the “you” that must BUY in vs 18 and OPEN in vs 20. The fact is plain -- there is no justification for that arbitrary insertion into the text of different definitions for “you” – except to defend Calvinism’s doctrinal “need”.

Staying “in context” Christ now provides the "solution" for “the YOU” that is about to be spewed out.

This same “you” must buy the spiritual gold, spiritual white garments and spiritual eye salve – to clothe “yourself”. There is no way to split up “YOU” from “YOURSELF” that is to be Clothed.

They are being told to “take action”. Without taking that action they remain self-deceived. The SAME group that is condemned – is the same group that is asked to “take action.

Then Christ moves ON to the more general case - that also applies to those who are OUTside of Christ due to having been spewed out.

(Notice Christ says he loves them. And it is NOT true that the Laodiceans are the ONLY ONES Christ loves. Rather "God so loved the WORLD". )

Christ is calling for “repentance” – and stating His love for the lost – about to be spewed out of His mouth.
Heb 12 tells us that - For ALL whom God loves He reproves and disciplines. We see this in John 15 with the trimming of the branches as well as in Heb 12 with the children of God being disciplined.

The principle has moved to one that is general - and not some special dispensation/treatment that only applies to the Laodiceans. Those whom God loves He disciplines (disciples) Heb 12, John 15, Rev 3:19

And in keeping with that general case we have Christ continuing to speak – to the SAME group and showing that this is a personal – direct message..

Here we see the case of those NOT in UNION with Christ – NOT in fellowship with Christ. As even some Calvinists will admit – regeneration is the first point where a person IS in union with Christ.

http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/35/1533.html#000005

The case is made that the same “anyone” that is instructed to “open the door” is the SAME “anyone” that WILL receive the benefit of immediate fellowship with Christ (I will dine WITH him and he WITH Me). Here is picture “union WITH Christ” – following as a result of the choice to open the door.

Many reject the idea that those being addressed in Rev 3 could possibly be OUT of union with Christ”. They shrink from thinking that the sinner is “alone and without UNION with Christ” on the INSIDE while Christ is on the OUTSIDE! The reject this because “Calvinism” needs to avoid this “inconvenient detail” of scripture..

Yet we see “in the text” that each individual must HEAR and OPEN the door and then to each ONE that does – the RESULT will be that immediate fellowship that is promised. This is not a case of those ALREADY in fellowship with Christ and “inside the church” being promised that they WILL be in fellowship if they only open the door. Rather it is a promise to the condemned of Vs 17 that THIS action will result in the INDIVIDUAL being IN fellowship The propitiation (atoning sacrifice) of Christ provides the currency in "suffering" owed by all lost humanity - but God holds application of that currency by His OWN rules - to "Whosoever Will" saying "I STAND at the door and KNOCK if anyone HEARS my voice AND OPENS the door I WILL come IN" Rev 3:21.

Fortunately Calvinists like John MacArthur seem to “get the point” about UNION with Christ NOT being defined as “the sinner alone on the inside WITHOUT Christ while Christ is on the OUTSIDE knocking and waiting for the sinner to open the door”

Here's what John Macarthur (calvinist) says

From MacArthur's study Bible comments on Rev 3, page 1997.


The conditions are clear - God is not fire-hosing us with payment of our debt. Rather the blood of Christ - and suffering for our sins is carefully treasured - held for us to claim "IF we CONFESS our sins HE IS faithful and just to FORGIVE us our sins AND to CLEANSE us from ALL unrighteousness".

It could not BE any clearer.

Instead of avoiding the details - glossing over them and ignoring them -- embrace them!

#1. CHrist on the OUTSIDE - lost humanity alone on the INSIDE.
#2. Christ is not opening the door - He is only knocking and waiting. (Drawing ALL mankind unto Him)
#3. The invitation is in the form of a knock - NOT in the form of OPENING the door and coming in but WAITING and knocking!

[

 

quote]Rev 3:20[/quote]

The gating action is very simple. Having STARTED with Christ taking the inititiative and knocking - the NEXT gate is "IF ANY of mankind" alone and on the inside WITHOUT Chirst -- chooses to hear AND to OPEN the door THEN the desired union will take place!

The next action is Christ’s - HE WILL come in -- and UNION With Christ Takes place. Note the details IN the text where Union WITH Christ is the focus!

Those who deny this goal - the objective of Christ in Knocking -- the goal of UNION WITH Christ -- deny the entire Gospel invitation of Rev 3:22!
Why deny the Gospel "just for Calvinism"? Why not embrace the truth instead?

See friends -- Be willing to quote the text and show how EACH salient point IN the illustration is showing the Gospel truth!!


Salvation is “individual” the remedy is “individual” the people IN the church of Laodicea are in fact “individuals” with the spiritual condition described, and in need of taking the “action” described – individually – to obtain the “individual solution” described IN the text in “individual” terms.

Note – the “individual terms” continue –

It is NOT just the Laodiceans that will enjoy God's company and sit with Christ - but ALL who open the door.

At times – the Calvinist approach is to imagine “the door of the CHURCH” is closed to Christ and all on the inside of the church are “without Christ” – all on the inside are “spiritually blind, wretched, poor, miserable and spiritually naked” without the robe of Christ. Then in that view – one of the members is asked to “let Christ into the church” since He is outside the door of the church knocking. But in that case the “result” would be that only to that One – is fellowship restored – the REST would remain – spewed out – miserable and lost since the language of the solution shows that “I with HIM and HE with ME” is the nature of this 1-to-1 solution.

Calvinism’s attempted rework of the text is not possible.

 

Bob, don't waste your breath. Tragic doesn't care for study, he would rather fight. You are correct, though, and it is good to see that even some calvinists realize what Rev. 3:20 really says.

 

Phil2:13, "It is GOD, of His good pleasure, who works in you to will and to do"

Eph1:5, "Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His (own) will, to the praise and glory of His grace, wherewith He hath made us accepted in the Beloved (Christ Jesus) ... according to the riches of His grace ... having made known to us the mystery of His will according to His good pleasure which He hath purposed in Himself ... we have obtained an inheritance being predestinated according to the purpose of Him who worketh all things after the counsel of His own will, that we should be to the praise of His glory ...."
And many more Words of God to the same effect!

Revelation 3:20: "I knock" it says; and, says HE, "Behold, it is I who knock". In the beginning it was God, who spoke, and it was. So, in this here new "beginning of the creation OF GOD" -- it is a creation and a beginning not of man's! The knock of Christ is the Word of God that creates out of nothing, yes in fact, that creates out of wilfull, sinful, resistance and opposition. Not out of saintly co-operation.

 

Ever thought of what could have happened, willed Christ not to knock on that door?

 

Understood. TP is primarily "gaming the topic" rather than actually engaged in Bible study and discussion.

But it leaves me an open door to post some of my personnal files on this topic while exposing TP's lack of substantive exchange.

"Two birds at once" if you will.

The problem is - that if you allow yourself to engage in TP's gaming - the whole thing melts down into TP-ism after TP-ism in the exchanges.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Well, I was looking forward to adressing Bob's assertions; however:

If you think I am going to put up with being spoken down to and over you are both, collectively and individually, out of your minds.

Stew in your self-righteousness; should you decide to apologize for treating me like less than an equal human being and brother in Christ, I will be glad to participate.

 

No apology necessary, unless you feel like calling someone "boy" is righteous. You're a hypocrite.

 

And calling you "boy" was areaction to an obvious incident of you talking down to me. Get the log out o your own eye before you start throwing names around.

 

Are you the pot or the kettle?

 

both...............

 

I'm not the idiots who share a brain, though.

 

For someone who's 44 years old, you sure act like 14 years old. You really need a dose of maturity.

 

I guess he didn't see us on Haggard did he Web?

 

If we all agreed on everything we would be calvinists

 

If you think Calvinists agree on everything, you're dumber than even I thought.


Go ahead and post somethion derogatory now, so's you can get your precious last word in. When you both grow up enough to discuss things, drop me a PM and we'll discuss.