Ya know -- I oughta read that. See what all the hub-bub is about! :laugh:
Seriously, Calvin did the best he could with what he had to work with. I don't know about him. I try to "know no man after the flesh" including what they write "on behalf of the betterment of mankind." I definitely think he was trying to "institute" secular structure onto society -- something that evangelicals can hardly resist even to this day!
I don't think he had the advantages we have today. He was working with the Vulgate/"vulgar" Bible, right? Concordances -- nonexistent. And commentary besides Catholic -- nonexistent. I mean, what do you expect a spiritual "first grader" to actually come up with???
skypair
Who are the false professors?
Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Isaiah40:28, Dec 4, 2007.
Page 3 of 6
-
John Calvin was not the first Reformer , he was of the 2nd generation . He read Bucer , Luther and others . And he did not rely on the Vulgate -- he actually knew Greek and Hebrew .
If Calvin was a spiritual first-grader I want to be the same . You certainly are not the least bit familiar with his writings to make such a stupid assertion .
Closing hint : If you do not know what you are talking about ...don't talk at all . -
-
But that was the way in those days. The RCC had practically "canonized" the writings of the ECF and the Reform/Calvinist movements took much from earlier men's opinions. Wouldn't you agree?
skypair -
Are you the only one who "heavily" leans upon Holy Spirit sky? -
skypair -
-
FTR, I have never read anything by John Calvin and you won't see me quoting him. If I can't make my point with scripture, then I my point is nothing more than the opinion of man.
Your defense is that it's ok to quote someone as long as they agree with Sky's doctrine. -
Your arrogance and presumption no know no bounds SP . You have claimed in the past that you post much more ( actually "speak against" ) about Calvinism than the man John Calvin . But most of the time (in your muddle-headedness ) you lump em' together as if they were virtually synonymous .
You , in your pride , think that your instruments must be very modern and sophisticated in contrast to the crudeness of John Calvin's tools .
Well , I have news for you my flying friend . You are not in the least as familiar as you believe you are with the Bible . John Calvin was leagues ahead of most of us -- "crude instruments" and all . John Gill , Matthew Henry , John Owen and many others of centuries past knew more than you'll ever hope to acquire in a lifetime .
Do you lean more on the sermons of Adrian Rogers than on the Holy Spirit ?! "Why that's an outrageous statement !" you rightly reply . Then don't come up with the junk you affix to John Calvin .
What are the writings of ECF ? To what are you referring ?
The Reformation ( if that's what you meant by the Reformed/Calvinist movement ) was a movement of God which was characterized by a return , or rediscovery ( after a thousand years of shameful neglect by most ) of the Word of God .
Of course some of the tenets of Calvinism would be attacked today -- no surprise there .They certainly are . But the teachings are not "shot down" as you so quaintly put it -- if by that terminology you think Calvinism is of no scriptural merit . -
-
-
-
Here is her statement:
The statement to which you later claimed to be what you trace the thought from is this one from me:
I always, always and always state "believe" not profess. One can profess anything, the profess of salvation is "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved".
So what did I say? Let's look again:
"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved".
If a person cannot recognize this critical and dramatic detail that changes the context of statements regarding the topic, they are in over their head and need to head off lesser waters.
However, for a most thorough treatment of The Failure of Perseverance, I have provided an extensive treatment of Luke 8 that has been untouched regarding any hermeneutical/exegetical refutation. A lot of crying and complaining but not hermeneutical/exegetical refutation. Perseverance? Luke 8 says no. -
-
Demons aren't GIVEN the promise of the GOSPEL. The promise "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved" is for HUMANS ONLY.
Are you really so ignorant of SOTERIOLOGY that you think DEMONS can be saved through Jesus Christ?
My goodness man, that is milk doctrine you are spitting up on yourself.
The truth is you are without refutation and cannot from any exegetical or hermeneutical position, provide an argument.
But fella, you need a refresher Soteriology 101 class before making really fundamental errors like "even demons believe".
Secondly, I established in the lengthy treatment, that "believe" in Luke is absolutely established in the context of salvation. But of course you really didn't read that part and have no argument against it. Really, you are just interested in shooting peas and this silly comment of yours isn't even a pea. -
I'll not even comment on the Soteriology 101 comment. Keep your nastiness to yourself. -
-
:laugh: -
I find this type of response so useless.
The intent of your position is to give those who profess to believe the application of salvation regardless of what life they live in evidence of it. I find that completely unbiblical.
I read your statements and asked you how your treatment of Luke 8 squares with the Jews "belief" in John 2 and John 8.
I stilll believe your position to be false teaching which brings confusion into the word of God and His people. -
*edited...wrong 3 letter name...
Page 3 of 6