REFORMERS - The LIght of the New World

[GraceAndTruth]

Yes you made this assumption about me before before, I am 29 and have been saved for eight years but age and how long one has been saved has never been a limitation with God. I question because because I love to learn whether one considers that to be immature or not is not important to me
However from what I have seen you are not mature as you think. You refuse to listen to anyone nwho opposes your stance with an unwillingness to learn or listen you think yourself to be well versed in scripture but fail to see beyond your own Rhetoric you lack the spirit of love and and are crude and sarcastic in your responses even with your laughing emojie's or the boring ones

Many have given you wise council including me but you do not have the heart of a student and so you are unable to listen and learn if one cannot listen and learn is that not in of itself a sign of immaturity?

I am not putting you down for being young, either in years or in the Lord.
You just seem to ask questions that seem above your spiritual maturity level. That is no reflection on anyone....we all started somewhere. I just think you might process the basics a bit more before you try to school anyone else. i have seen a lot of what you say as being a bit above yourself.

One bit that bothers me about you is that you ask questions that are easily answered if you just open a bible.

My 'stance' is as old as the bible....if you knew anything at all about the history of the church you would know that. Also you have no real knowledge of this calvinism thing you peeps are so obsessive over.


One thing I do not need or want is 'wise council' from a kid.
I have been where you are.
I have studied for over 40 years and I don't need any input from a babe in Christ.
There are others in these forums that I do heed and enjoy what they add to my knowledge.
If you don't like my theology, why approach me? For an argument? how fun.
You know me welll enough by now to make that choice.
As it say in Hebrews........press on to maturity. (in understanding)

 

[Blain]

I am not putting you down for being young, either in years or in the Lord.
You just seem to ask questions that seem above your spiritual maturity level. That is no reflection on anyone....we all started somewhere. I just think you might process the basics a bit more before you try to school anyone else. i have seen a lot of what you say as being a bit above yourself.

One bit that bothers me about you is that you ask questions that are easily answered if you just open a bible.

My 'stance' is as old as the bible....if you knew anything at all about the history of the church you would know that. Also you have no real knowledge of this calvinism thing you peeps are so obsessive over.


One thing I do not need or want is 'wise council' from a kid.
I have been where you are.
I have studied for over 40 years and I don't need any input from a babe in Christ.
There are others in these forums that I do heed and enjoy what they add to my knowledge.
If you don't like my theology, why approach me? For an argument? how fun.
You know me welll enough by now to make that choice.
As it say in Hebrews........press on to maturity. (in understanding)

 

[Blain]

Yes I ask questions that wouyld at first glance be easily answered byt looking at the word of God however not everyone sees with the same eyes and not everyone can recieve the word as one one who actually knows his voice and so when I ask a quesation it usually has a dual meaning one for my own learning and also to provoke deeper thinking among other belivers however because of the limtation of words this is not alwats een or interprated as it is meant to be.

I only know how to speak what the sp;irit places on my heart to speak trust me sometimes and actually often more than sometimes I wish I could speak other tuhan what the spirit [laces on my herart to speak but I fon't know any other way to be, I have never conisdered myself wise or stong or holy in any way and whne it come to writing or typing this is the only way I am able to speak my heart and perhaps that iasa the entire point and why I was lead to cc to begin with.


It is true that calvinsims is new to me but from what I have seen so far from it and from ypu have shown by the fruits of your responces to those who oppose you I have not seen any evidence of the truth.
It isd true I am lacking and having much to learn but check my posts on my account and see how I am willing I am to repent and learn and admit when I am wrong but you have yet to do this even once

If there was ny truth about me I hope you accept is that is that I care far more about others learning
God's truth his real truth known only by the spirit than being correct or righbt or being a teacher of any kind

 

[Nehemiah6]

As a Christian of ANY 'ism' you should agree with at least L and P

How can any Christian -- in good conscience -- agree with Limited Atonement when the Bible makes it crystal clear that Christ died for the sins of the whole world, and the Lamb of God took away the sin of the world. Even good old John Calvin could not avoid that interpretation (although he later ignored it).

CALVIN'S COMMENTARY ON JOHN 1:29 (SEE BIBLE HUB)
The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

"Behold the Lamb of God. The principal office of Christ is briefly but clearly stated; that he takes away the sins of the world by the sacrifice of his death, and reconciles men to God...

Who taketh away the sin of the world. He uses the word sin in the singular number, for any kind of iniquity; as if he had said, that every kind of unrighteousness which alienates men from God is taken away by Christ. And when he says, the sin Of The World, he extends this favor indiscriminately to the whole human race; that the Jews might not think that he had been sent to them alone.

But hence we infer that the whole world is involved in the same condemnation; and that as all men without exception are guilty of unrighteousness before God, they need to be reconciled to him. John the Baptist, therefore, by speaking generally of the sin of the world, intended to impress upon us the conviction of our own misery, and to exhort us to seek the remedy. Now our duty is, to embrace the benefit which is offered to all, that each of us may be convinced that there is nothing to hinder him from obtaining reconciliation in Christ, provided that he comes to him by the guidance of faith...."

 

[cv5]

I ought to know my OWN doctrine...and that TULIP is correct. And 100% biblical.
There is no "present day tulip"..........THE TULIP is one and only as written by BEZA

TULIP can be a problem. What the far far bigger problem is amillennialism and preterism.
Kicking Israel to the curb was the biggest mistake the reformers ever made.

 

[GraceAndTruth]

How can any Christian -- in good conscience -- agree with Limited Atonement when the Bible makes it crystal clear that Christ died for the sins of the whole world, and the Lamb of God took away the sin of the world. Even good old John Calvin could not avoid that interpretation (although he later ignored it).

CALVIN'S COMMENTARY ON JOHN 1:29 (SEE BIBLE HUB)
The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

"Behold the Lamb of God. The principal office of Christ is briefly but clearly stated; that he takes away the sins of the world by the sacrifice of his death, and reconciles men to God...

Who taketh away the sin of the world. He uses the word sin in the singular number, for any kind of iniquity; as if he had said, that every kind of unrighteousness which alienates men from God is taken away by Christ. And when he says, the sin Of The World, he extends this favor indiscriminately to the whole human race; that the Jews might not think that he had been sent to them alone.

But hence we infer that the whole world is involved in the same condemnation; and that as all men without exception are guilty of unrighteousness before God, they need to be reconciled to him. John the Baptist, therefore, by speaking generally of the sin of the world, intended to impress upon us the conviction of our own misery, and to exhort us to seek the remedy. Now our duty is, to embrace the benefit which is offered to all, that each of us may be convinced that there is nothing to hinder him from obtaining reconciliation in Christ, provided that he comes to him by the guidance of faith...."

But you KNOW that only believers are covered by the blood of Christ.
And it is the blood that atoned for sin.
THAT is the L in "limited".....means what has been applied.

So your protest is on a false premise.

I am seeing some strange definitions of TULIP and I think someone or several someones are confusing the issue by re-defining my faith. I stand by the historic doctrines of the tulip.

I don't need a sermon. Never read them.
If I want word of wisdom outside the bible, I'll read some Spurgeon.

 

[cv5]

How can any Christian -- in good conscience -- agree with Limited Atonement when the Bible makes it crystal clear that Christ died for the sins of the whole world, and the Lamb of God took away the sin of the world. Even good old John Calvin could not avoid that interpretation (although he later ignored it).

CALVIN'S COMMENTARY ON JOHN 1:29 (SEE BIBLE HUB)
The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

"Behold the Lamb of God. The principal office of Christ is briefly but clearly stated; that he takes away the sins of the world by the sacrifice of his death, and reconciles men to God...

Who taketh away the sin of the world. He uses the word sin in the singular number, for any kind of iniquity; as if he had said, that every kind of unrighteousness which alienates men from God is taken away by Christ. And when he says, the sin Of The World, he extends this favor indiscriminately to the whole human race; that the Jews might not think that he had been sent to them alone.

But hence we infer that the whole world is involved in the same condemnation; and that as all men without exception are guilty of unrighteousness before God, they need to be reconciled to him. John the Baptist, therefore, by speaking generally of the sin of the world, intended to impress upon us the conviction of our own misery, and to exhort us to seek the remedy. Now our duty is, to embrace the benefit which is offered to all, that each of us may be convinced that there is nothing to hinder him from obtaining reconciliation in Christ, provided that he comes to him by the guidance of faith...."

Truly Christ's propitiation is infinite in value and scope. Tragically to so many choose to reject His grace. And yes I am a firm believer in election.

 

[GraceAndTruth]

TULIP can be a problem. What the far far bigger problem is amillennialism and preterism.
Kicking Israel to the curb was the biggest mistake the reformers ever made.

I don't know where you get your information but everything I have seen you write about MY faith has been wrong.
Jews are not excluded, they are embraced as fellow believers.........two types of olive trees grafted together to the same root (Christ)
What you may be missing is the rejection of Israel as a nation by God. see Romans 11.

 

[cv5]

But you KNOW that only believers are covered by the blood of Christ.
And it is the blood that atoned for sin.
THAT is the L in "limited".....means what has been applied.

So your protest is on a false premise.

I am seeing some strange definitions of TULIP and I think someone or several someones are confusing the issue by re-defining my faith. I stand by the historic doctrines of the tulip.

I don't need a sermon. Never read them.
If I want word of wisdom outside the bible, I'll read some Spurgeon.

Compressing all of the Scripture down to TULIP is a mistake in my opinion. Enforcing it is an even bigger mistake.

 

[cv5]

I don't know where you get your information but everything I have seen you write about MY faith has been wrong.
Jews are not excluded, they are embraced as fellow believers.........two types of olive trees grafted together to the same root (Christ)
What you may be missing is the rejection of Israel as a nation by God. see Romans 11.

What you are missing is that Paul in Romans 9, 10 & 11 clearly indicates beyond any shadow of a doubt that God is NOT through with the ethnic NATIONAL Israel.

Read Isaiah chapter 9 and 11 and 14 and 60. And literally hundreds of other Old Testament chapters. Have these prophecies been fulfilled yet? Or are you making out God to be faithless and a liar?

 

[GraceAndTruth]

Compressing all of the Scripture down to TULIP is a mistake in my opinion. Enforcing it is an even bigger mistake.

This so-called 'calvinism' is "down to TULIP" as you say because you who hate it have so designated it to be so. "calvinism is so much more than the tulip........however, I don't see anyone willing to discuss it rationally.

Do you realize the history of calvinism is extensive and these doctrines that have been given the name of Calvin, even though he never wrote them, have endured much persecution and still thrive today? Even the Roman Catholic Church started out as 'calvinist' with the reaffirming their core beliefs in 520AD in the 2nd Council of Orange. (look it up) Though it rejected all forms of Christianity in TRENT and became the persecuters of God's people, their early history as a church is in the bible.

It is not up to me to convice you or anyone else of my truth. Questions asked and i try to answer. If you think you know my answer before you ask or commnet, then you are only baitng and not debating.

 

[GraceAndTruth]

What you are missing is that Paul in Romans 9, 10 & 11 clearly indicates beyond any shadow of a doubt that God is NOT through with the ethnic NATIONAL Israel.

Read Isaiah chapter 9 and 11 and 14 and 60. And literally hundreds of other Old Testament chapters. Have these prophecies been fulfilled yet? Or are you making out God to be faithless and a liar?

specific verse? IN CONTEXT please

 

[cv5]

specific verse? IN CONTEXT please

The context is in the chapters please read all of those chapters in their entirety. To postulate that God is done with Israel is a heresy and on its face absurd.

 

[GraceAndTruth]

The context is in the chapters please read all of those chapters in their entirety. To postulate that God is done with Israel is a heresy and on its face absurd.

I'm not your pupil, you are not my teacher.
I don't do 'assignments'.
You should be able to state your position in your own language and then the scripture you got it from.

 

[GraceAndTruth]

The history of Thanksgiving in the United States is often traced back to 1621 when the Plymouth Colony settlers and the Wampanoag shared a meal celebrating the harvest. Their trial began in 1620 with the voyage of the Mayflower, a 65-day-long ordeal in which 102 men, women, and children crossed the stormy Atlantic in a space the size of a city bus. Then followed a cruel New England winter for which they were ill-prepared. Due more to exposure than starvation, their number dwindled rapidly, so that by the onset of spring fully half of them had died. Fourteen of the eighteen wives had perished, and widowers and orphans abounded. That the Pilgrims could celebrate at all in this setting was because of their faith and assurance that God is in control.

 

[cv5]

I'm not your pupil, you are not my teacher.
I don't do 'assignments'.
You should be able to state your position in your own language and then the scripture you got it from.

So you won't read those chapters? By yourself for yourself? Wow. I'm glad I don't have that problem.

 

[Nehemiah6]

And yes I am a firm believer in election.

Unconditional election NULLIFIES the offer of salvation to all mankind. Which is firmly embedded in Scripture.

 

[Nehemiah6]

ut you KNOW that only believers are covered by the blood of Christ. And it is the blood that atoned for sin. THAT is the L in "limited".....means what has been applied.

That is an incorrect interpretation of Limited Atonement. According to Reformed Theology Christ died only for the elect. However, according to a proper interpretation of John 1:29 (supported by Calvin in his commentary) Christ died for the sins of the whole world.

The above truth is totally separate from the fact that only those who obey the Gospel, and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, are washed in the blood of the Lamb. Therefore the atoning work of Christ applies only to believers. But if all would believe, all would be saved. The Gospel invitation is to "whosoever will" (anyone and everyone).

 

[cv5]

Unconditional election NULLIFIES the offer of salvation to all mankind. Which is firmly embedded in Scripture.

Don't misunderstand me I honestly believe every person is given a free will choice. Yet at same time God sovereignly elects his chosen ones. Both concepts are without doubt represented in the scripture.

Beyond all of that, none of this has any bearing on our preaching to the world whatsoever. Whosoever will choose will choose whomsoever has been chosen will be chosen.

 

[GraceAndTruth]

That is an incorrect interpretation of Limited Atonement. According to Reformed Theology Christ died only for the elect. However, according to a proper interpretation of John 1:29 (supported by Calvin in his commentary) Christ died for the sins of the whole world.

The above truth is totally separate from the fact that only those who obey the Gospel, and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, are washed in the blood of the Lamb. Therefore the atoning work of Christ applies only to believers. But if all would believe, all would be saved. The Gospel invitation is to "whosoever will" (anyone and everyone).

Calvin stipulated that the "all" were believers only. (have you read Calvin's commentary?)
Other calvinist theologians said it my way.
In truth we are saying the same thing.....it IS limited BECAUSE it is applied only to those born again
Maybe you have an issue with the word "LIMITED".
adjective. having a limit; restricted; confined. without fullness or scope; narrow. (of sovereignty, etc) restricted or checked
God's elective power ensures that it was limited from the foundation of the world.