Can the nonelect ever be born-again? (2 Kings 22:27) With the elect thou wilt be elect: and with the perverse thou wilt be perverted.

[Charlie_2024]

He had it correct. There would be no Elect without the blood of Jesus since a perfect sinless man chose to sin in the Garden.

OK, so you believe Jesus was crucified before the foundation of the world. That's a new one. It doesn't make any sense to me, but I'm willing to be enlightened on this newly discovered doctrine

 

[Stan_the_Man]

none of it is supported by any scripture

Calvinists wouldn't know since they are blinded by the devil to follow the calvinist cult that thinks God and the devil is the same guy.

By accusing the Calvinist view God, as being the Devil. This demonstrates your ignorance of what Calvinist theology teaches.

Well, when calvinists reach their final destination they'll have all eternity in hell to cry about how wrong they were.

We do believe that God is sovereign over all His creation, which fallen man rejects because they refuse to allow God to be God. They demand that God conforms to their expectations of how He must behave or they reject His authority over them.

Stuff like this is why calvinists are so confused.

You either believe that God is in full control over His creation or you don't. If you believe you can override Gods authority and will, because He doesn't pass your scrutiny or meet your expectations. Then I believe that view is blasphemous, and it should be repented of.

Well you believe wrong!

 

[Stan_the_Man]

you believe Jesus was crucified before the foundation of the world. That's a new one. It doesn't make any sense to me

Calvinists don't know God's Word, if they did they would know the Word of the Lord tells us Jesus was crucified before the foundation of the world.

Revelation 13:8
And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

I sure hope you get delivered from the calvinist cult holmes before you croak and it's too late

 

[Charlie_2024]

He had it correct. There would be no Elect without the blood of Jesus since a perfect sinless man chose to sin in the Garden.

Just one more point on this, Adam did not choose to sin. He was deceived by Satan into disobeying God. Just before you say it was Eve, who tricked him into it. She was already Satan's servant at that point, she was doing His will by seducing Adam

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

OK, so you believe Jesus was crucified before the foundation of the world. That's a new one. It doesn't make any sense to me, but I'm willing to be enlightened on this newly discovered doctrine

Nowhere in my post have I said what you just asked and assumed.

 

[Stan_the_Man]

Just one more point on this, Adam did not choose to sin. He was deceived by Satan into disobeying God.

1 Timothy 2:14
And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

Here again, if you actually knew God's Word you would know that God's Word tells us Eve was deceived, not Adam.

This means Adam knew what he was doing was wrong and decided to do it anyway!

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

Just one more point on this, Adam did not choose to sin. He was deceived by Satan into disobeying God. Just before you say it was Eve, who tricked him into it. She was already Satan's servant at that point, she was doing His will by seducing Adam

You clearly do not know your scripture
1 Timothy 2:14
14 and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived

Adam sinned WILLFULLY!
a Perfect sinless man sinned willfully!

 

[Charlie_2024]

Calvinists wouldn't know since they are blinded by the devil to follow the calvinist cult that thinks God and the devil is the same guy.






Well, when calvinists reach their final destination they'll have all eternity in hell to cry about how wrong they were.






Stuff like this is why calvinists are so confused.







Well you believe wrong! View attachment 261739

Well, all of that is your private interpretation, it's not supported by any facts or backed by any scriptures. All of those things exist in you mind alone, but I utterly reject them all as utter nonsense.

My world view is based on Gods living inerrant eternal Word, I would be a fool to turn my back in what Gods said and believ you who contradicts what God says. So my choice is clear, believe in you or God, and my choice is clear because my worldview is founded on Gods Word and not on any mans word

 

[Charlie_2024]

You clearly do not know your scripture
1 Timothy 2:14
14 and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived

Adam sinned WILLFULLY!
a Perfect sinless man sinned willfully!

You have misapplied the text, Satan caused Adam to sin against God through His servant Eve. So Eve was just a pawn in Satan's arsenal, she had no say in what her Master commanded her to do. Just as all those outside of Christ today have no choice in what they do. They're also Satan's unwitting slaves and servants

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

The saved are saved so this verse cannot be about the saved who are saved.

3:17 For God sent not the Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him.

So it is God's Will that everyone could be saved or might be saved.

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

You have misapplied the text, Satan caused Adam to sin against God through His servant Eve. So Eve was just a pawn in Satan's arsenal, she had no say in what her Master commanded her to do. Just as all those outside of Christ today have no choice in what they do. They're also Satan's unwitting slaves and servants

Nowhere does it say Satan caused Adam to sin. NOWHERE!
I am going by the Bible and you are "making it up."

 

[Charlie_2024]

1 Timothy 2:14
And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

Here again, if you actually knew God's Word you would know that God's Word tells us Eve was deceived, not Adam.

This means Adam knew what he was doing was wrong and decided to do it anyway!

It just depends on which interpretation you chose to run with. There are too many conflicting interpretations to list here

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

It just depends on which interpretation you chose to run with. There are too many conflicting interpretations to list here

ALL Bible versions of 1 Timothy 2:14 say the "SAME THING."

But the one I am using is the "oldest known Greek" we have in archive file. So every version HAS TO match it or it is not legit.

 

[Charlie_2024]

Nowhere does it say Satan caused Adam to sin. NOWHERE!
I am going by the Bible and you are "making it up."

I wasn't referring to the text, I referred to the application which can only be applied as Satan causing Adam to sin through Eve. Satan knew that He couldn't seduce Adam so He seduced to weaker woman and used her to get to Adam.

Satan is likened to a lion, He always attacks the weaker animals because they are easy prey. That's why women are forbidden to teach men in the Church

 

[Charlie_2024]

ALL Bible versions of 1 Timothy 2:14 say the "SAME THING."

But the one I am using is the "oldest known Greek" we have in archive file. So every version HAS TO match it or it is not legit.

I'm not disputing the wording, I'm referring to the application or "the moral of the story". We can take texts out of their intended context and apply them to unrelated doctrines and end up with a false theological view.

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

I wasn't referring to the text, I referred to the application which can only be applied as Satan causing Adam to sin through Eve. Satan knew that He couldn't seduce Adam so He seduced to weaker woman and used her to get to Adam.

Satan is likened to a lion, He always attacks the weaker animals because they are easy prey. That's why women are forbidden to teach men in the Church

We go by the BIBLE not what you think.

Clearly your whole doctrine is based off of opinion because if it was the Bible you could not lack so much knowledge.

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

I'm not disputing the wording, I'm referring to the application or "the moral of the story". We can take texts out of their intended context and apply them to unrelated doctrines and end up with a false theological view.

You're making it up. Nowhere in Genesis nor what Paul wrote has Adam being deceived. It takes someone who is deceived to think Adam was deceived when the Bible plainly claims "he was not deceived."

1 Timothy 2:14
14 and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived

 

[Charlie_2024]

The saved are saved so this verse cannot be about the saved who are saved.

3:17 For God sent not the Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him.

So it is God's Will that everyone could be saved or might be saved.

That sounds like one of those verses that can be interpreted in may ways. Some would say the word "MIGHT" means, will be saved, others would say it's a lottery and it comes down to the luck of the draw and others have invented many other ways to apply this word.

At the end of the day, all of scripture must fall into line with the whole counsel of God. We can't pluck verses out in isolation and use them to support a particular doctrine. It takes a lot more than that to build a case

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

That sounds like one of those verses that can be interpreted in may ways. Some would say the word "MIGHT" means, will be saved, others would say it's a lottery and it comes down to the luck of the draw and others have invented many other ways to apply this word.

At the end of the day, all of scripture must fall into line with the whole counsel of God. We can't pluck verses out in isolation and use them to support a particular doctrine. It takes a lot more than that to build a case

How can it be interpreted any way than what it claims when we know the Elect are past the "might be saved" stage and are at the guaranteed stage of being saved?
They cannot be Elect without being saved, therefore they "are saved."
So clearly verse 17 is for those who "are not" saved.

 

[Charlie_2024]

We go by the BIBLE not what you think.

Clearly your whole doctrine is based off of opinion because if it was the Bible you could not lack so much knowledge.

I reject your private opinion, that you go by the Bible. If that was the case you wouldn't be imposing your private view on Bible doctrine. If you want to be taken seriously you need to provide evidence that your view is not a false one.

Simply claiming to have the correct interpretation, doesn't mean that you poses it. It would take more than just your words to convince me that you have the authority to interpret scripture according to your understanding.

The Bible commands us to obey it, we were never given the right to cherry pick it, and use it to promote our private views which don't line up with the rest of scripture.