3 Tactics Calvinists Use Against Non-Calvinists

What an unusual interpretation of the Genesis account.

I would refer you to the passages that pertain to the fall of Lucifer and his fellow angels after their loss of the war in Heaven.

Just an historical note:

TULIP is not something John Calvin came up with. It was put together by supporters of Calvin's ideas after the church got together and condemned Arminianism as heresy.
Arminius and his followers put together some group of points in which they opposed the theology that Calvin had taught, which were all rejected by the Synod of Dort. TULIP is a set of counter-points to the heresies of Arminianism.
This all took place decades after Calvins death.

Also: Calvin himself said that there is nothing in his Institutes that Augustine had not first taught.

So really you guys are more accurately described as fighting Augustinianism.

in re:

• Romans 5:13 says sin existed in the world before the law
• Whispered says sin didn't exist before the law
• Galatians 3:17 says the law came 430 years after Abraham
• Whispered suggests "of the tree in the midst of the garden you may not eat" = "the law" as referenced in the NT
• post asks whether this law "of the tree in the midst of the garden you may not eat" is how Whispered believes Satan fell?
• Whispered replies:

you do not believe Satan's first sin was eating from the tree after God told Adam not to eat of it?
good. me either.
but you believe sin didn't exist before the law, and even if you also believe that "the law" = "do not eat of the tree in the midst of the garden" then you still have a problem if Satan had sinned before Adam was told not to eat. you have sin existing before you say it exists. you're wrong; the Bible says so.



when was this?

Realizing Augustine of Hippo's theology was partly influenced by the Gnostics?

If you choose to misrepresent my remarks further

Sin did not exist before the law.

As I have stated before; Salvation is "a deliverance" and many salvation scriptures do not have reference to eternal deliverance, but to a deliverance we receive while we live here in this world. There is a deliverance (not eternal) that we receive when we come to a knowledge of the truth of the Gospel, as evidenced in Romans 10; Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel (Jacob's name was changed by God to be called Israel, who is representative of God'd elect) is, that they might be saved (delivered from a lack of knowledge of the gospel), For I bear them record that they have a zeal (evidence that they are born of the Spirit) of God, but not according to knowledge, For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness (by their good works) have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. The inspired scriptures were not written to those who are not of the elect, but are written only to the elect, teaching them how God wants them to live their lives as they sojourn here on earth. Jesus instructed his Apostles to go and preach to the lost sheep (God's elect) of the house of Israel (Jacob). The Apostles were to teach them the gospel that explains how Jesus has already saved them eternally and imputed his righteousness unto them so that they don't have to go about to establish their own righteousness, by their works. Romans 30-31, Now I beseech you, brethren, for the Lord Jesus Christ's sake, and for the love of the Spirit, that ye strive together with me in your prayers to God for me, That I may be delivered from them that do not believe in Judea, and that my service which I have for Jerusalem may be accepted of the saints (elect). Why do you think that Paul only wanted to preach to those that already believed? Jeremiah 50:6, My people hath been lost sheep, their shepherds have caused them to go astray (probably teaching them that they have to do good works to get eternally saved - just my guess);

TULIP is an acronym used to summarize the Five Points of Calvinism, which were codified in the Canons of Dort by the Synod of Dort in 1618 and 1619, which met to address the points raised by the Arminians of that day.
"By his own admission, John Calvin's theology was deeply influenced by Augustine of Hippo, the fourth-century church father. Twentieth-century Reformed theologian B. B. Warfield said, "The system of doctrine taught by Calvin is just the Augustinianism common to the whole body of the Reformers."[1] Paul Helm, a well-known Reformed theologian, used the term Augustinian Calvinism for his view in the book "The Augustinian-Calvinist View" in Divine Foreknowledge: Four Views.[2] [source and more reading, Wikipedia]
John Calvin and TULIP
John Calvin wrote, "Augustine is so wholly within me, that if I wished to write a confession of my faith, I could do so with all fullness and satisfaction to myself out of his writings."[3] "This is why one finds that every four pages written in the Institutes of the Christian Religion John Calvin quoted Augustine. Calvin, for this reason, would deem himself not a Calvinist, but an Augustinian. [...] Christian Calvinist, should they be more likely deemed an Augustinian-Calvinist?"[4] Cary concurs, writing, "As a result, Calvinism in particular is sometimes referred to as Augustinianism."[5] The theology of Calvinism has been immortalized in the acronym TULIP, which states the five essential doctrines of Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresistible grace, and Perseverance of the saints. These were detailed in the Second Synod of Dort in 1618–1619 against the opposing Five Articles of Remonstrance which followed the theology of Jacobus Armenius. Modern Reformed theology continues to assert these five points of Calvinism,[6] which Calvin credited to Augustine. "

realizing what you just quoted?

just the part common to the whole body.

did you mean to imply that gnosticism is common to all the reformers or did it just come out that way because you didn't comprehend what you cited?

thank you for substantiating everything i said

I do not ascribe to your doctrine. There is no doctrine I know of wherein it is taught that Satan ate of the fruit of the tree of knowledge.

Sin did not exist before the law. As we're informed in Genesis. God's law was created there when He told Adam and Eve to not eat of the fruit of the tree of life.

Satan fell to earth before Adam and Eve were created. This is how he in serpent form entered into Eden knowing of God's forbidden tree and the first law that was uttered from their creator's mouth.

It is unfortunate that you enjoy omitting a mature demeanor when you choose to post as that.
Excerpting out of context parts of my reply so as to appear as you do .

These excerpts encapsulate the unbiblical state of John's doctrine.



Quotes from John Calvin: “For our nature is not only utterly devoid of goodness, but so prolific in all kinds of evil, that it can never be idle. Those who term it concupiscence use a word not very inappropriate, provided it were added, (this, however, many will by no means concede,) that everything which is in man, from the intellect to the will, from the soul even to the flesh, is defiled and pervaded with this concupiscence; or, to express it more briefly, that the whole man is in himself nothing else than concupiscence.” (Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 2, Chapter 1, Section 8)

Concupiscence is the Greek word “Epithumia” which means: “desire, craving, longing, desire for what is forbidden, lust.” (KJV New Testament Greek Lexicon online at Crosswalk Bible Study Tools) Concupiscence means to desire or long for something that is forbidden, that which is not of God. John Calvin is stating that man is completely in the state of concupiscence in which man can do no good at all unless it is God who first changes the will of man to do good. John Calvin and the teachings of Calvinism teach that man is dead in sin and there is nothing that man can do which is good, therefore man has no ability or free will to choose God because he is in a state of concupiscence. [end excerpt]


Quote from John Calvin: “What can a dead man do to obtain life? But when he enlightens us with the knowledge of himself, he is said to raise us from the dead, and make us new creatures.” (Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 14, Section 5) John Calvin taught that man was dead in their sins, and according to Calvinism this means that a person who is dead in their sins has no more ability to choose God than a dead man in a tomb can do anything.



Quote from Canons of Dordt on Total Inability: “Therefore, all people are conceived in sin and are born children of wrath, unfit for any saving good, inclined to evil, dead in their sins, and slaves to sin; without the grace of the regenerating Holy Spirit they are neither willing nor able to return to God, to reform their distorted nature, or even to dispose themselves to such reform.” (Canons of Dordt, III & IV, Article 3) Canons of Dordt are official statements on what Calvinism teaches, this quote is concerning “Total Inability.” This statement indicates that a person cannot be willing to choose God unless the Holy Spirit regenerates them. The Canons of Dordt explains what Calvinism is, and is in agreement with what John Calvin taught on “Total Inability.”

& what does any of that have to do with teaching repentance or not?

Perhaps you can find your answer here:

https://bibletruthpublishers.com/all-library-authors/lua [listed (scroll to far right) under "Wilson, P" ]

[Paul Wilson, 1899-1966]

^ From your paragraph here, I would direct you to the posts I've made in the past, regarding:

--Romans 1 thru Romans 5:11 = "sinS"

--Romans 5:12 thru Romans chpt 8 [end] = "Sin"



____________

later in that article (I provided at link) [I think], he points out the actual wording of 1Jn2:2, as here:

https://biblehub.com/text/1_john/2-2.htm

^ From your paragraph here, I would direct you to the posts I've made in the past, regarding:

--Romans 1 thru Romans 5:11 = "sinS"

--Romans 5:12 thru Romans chpt 8 [end] = "Sin"



____________

later in that article (I provided at link) [I think], he points out the actual wording of 1Jn2:2, as here:

https://biblehub.com/text/1_john/2-2.htm

that is not my doctrine. stop speaking confusion.
i asked you if that was your doctrine, because you contradict Romans 5:13 saying sin didn't exist before the law, and you contradict Galatians 3:17 saying "the law" = the command not to eat of the tree.

given that your doctrine is sin did not exist before the law was given, and your doctrine is that "the law being given" is Adam being told not to eat of the tree, then Satan could not have sinned before this time. that is the i your doctrine




your doctrine is that the law was created when Adam was told not to eat of the tree ((there's no record of the Woman being told)).
your doctrine is that sin did not exist before this.



your doctrine is that Satan had no sin when he was thrown to earth because your doctrine is that Satan fell to earth before sin existed.

that's a problem. don't be to proud to acknowledge it; and please don't throw shade like it's my problem, because it's not; it's yours.

Perhaps you can find your answer here:

https://bibletruthpublishers.com/all-library-authors/lua [listed (scroll to far right) under "Wilson, P" ]

[Paul Wilson, 1899-1966]

what is unbiblical about any of what you cited?
here is a link to a list of about 130 different verses that support total depravity:
http://traviscarden.com/total-depravity-verse-list

what verses refute it?

& what does any of that have to do with teaching repentance or not?