I don't understand why so many Christians fuss about man-made doctrines, making simple gospel so complicated.
Calvinists are not the only ones, MADs are doing the same.
The Slaying of Reformed Theology (Calvinism)
- Thread starter Evil.Eye.<(I)>
- Start date
- Status
I don't understand why so many Christians fuss about man-made doctrines, making simple gospel so complicated.
Calvinists are not the only ones, MADs are doing the same.
Eagles Wings
New member
I'm not surprised at the strange bed-fellows that are made in these anti-Calvinist/Reformed threads.
Nothing new here at all.
Nothing new here at all.
OP comments pertinent to the scripture? I thought we were all joined by Christ?
Eagles Wings
New member
Not gonna waste my breath. I'll ignore from here on out.
Sister, if it is extra biblical it is all subject to 1 John 2:27. I believe Mid Acts Dispensationalist's despise extra biblical doctrine, but I can't speak for them.
Out of mutual respect, I will do the same.
One thing is certain. The OP is uncontested and the assertions bind us to scriptural debate, void of human commentary. It is already holding strong.
Calvinists use the scripture for their doctrines too.
Why yours is any different?
Calvinism adheres to the authority of a scriptural lens. It relies on Calvin's Institutes, Reformed Commentary and The Westminster Confessions of Faith.
I am no snowflake that is unique and special. I simply share a belief that many here and elsewhere share. Scripture is all that is required. God provides guidance. Every addition to scriptural understanding is in violation of 1 John 2:27. All ideas must be defensible by simple scriptural usage and possibly original, lingual tools like interlinear bible tools and full biblical use for context.
No doctrine is solid, unless it is only from scripture. I am not discussing lengthy commentary, but solely scriptural analysis.
I would be happy to answer any further questions you have, but if they are out of the context of this OP, I will ask that you evaluate a previous post towards you and use exegesis and the provided scripture alone to explain why you disagree with it. You would be welcome to use other scripture in addition, but contextually, I would ask that you stay within the parameters of the posted scripture.
Thank you.
You are trying to get everyone gang attack on Calvinism.
This is kind of call out thread.
why do you do that?
I will be happy to answer your non OP related questions if you would kindly evaluate this as I suggested earlier.
Link Here
That's the OP, but that links to #398.
Actually neither the link OP or this is about Calvinism being anti-Semite, though that is part of the equation.
#398 remains your difficult scriptural challenge.
Link Here
It is clear to me that you are trying to push your Zionism by making Calvinism being anti-Semite.
Nang
TOL Subscriber
Mam,
I am far past discussing Zion now. I take it you are refusing to answer the scripture in the link?
Link Here
Please address the OP.
This is no longer about Zion. That was a motivation, but now I'm turning the laser of scripture elsewhere.
I am assuming that it is incontestable as not one Reformed Student has touched it.
Nang
TOL Subscriber
Your OP challenge is false.
Why should I address your theological ignorance and condemnations of my faith?
- Status