The Slaying of Reformed Theology (Calvinism)

[daqq]

Yeshua.

Now I know you're tripping :rotfl:
Too full of yourself to call him Jesus like everyone else.

Matthew 1:22-25
22 But this whole thing was done so that what is spoken by YHWH through haNavi Yeshayahu might be fulfilled, saying: 23 Behold, the παρθενος shall retain εν-γαστρι, (in belly), and shall τεξεται-produce a son, (τεξεται-τικτω plant life), and you shall call his name עמנו־אל, Ιμμανου·Hλ, (ע־א · I͞H), which is interpreted, El is with us, (μεθ ημων ο θεος). 24 And Yoseph arose from the deep sleep, and did as the Malak of YHWH commanded him, and received his wife: 25 and knew her not until she ετεκεν-produced a son, (ετεκεν-τικτω plant life), and he called his name I͞H.

Behold, one whose name is Tzemach-Branch ~ Ανατολη-Rising Light, (Zec 6:12-13).

 

[daqq]

Anti-Calvinism is like a mental illness, because I just stated that Calvinism is not a rejection of free will- and have stated it for the past year on this site- but you all keep repeating the same thing over and over

Unconditional Election - False and rebuked by Yeshua, epistle to the Hebrews, and by Paul.

Yeshua.

Now I know you're tripping :rotfl:
Too full of yourself to call him Jesus like everyone else.

Unconditional Election is simply acknowledging God's omniscience. At the Beginning, He predetermined how He would conduct His will and which of the fallen He would draw.

It is inevitably true, unless you believe in a god who blinds Himself to the future- some people actually think that, because a lot of you are just irrational loons.


You don't actually understand Limited Atonement, and that statement makes it abundantly clear.

First to the Yhudim:

Yohanan 7:37-39
37 In the last day, the great day of the Feast, [Shmini Atzeret - Sukkot-Tabernacles] I͞H stood and cried, saying, If anyone thirsts, let him come unto me, and drink!
38 The one faithfully-trusting into me, as the scripture has said, out of his cavity shall flow rivers of living water!
39 But this he spoke of the Spirit [the new Spirit of Eze 11:19, Eze 18:31, Eze 36:26] which those faithfully-trusting into him were about receive: for not yet was the Spirit because I͞H was not yet glorified, [Golgotha].

And also to the Greeks and the Nations:

Revelation 10:10-11 KJV
10 And I took the little book out of the angel's hand, and ate it up; and it was in my mouth sweet as honey: and as soon as I had eaten it, my belly was bitter.
11 And he said unto me, Thou must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings.

Revelation 21:5-6 KJV
5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. [2 Cor 5:17] And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.
6 And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely. [John 7:37]

Revelation 22:17 KJV
17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.

One thing Robert Pate is right about: WHOSOEVER WILL! :chuckle:
But as for you and yours the author says in the same passage:

Revelation 22:18-19 KJV
18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

For when he says "whosoever", you add, "is elect" and nullify the Word of Elohim.
You better hope and pray that Hell is just an allegory . . . :Nineveh:

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

First to the Yhudim:

Yohanan 7:37-39
37 In the last day, the great day of the Feast, [Shmini Atzeret - Sukkot-Tabernacles] I͞H stood and cried, saying, If anyone thirsts, let him come unto me, and drink!
38 The one faithfully-trusting into me, as the scripture has said, out of his cavity shall flow rivers of living water!
39 But this he spoke of the Spirit [the new Spirit of Eze 11:19, Eze 18:31, Eze 36:26] which those faithfully-trusting into him were about receive: for not yet was the Spirit because I͞H was not yet glorified, [Golgotha].

And also to the Greeks and the Nations:

Revelation 10:10-11 KJV
10 And I took the little book out of the angel's hand, and ate it up; and it was in my mouth sweet as honey: and as soon as I had eaten it, my belly was bitter.
11 And he said unto me, Thou must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings.

Revelation 21:5-6 KJV
5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. [2 Cor 5:17] And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.
6 And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely. [John 7:37]

Revelation 22:17 KJV
17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.

One thing Robert Pate is right about: WHOSOEVER WILL! :chuckle:
But as for you and yours the author says in the same passage:

Revelation 22:18-19 KJV
18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

For when he says "whosoever", you add, "is elect" and nullify the Word of Elohim.
You better hope and pray that Hell is just an allegory . . . :Nineveh:

How did you know.....?

Rotfl.... I wasn't going to press the Hinnom Valley portion, but simply use the scripture to assert the danger of "ANY" doctrines of men.

To add a word or remove a word.... I'll be right back and edit in the quoted question... you beat me to the punch!

#Awesome

Do you believe the Bible is the inerrant word of God and meant to be read with all scripture in mind?

John 5:39 and Matthew 5:37

Note... concession would be wise. I already have what I need in your previous words. So far, you are reasserting the validity of the OP.

 

[Brother Ducky]

The question was geared around your support of the W.C.of.F. In your quoted post.



Yes



Yes, to a degree. Your "in general" is where I believe you see that some place doctrines over Christ and Scripture. Please correct me if I misunderstood you. That was a supposition on my part.



You know my full agenda. Would you please tell me if 1 John 2:27 says that the Holy Spirit should be our teacher, please tell me if you read it differently.



In your words, what is "pre-destination?" And, I know you to be honest, because of your demeanor in word and speech. You are succinct and up front. This denotes that you have nothing to hide.

Of course, the Holy Spirit if the teacher par excellence. But not at the expense of excluding human teachers. Pastor-teacher is a gift from God to the church. Paul claims to be a teacher and instructs Timothy to teach. So I John 2:27 can't be taken as an absolute.

Implicit or explicit in most posts on this site is the attempt of men and women to teach. Perhaps we should not post here or anywhere?

Predestination, without trying to be to technical is the specific choosing of some by God for Salvation; and the non-choosing of others for salvation.

Do not think that I would ever place doctrine over Christ and Scripture. But we may weight some Scriptures and consequences differently, leading to the appearance of that.

 

[Crucible]

You're right. Calvinism (Reformed Theology) is an ancient cult.

Says the guy who thinks he's randomly going to beam up to the heavens while posting nonsense on TOL :wave2:

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

Of course, the Holy Spirit if the teacher par excellence. But not at the expense of excluding human teachers. Pastor-teacher is a gift from God to the church. Paul claims to be a teacher and instructs Timothy to teach. So I John 2:27 can't be taken as an absolute.

Predestination, without trying to be to technical is the specific choosing of some by God for Salvation; and the non-choosing of others for salvation.

Do not think that I would ever place doctrine over Christ and Scripture. But we may weight some Scriptures and consequences differently, leading to the appearance of that.

I am going to make a terrible assumption. You fully believe 1 John 2:27. You are kind in speech to your elders, but you do not believe a single extra biblical thing without searching the Holy Spirits guidance. I further assert that if I continue my line of questioning, you will see the point of this OP and recognize..............

Drum Roll.... You are not reformed and thus not a "Calvinist". Perhaps you have close friends that are, or came to Christ through Calvinist influences, but your Spirit is clear!

You are Sola Scripture, Sola Christ, Sola Holy Spirit...

You have remnants of the lens you know, but I refuse to lead you down this primrose path.

If my questioning intrigues you, I will continue for your sake, but I am calling a refusal on my part to continue asking you questions that are designed to take you to a point of conceding or admitting error.

Pride is not my motivation.

You are not a win for Calvinism, but a victory for Christ.

Shall we call this a draw for Jesus and the simple discussion of two souls that cling to the cross?

Or do you want me to continue questioning you for the sake of your interest and retain my previous assertion of two souls that cling to the cross?

The only profit I see in continuing is that you might end up feeling inclined to cast aside a few theological doctrines you have picked up along the way. But... why... you don't need them anyways. I can tell.

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

You're right. Calvinism (Reformed Theology) is an ancient cult.

Says the guy who thinks he's randomly going to beam up to the heavens while posting nonsense on TOL :wave2:

[MENTION=17677]Crucible[/MENTION] do you count yourself an eschatologist?

 

[Brother Ducky]

I am going to make a terrible assumption. You fully believe 1 John 2:27. You are kind in speech to your elders, but you do not believe a single extra biblical thing without searching the Holy Spirits guidance. I further assert that if I continue my line of questioning, you will see the point of this OP and recognize..............
a
Drum Roll.... You are not reformed and thus not a "Calvinist". Perhaps you have close friends that are, or came to Christ through Calvinist influences, but your Spirit is clear!

You are Sola Scripture, Sola Christ, Sola Holy Spirit...

You have remnants of the lens you know, but I refuse to lead you down this primrose path.

If my questioning intrigues you, I will continue for your sake, but I am calling a refusal on my part to continue asking you questions that are designed to take you to a point of conceding or admitting error.

Pride is not my motivation.

You are not a win for Calvinism, but a victory for Christ.

Shall we call this a draw for Jesus and the simple discussion of two souls that cling to the cross?

Or do you want me to continue questioning you for the sake of your interest and retain my previous assertion of two souls that cling to the cross?

The only profit I see in continuing is that you might end up feeling inclined to cast aside a few theological doctrines you have picked up along the way. But... why... you don't need them anyways. I can tell.

Not sure you are my elder, but with the exception of aggravating a few who need it, I am usually discussing issues. And I am Reformed. But I recognize that being Reformed is not the way to heaven, nor is being anti-Reformed, but rather being a Christian. And there is really very little that one has to hold to be saved.

Happy to discuss. I still hold that your original OP does not dismantle Reformed Theology.

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

Not sure you are my elder, but with the exception of aggravating a few who need it, I am usually discussing issues. And I am Reformed. But I recognize that being Reformed is not the way to heaven, nor is being anti-Reformed, but rather being a Christian. And there is really very little that one has to hold to be saved.

Happy to discuss. I still hold that your original OP does not dismantle Reformed Theology.

[MENTION=10685]Brother Ducky[/MENTION],

I am not your elder. I was referring to those that are reformed and have guided you along the way, out of Love.

Do I take "happy to discuss" as proceed or conclusion?

You call it... pick up where we left of, or exchange parting words of peace on this thread...

If I don't get an answer from you by 6:00 PM tomorrow, I'm posting the song rubber ducky with your name in place of some of it's lyrics and a gif of Bert and Earnie, as well.

#Maybe... probably not, because that's creepy, but... at least a rubber ducky gif.

 

[Crucible]

[MENTION=17677]Crucible[/MENTION] do you count yourself an eschatologist?

John Calvin opposed all millennialism, stating that it is too childish to deserve a rebuttal.

Literally :chuckle:

A sizable amount of people on here are premillennial rapturists, as are 70 million Americans and a few off in Europe- for some reason or another, despite being little more than a splinter of Christianity, the idea has become popularly presumed and often displayed in the media.

That's largely because it is a belief rooted in contemporary churches and endorsed by a lot of wealthy people.
In other words, it's showbiz Christianity.

An Anglican pastor in the 1800's named John Darby started the whole thing, building off of whispers following the Reformation in the 1500's.

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

John Calvin opposed all millennialism, stating that it is too childish to deserve a rebuttal.

Literally :chuckle:

A sizable amount of people on here are premillennial rapturists, as are 70 million Americans and a few off in Europe- for some reason or another, despite being little more than a splinter of Christianity, the idea has become popularly presumed and often displayed in the media.

That's largely because it is a belief rooted in contemporary churches and endorsed by a lot of wealthy people.
In other words, it's showbiz Christianity.

An Anglican pastor in the 1800's named John Darby started the whole thing, building off of whispers following the Reformation in the 1500's.

And his opinion matters to you why, in your study of eschatology? Sincere, but it's still dangerous to answer this.

Incidentally,
I am neutral on that particular concept, but am fairly versed on most sides of those discussions.

 

[nikolai_42]

Then, what does 1 John 2:27 say to you?



....

Just a heads up. I had just finished off one of those posts - having just finished admirably defending my view and silencing all critics for all time when I hit "Submit" and was advised I had been logged out and needed to log in again. Upon doing so, the screen was quite blank. Needless to say, I won't try to replicate that post, but will attempt to regroup and (hopefully) respond in the next day or so.

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

Just a heads up. I had just finished off one of those posts - having just finished admirably defending my view and silencing all critics for all time when I hit "Submit" and was advised I had been logged out and needed to log in again. Upon doing so, the screen was quite blank. Needless to say, I won't try to replicate that post, but will attempt to regroup and (hopefully) respond in the next day or so.

I am so very sorry! That is horrible when that happens! I am patient. Thank you for your efforts.

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

Current Thread tally...

[MENTION=17195]daqq[/MENTION] is uncontested by [MENTION=17677]Crucible[/MENTION]

[MENTION=17677]Crucible[/MENTION]'s straw man caught fire, as he is asserting that extra biblical writings are okay to look at scripture with, as a lens of true understanding.

[MENTION=5671]nikolai_42[/MENTION] is contesting my use of 1 John 2:27 and had a reply, but his efforts were messed up by a web page issue. He will be re-writing and submitting it when he gets the time.

[MENTION=10685]Brother Ducky[/MENTION] has a decision to make... I'm not certain if he wants to persist or not. I had desired to call a draw, because he seems to have his head screwed on "mostly right." ...cough...pre-destination

 

[Crucible]

Current Thread tally...

[MENTION=17195]daqq[/MENTION] is uncontested by [MENTION=17677]Crucible[/MENTION]

[MENTION=17677]Crucible[/MENTION]'s straw man caught fire, as he is asserting that extra biblical writings are okay to look at scripture with, as a lens of true understanding.

[MENTION=5671]nikolai_42[/MENTION] is contesting my use of 1 John 2:27 and had a reply, but his efforts were messed up by a web page issue. He will be re-writing and submitting it when he gets the time.

[MENTION=10685]Brother Ducky[/MENTION] has a decision to make... I'm not certain if he wants to persist or not. I had desired to call a draw, because he seems to have his head screwed on "mostly right." ...cough...pre-destination

You're opinion of daqq's arguments are founded on prejudice of what I've stated, not by an objective judgement. Daqq has done nothing but spew a myriad of points that try to resemble rebuttals but are really either moot or lacking any real exegesis.

As far as you're concerned, you need to just drop what you're doing and go back to the drawing board, because this thread- titled 'The Slaying of Calvinism'- is a mark of someone who doesn't really know what they are talking about. You're likely a kid who has yet to realize he doesn't know as much as he thinks he does

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

You're opinion of daqq's arguments are founded on prejudice of what I've stated, not by an objective judgement. Daqq has done nothing but spew a myriad of points that try to resemble rebuttals but are really either moot or lacking any real exegesis.

As far as you're concerned, you need to just drop what you're doing and go back to the drawing board, because it's obvious that this thread- titled 'The Slaying of Calvinism' no doubt- is a mark of a plain novice who doesn't really know what they are talking about.

Your citing of extra biblical works being okay to view scripture with has set "your" theological strawman ablaze.

It's not my fault that you can't keep up with [MENTION=17195]daqq[/MENTION]'s lingual extrapolation of scriptures. Nor is it [MENTION=17195]daqq[/MENTION]s fault that after he goes to great lengths to assert a valid argument with ONLY scripture, that you counter with ill prepared responses that are...

25% biblical-25% praises of Calvinism and Reformed Theology-25% Opinion and 100% lacking in contrast.

Sharpen up your "Biblical Sword", burn all the "Extra Biblical" precepts off of it, and come to battle prepared.

Until you do so....
[MENTION=17195]daqq[/MENTION] has every right to.... dance around the ring.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Just a heads up. I had just finished off one of those posts - having just finished admirably defending my view and silencing all critics for all time when I hit "Submit" and was advised I had been logged out and needed to log in again. Upon doing so, the screen was quite blank. Needless to say, I won't try to replicate that post, but will attempt to regroup and (hopefully) respond in the next day or so.

I hate that when it happens...hence this:

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...OL-User-Tips&p=4865645&viewfull=1#post4865645
(only subscribing members can see the above)

AMR

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

I hate that when it happens...hence this:

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...OL-User-Tips&p=4865645&viewfull=1#post4865645
(only subscribing members can see the above)

AMR

I am happy to receive your contribution. It would be nice if we could speak via back and forth and not simply your "canned links".

Alas, I am as attached to my youthful ways of communication as you are to your "old man" links.

I'll try to copy and paste it if possible under a quote of your submission.

#Was Noah's ark fun?

 

[Brother Ducky]

I will discuss for a while, at least.

Re: Point the first...
1: Is God a promoter of Sin? Absolutely Not

I can't think of any Reformed folk who would disagree with this.

How does this refute Reformed Theology?

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

I will discuss for a while, at least.

Re: Point the first...
1: Is God a promoter of Sin? Absolutely Not

I can't think of any Reformed folk who would disagree with this.

How does this refute Reformed Theology?

You have brought us right back to the initial question we left off on.

I'll edit it in.

Predestination, without trying to be to technical is the specific choosing of some by God for Salvation; and the non-choosing of others for salvation.

Choosing and non-choosing... election...

What separates the elect from the reprobated that will perish?