Am I a "Cheerleader for Truth," you bet.
unfinished business
- Thread starter heir
- Start date
Nang
TOL Subscriber
Your, "truth of God" would be Calvinism.
Your "understanding of truth" comes from John "The Pope of Geneva" Calvin.
Calvinists only have one opinion: "Whatever John Calvin said was true."
musterion
Well-known member
That is exactly where Reformed theology, for all it's fetishizing of pettifogging hairsplitting, fails you. The issue here is not so much WHAT God intended to do, but WHEN and HOW He intended to do it.
God had never promised to save pagan dog Gentiles by any means OTHER than coming to Him through Israel, the only chosen nation. This prioritizing of peoples was very much in place with the Gospel of the Kingdom preached in the Gospels and Acts, as demonstrated by the example of Cornelius.
TODAY, with the previously unrevealed Gospel of the grace of God, all of that is temporarily suspended. Any and all may freely come to Christ and be forgiven and justified on the sole condition of faith, completely apart from (indeed, in spite of) Israel which today is set aside in stumbled blindness of unbelief just as all other nations had been at Babel.
You'll refuse all this, of course. You need not reply saying so. We already know.
The Grace Gospel is the ONLY Gospel for today. The Calvinist gospel is a false gospel. (Another gospel)
Nang
TOL Subscriber
Sorry, but all I see in your theory, is very poor Christology . . In that you make attempt to divide the hypostatic union of natures that abide in Christ Jesus forever.
His flesh and divine natures were perfectly united in order to work the salvation of His brethren. Hebrews 2:14-18
Amen Must.
By the way Nang, Hebrews was written/pertaining to the "Hebrews."
musterion
Well-known member
For those who see this exchange:
Note that the above canned reply does not address what I said. It is a reply either from an unsound mind incapable of simple comprehension, or is that of a deliberate troll. I'll stop wasting my time because I don't care which one is the case. But one of them is the case.
John Calvin and his ilk sure pulled a "fast one" on the purity of the Gospel of Grace.
musterion
Well-known member
Calvin did not believe it, I'm convinced. His own testimony (such as it is, it is very brief) bears no indication that he heard and believed the saving Gospel of the grace of God.
She, like many other Calvinists, have suffered through years of "Reformed Theology" and have been thoroughly brainwashed to the very core of their mind.
Nang
TOL Subscriber
There is no separating what God intended to do, from when and how He accomplished His will. All was ordained. One package of perfect achievement!
From the nation of Israel, the Elect Israel of God was brought into this world to save sinners.
Your refusal to acknowledge Jesus Christ as the true, spiritual "Israel" messes up your entire belief system.
Someone once said: "You can take Calvin out of the Catholic church, but, you can't take the Catholic church out of Calvin."
"Calvinist Speak."
Nang
TOL Subscriber
For your own sake, you really should consider the Theological danger of suggesting different purposes supposedly decreed for The Son of Man and the Son of God.
Such is very unsound and unorthodox Christology . . .
Nang
TOL Subscriber
You really should stop commenting, for you do not know what you are talking about.
It's very "UnPresbyterian, huh"