God's Truth
New member
What a joke. I believe we have to believe and obey to be saved, and that is the complete opposite of Calvinism.
What is happening to you? You are getting worse.
Proof that Paul didn't preach a different gospel than Peter
- Thread starter tetelestai
- Start date
What a joke. I believe we have to believe and obey to be saved, and that is the complete opposite of Calvinism.
What is happening to you? You are getting worse.
How would you know if it is the complete opposite of Calvinism?
God's Truth
New member
You surely are lost and confused.
Your problem is that you were responded to by us but you unfortunately concluded this meant you know what you are talking about. And the more we responded from your error; the more you became married to your error.
Sort of like how Pharaoh's heart actually became hardened by God.
You often assert that God, or Jesus, or the Spirit chose you. This too, is the error of Calvinism of verses misinterpreted.
But you can't help it; you're clueless about how to study.
What you can help - and this is your condemnation - is your refusal.
Here - a primer on the two gospels - take your time...
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=110769
God's Truth
New member
Calvinists believe that God chose people before the creation of the world, and that they cannot obey or believe until they are saved.
That is a world of difference from God's Truth.
Jesus says he saves those who obey. See John 14:23, and Acts 5:32.
You have misunderstood their error - that is not what they assert - they assert that He calls an elect He long ago chose - and - that He - then - gives them the faith to believe - and - the ability - to obey.
You're both off.
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
Here is what Paul wrote:
"According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love" (Eph.1:4).
And here is how we are chosen:
"But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth" (2 Thess.2:13).
In the Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary we see that the words "from the beginning" refers to "before the foundation of the world":
"from the beginning--"before the foundation of the world" (Eph 1:4; compare 1Co 2:7; 2Ti 1:9); in contrast to those that shall "worship the beast, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" (Re 13:8)" [emphasis added] (Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary, Commentary at 2 Thess. 2:13).
You'll need God to be saved. Regeneration precedes faith. You have it backwards and have no proofs. The only option you have is to save yourself and pretend God is watching you obey and refrain from pork and wordhip on the 7th day without burning fire meaning no sparks in your car on Saturday. No heat on that day in the winter
Shasta
Well-known member
I for one am not interested in inventing any new theology or in contributing to the genesis of yet another denomination. It is enough for me to understand the faith once and for all delivered to the saints.
As far as this mysterious post that answers the OP - it is entirely possible I missed it. It's also possible that you have assumed an argument that will convince a true believer in MAD will convince anyone else.
I will not say that a person's doctrine is wrong because they got it from a certain source. To do that would be to commit the genetic fallacy. I was merely saying it is highly unlikely that you came up with a doctrinal system of this complexity whole cloth just from reading the scriptures. If it were that easy to see others throughout history would have seen it. As you said you have a computer that gives you access to a whole library of opinions. Ideas originate from somewhere even if we do not know from where.
As for the genealogy of MAD, it goes back no further than the 1800s.
The only ones before that who believed in a Paul-only gospel and canon of scriptures were heretical groups like the Paulicans of 7th and 10th centuries and the Marcionites of the Second Century. Given your apparent disdain for history this is probably of no interest to you.
If so then it will be equally irrelevant that Christian writers in First and Second Century seemed to have no knowledge whatsoever of a "Jewish Gospel." They quoted all the books of the NT as if they were all equally inspired.
BTW I have no idea what John Darby wrote or believed
Shasta
Well-known member
In what ways were their gospels different, in your opinion?
Due to Paul's reaction (and we only know his letters in response to his conflict with Peter and James) it must have been a serious breach.
The main problem in studying Paul's authentic letters is that we can only listen in on one side of the conversation.
Ostensibly it had to do with disputes over the table fellowship and the inclusion of what Paul calls "the nations" (the Gentiles).
It must have been interesting to be a fly on the wall when Paul "challenged Peter to his face."
I'll tackle it from this passage, as all Paul's passages on this are the same in this - Ephesians 1:
4. According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
5. Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
6. To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.
What Paul is asserting in all these passages is that; before the foundation of the world, God determined that He would choose those in His Son - who trust His Son - to be holy and without blame before God in love; in His Son where in He have made us accepted in the Beloved - in His Son.
This issue of being holy and without blame before Him in His Son - is the issue of our adoption as Sons - from children of God to Sons of God; where a child is recognized as an heir; with all its rights and privileges.
Its God's good pleasure that those who believe on His Son be placed into living union with His Son; accepted in Him; in the beloved, to the praise of the gory of His grace in us in His Son.
To the glory of this grace in us in His Son as it is witnessed in action by those principalities and powers in heavenly places that Ephesians 3 relates, are learning about this grace as it plays out in us.
As we "walk in" same, holy, or, "not conformed unto this world, but transformed by the renewing of our mind" by this information about all this, this information that is "according to the image of Him that created" this New Man we have been made a part of.
All this predestinated issue is God determined in eternity to do in His Son; in whom we have been accepted:
12. That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.
13. In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
14. Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.
Heard the gospel of your salvation, trusted, or believed, were sealed in Christ with that Holy Spirit of Promise, which is the earnest of our inheritance, until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.
Paul's attitude is not the same as rest of Jesus' followers at that time.
He seems to give good example of nowadays Christians to imitate him.
Just take a look at this site.
But you cannot blame them. After all, Paul says to imitate him.
Spam, and satanic, as there is more than just one piece of good news, in the book, and Judas did not preach the good news of 1 Cor. 15:1-4 KJV, nor did the 12, at least prior to the dbr, as you claim, on record, and you cannot produce one verse, that shows that he/they did. Your father the devil taught you that-not the bible.
musterion
Well-known member
This is why you are essentially no different from Meshak, who is just a troll. You make appeals to the authority of the Bible while denying the veracity of chunks of it. Insanity.
musterion
Well-known member
Originally Posted by God's Truth
Calvinists believe that God chose people before the creation of the world, and that they cannot obey or believe until they aresavedregenerated.
You have misunderstood their error - that is not what they assert - they assert that He calls an elect He long ago chose - and - that He - then - gives them the faith to believe - and - the ability - to obey.
If she meant what I substituted above, then she's actually correct. You both are.
So what? Does the fact that the sacred name of the LORD God, for eg., only goes back no further, to when it was revealed to Moses, His servant, mean that it was not His sacred name, prior to that? So, you, like others, assert that when you discover truth, determines if it is, in fact objective truth? So, the Lord Jesus Christ was not Lord, God, until you discovered it? Save it-rhetorical questions.
Listen up, rummy:When you determine objective truth, when you "discover" it, in no way determines if it is, in fact, objective truth. The truth goes on eternally, regardless of when you "found out about it," or, for that matter, when you believed it. Discover of/belief in the truth, in no way determines it's veracity.
Now, please have a seat, while I teach. Understood? Great!
Let me guess your "response::" The earth was flat at one time, you see, well, uh, urr, you see....Let me check my commentaries...
You are worshiping Christ and ignoring Jesus. You appear to be involved in a "belief-based" faith, a religion that only requires you to accept ancient first-century theological phrases like "Jesus was born of a virgin," "Son of God," "Messiah," or "died for our sins."
As such, you do not feel called upon to suffer the slightest urge to change your own behavior toward what Jesus preached.
You feel out of it within an "action-based" faith that demands we establish a personal relationship with Jesus.
History does inform faith. The religious, economic, social, political and cultural history of ancient times is the bedrock of evidence, facts and honest data on which we build our beliefs, faith notions, opinions and interpretations.
Your disdain for this important difference is obviously confusing for you. You are mixing up both the facts and the faith that can be found within the pages of the Holy Bible.
The more difficult (and the more historical) sayings of Jesus fail to even register for you. Whenever I bring them up there is always someone who leaps upon me and accuses me of being a heretic.
Hey, guy, that ol' global culture still keeps on a-comin' at ya. You are truly outnumbered. I think this fact is what makes you defensive and fearful of historical methodology. And fearful of Jesus and his unique "voice print."