yes
chrysostom
- Thread starter chrysostom
- Start date
theophilus
Well-known member
Not in the flesh and only as I am covered in the blood of Christ Jesus.
So...
...no/yes.
When I fall short I take it to my Father in prayer.
theophilus
Well-known member
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Chrys said, "you HAVE to walk the walk". It's a must, according to him.
If I walk the walk 1% of the time, does that satisfy the demand?
Do Calvinists agree that it would be evil to oppose God?
When a Calvinist tells others that they should do good and not evil, they just might be talking to someone that is not capable of doing anything but evil.
So telling them to be good would be in direct conflict with God's decreed purpose that he remain evil.
To put another way, to tell a reprobate that they should be doing good would make you an opposer of God's decree for them.
If they are doing evil things, it is only because God decreed them to be doing evil things.
So why would you tell them to oppose God's decree for them?
Since God is the one that plants belief in you, then telling others what they should believe would be in opposition of God's decree.
They cannot believe what you tell them, they can only believe what God plants in them.
So no one should be listening to you at all.
Nothing you tell them will matter.
In fact, scripture shouldn't even be believed, beacasue it has no power to convince you one way or the other.
They should just wait till God plants in them whatever He wants them to believe.
Therefore, wickedness is decreed by God to take place.
The wicked are no more responsible for their belief and behavior than the non-wicked.
They can be nothing else.
In fact, don't Calvinists say that God's decree is holy and just, and that His decree of wickedness glorifies Him just as His decree of righteous also glorifies Him?
We can sorta see this concept in that it seemed wicked for man to crucify Christ on the cross, but we actually view it as glorious.
So in this case, wickedness did glorify Him.
I mean, Peter tried to stop the wickedness from happening, but was made to not hinder the wickedness, but to let it happen.
But is that the pattern in which we should perceive all wickedness?
Are we to see all wickedness as glorious and not attempt to hinder any wickedness?
Why would God be grieved of the wickedness he saw if that wickedness glorifies Him?
Why would God be grieved when he saw men being wicked, if it was His decree they be that way?
That would have God grieving over what He Himself decreed in advance to happen!
When a Calvinist tells others that they should do good and not evil, they just might be talking to someone that is not capable of doing anything but evil.
So telling them to be good would be in direct conflict with God's decreed purpose that he remain evil.
To put another way, to tell a reprobate that they should be doing good would make you an opposer of God's decree for them.
If they are doing evil things, it is only because God decreed them to be doing evil things.
So why would you tell them to oppose God's decree for them?
Since God is the one that plants belief in you, then telling others what they should believe would be in opposition of God's decree.
They cannot believe what you tell them, they can only believe what God plants in them.
So no one should be listening to you at all.
Nothing you tell them will matter.
In fact, scripture shouldn't even be believed, beacasue it has no power to convince you one way or the other.
They should just wait till God plants in them whatever He wants them to believe.
Therefore, wickedness is decreed by God to take place.
The wicked are no more responsible for their belief and behavior than the non-wicked.
They can be nothing else.
In fact, don't Calvinists say that God's decree is holy and just, and that His decree of wickedness glorifies Him just as His decree of righteous also glorifies Him?
We can sorta see this concept in that it seemed wicked for man to crucify Christ on the cross, but we actually view it as glorious.
So in this case, wickedness did glorify Him.
I mean, Peter tried to stop the wickedness from happening, but was made to not hinder the wickedness, but to let it happen.
But is that the pattern in which we should perceive all wickedness?
Are we to see all wickedness as glorious and not attempt to hinder any wickedness?
Why would God be grieved of the wickedness he saw if that wickedness glorifies Him?
Why would God be grieved when he saw men being wicked, if it was His decree they be that way?
That would have God grieving over what He Himself decreed in advance to happen!
theophilus
Well-known member
Ask God.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
:e4e:
I'm just making a point.
I don't have a problem with walking the walk.
Even non-Christians behave godly at times.
You cannot attach behavior to the gospel, however. It won't work.
We need more cowbell!I want more, too.
I see it that way too.
If by works, then it no longer grace, but debt.
I have stp on ignore for very good reasons
-he and others have proved that there are stupid questions
-but
-this got me thinking about walking and working and how much is enough
-it really comes down to attitude
-knowing that we are at His mercy
-knowing that we did not do enough
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
So if you do 75%, God will cover the 25% remaining?
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Because you do not like to be challenged.
You would rather write me off as a wacky and a meanie.
theophilus
Well-known member
That's Mormonism.
theophilus
Well-known member
I have trouble at times talking the talk.
"No man can tame the tongue"...and I am a woman.
I may as well eat a live Polar Bear with chopsticks (not the piano diddy).
I'm getting there, though.
theophilus
Well-known member
Thanks, Theo.I'm going to have to think through this before I answer you.
I value you as a long time friend.
And until you started posting here at TOL lately, I never viewed you as a Calvinist.
Go figure!
But I would like to discuss the topic with you, and don't intend to stomp on you about it.
Just discuss, friend to friend, and would like any light you can shed on my questions.
With others, you will have to fend for yourself!!!
heir
TOL Subscriber
None of those reveal "what determines whether one is a Christian, or not?". A couple of those reveal the person is not! And since when does what you DO have anything to do with salvation?
You all's limited perspective of predestination is disappointing. It seems we can never get out of the rudiments in order to delve into anything more complex.
Calvinism sits directly on a notion of Providence, which like Catholicism, there is a authority from within the church itself which God utilizes.
If you tell a person to do good, and they were evil before but become good, then they were predestined, incited by God's Providence to be such.
You really just wasted your time making the other 80% of your post, cascading fiction from more fiction. But I suppose that's all you can do when rejecting the real gospel
Your non-answers are noted.You all's limited perspective of predestination is disappointing. It seems we can never get out of the rudiments in order to delve into anything more complex.
Calvinism sits directly on a notion of Providence, which like Catholicism, there is a authority from within the church itself which God utilizes.
If you tell a person to do good, and they were evil before but become good, then they were predestined, incited by God's Providence to be such.
You really just wasted your time making the other 80% of your post, cascading fiction from more fiction. But I suppose that's all you can do when rejecting the real gospel
According to Calvinism, what you believe is exactly what God made you to believe, and not because you made any decision to agree or disagree.
It is just as likely that God has made you believe a lie, thinking it is truth, so He can be glorified by your false belief..
Exactly. But your premise is based on an idea that people are supposed to believe what they believed in the beginning, which is nonsensical and ridiculous. Calvinism is about the evolution of the person- their end result. What they ultimately become and believe when the rooster crows.
They were either saved or damned from the start according to that.
You should be arrested for attempted theology