Is Calvinism Wrong?

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

William Tyndale for consideration:

"And again, a good man might err in many things, and not be damned; so that his error were not directly against the promises that are in Christ’s blood, neither that he held them maliciously ... and though all be false, yet should I not be damned, so long as I had no obstinacy therein: for the faith that I have in Christ’s blood should swallow up that error, till I were better taught."

So when Jesus judges between the sheep and the goats at the end of the world (Matthew 25) which doctrinal stances does he use to divide them between the sheep to his right and the goats to his left?

^ “neither that he held them maliciously” is weighty...

 

[Robert Pate]

Of course, your first statement is generally true; and likely on a large scale overall.

But as much as I abhor the hermeneutics of Dispensationalism and other questionable doctrine/s, I do know what they are attempting to convey and I don’t automatically discount them as unbelievers (even if their demeanor of words and actions aren’t very appealing or are downright hypocritical and nearly blasphemous).

And your last statement would be more about the human condition in general, even amongst the redeemed. And I prefer to judge things rather than hearts, since I’ve been commanded to do the former and must leave the latter in the hands of Him who has been given to be the Judge of all mankind... the Son.

God can find no sin in the man that confesses with his mouth the Lord Jesus and believes in his heart that God has raised him from the dead, Romans 10:9-10.

However, there is a Gospel to be believed and embraced as the only means of ones salvation. This is where the trouble begins. There are many on this Forum that profess Christ as their savior, but do not believe the Gospel. When I say Gospel I mean the Gospel that justifies the ungodly, Romans 4:5 and reconciles us and the world unto God, 2 Corinthians 5:18, 19. Are these saved or are they counterfeits? How can one profess Christ as their savior and deny the way that he saved them?

 

[Rosenritter]

Indeed that is one aspect of the prevailing question/s. What is/are the outer boundary/ies or perimeter? Is it an ecumenist or syncretist doctrinal free-for-all with no accountability whatsoever for even Christology?

When the lawyer answered that the whole law was fulfilled with "Love God" and "Love thy neighbor" he countered with the question of "but who is my neighbor?" Jesus gave the more expansive and inclusive answer of even the Samaritan that passed by the way. If the question is still "who is my brother" then I think it is also appropriate that we should consider the more expansive and inclusive answer as well.

John 13:34-35 KJV
(34) A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.
(35) By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.

If the question is shifting to boundaries of doctrine, I would say that we would first need to look to the fruits of the spirit. As it is written, if we have not his spirit we are none of his (Romans 8:9).

1 John 3:23-24 KJV
(23) And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.
(24) And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us.

Matthew 7:15-17 KJV
(15) Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
(16) Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
(17) Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

We are told that the Spirit will guide us into all truth (John 16:13). That does not necessarily mean that everyone who has subjected themselves to that spirit is in perfect truth already. Even Apollos who was said to be "fervent in the spirit" had room to learn the way of God more perfectly (Acts 18:26). In our example here Apollos was not perfect in doctrine, but because he was fervent in the spirit, truth was able to further manifest as the fruit of that spirit (Ephesians 5:9).

James 5:19-20 KJV
(19) Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him;
(20) Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.

1 John 5:16-17 KJV
(16) If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.
(17) All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.

I am not sure that looking for boundaries is the right way to go about this... but where there the Spirit is we find unity in Christ and the law of love. Some doctrines may be trivial (or even foolish) and have no real influence on our faith, but admittedly other doctrines (such as a denial of the resurrection of the dead) may be more damaging even to the overthrowing of our faith.

2 Timothy 2:16-19 KJV
(16) But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.
(17) And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus;
(18) Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.
(19) Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.

So how does Paul address this problem? He names two people who have erred... and he addresses their specific error. Ultimately it is up to God who knows who are his and who are not... and that we who are his should depart from iniquity. That leads us back to James, "if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him... [he] shall save a soul from death."

Ultimately those with the spirit of Christ will love their neighbors, love their brethren, and also love truth that they might be saved (see also 2 Th 2:10). While some doctrines may naturally oppose the spirit of Christ or weaken the faith of Christ. I would count the spirit of Christ (rather than any specific doctrine) as being the defining aspect of those who are brothers in Christ.

 

[Robert Pate]

When the lawyer answered that the whole law was fulfilled with "Love God" and "Love thy neighbor" he countered with the question of "but who is my neighbor?" Jesus gave the more expansive and inclusive answer of even the Samaritan that passed by the way. If the question is still "who is my brother" then I think it is also appropriate that we should consider the more expansive and inclusive answer as well.

John 13:34-35 KJV
(34) A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.
(35) By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.

If the question is shifting to boundaries of doctrine, I would say that we would first need to look to the fruits of the spirit. As it is written, if we have not his spirit we are none of his (Romans 8:9).

1 John 3:23-24 KJV
(23) And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.
(24) And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us.

Matthew 7:15-17 KJV
(15) Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
(16) Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
(17) Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

We are told that the Spirit will guide us into all truth (John 16:13). That does not necessarily mean that everyone who has subjected themselves to that spirit is in perfect truth already. Even Apollos who was said to be "fervent in the spirit" had room to learn the way of God more perfectly (Acts 18:26). In our example here Apollos was not perfect in doctrine, but because he was fervent in the spirit, truth was able to further manifest as the fruit of that spirit (Ephesians 5:9).

James 5:19-20 KJV
(19) Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him;
(20) Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.

1 John 5:16-17 KJV
(16) If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.
(17) All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.

I am not sure that looking for boundaries is the right way to go about this... but where there the Spirit is we find unity in Christ and the law of love. Some doctrines may be trivial (or even foolish) and have no real influence on our faith, but admittedly other doctrines (such as a denial of the resurrection of the dead) may be more damaging even to the overthrowing of our faith.

2 Timothy 2:16-19 KJV
(16) But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.
(17) And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus;
(18) Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.
(19) Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.

So how does Paul address this problem? He names two people who have erred... and he addresses their specific error. Ultimately it is up to God who knows who are his and who are not... and that we who are his should depart from iniquity. That leads us back to James, "if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him... [he] shall save a soul from death."

Ultimately those with the spirit of Christ will love their neighbors, love their brethren, and also love truth that they might be saved (see also 2 Th 2:10). While some doctrines may naturally oppose the spirit of Christ or weaken the faith of Christ. I would count the spirit of Christ (rather than any specific doctrine) as being the defining aspect of those who are brothers in Christ.

Good post. Jesus said, "You shall know them by their fruits" Matthew 7:16.

 

[john w]

It helps to know what the Greek words actually mean, but that gets lost on the KJV-only crowd that demands English is the final authority for whatever reason.

This tells me all I need to know about you, as there is no such thing as "the Greek," i.e., you're a fraud, along with all these other "The G(r)eek" con artists. Teach us "the English." Please.

In contrast to all you "The Greek" only, "Originals-Only" frauds?

 

[Robert Pate]

This tells me all I need to know about you, as there is no such thing as "the Greek," i.e., you're a fraud, along with all these other "The G(r)eek" con artists. Teach us "the English." Please.

In contrast to all you "The Greek" only, "Originals-Only" frauds?

There is no such thing as the Greek?

I have a book "Strong's Concordance of the Bible" it has hundreds of Greek words in it that have been translated into English. You need to go buy one.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

This tells me all I need to know about you, as there is no such thing as "the Greek," i.e., you're a fraud, along with all these other "The G(r)eek" con artists. Teach us "the English." Please.

In contrast to all you "The Greek" only, "Originals-Only" frauds?

If that tells you “all you need to know about me” and you have no idea how important linguistics are, then I would have to rightfully judge you as not having any love for the truth and the Word.

To teach THE (articular) English, one would need to teach THE (articular again, which is quite an important understanding) Greek.

To say that “there is no such thing as the Greek (and I actually said “the Greek words”, because all English words were translated from Greek words) is to demonstrate the greatest ignorance in human history.

Your post should tell anyone all they need to know about you, and to appropriately judge you as not representing the actual authentic Christian faith. There wouldn’t be “muh English” without “the Greek” that you so arrogantly despise as the divinely inspired text.

THIS is why everyone (except your fellow cronies) has no respect for you from all your demented railing.

It’s ignore for you, and long past due. This is ridiculous.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

When the lawyer answered that the whole law was fulfilled with "Love God" and "Love thy neighbor" he countered with the question of "but who is my neighbor?" Jesus gave the more expansive and inclusive answer of even the Samaritan that passed by the way. If the question is still "who is my brother" then I think it is also appropriate that we should consider the more expansive and inclusive answer as well.

John 13:34-35 KJV
(34) A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.
(35) By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.

If the question is shifting to boundaries of doctrine, I would say that we would first need to look to the fruits of the spirit. As it is written, if we have not his spirit we are none of his (Romans 8:9).

1 John 3:23-24 KJV
(23) And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.
(24) And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us.

Matthew 7:15-17 KJV
(15) Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
(16) Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
(17) Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

We are told that the Spirit will guide us into all truth (John 16:13). That does not necessarily mean that everyone who has subjected themselves to that spirit is in perfect truth already. Even Apollos who was said to be "fervent in the spirit" had room to learn the way of God more perfectly (Acts 18:26). In our example here Apollos was not perfect in doctrine, but because he was fervent in the spirit, truth was able to further manifest as the fruit of that spirit (Ephesians 5:9).

James 5:19-20 KJV
(19) Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him;
(20) Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.

1 John 5:16-17 KJV
(16) If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.
(17) All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.

I am not sure that looking for boundaries is the right way to go about this... but where there the Spirit is we find unity in Christ and the law of love. Some doctrines may be trivial (or even foolish) and have no real influence on our faith, but admittedly other doctrines (such as a denial of the resurrection of the dead) may be more damaging even to the overthrowing of our faith.

2 Timothy 2:16-19 KJV
(16) But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.
(17) And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus;
(18) Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.
(19) Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.

So how does Paul address this problem? He names two people who have erred... and he addresses their specific error. Ultimately it is up to God who knows who are his and who are not... and that we who are his should depart from iniquity. That leads us back to James, "if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him... [he] shall save a soul from death."

Ultimately those with the spirit of Christ will love their neighbors, love their brethren, and also love truth that they might be saved (see also 2 Th 2:10). While some doctrines may naturally oppose the spirit of Christ or weaken the faith of Christ. I would count the spirit of Christ (rather than any specific doctrine) as being the defining aspect of those who are brothers in Christ.

If so, then the biggest problem is that so many presume they know the meaning of love (agape), yet virtualy none do. So now we’re back to the same problem in another manner. Everyone loves (phileo) others, but few actually love (agape) others. But now the scope is even narrower than doctrine.

And I think you don’t understand the gravity of what I’ve just said. Love is an ontology before it can even be an economy (action). And to not know what agape is and substitute another form of love is quite literally not to be or show agape.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

There is no such thing as the Greek?

I have a book "Strong's Concordance of the Bible" it has hundreds of Greek words in it that have been translated into English. You need to go buy one.

Exactly. English is a late-emergent derivative language that is not original in any way. There would be no English text of scripture if it were not translated from Greek manuscripts.

One of the reasons so many despise the donor language is the same reason Ellen White inaugurated the KJV-only movement for the Adventist cult. They have pet false doctrines and understandings from misunderstanding English words rendered from Greek words. It’s an epidemic of willful and malicious arrogant ignorance by those who love not the truth and love not the Word, and thus love not God but only themselves and their artificial double standards.

There are many of these on TOL, to their shame and condemnation.

 

[Rosenritter]

If so, then the biggest problem is that so many presume they know the meaning of love (agape), yet virtualy none do. So now we’re back to the same problem in another manner. Everyone loves (phileo) others, but few actually love (agape) others. But now the scope is even narrower than doctrine.

And I think you don’t understand the gravity of what I’ve just said. Love is an ontology before it can even be an economy (action). And to not know what agape is and substitute another form of love is quite literally not to be or show agape.

I think I understand the nature of the problem and the gravity of the situation.

 

[Robert Pate]

Every human being is of infinite value to God because Jesus shed his blood for everyone, Hebrews 2:9. Therefore, everyone should be respected regardless of what they have done or who they are. In this country everyone is innocent until they are proven to be guilty. That is the Spirit of God. We show that we are Christians by how we treat those that are not Christians, Jesus said,

"Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father which is in heaven" Matthew 5:16.