John Calvin's Nazi God.

Status
Not open for further replies.

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
well for heaven's sake.............

well for heaven's sake.............

Unchurching the day after baptism and being baptized twice is a no no

Uh,...who left you with a pointy pontiff hat divvying out dos and donts ? lol :angel:
 

TulipBee

BANNED
Banned
Can a non believer obey?
And what do they need to obey?

Bank robbers obey traffic laws to get to the bank
 

TulipBee

BANNED
Banned
Uh,...who left you with a pointy pontiff hat divvying out dos and donts ? lol :angel:
Violation of Westminster confessions supported by Bible quotes that you and Pate don't believe. Pate believes in men like you do. You believe in sleepy dreamy men

Pate commited a sin against the Holy Spirit. By being re-baptized, he implied by his actions that what the Holy Spirit did in his first baptism was not sufficient. Objectively, that is a sin, because it insults the work of the Holy Spirit. But it is not the same thing as the sin against the Holy Spirit—the sin of "blasphemy against the Spirit"—which involves a final refusal to repent. Pate refused to repent of his lies caught in details posted by AMR. Either way, blasphemy flows out of Pates heart while being decieved by his religous mentor, Brinsmead, a wolf in sheep's clothing.
 
Last edited:

Robert Pate

Well-known member
Banned
Violation of Westminster confessions supported by Bible quotes that you and Pate don't believe. Pate believes in men like you do. You believe in sleeping dreamy men

So, the Westminster confession is your Bible? I thought that it was the Canons of Dort. Why do you need all of those writings of men? This is your problem you would rather hear the words of a heretic than God's word.
 

God's Truth

New member
Its like the question, what came first....the egg or the chicken? :crackup: - both arise together in a sequential series.
The chicken came first.
All allowance, ability, capacity, opportunity is granted by 'God', so of course, its all GRACE (all 'God'),...but our part is in responding to that grace and inter-acting with it. The 'process' then is co-operational, synergistic. While protests for it all being 'monergistic' abide,....so be it ,...but one cannot deny that within divine providence there is a 'synergestic' dynamic happening within it all, where man has some measure of freedom and responsibility in his 'relating' to 'God'. Debate on both sides go on,.....with various proof-texts and doctrinal preferences positioned. But do know,....points of view are subject to change ;)

1 Corinthians 10:21 You cannot drink from the cup of the Lord and from the cup of demons. You cannot eat at the Lord’s table and at the demon’s table. 22 Are we trying to make the Lord jealous? Do we think we are stronger than the Lord?
 

Ask Mr. Religion

☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) &#9
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame

Robert Pate

Well-known member
Banned

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
You are not obeying Jesus when you go to other gods.

Hi GT,

Go back and see our dialogue, - it might help to see I was directly responding to the issue of God's interaction with man (if God draws first or man makes the first gesture Godward, etc.), - the primary debate concerns 'monergism' vs. 'synergism'. You'll notice these terms are linked with their respective article links, for learning more of their meaning. (they are for clicking on ;) ...if your not familiar with the terms).

You're 'statement' above, or should I say 'assumption' is unrelated to the subject at hand.
 

God's Truth

New member
Hi GT,

Go back and see our dialogue, - it might help to see I was directly responding to the issue of God's interaction with man (if God draws first or man makes the first gesture Godward, etc.), - the primary debate concerns 'monergism' vs. 'synergism'. You'll notice these terms are linked with their respective article links, for learning more of their meaning. (they are for clicking on ;) ...if your not familiar with the terms).

You're 'statement' above, or should I say 'assumption' is unrelated to the subject at hand.

As for the topic of the thread, we are talking about gods.

You disobey God when you go to other gods for understanding and knowledge.

Pate's God is worse than a Nazi God because Pate's God condemns those who obey Him to get saved.
 

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
All of Calvin's teaching was right out of the Bible. Sorry, I can't say the same for you.


Lots of 'teachings, doctrines, ideas, concepts' come from "right out of the Bible",...that does not necessarily make them valid, binding, even 'ethical'. - since passages are subject to variant 'translations' and 'interpretations', and are furthermore limited to the cultural-context and belief-systems of the times in which they were written, reflecting the human author DOING the writing, per his given agenda ;)
 

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
As for the topic of the thread, we are talking about gods.

Yes, we've assumed the Calvinist 'god' to be a nazi god of sorts, whose love is selective at best, and whose will includes the eternal suffering, torment or utter destruction of a group of souls, just because he happened to specially pick them to be 'damned', and only elected a small group for his bestowed salvation, wholly unmerited, and utterly non-dependent of their own will and choice. YES, this makes for a maniacal 'god' at best, and the exuse for this 'god' being "he is 'God' so he can do as he pleases!" is ludicrous. One cannot worship a 'god' who goes contrary to conscience.

You disobey God when you go to other gods for understanding and knowledge.

Well, thats a matter of interpretation. There is One 'God',...yet many forms, pathways, tributaries, personifications, images, and names of this One 'God'.

Pate's God is worse than a Nazi God because Pate's God condemns those who obey Him to get saved.

A matter of 'interpretation' again. Any lover of God will naturally strive to 'obey' his God's laws and principled teachings, because they are true, good and lawful. Any transgression of natural or divine law is 'sin', anything missing the mark of love (divine perfection and fullness) is 'sin'. Until we are wholly perfected in love, living by love's perfect law, perfect even as 'God' is perfect,...there will be some taint or imperfection of 'sin' in us. We are striving towards perfection in the divine nature while in these carnal bodies, so 'sanctification' is a 'process', no matter our view of what comes first...."the chicken or the egg?" - to use the metaphor we alluded to earlier.

All is by God's grace. We can respond and co-operate, partnership with God, and choose life or death, blessings or suffering, but some things are 'conditioned' by various factors, but God's will of course is always good, since his nature is LOVE. Until we are perfect in love, there is some 'sin' still existing in some form, some lack, impurity, imperfection existing. - we can therefore OBEY as our will to do so has the lead over all other desires, as the Spirit inspires and empowers that 'obedience'. But 'sin' can still gain the upper hand, depending on what influence you yield to.
 
Last edited:

Robert Pate

Well-known member
Banned
As for the topic of the thread, we are talking about gods.

You disobey God when you go to other gods for understanding and knowledge.

Pate's God is worse than a Nazi God because Pate's God condemns those who obey Him to get saved.

Jesus said that he came into the world to save sinners, I qualify. You don't.
 

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
You teach that freewill is the saviour of sinners !

Recognizing the place of 'free will' in no wise deprives 'God' as being Savior. All is by grace,...included in divine providence....because 'God' is love. That 'love' provides for your freedom to choose his way or your own way.
 

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
Where does the scripture say that man has a freewill?

Sent from my 5054N using TheologyOnline mobile app

Are we seriously still asking? Many have been shared with you already, clearly, plainly SHOWING tha Man has freedom of choice, with GOD (remember him?) declaring and decreeing to heaven and earth as a testimony (as witnesses),...that He places before them life or death, blessings or cursing, and the INSTRUCTS them to CHOOSE life. How biblically inept do you have to be to deny this? Its mind boggling.

Also, every day human experience proves we have freedom of choice within any given situation or event,...that freedom is limited of course within the context of possible choices, but its there nevertheless.
 

TulipBee

BANNED
Banned
Lots of 'teachings, doctrines, ideas, concepts' come from "right out of the Bible",...that does not necessarily make them valid, binding, even 'ethical'. - since passages are subject to variant 'translations' and 'interpretations', and are furthermore limited to the cultural-context and belief-systems of the times in which they were written, reflecting the human author DOING the writing, per his given agenda ;)
Tell pate that about his idols
 

TulipBee

BANNED
Banned
Are we seriously still asking? Many have been shared with you already, clearly, plainly SHOWING tha Man has freedom of choice, with GOD (remember him?) declaring and decreeing to heaven and earth as a testimony (as witnesses),...that He places before them life or death, blessings or cursing, and the INSTRUCTS them to CHOOSE life. How biblically inept do you have to be to deny this? Its mind boggling.

Also, every day human experience proves we have freedom of choice within any given situation or event,...that freedom is limited of course within the context of possible choices, but its there nevertheless.
We wanna hear from the Bible, not urantia
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top