Spammers wasteland

[Gurucam]

Christ did use parables to hide truth from those who'd already rejected His Word -- not to reveal truth as is commonly believed. So what is your point here?

Jesus did use parable but not for the reason that you stated.

Matthews: 13 KJV N.T
10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?
11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.

The above clearly confirm that parables were given, as follows:

1. Parables were given to people who are not given by God to know the mysteries of God's kingdom of heaven.

It is clearly confirmed that the disciples were the only ones chosen by God. And only they were given by God to know/get the mysteries of God's kingdom of heaven.

Therefore, Jesus is not going to defy God and give others the truth/the mystery of God's kingdom of heaven 'hidden' in parables.

Parables are for 'the dead', who Jesus and God want totally out of here. Parables are for 'the dead to bury their dead'.

There is a clear and intended division between Abraham generations:

Galatians: 4 KJV N.T.
22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.
30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

2. parables were given to those people so that the little that they have will be taken from them.

Based on the above only foolish people will rush in and use parables which fill up most of the KJV N.T..

Jesus confirmed that only the Spirit of Truth brings All Truth.

John: 16 King James Version (KJV)
12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

Another warning was issued:

2 Corinthians: 3
6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter (the parable filled scriptures), but of the spirit: for the letter (the parable filled scriptures) killeth, but the spirit giveth life

Some people are not given to see the sameness of the above KJV N.T. revelations. And there are many other KJV N.T. revelations that totally and literally support the above.

Where did you get the ideas that "Christ did use parables to hide truth". This suggest that truth are hidden in parables. There are no truth in parables, hidden or other wise. The intent of parables was not to hide truth in them. The intent of parables was and is, for 'the dead' to grab on to them (parables) and use it on their fellow dead and so bury their fellow dead counterparts.

By giving parable Jesus intended to deliberately fool these people and take away the little that these people had. Jesus know that the dead will use parables and so bury their own spiritually dead kind. (this is confirmed very clearly in the KJV N.T.)

By distorting the literal word in the KJV N.T. you mislead those seeking correct guidance. This is why a billion strong Christians are seek truth in parables. And they are misled and they are not chosen.

The mysteries of God's kingdom of heaven is not hidden in scriptures. The purpose of parables is for the dead to bury their dead. This is one of Jesus' agenda (i.e. to 'let the dead bury their dead').

Jesus confirmed that All Truth comes only from the Spirit of Truth through a direct connection between this Spirit and one's own heart or spirit.

Jesus had two agendas:

Matthew: 8 King James Version (KJV)
22 But Jesus said unto him, 1. Follow me; and 2. let the dead bury their dead.

Those who follow Jesus were only the disciples. Only they were give to Jesus by God. And only they were given by God to know the mysteries of God's kingdom of heaven. Jesus would not defy God and hide truth in parables. (You must know that many wanted to follow Jesus, like the disciples and they were all turned away)

Parables are devoid of truth. Parables are for 'the dead to bury their dead'. Jesus had and executed his two agendas and missions.

This is the the division of the world which Jesus and God intended and executed. This division started 2000 odd years ago. The final division will also conform to this division.

1. A billion strong traditional Christians falsely believe that they are following Jesus. These billion people esteem, used promoted and invoked the ten commandments (the law of sin and death) during their life on earth. They are Old people. They are not New people in Christ.

These are the ones who soweth to the flesh. They are all under the law of sin and death. They all sin and died spiritually and they reap the fruits of sin and death: When they physically died they are all delivered (together with their physical bodies) to hell inside the earth, with Satan. They are the dead who bury their dead.

2. On the other hand a chosen few transgress the ten commandments to as to serve in the newness of spirit. They soweth to Spirit. When they die their spirit bodies are separated from their dead physical bodies. Then only their dead physical bodies are buried in the earth.

They remain in their spirit bodies and rise in three days in their spirit bodies, like Jesus Christ, to be like angels in heaven.

Galatians: 6 King James Version (KJV)
7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
8 For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.

Some false prophet 'pull the wool over your eyes' and have you in corruption.

 

[musterion]

Do you have a smart tv where you can watch the youtube on the big screen?

Nope. Big 12 year old Gaia murdering, energy sucking tube, still works.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Nope. Big 12 year old Gaia murdering, energy sucking tube, still works.

Do you use Rabbit Ears? I'm kind of an antenna/satellite enthusiast...or used to be.

 

[Right Divider]

I have been on TOL since 2010. During that time Nang has often had pictures of herself in her profile. She is an older lady.

How did you verify that those pictures were actually her? Just curios.

 

[musterion]

Do you use Rabbit Ears? I'm kind of an antenna/satellite enthusiast...or used to be.

Nope. Its just a slave to the DVD player.

 

[Sherman]

How did you verify that those pictures were actually her? Just curios.

How would a member have different pictures of the same woman over a period of time? I think we are getting far afield here.

 

[Nihilo]

First and foremost, we differ primarily with the RCC because Reformers hold to the Truth that sinners are justified by faith, alone.

Before exploring what the Church actually teaches on the matter, I thought this too, but I haven't found that taught in the Catechism, which is internally claiming to be the entirety of the Catholic faith. What I have found is that for those Christians not in full communion with the Holy See (non-Catholics, and Catholics who disagree with what the Holy See teaches), that faith alone does justify. It cannot be therefore, that those in full communion are justified in some other manner, and I haven't seen where the Church teaches such.

The RCC system of thought, as your document verifies, is a synergistic system, that declares soteriology contingent upon human co-operation (“good works”).

If you mean by this that soteriology depends upon Catholics not committing mortal sins, then I agree with you. But the Church goes to very great lengths to explain precisely what it means to be in a state of mortal sin, and it's very difficult to do this.

You are taught that God’s grace does not monergistically save, but only enables and helps the sinner lead a holy life, so that he might be declared saved on the last day. Obedience to God synergistically achieves ultimate salvation, rather than being the result of saving Grace that changes the heart and mind of the sinner upon regeneration.

Actually, the Church teaches that in baptism, the heart and mind are changed. Baptism is the new creation.

The recent discussion we have had on this thread, reveals the lengths to which some will take a supposed synergism, which they believe necessary for salvation, to apply even to non-contingent God, robbing Him of His Simplicity, Immutability, Omniscience, etc.

In this regard, Arminians are more like the RCC than Calvinists. Arminians are Synergists, where Calvinists are Monergists. Thus the ongoing conflict between these two Protestant camps.

Monergism, which is a Protestant word, is fully expressed through the Church's teaching on divine Providence.

I will go through the Magistrate declarations, and point out our differences.

This paragraph is agreeable.

I thought you might like that one.

That is because God is not contingent upon secondary causes.

Of course, since He is contingent upon nothing. Aseity.

The secondary agency (will) given to man is accountable to submit to God’s primary causes; particularly through moral obedience to His commands.

Is this another way of saying that we should obey God? If so, in what way does this relate to your thought that salvation is monergistic? Or, are you separating faith from doing good, where faith is a gift, and doing good is through our own effort? Calvin I know explained that there is a "civil obedience," which does not require faith.

(Decalogue) However, God is not subject, nor accountable, to the same Laws of Creation, for He is Creator. His commands (Word) is mankinds’ final authority.

And when His Word says that His Church is given the keys to the kingdom, and the power to bind and to loose, and to remit sins, why don't you believe that this applies to His entire Church, but only to local ecclesial communities and assemblies?

God’s people are gifted with faith. Faith is knowledge of God’s will, intents, purposes, and promises. Belief is the acting out and manifesting saving faith, but sinners are justified by faith alone, apart from any works of belief. Trust, is resting in this Truth.

Justification comes by faith, alone and so does Sanctification. Works do not factor in at all, other than manifesting the fruits of the Indwelling Holy Spirit in the lives of the regenerate.

And how is this distinct from saying that if you do not do good, that you are not saved?

There is no synergy in any of this. Calvinism is a Monergistic view in all regards.

This does not rule out obedience, the duties of living according to the moral Law, but rather establishes and validates both. Romans 3:31

How does it not rule out obedience, if Calvinistic monergism is true? If we only have faith monergistically, and we only do good monergistically, then it follows that if we do not have faith and we do not do good that this also is due to monergism, correct?

Disagree. God does not need His creatures co-operation. This is Synergism.

But the text did not say that He "needs," but that He "makes use of his creatures' co-operation."

It is mans’ duty to submit his will and actions to the sovereign will of God.

And how does this duty integrate together with the notion that monergism is the cause of doing good? Or am I misunderstanding you?

God’s purpose in bestowing saving grace upon His people, is to bring them into harmony with His will.

I agree. I believe that it is summed up nicely in the petition, "Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven."

This was exemplified throughout the life of Jesus Christ. He without fail, did the will of the Father and not his own. Jesus Christ did not co-operate with God; He obeyed all the holy and moral Law. This is how mankind was created to live with God. In willful submission to God’s commands and holy standards.

Just to clarify, when you say "willful submission," you mean that God monergistically grants the elect this, and it is not due to any effort on our part?

IOW’s man was not created to be God’s buddy; nor was man created to elevate himself through holy works to God’s equal.

Agreed, of course.

This is not providence; this is Law. These duties came in the form of command/promise. This was the basis of the first Covenant of Creation (Works) which Adam breached in his disobedience.

We are no longer to subdue the earth and have dominion over it? I don't see where this was abrogated.

Creation was complete before the fall. Justification through faith will result in spiritual good for the believer and goodness shown to one’s fellow man. But it is an effect of faith; not a cause of faith or a synergistic work of any kind.

Though often unconscious collaborators with God's will, they can also enter deliberately into the divine plan by their actions, their prayers and their sufferings. They then fully become "God's fellow workers" and co-workers for his kingdom.

I object to the words, “collaborators, fellow-workers, and co-workers, all together . . for all the reasons already stated above. Christians are God’s subjects; enabled to serve His righteousness through the power of His Holy Spirit, alone.

See, this portion of the text in particular is what caught my eye as a former monergist myself. Here, the Church explains that everybody is always doing the "hidden" will of God, but when we violate His revealed will, we are only "unconsciously" doing so, and when we do good, then we experience true freedom.

I personally rather like this treatment of the subject, as it answers a lot of questions about both sovereignty and providence, and about human freedom and volition, and how they fit together seamlessly and cogently.

This is a monergistic statement that I can mostly agree with. However, the bolded is not biblical and a little too dramatic I believe, for it opens the door to the possibility of justification (forgiveness) being lost through lack of works, trust, obedience, rituals, etc. none of which God is dependent upon.

All right.

The saints will persevere to the end because God has promised to preserve them to the end. It is by this total reliance and rest in God, by faith, that the saints endure all things. To God alone be the glory!

We actually agree here.

 

[Right Divider]

How would a member have different pictures of the same woman over a period of time?

I could post pictures of Phyllis Diller over time and claim that it was me. I'm just saying that this does not verify anything.... that's all.

I think we are getting far afield here.

Ok

 

[Nick M]

God never rejected the reprobate according to His foreknowledge of their actions. God rejects reprobates according to His will. God formed all men, either for dishonor or honor, according to His willful purposes and good pleasure. To reject this truth is disbelief and a rejection of Sovereign God Himself.

It is those not written in the Lamb's Book of Life that are reprobate and who will deservedly suffer hellfire

Well, I believe God Almighty is running the universe, down to every detail, according to His predetermined will and good pleasure.
Do you disagree?

Any sinner who lives his life wrongly and does not repent of his sins, will be held responsible and judged for breaking God's laws and are reprobates justly consigned to death and hell. Sinners only receive what they have earned. Men reap what they sow.......A sinner who does not repent of his failings, wrong practices, and foul behavior proves to not belong to God, but manifests he is reprobate and remains dead in his sins."

Does this help?

Good question. Does this help? Nang is not a member of the Body of Christ. She reject the gospel and says the most heinous things. I have never said anything wicked like this, even when outside of Christ. John W has never said anything wicked like this. But he rebukes her sharply, and rightly so.

This is pathetic.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

It looks as if PPS and Nang have abandoned this thread? Their presence here was truly awe-inspiring and created an atmosphere of creativity. I wish them well on their journey to other threads. Threads in which they can share their false doctrines without a barrage of malcontents on their heels, ever ready to pounce on them with sheer delight. May they go their way unmolested by truth, logic and reason. Hopefully, they'll be fortunate enough to find pockets of naivete they can wholly inspire and direct into paths of uncertainty and faithlessness. There have always been poor souls seeking to follow one who has no answers yet, can provide them with fanciful words and phrases that emit elements of emotional instability and enablement.

So, I wish them nothing but the best in their journey forward, a journey that, at times leads to nowhere. Perhaps Nang will cross paths with a supposed Elect and guide them to the crossroads of knowledge that leads them, at best, to a disillusioned dead end. Although they say, "Hope Springs Eternal" hope that is less than hope leads to despair and emptiness. A heart that lacks hope is like a mind without a vision and a sky without the light of day. So, lead on Nang with PPS in tow. Your mission, whatever it be, lies elsewhere. Your triumphs may become losses and your hopes become desolate, however, may you continue to grasp what little hope that lies dormant in your palm.

 

[Eagles Wings]

.....K:........:dog:........:spam:........:deadhorse:........:wave:.....

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

.....K:........:dog:........:spam:........:deadhorse:........:wave:.....

Are you not a member of the Catholic Church? That's what I've been lead to believe.

 

[Nang]

Good question. Does this help? Nang is not a member of the Body of Christ. She reject the gospel and says the most heinous things. I have never said anything wicked like this, even when outside of Christ. John W has never said anything wicked like this. But he rebukes her sharply, and rightly so.

This is pathetic.

What in my definition of a reprobate soul, is so wicked?

Do you comprehend what reprobate means?

Or do you deny that many sinners are reprobate and simply deny the doctrine of reprobation altogether?

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

What in my definition of a reprobate soul, is so wicked?

Do you comprehend what reprobate means?

Or do you deny that many sinners are reprobate and simply deny the doctrine of reprobation altogether?

Relax!

 

[Nang]

Before exploring what the Church actually teaches on the matter, I thought this too, but I haven't found that taught in the Catechism, which is internally claiming to be the entirety of the Catholic faith. What I have found is that for those Christians not in full communion with the Holy See (non-Catholics, and Catholics who disagree with what the Holy See teaches), that faith alone does justify. It cannot be therefore, that those in full communion are justified in some other manner, and I haven't seen where the Church teaches such.

This is accurate, the RCC does not proclaim justification by faith alone, and thus the Reformers were led to spell out the doctrine with great clarity.

They saw the praxis of the RCC in denial of this truth, and made a revolutionary issue of the matter.

If you mean by this that soteriology depends upon Catholics not committing mortal sins, then I agree with you.

No, I meant the RCC view that one is not saved during one's lifetime, for supposedly it is not enough to trust in faith alone to be pardoned from all guilt of sin . . a lifetime of good works (religious observances practiced) must be added to belief in Jesus Christ, in order to find assurance of salvation on the deathbed.

Is this another way of saying that we should obey God? If so, in what way does this relate to your thought that salvation is monergistic?

It is every person's duty to obey God, but only God can change a sinner and empower a sinner to do so. Then, that regenerated soul WILLINGLY obeys God, because he WANTS to obey God and live a holy life. No "shoulds" or "musts" but volitional joy to live in submission to the sovereign will of God.

Or, are you separating faith from doing good, where faith is a gift, and doing good is through our own effort?

The point I most want to make, is that salvation comes by the grace of God, through the gift of faith alone, and no necessary works or good deeds are required or should be added to that faith.

And when His Word says that His Church is given the keys to the kingdom, and the power to bind and to loose, and to remit sins, why don't you believe that this applies to His entire Church, but only to local ecclesial communities and assemblies?

I believe the "keys of the kingdom" is the Gospel message; which every regenerate soul is commissioned to proclaim. The Gospel works as a two-edged Sword of the Spirit, blessing those Elect God is drawing to Himself, and condemning those who do not believe.
John 3:14-21

If we only have faith monergistically, and we only do good monergistically, then it follows that if we do not have faith and we do not do good that this also is due to monergism, correct?

Correct.

But the text did not say that He "needs," but that He "makes use of his creatures' co-operation."

I simply deny co-operation in principle. Those regenerate who manifest faith through good deeds, do so through the power of the Holy Spirit. They are "used" as instruments of Sovereign God . . and they respond as instruments willingly and with great joy.

I believe that it is summed up nicely in the petition, "Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven."

Amen!

Just to clarify, when you say "willful submission," you mean that God monergistically grants the elect this, and it is not due to any effort on our part?

The Christian faith is an active faith; it is not passive. However, God's work of sanctification (holy works) in the Christian, is irresistible, for they are the product of His grace.

We are no longer to subdue the earth and have dominion over it? I don't see where this was abrogated.

Agreed. And we are more than conquerors, in Jesus Christ. Romans 8:37

this portion of the text in particular is what caught my eye as a former monergist myself. Here, the Church explains that everybody is always doing the "hidden" will of God, but when we violate His revealed will, we are only "unconsciously" doing so, and when we do good, then we experience true freedom.

You will have to explain more of this teaching to me, for it is new to me.

Also, please forgive me for doing some snipping with this response, but it is meant for brevity, only.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Both the Catholics and the Calvinists have it ALL wrong! Neither one of them is of the TRUTH.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

AMR shares the SAME beliefs as Nang.

I would not go this far. We are aligned on the majority of Reformed doctrine, but will disagree on matters related to infra vs. supra lapsarianism. Although I posted previously above some links from the Open Theism Archive related to the topic that may imply all supralapsarians are Hyper-Calvinists, that would be too much of a generalization. Not all supralapsarians are heretical Hyper-Calvinists.

Unfortunately, I cannot edit those old posts to make the distinctions more clear, but I did explain true Hyper-Calvinism of the likes of b57 and Nanja here. Nang is definitely not a Hyper-Calvinist.

3) Nang is a staunch "Calvinist." She believes that God CHOSE before the foundation of the world who would become a member of the "Elect" and the rest would be condemned to eternal damnation.

The lump of clay in God's hands was a fallen lump, hence God owed none mercy, only justice. That He chose to save some out of a fallen mass of humanity, the elect, is a testimony to His glory and mercy. Of course, persons denying that all are fallen in the sin of Adam from birth, would lead to your characterization. We Reformed view all unregenerate as sinners who sin. The rest view all unregenerate as sinners because they sin. There is a world of difference in these two views. The former affirms the doctrine of the original sin of Adam. The latter denies it.

She also believes that one MUST be "regenerated" before receiving "saving faith." That, in and of itself, is putting the proverbial "Horse before the Cart."

No, this is the teaching of Scripture, for all are sinners in Adam just as if we were there when he sinned in the Garden. Again, getting the doctrine of original sin as taught in Scripture wrong leads to the view that the unbeliever possesses some seed of grace that gives he or she the moral ability to do good in the eyes of God such that he or she can choose wisely, making God a debtor. This is Roman Catholicism revamped for Arminianism. Scripture is clear that the unregenerate possess no moral ability to choose wisely, until regenerated (Eze. 36:26), at which point they can only but choose wisely.

She doesn't appear to be a "Hyper-Calvinist" like B57 or Nanja. Those folks are the RADICAL form of Calvinism.

Agreed.

A perfect description of the free-will ...

A perfect description of free will, which all Reformed affirm, is the ability to choose according to one's greatest inclinations at the moment one so chooses. The Reformed affirm that the very fact of this liberty of spontaneity exists because God established it.

From this it follows that those that are not believers can only choose to sin more or sin less. The unbeliever possesses no moral ability to not sin, for they sin with every word, thought, or deed, as even their moral acts of "good", such as giving to the poor, are performed with the wrong motives. These acts are never performed for the glory of God, for the unbeliever hates God with every breath they take. Until the believer can come to grips with this fact, they will continue with their lachrymose pleadings to others to "make a decision for Jesus" as if those in enmity with God possessed the moral ability to do so before God acts to radically change their fallen state (Eze. 36:26) via what is known as regeneration.

In summary, you can continue to post "Calvinists believe this or that" but when your content is examined, it will usually be found wanting of deeper understanding of exactly what the Reformed actually believe.

Why not take the time to actually study the teachings of the Reformation before swallowing the camel offered up on discussion sites? Here is a freely available resource for your study and edification:

https://www.biblicaltraining.org/search/node/berkhof

When you can sincerly interact with such materials, perhaps then those that you cavil against will sit up and take notice. We are always willing to discuss substantively matters that which we hold dear.

AMR

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

I would not go this far. We are aligned on the majority of Reformed doctrine, but will disagree on matters related to infra vs. supra lapsarianism. Although I posted previously above some links from the Open Theism Archive related to the topic that may imply all supralapsarians are Hyper-Calvinists, that would be too much of a generalization. Not all supralapsarians are heretical Hyper-Calvinists.

Unfortunately, I cannot edit those old posts to make the distinctions more clear, but I did explain true Hyper-Calvinism of the likes of b57 and Nanja here. Nang is definitely not a Hyper-Calvinist.

AMR

The only Hyper-Calvinists aboard TOL are B57 and Nanja. This, I was already aware of.

 

[musterion]

Any sinner who lives his life wrongly and does not repent of his sins, will be held responsible and judged for breaking God's laws and are reprobates justly consigned to death and hell.

What Nang said there is exactly what God's Truth says, just worded a little less bluntly.

 

[Nang]

What Nang said there is exactly what God's Truth says, just worded a little less bluntly.

What was the context of my quoted words? Do you remember that vital factor, Musty?

What are the wages of unrepentant sin, Musty?

What is the definition of reprobation, Musty?

And if you are going to compare my beliefs to GT, you had better prepare explanatory proofs, rather than just mouthing off.