Spammers wasteland

[Grosnick Marowbe]

With a certain degree of certainty, I would endeavor to speculate, Nang and her ilk only read Reformed commentaries and other written works of that nature.

 

[Nang]

The Holy Spirit and God's written word is enough. Why mix perfection with imperfection?

Martin Luther was indwelt by the Holy Spirit. Are you saying you cannot learn from a spirit-filled Christian?

Or just that you do not want to learn all you can of the Lord God?

 

[Nang]

With a certain degree of certainty, I would endeavor to speculate, Nang and her ilk only read Reformed commentaries and other written works of that nature.

Ha!

You would be speculating quite wrongly.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

This explains why you constantly misinterpret others and accuse people wrongly about their beliefs.

You do not read all you should read . . .

That is something you should fix. Quick.

I didn't say I don't read the entirety of all posters comments. Just the ones that hold no interest for me. Yours for instance.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

What happens if you don't?

Likely the same thing that happens whenever the believer fails to do his duty. There will be rewards in heaven according to our actions. That said, all our cups will be full there, only that some cups will be larger than others'. So run the good race and be obedient, just as Paul admonishes the faithful.

AMR

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

You're wrong. Hyper-Calvinists believe God IS the author of ALL including sin. Ask B57 or Nanja?

So? Using the genetic fallacy is not an argument for we can all point to this or that wing-nut in the Reformed or non-Reformed camps.

AMR

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Ha!

You would be speculating quite wrongly.

Well, perhaps you pick up a "National Enquirer" now and then, which is your right. I've been known to do that myself.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

So? Using the genetic fallacy is not an argument for we can all point to this or that wing-nut in the Reformed or non-Reformed camps.

AMR

I notice just a hint of animosity in your post.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

And yet, according to my understanding of your doctrine, God chose saved and damned BEFORE any of the these people could have any chance to make these decisions.

BTW, thanks for the neg rep. Your doctrine is FULL of contradictions!

Your understanding is incorrect. Your view here is the view of the hyper-Calvinist (b57, Nanja), a denounced heresy among orthodox Reformed. The lump of clay being contemplated in God's hands was an already fallen lump out of which God chose to save an amount no man can number for His own purposes and without any consideration of the personal merit of those so chosen.

AMR

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Likely the same thing that happens whenever the believer fails to do his duty. There will be rewards in heaven according to our actions. That said, all our cups will be full there, only that some cups will be larger than others'. So run the good race and be obedient, just as Paul admonishes the faithful.

AMR

Are you quite confident that you're a "Shoe-in" for many rewards?

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

I was only going by what Nang said. Your problem isn't with me it's with what she said.

No. You have not understood what Nang said. I explained it (see previous link) and noted your confusion.

AMR

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Martin Luther was indwelt by the Holy Spirit. Are you saying you cannot learn from a spirit-filled Christian?

Or just that you do not want to learn all you can of the Lord God?

Are you making assumptions about my learning desires?

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

I'm sorry, I find your posts far too lenghthy and complicated. I haven't the patience for reading such fine writings. That's on me. I take full responsibility for that. So, I didn't read the entirety of your post. However, I did read Nang's post and it said what it said. You or nobody else can get around it or rationalize it in any way. Understand?

Well of course you do. You want some McTheology served up in five minutes or less or it is free. Hiding behind the "I'm just a plain old fellow" excuse is no excuse. It gets old and speaks greatly to your lack of discernment.

The plain fact is that you have not properly understood Nang's statement. I explained it in painful detail. You are either incapable of understanding plain explanations or too stubborn to admit error. If the former, then why should anyone take you seriously? If the latter, why not change your ways? :think:

AMR

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

I'm not interested in following you around. You're wasting your time if you believe I'm interested in doing so. Please make your point simple and to the point. Otherwise, I lose interest readily.

You tee up Scripture, our Lord's lament, hoping to support your view. I provide a pointer to a clear explanation as to why the Scripture you are trying to use will not support the exegetical freight you are importing within it. It is that simple. Your intellectual laziness is not helping your cause at all.

AMR

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

No. You have not understood what Nang said. I explained it (see previous link) and noted your confusion.

AMR

From your viewpoint, I am "confused." From my viewpoint, I'm not. I understood what she was saying. Are you trying to "Cover" for her? By the way, I'll choose my viewpoint as the truth. At the same time, I realize you'll be doing the same. I have no illusions related to that.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

I pray, I read, I study the Bible. However, when it comes to other languages, commentaries, scholarly dissertations, and what some group of individual's said 400 years ago, I have absolutely no interest. That's who you're dealing with here.

The typical "Just Me and My Bible" mentality is not found in Scripture. If you read and study the Bible then you would know this. Just because you do not claim to be gifted with greater knowledge is no warrant to eschew those that have been so gifted. You know, those same persons indwelled by the same Spirit you possess? It is as if you think none of the saints that have come before you have anything to say of relevance to you. This is chronological snobbery.

AMR

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

You tee up Scripture, our Lord's lament, hoping to support your view. I provide a pointer to a clear explanation as to why the Scripture you are trying to use will not support the exegetical freight you are importing within it. It is that simple. Your intellectual laziness is not helping your cause at all.

AMR

Merely a rather "angered" opinion. I would expect you to mistrust what I have to say, and the feeling is quite mutual I assure you.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

The typical "Just Me and My Bible" mentality is not found in Scripture. If you read and study the Bible then you would know this. Just because you do not claim to be gifted with greater knowledge is no warrant to eschew those that have been so gifted. You know, those same persons indwelled by the same Spirit you possess? It is as if you think none of the saints that have come before you have anything to say of relevance to you. This is chronological snobbery.


AMR

Is there truly any "Greater" knowledge than what we find in God's Inspired Word?

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

God is aware of ALL. However, if I were a Calvinist, wouldn't I just leave the eternal destination of others to God? After all, you people believe that God already chose who He would save and who He would send into eternal damnation, right? Prayers of this manner are seemingly of no value if what you people believed was true. (which it's not) God is Sovereign and has chosen whom He would save according to you and your ilk, correct?

Read and digest the thoughts of others before you reach for the "submit" button. This has been explained. The eternal destination of others ordained by God includes the means of getting to that destination, such as prayer, promiscuous preaching of the Good News, and so forth.

You want to go to the store to buy groceries. This assumes you have a way to get there (a means), the monies to buy groceries (a means), that the store exists (a means), and a will to do so (a means). Each and every one of these means have been ordained by God such that your actual act of buying groceries will actually happen.

AMR

 

[patrick jane]

No. You have not understood what Nang said. I explained it (see previous link) and noted your confusion.

AMR

Machiavellianism