The Slaying of Reformed Theology (Calvinism)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Evil.Eye.<(I)>

BANNED
Banned
Fair enough. But it does not seem to be in the spirit of let your yes be yes.

Rotfl... you are sharp! I thought of this when I wrote it and felt quite terrible... but... you are a refreshing individual to debate with. I refuse to do this leg work for you. If I did, it would ruin the opportunity to drive you to scripture.

This is my true motivation in encouraging you to research this matter. You will not be disappointed.

Historical information on the matter for you to look up isn't commentary that asserts biblical intent.

Count this my first hint. I will be off a bit. I hope to continue this when I get back. You are not lazy or dumb and I sense the Spirits draw of you to scripture.

I feel guilt free on this one.

Until I'm back,thank you for your persistence and engagement. It is very noticed and appreciated!

: )

I will give you the respect of recognizing your valid argument.

Red pill, You jump in and study this.

Blue pill, I simply answer it all for you and surrender to your rightful assertion of yes and no..... would the evil one encourage you study a matter of scripture?

morpheus-red-pill-vs-blue-pill.jpg
 

Evil.Eye.<(I)>

BANNED
Banned
The Slaying of Reformed Theology (Calvinism)

!!!Tally Update!!!

[MENTION=5671]nikolai_42[/MENTION] and [MENTION=18375]Evil.Eye.<(I)>[/MENTION] are communicating to fully understand Nikolai_42's assertions before full counter debate occurs.

[MENTION=10685]Brother Ducky[/MENTION] has to choose the red or blue pill.
 
Last edited:

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
Unction of the holy one....................

Unction of the holy one....................

2: 1st John 2:27

#Bump
# To quote a brilliant friend... "Me thinks the Calvinists are messing the gospel up"

I'd like to add some thoughts on point #2 - 'Let no man teach you'.

Of course I gather you understand that some are set in the ecclesia as teachers, and have a special calling or ability to teach (so there are humans that function as teachers, even Jesus the man taught), but that no man is to be worshipped beyond the sacred calling and gift of God within him or upon his life, as God alone is the One we worship, the Spirit that is life. Jesus says God is Spirit, and they that worship him must do so in that spiritual reality.

The 'anointing' is the unction of the Holy Spirit, or spirit of truth, that is within the guidance-grasp of the spirit-born believer. One may argue that this saying would not apply to their particular theology since they claim to be led by God and not any particular man. This saying must be properly discerned. In any case, at least by John's teaching...the 'anointing' of the Spirit teaches one's own spirit-soul in the inner sanctum. It is by this spirit-contact and 'merging' of the soul with God in divine service, that one is directed thereby in things spiritual.

So we understand this saying appropriately.

The 'anointing' of the Spirit is ministered thru 'man', but it is the anointing of God that is the essence or spirit-presence that is the 'God' we follow. One Spirit anointing many vessels.

View attachment 25200
 

daqq

Well-known member
I'd like to add some thoughts on point #2 - 'Let no man teach you'.

Of course I gather you understand that some are set in the ecclesia as teachers, and have a special calling or ability to teach (so there are humans that function as teachers, even Jesus the man taught), but that no man is to be worshipped beyond the sacred calling and gift of God within him or upon his life, as God alone is the One we worship, the Spirit that is life. Jesus says God is Spirit, and they that worship him must do so in that spiritual reality.

The 'anointing' is the unction of the Holy Spirit, or spirit of truth, that is within the guidance-grasp of the spirit-born believer. One may argue that this saying would not apply to their particular theology since they claim to be led by God and not any particular man. This saying must be properly discerned. In any case, at least by John's teaching...the 'anointing' of the Spirit teaches one's own spirit-soul in the inner sanctum. It is by this spirit-contact and 'merging' of the soul with God in divine service, that one is directed thereby in things spiritual.

So we understand this saying appropriately.

The 'anointing' of the Spirit is ministered thru 'man', but it is the anointing of God that is the essence or spirit-presence that is the 'God' we follow. One Spirit anointing many vessels.

View attachment 25200

And testimony is spirit just as Yeshua says that his words are Spirit and they are Life. The anointing is therefore the new Spirit as foretold in the three Ezekiel passages which have already been mentioned so many times. That new Spirit is the Spirit of the new covenant and is the full Testimony of Yeshua from start to "IT IS FINISHED". Anyone who does not have and hold that full Testimony of Messiah in uprightness and truth neither has the Anointing because the Testimony is the Anointing Word. :)
 

Evil.Eye.<(I)>

BANNED
Banned
!!!Morning Tally!!!

[MENTION=5671]nikolai_42[/MENTION] has till Tuesday to fully assert the intent of their rebuttal before it is countered.

[MENTION=10685]Brother Ducky[/MENTION] has paused conversation to decide between the red or blue pill.
200w.gif


[MENTION=17195]daqq[/MENTION] and [MENTION=1746]freelight[/MENTION] have asserted some phenomenal discussion and Exegesis.

[MENTION=17195]daqq[/MENTION] is now dubbed a scriptural Jedi Master

[MENTION=1746]freelight[/MENTION]'s Exegesis and history on Gehenna is spot on. LINK HERE

With all this silence... it feels like a possible concession on the part of the Calvinists. I hope I'm wrong! But, victory and hard rebuttals will surely follow concession.

: )
 

Evil.Eye.<(I)>

BANNED
Banned
200w.gif


In a moment... this Master's mouth will move... and the out-of-sync dialogue will follow...

"Wait, do not finish them yet... it would be dishonerable... give them one more day to reply"

# And now a link to a song. Substitute the word girl with... "straw man".


#yup, I went there...
 

Brother Ducky

New member
Rotfl... you are sharp! I thought of this when I wrote it and felt quite terrible... but... you are a refreshing individual to debate with. I refuse to do this leg work for you. If I did, it would ruin the opportunity to drive you to scripture.

This is my true motivation in encouraging you to research this matter. You will not be disappointed.

Historical information on the matter for you to look up isn't commentary that asserts biblical intent.

Count this my first hint. I will be off a bit. I hope to continue this when I get back. You are not lazy or dumb and I sense the Spirits draw of you to scripture.

I feel guilt free on this one.

Until I'm back,thank you for your persistence and engagement. It is very noticed and appreciated!

: )

I will give you the respect of recognizing your valid argument.

Red pill, You jump in and study this.

Blue pill, I simply answer it all for you and surrender to your rightful assertion of yes and no..... would the evil one encourage you study a matter of scripture?

morpheus-red-pill-vs-blue-pill.jpg

Blue pill. At the moment only interested in results. You do not need to show your work.
 

Evil.Eye.<(I)>

BANNED
Banned
Blue pill. At the moment only interested in results. You do not need to show your work.

Hell is the Greek word used in place of Gehenna from the Old Testament.

Gehenna was a place that was used for disposal. It is also the literal location that Daniel points to for the "Final Battle". Armageddon!!! Or Her Megiddo... Megiddo was a place of an enormous battle in scripture and noted by historians.

Gehenna was a vally where the bodies were burned in completion of the battle.

The final conflict is a literal battle and the 2nd death bodies to be burned will span a collection of participants from "ALL" time.

The dead are brought back in Revelation and the final battle will literally center around...

Israel! The people that rise against Israel will meat a sudden and final end! The bodies of the lost that remain from the battle will be so numerous that just as Gehenna burned for a time so long that it was also used for trash disposal, so will it burn again.

The fire is described as eternal because those that are consumed by it will never return to life. Their soul will be "destroyed". The eternal destruction is a metaphor for permanent death of "body" and "soul".

As far as the "beast", "false prophet" and "Anti Christ"... well that verbiage is pretty damning! (Pun)

There are Ezekiel passages that are believed to shed light on this.

Hell was the Greek word that people understood and thus it was used.

The mother church used the idea of eternal torture to encourage people to "pay for their relatives" removal from the flames. It was such a strong tool of suggestion and control that the doctrine of eternal torment lives to this very day.

If you study the matter, you will find all the literal passages on the matter to say eternal "destruction" and the metaphorical passages to say hell and torment.

This requires Hebrew understanding of eschatology utilized to truely understand Revelation.

But alas... this thread has run its coarse and I close my Scriptural assault towards Calvinism.

I'm now focusing on the real evil doctrine of Demons...

"Spiritual Israel" superseding "Literal Israel"!

I'll keep the thread open long enough for you to share your response. And perhaps continue discussion on this.

So... now I welcome you to ask direct yes or no questions towards me and I will let my Yes be yes and my no be no.

Looking forward to your first question..."Neo"
[MENTION=18375]Evil.Eye.<(I)>[/MENTION]
 
Last edited:

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
Word therapy.......

Word therapy.......

3: Matthew 5:37

#
giphy.gif

Touching Point # 3

“Again you have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform your oaths to the Lord.’ But I say to you, pdo not swear at all: neither by heaven, for it is God’s throne; nor by the earth, for it is His footstool; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of rthe great King. Nor shall you swear by your head, because you cannot make one hair white or black. But let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No.’ For whatever is more than these is from the evil one.


This is one of those sayings that can really stretch our philosophical noodles,...however we try to apply it within any given context. For those of us who love to 'expound', whether in varying ways of 'exegesis' or 'eisegesis',...it can sometimes be hard to keep things to just a more simple 'yes' or 'no' :) - we often like to embellish for whatever reason, although some are more succinct or tactful in that area. Some are bit 'short', others a bit long lol.

Of course when dealing with more extensive schools, like 'Systematic Theology' (Reformed or otherwise).... things can get more intellectualized where one theory, doctrine or concept goes on to keep other theories, doctrines and concepts in place (co-dependent). Here, we have quite a large and perhaps 'over-riding' system,...where it kinda just takes over. Perhaps like creating a theological Frankenstein?

Anyways,...do you have more to share on how this might relate to Calvinism in general, or some additional philosophical insights here as well? I see the value in keeping things to a clear positive or a negative concerning some issues, whereas other areas often can be more expounded on as they cover a more multi-dimensional context.
 

Evil.Eye.<(I)>

BANNED
Banned
Touching Point # 3




This is one of those sayings that can really stretch our philosophical noodles,...however we try to apply it within any given context. For those of us who love to 'expound', whether in varying ways of 'exegesis' or 'eisegesis',...it can sometimes be hard to keep things to just a more simple 'yes' or 'no' :) - we often like to embellish for whatever reason, although some are more succinct or tactful in that area. Some are bit 'short', others a bit long lol.

Of course when dealing with more extensive schools, like 'Systematic Theology' (Reformed or otherwise).... things can get more intellectualized where one theory, doctrine or concept goes on to keep other theories, doctrines and concepts in place (co-dependent). Here, we have quite a large and perhaps 'over-riding' system,...where it kinda just takes over. Perhaps like creating a theological Frankenstein?

Anyways,...do you have more to share on how this might relate to Calvinism in general, or some additional philosophical insights here as well? I see the value in keeping things to a clear positive or a negative concerning some issues, whereas other areas often can be more expounded on as they cover a more multi-dimensional context.

If Love is Yes and Hate is No...

Any 1,000,000 words you write always come down... to... Yes!

This is all I'll ever say about and to you Freelight.

/ )
 

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
True Love is total, indivisible, impartial........

True Love is total, indivisible, impartial........

If Love is Yes and Hate is No...

Any 1,000,000 words you write always come down... to... Yes!

This is all I'll ever say about and to you Freelight.

/ )

:thumb:

Yea and Amen :)

All comes back to the fundamental of reality, which is 'God' himself, and the very law and principle of his divine will and nature. The word 'love' may have become so trivialized, but if/when we consider John's description of love in his gospel, there is Only Love, as God is One and all. His Love is 'echad'. His holy name is also 'One', it is the ever Existential Reality, expressing itself in willful creation, engaging all co-creational adventures with other sentient beings who are His offspring, as Love wills. All else by way of 'sin' is but a missing of the mark of Love's nature and will, a falling short of its fulfillment. - yet as long as Love is, there is always hope, redemption, salvation, immortality.

Also if love is omnipresent, there can be be no such thing as 'Preterition', since love does not pass over, abandon, disregard, those created/made in its own image and likeness, having divine value therefore and divine potential. Such an act of 'preterition' is wholly contrary to love. Love is. Love is all-inclusive and all-conclusive.

View attachment 25201
 

Evil.Eye.<(I)>

BANNED
Banned
:thumb:

Yea and Amen :)

All comes back to the fundamental of reality, which is 'God' himself, and the very law and principle of his divine will and nature. The word 'love' may have become so trivialized, but if/when we consider John's description of love in his gospel, there is Only Love, as God is One and all. His Love is 'echad'. His holy name is also 'One', it is the ever Existential Reality, expressing itself in willful creation, engaging all co-creational adventures with other sentient beings who are His offspring, as Love wills. All else by way of 'sin' is but a missing of the mark of Love's nature and will, a falling short of its fulfillment. - yet as long as Love is, there is always hope, redemption, salvation, immortality.

Also if love is omnipresent, there can be be no such thing as 'Preterition', since love does not pass over, abandon, disregard, those created/made in its own image and likeness, having divine value therefore and divine potential. Such an act of 'preterition' is wholly contrary to love. Love is. Love is all-inclusive and all-conclusive.

View attachment 25201

Amen!

I know their will be lost "souls", but through the scope of Love... it will be clear why they cease.
 

Evil.Eye.<(I)>

BANNED
Banned
This is NOT the sum and substance of my lost post, but what if these Puritans and Calvinists you reject as teachers were also taught by that same Spirit? Would you rob the world of what they have received of God to explain the scriptures?

Then said he unto them, Therefore every scribe which is instructed unto the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and old.
Matthew 13:52

Note also the difference between teaching and exegeting. I am sure you are far more familiar with the Greek than I am, but I John 2:27 speaks of men being taught by the Spirit of God. As does John 6:45 (with clear references to Isaiah 54:13 and Jeremiah 31:34). But exegesis is found in the unfolding of what God has revealed and taught. For example, in Acts 10:8, Cornelius exegetes to his attendants what the angel of God told him. It wasn't teaching, but it was explaining and detailing. Exegesis can be much more than just reading. Stephen's deathbed sermon was an exegesis of most of Israel's history. A condensation, yes, but a retelling for a certain purpose to bring out a point.

But even beyond that, there is a ministry of teaching that works with the Holy Spirit (not instead of it):

But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:
Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.
But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.
Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

I Corinthians 2:7-14

So a teacher is given wisdom of God. He isn't given it of man. But that doesn't stop Paul from teaching as he does. He is teaching what the Spirit has revealed. That doesn't mean those that hear will understand, but rather that by his teaching, the Spirit can reveal to the hearer what the truth is. By this passage, it can't be any other way. But that doesn't stop a man from teaching, exegeting, expressing the truth of God by his understanding. That man may understand it, but the fact remains that no hearer will receive it unless the Spirit of God opens his eyes and ears and heart. And Paul isn't simply speaking to unbelievers :

For this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus, who is my beloved son, and faithful in the Lord, who shall bring you into remembrance of my ways which be in Christ, as I teach every where in every church.
I Corinthians 4:17

The teaching John speaks of in his epistle indeed is only the work of God. But he isn't, in one sentence, removing the necessity for teachers in the Body of Christ :

And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God
Ephesians 3:9-10

(Not that we are necessarily doing what Paul is doing - declaring the purpose of the church - but that teachers are a part of fulfilling what Paul said is the church's purpose)

And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

Ephesians 4:11-14

I venture to say that this isn't accomplished yet. So I don't see an issue with these teachers.


EDIT : Note that this is not an exhaustive treatment in any sense of the term. The scriptures are the only objective way we have been given to judge the words of others (teachers and otherwise). So saying everyone is "taught of God" isn't saying everyone should be teaching. Just that the Holy Spirit is faithful to bring to mind, apply to heart etc... what each individual needs.

Well stated, :)

This is not to be adversarial but simply to state where it fails in my view, that is, because Testimony is Spirit. The Testimony of Yeshua in Gospel accounts is the new Spirit foretold and promised in Eze 11:19, Eze 18:31, Eze 36:26. That is why John 7:39 does not have "given" in any Greek codex, manuscript, or text, but rather given has been inserted into most English translations and placed in italics. The Young's Literal Bible Translation probably provides the most correct reading, (which follows the Textus Receptus), but really no matter what Greek text you look at they all read pretty much the same way and this is where your argument fails in my opinion:

John 7:37-39 YLT (Young's Literal Bible Translation)
37 And in the last, the great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, 'If any one doth thirst, let him come unto me and drink;
38 he who is believing in me, according as the Writing said, Rivers out of his belly shall flow of living water;'
39 and this he said of the Spirit, which those believing in him were about to receive; for not yet was the Holy Spirit, because Jesus was not yet glorified.


See what I mean? It does not say anything about the Holy Spirit being given but rather "not yet was the Holy Spirit, because Jesus was not yet glorified." And that glorification took place when the Son of man was lifted up at Golgotha. And what are the final words of Messiah at Golgotha in the Gospel of John? Everyone knows, "IT IS FINISHED!" Therefore when the Master says this he speaks of that Holy Spirit-Testimony having been completed as he breathed out his last and commended up his Spirit to the Father. What does this mean to my theology? It means that the Testimony of Yeshua found in the Gospel accounts is the New Covenant Spirit; the same foretold in the Ezekiel passages referenced above. Therefore anyone not having and holding the full Testimony of Yeshua in uprightness and truth neither has Holy Spirit. It all therefore comes down to proper exegesis and understanding of everything we read; and everything we read outside of the Gospel accounts and Testimony of Messiah must be viewed and understood through the lenses of the Testimony of Messiah found in the Gospel accounts. Not even Paul may be understood without first understanding the teachings of the Master Teacher Messiah Yeshua; neither Torah, neither the Prophets, nothing can be understood without the New Covenant Spirit which is the Testimony of Yeshua found in the Gospel accounts. Sorry if I appear to be overstating this point but I feel it cannot be overstated enough. The words that Messiah speaks in the Gospel accounts are Spirit and they are Life: the Testimony of Yeshua is likewise the Spirit of Grace because Yeshua paid for that holy Testimony with his own life and blood. The Spirit of Elohim was upon him from his immersion and therefore the Testimony of Yeshua was given to him from above, (without measure). If he paid for his Doctrine and Testimony which was not even his own, as he says, and he paid for it with his own life and blood, then anyone who tramples it tramples his blood, the blood of our covenant, the Spirit of Grace.

So when you ask, "but what if these Puritans and Calvinists you reject as teachers were also taught by that same Spirit?", it is a good and valid point, imo, and a legitimate question, and it sure comes up often in forum boards such as this where there are those who like to claim "the Holy Spirit told me", or "the Holy Spirit revealed it to me", and so on, but this herein above is the answer to that dilemma although I already understand it is not going to be accepted by the Trinitarian viewpoint. However I also have no doubt that John 7:39 says what it means, and means what it says, and that does not include adding given into the text so as to alter the meaning of the statement. And there is no doubt that it is written the way it is for an extremely critical and vital reason. You really do not need to be able to read Greek to investigate this deeper; simply be willing to ask yourself and God why it might be the way I have shown you or why I might be wrong. The most important thing if you really want the truth is to be willing to question yourself and your understanding, (and if so then you will not turn off your mind and simply tell yourself that I cannot possibly be right). Investigate this one single verse which I have posted; find out whether or not given should be inserted into in the text of most English translations; is it really put there simply to provide "a more smooth delivery" of the text into English? or does it actually change the meaning of the text? (it absolutely does). You might be surprised at what you find; no one has much of anything to say about this because everyone just assumes it is supposed to be there, because of tradition and doctrine, but it is not found in any manuscript or codex and rather says pretty much exactly what the Young's Literal Bible Translation says quoted herein above. And please know that this is not just some "loophole" I dug up to drive a wedge into what you believe, nope, just trying to tell you the truth: for I never find loopholes in the scripture but rather hidden manna and everlasting treasures. :)

I want to ensure that I fully understand your perspective before I counter debate. This response is my "making sure I understand your assertion" response. Please tweak me and aid me until I express your assertions correctly as you are asserting them.

-You are asserting that exegesis and prophecy are different matters.
-You are asserting that the Spirit Lives and Works through us to this very day
-You are suggesting that just as Paul exegetes in scripture, we may, as well.
-You are asserting that men the Holy Spirit speaks through "post-cannon" to clearify matters may record assistant texts that the "Church" may draw from to further understand scripture.
-You are suggesting that "post-cannon" exegesis on cannon isn't the same as cannon, but can become tangent to Cannon to assist the church in "understanding cannon".
-You assert that "gifts of the Spirit" allow people to write and assert extra-canonical exegete on Cannon and it be a sort of holy-writ to the church

Please check all of my assumed statements in attempt to ensure I fully understand your thrust, because you're sure to see them again.

Ensure you add to my assertions if I missed anything, or set me straight on others if I misunderstood.

{My responses in red within the quote block}



I have a nuanced view of scripture and what Hebrews 4:19 calls the Living Word. As far as I can tell it doesn't violate Reformed Theology, but it's hard to properly relate (much to my frustration).

I actually understand what you are saying. Jesus is the True Living Word. However, He affirms the scriptures by proclaiming that they testify of Him. Cannon is special. It condemns and saves simultaneously. With the addition of the Spirit of Christ or (The Holy Spirit) in-dwelling us, the Spirit teaches us. I beleave you are attempting to work this into your verbiage.

Please correct me if I am misunderstanding your intended assertion.

[MENTION=10685]Brother Ducky[/MENTION],

Excellent point. I affirm that I too Love science fiction, movies, music and all the likes. But Theology is a personal matter. Would you agree that how we perceive God, shifts how we perceive ourselves and others? Enjoying Donnie Darko, or reading exciting books is different than knowingly investing works of men that tell us how we should understand scripture.

When we adopt, extra biblical teachings of man to our heart, and bypass the Holy Spirit, we have now depersonalized our understanding of God for a one size fits all relationship.

Everyone has different spiritual needs. Theology is extremely potent! It's like the flavor extract of the Spirit. One tiny squeeze and drop here or there and our very Spirit of Love towards humanity is altered. 1 John 4 in entirety explains this intimately, along with all of 1 John 2.

Now back to our discussion.

I have a challenge for you. You just acknowledged that your influence of theology has younexpressing that the predestination aspect of Romans dovetails into your Reformed understanding. Look at your last words to me about the "Lost". Does the Good shepherd say screw the 1 lost sheep, or does He drop everything and go look for him.

Again... compare your last statement with point 6 of the OP. One teaching says God, who is Love, never gives up and never stops hoping, while the other teaching says God gave up before some were born.

Imagine a father knowing one child would be good and the other child would grow up to be a steadfast farm hand.

Now you tell me [MENTION=10685]Brother Ducky[/MENTION]... what did the Prodigal son's Father do for His reprobate, prostitute loving hell raiser that squandered his entire inheritance?

Test my Spirit Brother Ducky. I'm alive, so you can reason with me. You're not reading the extra biblical assertions of a dead man. Your talking to a live man that Loves God and believes God is Love Just like you. You can question me and judge my Spirit and intent because I am alive. You can press me to answer all sorts of question and we can clang scriptural swords to grow. (I've buried a counter point in the previous 3 sentences that I will be scripturally supporting in response to Nikolai_42's post of contest.)

[MENTION=10685]Brother Ducky[/MENTION],

I referenced Allagories from our Beautiful, Lord God and Saviour.

Please forgive me for challenging your theological understanding. But, please... hate me, call me names, but seriously look at your words and compare them to the scripture for OP point 6 and the allagories I had "foreknew" would help assert its point.

I pray this strikes you with Love and doesn't change the civility and loving nature of our dialogue.

I excitedly look forward to your reply.

!!!Brief Tally Update!!!

[MENTION=10685]Brother Ducky[/MENTION] has delivered excellent responses. He now has some very specific verbiage to reply to that ties his verbiage to the contrasted assertion of the OP.

[MENTION=5671]nikolai_42[/MENTION] is building a strong point and is languishing over the correct expressive verbiage. I have provided him with a list of points that I perceive he is struggling intellectually to assert as well as provided a suggested possible expression of the extra verbiage he is trying to assert. I will not counter debate his post until he smiles and says, "yes, that was what I was expressing" to mean ole [MENTION=18375]Evil.Eye.<(I)>[/MENTION].

Hello BD,

Adding to my recent post here,

Why wouldn't Love act as Love to all, 'God' being the Universal Creator, Originator of all things and beings? Why would God's love be partial, imperfect, exclusively divided, misproportionally distributed? The rain falls and sun shines on ALL.

Seems to be a grace/justice balance that we do not fully understand.

What is Love's will? Why would Universal Love, what God IS,...desire anything that is unloving towards any sentient being?

No. Not really what I'm trying to say. There's a much finer distinction between the Word and the word in terms of scripture (if that makes any sense...)

That's the eye poker right there and tells you this is nothing more than man's inventive ideas for the purposes of the establishment of a new religious-political body in medieval times; for if you will join up and become Calvinist or Reform then you will suddenly become not quite so "doomed", (lol), although no doubt this goes unsaid because they do not need to say it out loud to believe it. And of course when you are teaching predestination and-or double predestination then you are going to avoid openly stating that you believe your church to be the only place where the elect may congregate. Every church or denomination that teaches eternal conscious torment and hell fire believes themselves to be the saved or elect whether they are willing to openly admit it or not. Reform gets away with many things by saying "we never actually said that", ("we don't want to be presumptive"), when in reality their preaching and even their very existence automatically implies that if you join you are considered on your way to election through "perseverance of the saints", (and of course remaining a member in good standing in their church). But they cannot openly tell you that because you do not actually have the free will to choose to join their church. :crackup:

!!!Morning Tally!!!

OP is being contested at point 2 by [MENTION=5671]nikolai_42[/MENTION]. Of all that have stepped up, he is currently the sole challenge to the OP. We currently have an open dialogue to fully convey his side of the issue.

I will provide a link to our last dialogue... Edit to come

Hint to [MENTION=5671]nikolai_42[/MENTION] and anyone assisting him... I will be building a case around 2 Peter 1:19-21 to fully assert 1 John 2:27's actual verbiage.

Additional note to [MENTION=5671]nikolai_42[/MENTION]... In this LINK I have attempted to assist in your scriptural search. This links to our current conversational progression.

There will be MUCH more, but I will not respond until Nikolai_42 is comfortable with my understanding of his scriptural assertions.

[MENTION=17195]daqq[/MENTION] remains the Deadliest Swordsman

Dead line for [MENTION=5671]nikolai_42[/MENTION]'s full articulation of counter argument. Tuesday.

Amen!

I know their will be lost "souls", but through the scope of Love... it will be clear why they cease.

This is something that can be changed...

But... as it stands now...

!!!Final Tally Update!!!

[MENTION=5671]nikolai_42[/MENTION] has had thorough time to ensure I don't improperly address his counter argument.

Thus, I will... properly address it.

[MENTION=10685]Brother Ducky[/MENTION] is still at liberty to continue discussion, but he is out of the debate via OP point 6

[MENTION=1746]freelight[/MENTION] has submitted an excellent exegesis on Agape Love.

[MENTION=17195]daqq[/MENTION] is scripturally battling Goliath wolverines with laser beam eyes to save his volcanic, island home.
 

Evil.Eye.<(I)>

BANNED
Banned
[MENTION=5671]nikolai_42[/MENTION],

Here is my counter to your counter of OP point 2.

2: Let no man teach you
Scripture for 2

Let's start with my initial post response:

[MENTION=5671]nikolai_42[/MENTION]

I am submitting all of 1 John 2 from the Complete Jewish Bible for context provision. I will also submit various additions to this post via edit. The lingual intent will be posted with the Greek to literal and I will find cross referenced verses that correlate intent.

1 John 2 Complete Jewish Bible (CJB)

My children, I am writing you these things so that you won’t sin. But if anyone does sin, we have Yeshua the Messiah, the Tzaddik, who pleads our cause with the Father. 2 Also, he is the kapparah for our sins — and not only for ours, but also for those of the whole world.

3 The way we can be sure we know him is if we are obeying his commands. 4 Anyone who says, “I know him,” but isn’t obeying his commands is a liar — the truth is not in him. 5 But if someone keeps doing what he says, then truly love for God has been brought to its goal in him. This is how we are sure that we are united with him. 6 A person who claims to be continuing in union with him ought to conduct his life the way he did.

7 Dear friends, I am not writing you a new command. On the contrary, it is an old command, which you have had from the beginning; the old command is the message which you have heard before. 8 Yet I am writing you a new command, and its reality is seen both in him and in you, because the darkness is passing away and the true light is already shining. 9 Anyone who claims to be in this light while hating his brother is still in the dark. 10 The person who keeps loving his brother remains in the light, and there is nothing in him that could make him trip. 11 But the person who hates his brother is in the dark — yes, he is walking in the dark, and he doesn’t know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded his eyes.

12 You children, I am writing you
because your sins have been forgiven for his sake.
13 You fathers, I am writing you
because you have known him who has existed from the beginning.
You young people, I am writing you
because you have overcome the Evil One.
14 You children, I have written you
because you have known the Father.
You fathers, I have written you
because you have known him who has existed from the beginning.
You young people, I have written you
because you are strong —
the Word of God remains in you,
and you have overcome the Evil One.
15 Do not love the world or the things of the world. If someone loves the world, then love for the Father is not in him; 16 because all the things of the world — the desires of the old nature, the desires of the eyes, and the pretensions of life — are not from the Father but from the world. 17 And the world is passing away, along with its desires. But whoever does God’s will remains forever.

18 Children, this is the Last Hour. You have heard that an Anti-Messiah is coming; and in fact, many anti-Messiahs have arisen now — which is how we know that this is the Last Hour. 19 They went out from us, but they weren’t part of us; for had they been part of us, they would have remained with us.

20 But you have received the Messiah’s anointing from HaKadosh, and you know all this. 21 It is not because you don’t know the truth that I have written to you, but because you do know it, and because no lie has its origin in the truth. 22 Who is a liar at all, if not the person who denies that Yeshua is the Messiah? Such a person is an anti-Messiah — he is denying the Father and the Son. 23 Everyone who denies the Son is also without the Father, but the person who acknowledges the Son has the Father as well. 24 Let what you heard from the beginning remain in you. If what you heard from the beginning remains in you, you will also remain in union with both the Son and the Father. 25 And this is what he has promised us: eternal life.

26 I have written you these things about the people who are trying to deceive you. 27 As for you, the Messianic anointing you received from the Father remains in you, so that you have no need for anyone to teach you. On the contrary, as his Messianic anointing continues to teach you about all things, and is true, not a counterfeit, so, just as he taught you, remain united with him.

28 And now, children, remain united with him; so that when he appears, we may have confidence and not shrink back from him in shame at his coming. 29 If you know that he is righteous, you should also know that he is the Father of everyone who does what is right.

1 John 2:27 Interlinear Link (Lexicon to Greek and Transliteration)

Link to Literal over Greek

Cross referenced verses that assist.

Jn. 4:14, 14:16-17, 26, 15:4-7, 16:13; 1 Cor. 2:12-13; 1 Jn. 2:20; 2 Jn. 1:2; 2 Pt. 1:16-17; 1 Pt. 1:20-23; He. 8:10-11; Je. 31:33-34

Point 1: 1 John 2:27 Context:

- 1 John 2 is void of analogy or parable. This makes its verbiage "Literal".

This is crucial to my OP point. Within Context, 1 John 2:27 maintains its continuity and exact verbiage, without allowance for tampering or reassignment of intent and meaning.

Point one held factual via assertion of context.

Point 2: Manuscript Translation

I have provided an interlinear study link that reveals the original Greek of 1 John 2:27

In the link, the exact verbiage that demands we only lift up the Holy Spirits Authority in scripture is made of inflexible verbiage.

Point 2 held factual via lingual, manuscript analysis.

Point 3: Identification of [MENTION=5671]nikolai_42[/MENTION]'s counter points

All employed conjecture, scripture and assertions within N42's counter argument serves to open Canon in a very slippery way.

The premise is that scripture can be difficult to fully understand, thus, it is ok to draw from the exegesis of "Godly" men to "assist" in this difficulty and generate doctrinal unity.

But... here comes the Mike Tyson KO...

Interpretation of Canon is a form of Prophesying.

This means that if one is going further than lingual exegesis or direct reassertion of scriptural intent... they are adding to Canon.

2 Peter 2:20

Jesus was the presence of GOD and Jesus was the true, final Prophet. Who but God can Prophesy for God? Even the apostles were direct extensions of the one on one teachings of Jesus. Paul was unique because He testified as one who communicated directly with the post ascension Yeshua/Jesus/God. But... make no mistake, these writings all link back to every recorded word of... The Living Word!

This means that canon is the final writings about God that take direct verbiage from the "Mouth" of God!

Hear Oh Israel... Dt. 6:4 + Jn. 5:39 + Jn. 10:30 drive this home!

God spoke through man and it is recorded in "Canon"... period!

Every word spoken about scripture (canon), or apart from scripture is "conjecture" of the human kind.

The instant an extra biblical person's words get printed and defined as a way to interpret "Canon", that person is officially declared a PROPHET!

Point 3 held factual via the assertion that N42 is attempting to interject reformed pioneer writings as Canonical lenses that are acceptable to interpret scripture with.

Point 4: Jesus is the final Prophet and Is God

Jesus is the very Spirit that indwells us. Unless you call the Holy Spirit an (Active Force... cough... blabobba witnesses), you know that God is One... (Let's spare the 40,000,000 ways to fight over what this means).

Jesus is the presence of God... Period! Trinitarian view leads to this as much as Modalism, or any other way of expressing the "Mystery" of the unity of God.

Now... the indwelling Comforter is our teacher too! But... the difference between good old TOL discussion fueled by our "spiritual" learning and Prophesy is simple.

If a person argues a point violently and assertively, but admits they are a fallible human being and NOT a prophet... it's cool!

But, if a person says... I'm 1000% correct and my word is as good as scripture... they have now declared them self a prophet... and... that's uncool.

Point 4 factually distinguishes between discussion and prophecy.

Final Point: Posthumous Prophets and High-stakes Gambling

Sometimes... extra canonical men and women, who write prolifically, become printed and utilized as an awesome way to interpret scripture.

If you love yourself and that prolific writer, it would be best to heed a tiny warning found in the close of cannon.

Rev. 22:19

Does anyone care to play Soul Russian Roulette with a 6 shooter loaded with 6 hollow points?

Enjoy fighting, fussing, discussing, praying over and generally pondering scripture with friends, family, loved ones and people you witness to......

But... for the love of God!... self... and your neighbor...

Let the extra canonical assertions go and quit trying to rewrite scripture through complex doctrines of men!

This concludes my first counter rebuttal to Nikolai_42
 
Last edited:

Evil.Eye.<(I)>

BANNED
Banned
!!!Tally Update!!!

I think I'll Post a movie clip if this OP goes uncontested for 2 more days. We'll say the "Run" will occur at 12 PM on Friday.
[MENTION=5671]nikolai_42[/MENTION] is the final say in this matter

It's been up a while and despite hype... it is genuinely uncontested...

[MENTION=3698]Tambora[/MENTION]... I know this seems like a false call...
But, to quote Douglas Adams...

Quote Source Link

""But the plans were on display…”
“On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.”
“That’s the display department.”
“With a flashlight.”
“Ah, well, the lights had probably gone.”
“So had the stairs.”
“But look, you found the notice, didn’t you?”
“Yes,” said Arthur, “yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.
Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, #1)

Tags: arthur-dent, bureaucracy, bypass, demolition, department, house, humour
like"

Death Star Run Friday at 12 PM

200w.gif
 

Evil.Eye.<(I)>

BANNED
Banned

On this note...

I won't close this thread...

But... I want to express that there is one thing worse than doctrines of men. I can't wrench ideas from mankind, any more than mankind can wrench ideas from me.

On this thread... it is abundantly clear that accepting another person's written ideas as companion to Holy Writ is dangerous and dividing...

Now I will do my part in practicing what I preach...

"No" ism or doctrine is worth Christian Disunity. I will continue to raise a ruckus over many ideas... But... no matter our understanding... we all depend on the same grace to cleanse and guide us. If we could all disagree and continue to Love one another as Christ loved us... even outside of the "camp" of Christianity...

The Gospel would be unfettered and unstoppable. But we are all "human" and not "God", thus division is in our cards.

I may vehemently argue my perception... but in the end... we are all Loved and died for by Christ.

We are many members of one body. As I believe Christ literally died for all... I believe the wheat and Tares are comprised of ALL humanity...

This is why Love thy Neighbor and Mercy are the most important of all biblical Truth. If we can't find peace in our souls with one another, because of Jesus' sacrifice of Love... then we must YRY harder, PRAY harder and READ harder.


................ I will not declare victory in the slaying of Calvinism, but simply our collective victory in Jesus Crucified and Resurrected.

Calvinist
Mad
Catholic
Jehovah's Wittinesses
Open Theists
Agnostics
Atheists
All Religions

... I truely believe with all of my human heart and Spirit that Jesus is seriously our collective, undivided peace.

I now sit next to Job and acknowledge that ONLY God has all the answers.

Feel free to debate up a storm here, continue dialogue or otherwise...

[MENTION=17195]daqq[/MENTION] and [MENTION=1746]freelight[/MENTION] thank you for all of your selfless assistance.

[MENTION=18164]Eagles Wings[/MENTION] thank you for showing Love to me, despite my assault on your ism. You genuinely place Christ as your souls pride, thus everything else has become peace.

[MENTION=17677]Crucible[/MENTION]... you're cantankerous and rough... but I still like you.

[MENTION=7209]Ask Mr. Religion[/MENTION]... I don't dislike you and I.. will... probably... always give you grief, but I know you are a Loving man who is passionate about Jesus, far more than you are about any Reformed teaching.

giphy.gif


Thread open for discussion, debate and spiritual battle...

But per OP author... OP assertion and final call are now subject to the words of this post.
 

Ask Mr. Religion

&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;&#9758;Presbyterian (PCA) &#9
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Member daqq denies the Trinity

Member daqq denies the Trinity

It is no secret that I hold the Adoptionist view,
Sigh.

Our Lord was fully God and fully man in an indissoluble union whereby the second subsistence of the Trinity assumed a human nature that cannot be separated, divided, mixed, or confused.

One can best understand this mystical union (together united in one distinguishable subsistence) by examining what it is not, thus from the process of elimination determine what it must be.

The mystical union of the divine and human natures of Our Lord is not:

1. a denial that our Lord was truly God (Ebionites, Elkasites, Arians);
2. a dissimilar or different substance (anomoios) with the Father (semi-Arianism);
3. a denial that our Lord had a genuine human soul (Apollinarians);
4. a denial of a distinct subsistence in the Trinity (Dynamic Monarchianism);
5. God acting merely in the forms of the Son and Spirit (Modalistic Monarchianism/Sabellianism/United Pentecostal Church);
6. a mixture or change when the two natures were united (Eutychianism/Monophysitism);
7. two distinct subsistences (often called persons) (Nestorianism);
8. a denial of the true humanity of Christ (docetism);
9. a view that God the Son laid aside all or some of His divine attributes (kenoticism);
10. a view that there was a communication of the attributes between the divine and human natures (Lutheranism, with respect to the Lord's Supper); and
11. a view that our Lord existed independently as a human before God entered His body (Adoptionism).

The Chalcedonian Definition is one of the few statements that all of orthodox Christendom recognizes as the most faithful summary of the teachings of the Scriptures on the matter of the Incarnate Christ. The Chalcedonian Definition was the answer to the many heterodoxies identified above during the third century.

AMR
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top