What are the basics of Reformed Theology
- Thread starter Bright Raven
- Start date
themuzicman
Well-known member
Cross Reference
New member
themuzicman
Well-known member
There is a transition at verses 59-60 that begins an audience change. In verse 44, Jesus is still speaking to the Jews who followed him looking for another free meal.
Cross Reference
New member
And? Aren't you the one who says pay attention to local context for most correct exegesis? What does 59-66 affect? Certainly not vs 66.
My emphasis was on son-ship:
"If we're to look at John 6 as an ordo saludis, God first draws through His teaching",
But not for salvation but rather for discipleship; son-ship in Him. In this will salvation then be on a higher level of consecration per John 17:3 KJV.
themuzicman
Well-known member
Endures to eternal life.
Will have eternal life, raised up on the last day.
Believe -> eternal life.
It's about salvation. The context is obvious
Cross Reference
New member
By whose standards yours, mine or God's? If God's then this, which is a process and not an event. Per John 6:40 KJV: "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." . . . John 17:3 (KJV)
Think "adoption" and the means by which it can only happen. Enduring for it is a discipline . . . as in discipleship. For one in Christ is given this mission and note, it is not for salvation but something in the afterwards of it: "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit," Matthew 28:19 (NASB)
Last edited:
The gospel that Jesus preached calls people to repent, and that's the Calvinists' dilemma.
Cross Reference
New member
Cross Reference
New member
Are you implying their dilemma is mine? I hope not.
There is no dilemma in Calvinism, only people who simply fail to understand predestination theology.
The 'dilemma' proposed here is utterly proof of that- you can't even resolve such to some people because it's obvious that if they can't understand the rudiments of predestination, then they aren't going to understand the complexities therein either
The 'dilemma' proposed here is utterly proof of that- you can't even resolve such to some people because it's obvious that if they can't understand the rudiments of predestination, then they aren't going to understand the complexities therein either
Cross Reference
New member
But that isn't what happened. When Adam transgressed, man was sealed to "vanity" [Rom 8:20 KJV], something Adam was unwillingly subjected to in order to present to him a way by which Adam would have to decide who would rule his disposition, either God would or his own flesh. God needed to know where his allegiance fell. It was set up by God with the hope of success that he would choose God that God could then further him along in His purpose to bring him into union with Himself. Other examples of this way of God's proving can be seen in His dealings first with Cain, Abraham, Moses, Saul, David and lastly, Jesus.
Cross Reference
New member
Fail to understand it?? By whose standard? Yours, Calvin's. Certainly not by the Holy Spirit, Calvin never knew.
The 'dilemma' proposed here is utterly proof of that- you can't even resolve such to some people because it's obvious that if they can't understand the rudiments of predestination, then they aren't going to understand the complexities therein either
Complexities? That is just a lead in for making excuses why your understanding doesn't work for you. How about you reconciling presdination with your understanding of the foreknowledge of God? Can you do that?
There is no dilemma in Calvinism, only people who simply fail to understand predestination theology.
The 'dilemma' proposed here is utterly proof of that- you can't even resole such to some people because it's obvious that if they can't understand the rudiments of predestination, then they aren't going to understand the complexities therein either
You're sure full of baloney today aren't ya? One need only do a study on Calvinism and they can learn the basics of Calvinism. (Reform Theology) It's not that difficult to get the jest. You make it sound like the secret of the century, that,
only a very few are privy. I got involved with Calvinism back in the mid-seventies and for a short period of time, declared I was a Calvinist. I got involved by listening to a number of Presbyterian Preachers, one of them being, John MacArthur.
Thank God He guided me onto the right path. Calvinism changes the character and intent of the God of the Bible in order to fit their "belief system."
By the standard of John Calvin, who was a far more practiced and knowledgeable theologian than a bunch of random, laymen people claiming that the Holy Spirit teaches them otherwise- whom nonetheless contradict each other all the same.
I'm trying to be nice and not call somebody theologically declined. Don't force my hand
Based by the arguments you all present against Calvinism, it is painfully obvious that you all need to just stay away from theology
Not everything is understood by plain reading, which is why some of you are rather green when it comes to biblical interpretation a well.
Predestination vs free will is an ages old debate with plenty complexities of thought and reason, and you all just shoot all matters of nonsense at it hoping something any of it will penetrate.
That's not theological, that's just rank prejudice.
I like the way Reformed folk always accuse posters that disagree with them, as being ignorant of the fundamentals of Calvinism. As if, the Calvinists are intellectually superior to whoever they're conversing with. Well, after all, they are the "Elect."
Based by the arguments you all present against Calvinism, it is painfully obvious that you all need to just stay away from theology
Not everything is understood by plain reading, which is why some of you are rather green when it comes to biblical interpretation a well.
Predestination vs free will is an ages old debate with plenty complexities of thought and reason, and you all just shoot all matters of nonsense at it hoping something any of it will penetrate.
That's not theological, that's just rank prejudice.
You give yourself, "Way too much credit." It's easy to see that you're "ego-driven." Good for you, somebody has to believe you're a "Mental Giant?" You're a majority of One. Hang in there pal.
Lon
Well-known member
Well, I think I could do this incredibly longer and better with Open Theism but this thread isn't about that. You hold to your system, flaws and all because it works for you, but I find it less biblically viable and further away from the main of Christianity.
But, since this is about Reformed theology, knock yourself out. -Lon