Science does this all the time. They have theories and abide by them until the theory is superseded. Just like men who are brought up in the denominations. As one set of statements or creeds fails to satisfy they'll be off to the next. Until they find the doctrines of "the reformers" and think they have struck pay dirt. That is until they face the king of terrors.
What is the Gospel?
- Thread starter Sonnet
- Start date
Science does this all the time. They have theories and abide by them until the theory is superseded. Just like men who are brought up in the denominations. As one set of statements or creeds fails to satisfy they'll be off to the next. Until they find the doctrines of "the reformers" and think they have struck pay dirt. That is until they face the king of terrors.
Lon
Well-known member
It depends on the Calvinist you ask. For me? Yes. Yes. Both. No. Yes. No.
,
For this discussion, realize that we all believe 'cannot' EXCEPT those who see no need for the Lord Jesus Christ. Romans 3:23. Often, a Calvinist means not much more than that. I realize some go further. Realize too, they, like you, are trying to follow logically who God is. While I am every bit a Calvinst, God IS love, in Him there is no darkness at all. Every time I ever see an accusation against Calvinism, it has to do with darkness in God. I am very much against a God who creates evil, as far as sin. The word, imo, is translated wrongly. In this case it is closer to "consequences." For me, "Evil" is not the best conveyance anymore. The biblical idea is not what most think Isaiah 45:7 because it is not talking about darkness. 1 John 1:5 If you ever find a Calvinist that says otherwise, let me know. I'll put that guy/gal on ignore with you. Some of them do think 'evil' means something different than consequences. I disagree, but they aren't saying God is evil based on that.
If God is good, then you know, beyond your own ideas of good, right and wrong, that God does it better and is better. Ultimately, you are going to have to come to a point, like I did, where you decide if God is Holier than your sense of Holy; is the definition of good, beyond your understanding of good. It has to come to that. It really is a question of whether God gets to be God, beyond our expectation of who and what God must be. It is an exercise of faith and trust, James 1:1-18 sometimes against your own notions. If you will, that is why I don't fret over doctrinal differences: NONE of us is perfect. Grace is the answer for TOL differences. There is no way any of us are ever capable. John 15:5 One of these conversations with you, I expect an epiphany on your part that will have you walking in grace. -Lon
I honestly can’t express gratitude and respect... enough. You also worded this in a way that didn’t condemn or judge Truster... you merely noted and acted according to his negative portrayal of the matter at hand.
Excellent Shooting! I won’t say another word about this...
I’m steppimg out on this ecumenical bridge and expressing how I can agree with you. You well know my opinions of final judgment and thus you are aware I believe all will be confronted with the reality that Jesus is Lord with a capital “G-o-d”
I even see hope in this final act we will see as a fading glory, once known as the first heaven and earth. In that light... I can completely agree with every word you wrote.
All my best... EE
I'll just quote my sig.
THE LORD JESUS CHRIST IS RISEN. Matthew 28:6 (KJV) Mark 16:6 (KJV) Luke 24:6 (KJV)
Romans 10:9 (KJV) 1st Corinthians 15:14 (KJV)
This is the Gospel.
[MENTION=18375]Evil.Eye.<(I)>[/MENTION] Truster just was not acting as a good representative in this thread. I am sure he is very devout and sincere, but he was not conducting himself in this thread in a manner that was fruitful.
I fully understand your stance Musterion...
However... I am reminded of a verse that seems to encourage me...
Matthew 15:18 But what comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this defiles a person
The key portion of this is that Sonnet’s mouth is uttering interest in God and honest expression of his ponderings, doubt, and searching...
This means that whatever his hearts motive... he is staring into the fire and reflecting on the substance thereof.
And why not post this song...
Song of Solomon 8:6 Set me like a seal over your heart, like a seal on your arm. For love is as strong as death, passion as intense as Sheol. The flames of love are flames of fire, a blaze that comes from the LORD
Hebrews 12:29 For our God is a consuming fire
1 John 4:8 ...God is love
I acknowledge what you are saying, respect it and agree. Well said... as always.
What an idiot.
Sonnet
New member
If Calvin was correct in asserting that man is dead in his sins and unable to turn to God, why does Jesus enjoin folk to do just that; even to those he explicitly describes as not his sheep?
John 10:36b-38
Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’? Do not believe me unless I do the works of my Father. But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.”
(Verses 25-26 Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The works I do in my Father’s name testify about me, but you do not believe because you are not my sheep.)
If they cannot do as Jesus invites them to without Godly regeneration then Jesus is...I hesitate to say it...merely toying with them. But, it seems to me that he is earnestly imploring them to believe, even suggesting that they focus on the proof of his works.
John 10:36b-38
Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’? Do not believe me unless I do the works of my Father. But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.”
(Verses 25-26 Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The works I do in my Father’s name testify about me, but you do not believe because you are not my sheep.)
If they cannot do as Jesus invites them to without Godly regeneration then Jesus is...I hesitate to say it...merely toying with them. But, it seems to me that he is earnestly imploring them to believe, even suggesting that they focus on the proof of his works.
1 John 2:27 ... and Matthew 23:8 mean the same to me as well. Personally... I agree with what you are saying... specifically in this quote.
I remain willing to strip to John 5:39 in the name of full unity in Christ, for this specific thread.
Regeneration... Predestination... Ordaining... Free Will... Sovereignty... Permissive Will... Punishment... Correction... Obedience... Depravity... Fallen Beings...
All of these words are theological buzz words that [MENTION=7209]Ask Mr. Religion[/MENTION] has rightly stated have stigmas attaches to human perception and they can all mean 1,000,000 different things to 10 different people... (exaggeration for effect).
Simplicity can be impeded by “pre conception”... and thus... the round and round goes on.
I will attempt to specify on the matter you are stating and what I have observed...
You are bringing up reform on a fairly consistent basis... so...
There are Macro Understandings and Micro Understandings That create dynamic differences in discussion...
The first big Macro Words are Destiny, Choice and Free Will
Theology cannot strike at anything without first traveling one or more of these roads...
As you zero in on “Destiny”... you find that the “Destiny” believing Theist attributes God’s omniscience to a kind that has every last molecule ordered in time, space and all of Creation.
The Destiny Theist then must sort out how Salvation occurs from this stance... many times the Destiny Theist attributes pre conceived sorting of mankind... because of the simple nature of linear structure that was “ordained” by God...
Dichotomies occur with this camp... because some define God as “Disabling” some and “Enabling” others.
[MENTION=6696]Lon[/MENTION] and [MENTION=7209]Ask Mr. Religion[/MENTION] are staunch “Destiny Theists and staunch advocates of God’s perfect goodness... as much as the constraints of “Destiny Theism” allow... and... I will state that they go to enormous lengths to leverage their understanding to ease mankind’s burden through proclaiming the Gospel of God’s Infinitly Effectual Saccrifice.
Within Destiny Theism... the Micro Shifts occur...
The most dramatic of these is founded on humility or elitism.
Lon and AMR found their Destiny in humility... while many Destiny Theists claim elitism and “Regeneration” that makes them “better” than others.
Neither Lon nor AMR do this. You can debate with them to the ends of the universe and they will remain founded on Jesus... and the framework of Destiny that occurs from Perfect Omnicient planning...
Others... might leverage Destiny to minimize the value of others...
Note... this is all founded on perception and choice in understanding...
CHOICE... lingers between both the Destiny and Free Will camp... but it takes on significantly altered meaning... within each of the Macro Camps...
To be blunt... Free Will and Destiny Theists believe that God’s Love is irresistible... but Free Will Theists believe that God “Allows” Human choice to reject His Saccrifice And Love...
I’m not wasting my time with Any camp that denies absolute salvational assurance... so... I’m not addressing that... as God’s Intent to Save is genuinely perfect and unfailing...
Now... on that note... the Destiny Theist says that God Is Unfailing... thus He could never Save someone that will be “Lost”. The Free Will Theist believes that Human Choice, out of God’s Choice... is honored. Thus... God proposes salvation to all and pulls all, but accepts rejection as a viable response.
Sincerely... these are lenses of understanding and human points of contention...
In the end... God is Love... Is Effectual... and Unchanging at core...
Destiny believes we adapt to God... while Free Will believes God and Humanity adapt to one another and in the process... the human being is “changed” at core... for the very best and most sincere result...
These simple ponderings can generate Volumes of text and Libraries of Commentary... but one must recognize... Perception does not define...
Only Truth DEFINES...
And TRUTH has a name...
John 14:6 Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
And in this... we can all lean back on John 5:39... because no matter the path of logic... The Believer knows It’s ultimately God that accomplishe(d/s) ALL... and it is us who Respond in gratitude and Joy...
That is a place that most can agree on and it is the place of peace... to be forth right...
All my best...
EE
Last edited:
glorydaz
Well-known member
LOL...."the true author". You give mankind way more credit than I do. Have you ever read the Bible?
Jesus, Himself, tells us that. I can't help it if some have "outsmarted" themselves, and claim "whosoever" doesn't mean what it does.
John 3:16
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Lon
Well-known member
Because of those who will? Someone had once told me that Calvinism/Arminian are opposite sides of the same coin. On one side "chosen from the beginning of the word" on the other "all who call upon the name of the Lord will be Saved." That was the first time I'd ever heard that Calvinism and Arminianism are the same, but opposite sides of the same coin. It helped, not sure if it will for you. I know what you are saying but neither the Arminian nor Calvinist position save. They are simply perspectives about salvation. If I'm wrong, nobody goes to hell because of it. If I am right, nobody goes to hell because of it. With all of us, our business is salvation. The ONLY thing you need to think on is your own response to God, His Goodness, His Grace. What do you do in the light of mercy and grace? What do you do with the Only Savior of the whole world?
Didn't want to be His sheep? Couldn't have been His sheep if they wanted? I feel like I'm going to have to deconvert you from Calvinism to make you a Calvinist.
You answer your own post:
He does. Question: Could He have done more? Would showing them a miracle have worked? Had they seen any before this? Would crying over them and imploring with them have worked? What DID and DIDN'T work? Why? Why didn't it work? In instances where it did work, why did it? How about you? WHY did you call on the Name of the Lord? Moreover, "could" you have called upon Him in your own strength? 1 Corinthians 12:3
No real debate here, just trying to meet your questions meaningfully.
Lon
Well-known member
Agree. If you match TULIP to the Romans road, it is how a Calvinist understands the Romans Road. The gospel is that same gospel all of us would purport: Romans 5:8 et al
musterion
Well-known member
We'll have to disagree on this. I believe he said he is doubting whether God exists. Unless and until THAT is settled, every other point of discussion is pointless.
I fully understand your stance, maintain mine... and note the wisdom in your words...
I’m basing my stance on the Father in Matthew 9:24 ...
“Immediately the father of the child cried out and said, “I believe; help my unbelief!”