What Love is This?

[AlwaysLoved]

Post this on Calvinist sites and see what kind of response you get:

Where is the love in assuming you were irresistibly regenerated and allegedly given no choice in the matter just as you claim others were denied any opportunity for salvation?

I recently did just that at http://aomin.org/articles/chat.html and they banned me.

[AlwaysLoved]

Man is not regenerated by doing something special but by believing the Lord Jesus as his Savior: "to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave the power to become children of God; who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God" (John 1.12-13). First you must be willing to "receive him" then you may "become children of God" NOT the other way around. There is not some regeneration before salvation, for salvation is regeneration. "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost" (Tit. 3.5). "Saved us" here is "washing of regeneration". To be regenerated/saved one must do what? "Believe in his name"; NOT assume pridefully you were irresistibly regenerated and without prior having had to believe on Him. For that is a selfish salvation.

God is the "Savior of all men, specially those who believe" NOT "Savior of all men [to sustain men but not from Hell], specially those who believe". The "specially those who believe" are included in the "Savior of all men", yet some men included in "Savior of all men" are going to Hell. Do you see the contradiction? It's impossible to claim God is the Savior of all men though some for Hell AND specially those who believe BECAUSE nobody who believes is going to Hell.

[David Hewitt]

Post this on Calvinist sites and see what kind of response you get:

Where is the love in assuming you were irresistibly regenerated and allegedly given no choice in the matter just as you claim others were denied any opportunity for salvation?

I recently did just that at http://aomin.org/articles/chat.html and they banned me.

I would suspect that you would be told that you haven't represented the doctrine of "Irresistible Grace" properly among other things. :)

Dave Hewitt

[AlwaysLoved]

I would suspect that you would be told that you haven't represented the doctrine of "Irresistible Grace" properly among other things. :)

Dave Hewitt
That's what I hear, but they can never show it.

[David Hewitt]

..they just haven't been willing to because they are weary of the frequent messages about how such people aren't saved. I know this to be the case, at least partly, of why you or another keeps getting banned from James White's chat channel.

I am able and would be happy to explain the doctrine to you if you would like.

dave

[AlwaysLoved]

That's silly. Coyness is never the answer. You exhibit the same unethical behavior. Calvinism is a cult and like other cults they shut their minds down, ban those who speak plainly against them why they are a cult. I would be happy to respond to anything you say. You won't get banned here for discussing like you do on Calvinist sites. You can even claim someone is unsaved and you don't get banned for that either. Their position is so untenable all they can do is like John Calvin kill the Arminians or in this day and age, ban them from the internet. James White definitely is unsaved and in all probability going to Hell, because he will likely never give his life to Christ. He worships a false Christ. Your conscience can't see this because likewise I am sure it has not been quickened by the Holy Spirit, but I pray one day you will. You're underestimating what a bad man he is: he is "condemned already" (John 3.18) for refusing God's way of salvation for another. There's lots of a good videos on the internet that show James White is not born-again.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1o0w4L1wHQ

[David Hewitt]

That's silly. Coyness is never the answer.

Well, the intent was never to be coy or cute. So my apologies if it came across that way.


You exhibit the same unethical behavior.

Here you lost me: What Scriptural principle or command did I violate? I missed it.


Calvinism is a cult and like other cults they shut their minds down, ban those who speak plainly against them why they are a cult.

Well, if Calvinism were really what you make it out to be, then I would agree with you. However, whether you realize it or not, you really do not understand what the so-called 5 points of Calvinism really entail. Being able to quote the doctrines is only a start of course; fleshing them out properly is another thing all together. For example, the Doctrine of Irresistible Grace, or Effectual Calling as it is often called, simply means that when God seeks out to save someone, He does. This is accomplished by causing someone to be born again/regenerated by the Holy Spirit which instantly produces faith in the person by which the person is then justified. Regeneration is not the whole of salvation, and neither is justification; they are both integral parts of it, though, of course. I would be happy to elaborate on that if you like, but it would probably be better to start back up the stream a bit. Effectual Calling is the fourth head of Doctrine, and though one can indeed support it with Scripture in and of itself (such as <a href="http://www.gnpcb.org/esv/search/?q=john+6%3A37-40&src=esv.org">John 6:37-40</a>) it helps to start at, well, the beginning with anything. Wouldn't you agree? :)


I would be happy to respond to anything you say. You won't get banned here for discussing like you do on Calvinist sites. You can even claim someone is unsaved and you don't get banned for that either.

Hadn't planned on saying anyone isn't saved, but nice to know all the same. :)


Their position is so untenable all they can do is like John Calvin kill the Arminians or in this day and age, ban them from the internet. James White definitely is unsaved and in all probability going to Hell, because he will likely never give his life to Christ.

Here is something that I cannot understand. For example... Calvin was dead before there was anyone around who would call themselves an Arminian at all. Furthermore, how is it that you can know the status of salvation for anyone? Dr. White readily affirms that salvation is by faith alone in Christ alone by grace alone...so I fail to see why you say what you do or what basis you have for saying it.


He worships a false Christ. Your conscience can't see this because likewise I am sure it has not been quickened by the Holy Spirit, but I pray one day you will.

A false Christ? I'm afraid I'd have to ask for some documentation of that, and in something other than videos that you have produced. :) It is also interesting to note that you use the terminology of being "quickened by the Holy Spirit." That's called "regeneration" in some circles, and indeed, it is something that the Holy Spirit does. :D


You're underestimating what a bad man he is: he is "condemned already" (John 3.18) for refusing God's way of salvation for another. There's lots of a good videos on the internet that show James White is not born-again.

Care to point one out other than one you produced? Perhaps some primary sources, maybe one of his videos where he denies foundational tenants of the Christian Faith?

Thanks, Troy!

sdg,
dbh

[AlwaysLoved]

Well, the intent was never to be coy or cute. So my apologies if it came across that way.
So far coyness has been your thing. If it quacks like a duck and walks like a duck, it's probably a duck.


Here you lost me: What Scriptural principle or command did I violate? I missed it.
The simple matter of being unable to substantiate your belief.


Well, if Calvinism were really what you make it out to be, then I would agree with you. However, whether you realize it or not, you really do not understand what the so-called 5 points of Calvinism really entail.

Oh don't be coy. Make it out to be what?


Being able to quote the doctrines is only a start of course; fleshing them out properly is another thing all together. For example, the Doctrine of Irresistible Grace, or Effectual Calling as it is often called, simply means that when God seeks out to save someone, He does. This is accomplished by causing someone to be born again/regenerated by the Holy Spirit which instantly produces faith in the person by which the person is then justified. Regeneration is not the whole of salvation, and neither is justification; they are both integral parts of it, though, of course. I would be happy to elaborate on that if you like, but it would probably be better to start back up the stream a bit. Effectual Calling is the fourth head of Doctrine, and though one can indeed support it with Scripture in and of itself (such as <a href="http://www.gnpcb.org/esv/search/?q=john+6%3A37-40&src=esv.org">John 6:37-40</a>) it helps to start at, well, the beginning with anything. Wouldn't you agree? :)
The problem with your irresistible grace theory is that it doesn't give the person the choice and just irresistibly imposes it on a person. Since such behavior is unethical for us towards one another, it would be for your god too showing you that you are not a Christian. What's even worse is your god sends people to hell without any opportunity for salvation. Again, that is Satanic. In Christianity, faith can be freely obtained by anyone; not so in Calvinism.


Hadn't planned on saying anyone isn't saved, but nice to know all the same. :)
How ecumenical of you. That in itself is wrong, and you missed the point. The point is it is wrong to silence the voice of Christians against Calvinism. We should be allowed to freely speak the truth.


Here is something that I cannot understand. For example... Calvin was dead before there was anyone around who would call themselves an Arminian at all. Furthermore, how is it that you can know the status of salvation for anyone? Dr. White readily affirms that salvation is by faith alone in Christ alone by grace alone...so I fail to see why you say what you do or what basis you have for saying it.
Those who rejected John Calvin's beliefs are those who were targeted for execution. That would include Arminians. Arminianism is a belief system before or after Arminius. A person reveals whether they are saved or not: we shall know them by their fruit. If you can't know if someone is saved and who is a member of the body of Christ then you have no fellowship. It is all pretentious. Faith alone and grace alone are to James White not what they are to Christians. These may be freely obtained but to White they are not. They are irresistibly imposed on a person or denied. As Dave Hunt says, What Love is This? God is relational so He enjoys our responses and freely obtaining the water of life. He doesn't have to be like you and your god. Your god really is pathetic.

I understand you don't understand when you said of yourself you: "I fail to see why you say what you do or what basis you have for saying it." However, that contradicts your former statement: "whether you realize it or not, you really do not understand what the so-called 5 points of Calvinism really entail." This is obviously doublespeak. The Bible says be "not doubletongued" (1 Tim. 3.8). Just know you don't have a conscience to see what Christians can see because you are not born-again. It's impossible for you to see what we can see. Attempting to teach an unregenerate to worship God of the Bible or do good is like trying to teach a dead man. You can't understand. God has not given it to you to be able to. All I can do is continue to encourage you to seek after God with an honest heart and you shall surely find Him. If you don't, then you won't.


A false Christ? I'm afraid I'd have to ask for some documentation of that, and in something other than videos that you have produced. :) It is also interesting to note that you use the terminology of being "quickened by the Holy Spirit." That's called "regeneration" in some circles, and indeed, it is something that the Holy Spirit does. :D
But this is something the Holy Spirit has not done for you because God does not save that way you want Him to. He won't save you being selfish.

[David Hewitt]

My goodness Troy... I can see why so many people do not wish to interact with you, and I am afraid I'll have to be one of them. I have read how you conducted yourself over at CARM:

http://www.carm.org/troy-brooks

and how it has been you rather than the host of the site who was acting in an un-Christian manner. If there is a particular text over which we have disagreement that you would like to discuss, then we can do so. However, it will have to be done without your constant accusations of a person being lost or your assuming the worst from what I am saying. I assure you, I meant nothing hostile or deceptive in what I had previously posted, but it seems you insisted that I did. If we cannot get past that, then there will be an impass rather quickly.


sdg,
dbh

[AlwaysLoved]

Oh you are just being coy again with your tail between your legs.

Here is the response to that link of Matt Slick which he has not dealt with,

http://biblocality.com/forums/showthread.php?3681-Matt-Slick-s-Response-to-Troy-Brooks

Clearly you can see the sins of Matt Slick and why he is not born-again. One is not allowed to discuss these things on a Calvinist site because as we have seen they ban and censor like that murderous Protestant Pope of Geneva would do. You can discuss them here though with no fear of being removed for simple discussion on forums.

What you believe is really wrong for if it is evil for man to act like this then it is evil for your god also. You, Matt Slick and James White are clearly unsaved according to God's word. Almost all Calvinists are going to Hell. Don't blame me for what the Holy Spirit proves in the word of God.

I think your coyness is deceptive. You still don't deal with the problem before you that this is evil. If it is evil for us to act like this then it is evil for the god of Calvinism. There is no two ways about it. Praise be to God grace is not irresistible, atonement is not limited, election is not unconditional, man is not totally depraved and we don't persevere but the saints are preserved.

My prayers go out to you because you are lost. If that will be all fine, but just know my door is always open to you. This is another difference between Christians and Calvinists. Calvinists shut their minds down, cut off the line of communication, because their backs are up against the wall. What else can they do since they don't want to repent? Alas, they can't even repent because of their idol they erect in which they assume they were Totally unable to.

[David Hewitt]

Troy:

If there is anyone not saved in this exchange between the two of us, it is you sir, and not I.

Now, if we go under the assumption that we are both Christians, then we can trust the Holy Spirit to speak His truth from His Word.

So then, if you wish to continue this, let us go this route, and be done with your constant drumbeat of "Calvinism is evil" and "you are clearly not saved" nonsense:

Provide a verse of Scripture you think Calvinists use and misrepresent. I'll provide an exegesis of that passage using sound hermeneutics (http://wholecounsel.blogspot.com/2006/10/does-all-really-mean-all-all-time_28.html) and thus exegesis, especially in the realm of context (http://wholecounsel.blogspot.com/2006/05/hierarchy-of-context-part-ii_29.html), in response to yours.

Fair enough? If not, then I would think it best for this discussion to be over.

sdg,
dbh

[AlwaysLoved]

You really are not born-again because you refuse to repent and believe in Christ to be regenerated. Whereas I did. Now then, I don't think you should assume we are both saved since God only saves one way. You're contradicting yourself. I for one would feel ugly and gross inside if I was saved the way you claim a person is saved. Your conscience can't sense this. If you have a verse I would be happy to help you with it. Just know there are no verses in the Bible for Total depravity or any of the 5 points of Calvinism. And many verses that speak against your faith. I try not to cast pearls before the swine. My prayers go out to you.

[David Hewitt]

You really are not born-again because you refuse to repent and believe in Christ to be regenerated. Whereas I did. Now then, I don't think you should assume we are both saved since God only saves one way. You're contradicting yourself. I for one would feel ugly and gross inside if I was saved the way you claim a person is saved. Your conscience can't sense this. If you have a verse I would be happy to help you with it. Just know there are no verses in the Bible for Total depravity or any of the 5 points of Calvinism. And many verses that speak against your faith. I try not to cast pearls before the swine. My prayers go out to you.

Something that you need to understand, Troy, is that regenerated does NOT equal saved. Regeneration is part of salvation; justification is another. We believe, ie, have faith in Jesus to be justified, not to be regenerated. And, since you have thrown the ball back into my court, I'll hit it back with a verse from Romans 3:

Romans 3:28 ESV For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law.

So then, it is clear to see: We are justified by faith, or believing (the verb for "to believe" is just the verb form of "faith" in the original Greek), not regenerated. Rather, how is one regenerated, or born again (born from above)? Scripture does indeed address this:

John 3:3-8 ESV Jesus answered him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God." (4) Nicodemus said to him, "How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?" (5) Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. (6) That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. (7) Do not marvel that I said to you, 'You must be born again.' (8) The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit."

A few things worthy to note that are relevant to this discussion and therefore this issue:

First, please notice Nicodemus's question to Jesus in verse 4. He point-blank asked Him, "How can a man be born when he is old?" He was asking how someone is born again, the very thing Jesus mentioned in verse three. What was Jesus's response? Was it to "repent and believe" in order to be born again (regenerated)? The answer is no. Rather, Jesus goes on to explain in verses 5-8 that the Spirit of God is the one who gives birth to spirit, and that we cannot predict when God will do this. The quickening of the Spirit, the making someone born again, is like the wind; we do not know where it comes from or where it goes. This is the way it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.

This is of course NOT to say that people are not required to repent of sin and believe in Christ to be saved; they most certainly are, and such are graces produced in someone who is born again at the very moment of regeneration, which is, as I said before, part of the work of salvation God works in us, not the whole of it.

Does that make sense?

SDG,
dbh

[AlwaysLoved]

Yes regeneration does equal saved. No person who receives initial salvation is NOT regenerated and no person regenerated DOES NOT receive initial salvation because they are one in the same. Justified by faith shows our legal standing before God. Regeneration is not just a part of salvation, it is salvation for salvation is the regeneration of the spirit's innerman. You admit you are unsaved because you did not freely obtain the gift of faith to be regenerated. You just assumed you were regenerated already which is pompous and pride-filled.

First you must believe then God will regenerate you. When Jesus spoke to Nicodemus, He told him he must believe to be saved. You can't predict when someone will come to God with an honest heart to be saved by the Spirit of God. Never do we see in Scripture a person is regenerated which brings them to believe; they always believed to be regenerated: "whosoever believeth" (John 3.16) is clearly placed on the person to have the free-choice.

"Willingly offered" is found five times, such as "the people willingly offered themselves" (Judges 5.2); "willingly offered a freewill offering unto the Lord" (Ezra 3.5). The offer of salvation to Nicodemus, "whosoever believeth" (John 3.16) would not be given if he could not actually receive the cross by faith as a helpless sinner. Can people choose the cross, giving glory to God, without having to save (or regenerate) them first? Would it be unrighteous for someone to be saved (or disallowed salvation) without regard first for their choice? Can the spiritually dead repent of their sins, and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ as their Savior? "Everyone that thirsteth, come ye to the waters.... Let the wicked forsake his ways, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon" (Is. 55.1,7).

[David Hewitt]

Yes regeneration does equal saved. No person who receives initial salvation is NOT regenerated and no person regenerated DOES NOT receive initial salvation because they are one in the same. Justified by faith shows our legal standing before God. Regeneration is not just a part of salvation, it is salvation for salvation is the regeneration of the spirit's innerman. You admit you are unsaved because you did not freely obtain the gift of faith to be regenerated. You just assumed you were regenerated already which is pompous and pride-filled.

Ok, then we have a serious problem. I would completely agree that justification by faith related to our legal standing before God; justification is forensic by nature. god declares righteous all those who have faith in Jesus. Yet, from your own description above, are you saying that a person can be saved (in your terms, regenerated) without being justified, since, according to you, regeneration and salvation are "one and the same"? IF that is so, then where did justification go? How can someone be saved without proper legal standing before God? I would submit to you that they cannot be! So then, justification is needed for salvation, as is regeneration (which cannot be the whole of salvation if justification is also needed to be saved). Sir, you are in error.


First you must believe then God will regenerate you.

Show me that order in Scripture, where it uses the word "regeneration" or the phrase "born again" or "born from above" where is says "You must believe in order to be." You have failed to substantiate your believe in such a way, and I would submit to you the reason is that you cannot. :)


When Jesus spoke to Nicodemus, He told him he must believe to be saved. You can't predict when someone will come to God with an honest heart to be saved by the Spirit of God. Never do we see in Scripture a person is regenerated which brings them to believe; they always believed to be regenerated: "whosoever believeth" (John 3.16) is clearly placed on the person to have the free-choice.

Ah, the "whosoever" of John 3:16. Let's talk about that.

John 3:9-16 ESV Nicodemus said to him, "How can these things be?" (10) Jesus answered him, "Are you the teacher of Israel and yet you do not understand these things? (11) Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know, and bear witness to what we have seen, but you do not receive our testimony. (12) If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how can you believe if I tell you heavenly things? (13) No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man. (14) And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, (15) that whoever believes in him may have eternal life. (16) "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

Please note: After Jesus's discussion about being born again in verses 3--8, Nicodemus asks him another question, and Jesus changes the conversation slightly to answer it, giving a different answer to the question. Jesus has already talked about being born again; that is not the subject of his answer in these verses. Rather, he is addressing how these things can be, and moves into belief. It is noteworthy that Jesus talked about being born again first, and now in this section of Scripture he talks about believing and being saved, using different terminology. He gives a fuller answer about Salvation as a whole, and also talks about how this can be in verse 14, with the Son of Man being lifted up. It is Jesus's sacrifice that makes it so that people can be saved of course.

In any case, the issue of John 3:16 has nothing at all to do with supposed "free choice" The verse would best be translated, "God loved the world in this manner: He gave his only Son so that all the believers in Him should not perish but have eternal life." The point of the verse is not to put forward some concept of free will. Rather, it is to be a verse of security. Jesus is saying that all those who do truly believe in Him will have eternal life. The verse is descriptive and not prescriptive. That is, it is describing a reality rather than telling people something to do.



"Willingly offered" is found five times, such as "the people willingly offered themselves" (Judges 5.2); "willingly offered a freewill offering unto the Lord" (Ezra 3.5). The offer of salvation to Nicodemus, "whosoever believeth" (John 3.16) would not be given if he could not actually receive the cross by faith as a helpless sinner. Can people choose the cross, giving glory to God, without having to save (or regenerate) them first? Would it be unrighteous for someone to be saved (or disallowed salvation) without regard first for their choice? Can the spiritually dead repent of their sins, and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ as their Savior? "Everyone that thirsteth, come ye to the waters.... Let the wicked forsake his ways, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon" (Is. 55.1,7).

No one is saying that people are not to offer themselves willingly to God, whatever the context. I would agree that we must. We must turn from our wicked ways to the LORD. This is not in dispute. The question is this: how does a sinner who is radically opposed to God do this? We return to John 3:

John 3:19-21 ESV And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their deeds were evil. (20) For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. (21) But whoever does what is true comes to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that his deeds have been carried out in God."

Who does wicked things? Do not all men do wicked things? Is this not the case as is said in Scripture more than once (such as Romans 3)? What does a person who does wicked things NOT do? Such a person "does not come to the light". Why is this? It is because, were he to do so, "his deeds [would] be exposed." Verse 21 clearly says that there are people who do come to the light, people who do what is true....yet how can this be, since people who do wicked things do not come to the light? Verse 21 gives the answer. When someone does come to the light, ie come to Jesus, it is "clearly seen that his deeds have been carried out in God." God gets the credit for the person coming into the light. Thanks be to God for working a miracle that we would come into the light!

One other thing: The issue of "freewill offerings" has nothing to do with someone's supposed free will. All you have to do is back up a verse to see this:

Ezra 3:4-5 ESV And they kept the Feast of Booths, as it is written, and offered the daily burnt offerings by number according to the rule, as each day required, (5) and after that the regular burnt offerings, the offerings at the new moon and at all the appointed feasts of the LORD, and the offerings of everyone who made a freewill offering to the LORD.

"Freewill" offerings are contrasted with the "regular burnt offerings" or the "daily burnt offerings." Such were "as each day required. The people didn't have a choice in the matter with those; they were required by the Law, and everyone had to bring them. On the other hand, many chose to make "freewill" offerings, that is, offerings that we not required by the Law but that people wished to give over and above what was required. The difference between the too is that one was required and one was not. The offerings that were not were called "freewill" offerings.

sdg,
dbh

[AlwaysLoved]

I am not sure where you think I said a person who is regenerated is not justified. Perhaps you are a building castles in the air. Regeneration is a word used in the Bible only twice. Once it is used to describe in Matthew 19.28 the millennial kingdom that is to come (which you also deny because you have no faith Jesus will return just as He left to reign for the 1000 years on earth from the 3rd Temple). Yet another Calvinist amillennialist like Matt Slick. The other time is Titus 3.5 which speaks of new birth that "He saved us". Never is it used in the sense you use it--Hitlerish style forced upon salvation!

"Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of God, and saying, 'The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel'" (Mark 1.15). "Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out" (Acts 3.19). Conversion (salvation, new birth, regeneration, born-again) follows repentance and belief in Christ. "Today I have given you the choice between life and death, between blessings and curses. I call on heaven and earth to witness the choice you make. Oh, that you would choose life, that you and your descendants might live!" (Deut. 30.19) "For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men" (Tit. 2.11). "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance" (2 Pet. 3.9).

Your reading of John 3 is incorrect which is easily seen by verses 14 and 15: "And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life." This lifting up was for all of Israel not for just some of Israel. Likewise, Jesus died on the cross for the sins of the whole world, yet not all are saved, because man has a choice, and obviously some men such as yourself refuse to repent and believe in Christ to be regenerated. That's why you are going to Hell. You're a bad guy. You want to remain that way so what else can Jesus say than you are "condemned already" (v.18). What Jesus is saying to you is both descriptive and prescriptive. I saw your picture. You look like James White a bit. How unfortunate to have that nerdy look. Just teasing! :biggrin: But you don't you have try to be like him. It's funny how hard Calvinists try to be slick with their bow ties but ultimately always fail because there is no love, no communication of the Holy Spirit imparted to sinners, just a head game and mental gymanstics to try to rationalize their mistakenly alleged irresistible regeneration. Trust me, if preterition was true, God has passed over the Calvinists! Since you are such a James White fan why don't you watch another video about him why he is unsaved.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mR89MCT0vE

At the core you are not understanding true repentance and faith in Christ can't be achieved by it being irresistibly imposed on a person, because it is evil for us to behave this way to one another, so it is for God, for His standards are certainly higher than ours not lower. The reason why fallen man can respond to God is because God has provided sufficient grace to us all to be able to do so; otherwise God would not say to us we are "without excuse" (Rom. 1.20). These are contradictions for your faith. This is in stark contrast to the evil spirit that you worship through the idol you set up called Total depravity. An idol is used so you don't truly repent and believe as God would have you. It stands to reason that man can't be Totally unable and depraved if God's grace is sufficient to us-ward. They are mutually exclusive.

God does not get the credit for drawing a person to Himself when it debases God as an evil tyrant by forcing salvation onto people. Look what happened to Hitler after all was said and done. You wouldn't exist if it wasn't for God and no person could be saved without God doing the saving, but this is not mutually exclusive of the glory of God in making us in His image and giving us the enabling grace to have the choice. Even though you are not saved you still enact your free will, but it is to reject God of the Bible by pridefully assuming you were regenerated instead of a heartfelt repentance and faith by giving and prostrating yourself to be saved in the mercies of God's grace. This is how Christians deeply sense how you are unsaved because we can sense how you have not truly come to the cross as a helpless sinner to receive the Lord Jesus as Savior. In a phrase you "have not come to the light" that your deeds may be manifest which expose you. What is exposed is your idolatry called Total depravity which denies the sufficiency of God's grace and your selfish unwillingness to truly give your life to Christ as we whom are saved did. We can easily make this comparison because we are truly regenerated. You are not. We are as it were on the other side of the door so we can see what you look like on the others side what we were once also unsaved. Just know on the other side of that door we have a sense in our deepest parts that can easily discern what you want to be regeneration is not regeneration at all and never will be. You are going to Hell. Make no mistake about it.

The Old Testament is showing us things. "Free will" is a phrase used to emphasis the fact that we have free will. Cain and Abel employed their free will; one was given to works, the other was to provide an acceptable sacrifice. A person could refuse to give a free will offering. We are truly sovereign free will beings who have a choice. God of the Bible is able to do this: making us in His image. Your god can't. I know that may upset you but it is true. We are not robots. You're cold heart wants it to be this way so you can remain selfishly unsaved, but that speaks of your heart condition. God does not know you. Ever heard of the phrase used to describe Calvinists "stacking the deck"? In a game of cards stacking the deck is unethical.

My prayers go out to you.

[David Hewitt]

I may respond more later, but I wanted to correct one thing with regard to your statements about eschatology:

Am an an amillenialist? Yes. Do I believe Jesus is going to return? YES!! Amillenialists are not hyper-preterists. Furthermore, there have been plenty of Calvinists in history (such as Charles H. Spurgeon) who were not Amillenial (nor Dispensational I might add). Furthermore, Amillenialists do not deny that there is a millenium, either. Rather, we believe it to be rightly understood as the period of time between the first and second advents of Christ, which would be keeping with the interpretation of Revelation according to its apocalyptic genre and its use of symbols. So, as you can see, to be an amillenialist, you must necessarily believe in the 2nd coming of Christ. :D

Anyway, a minor point, but one to be made, giving a bit more evidence to the fact that you have frequently characterized and misrepresented Reformed teachings. You really ought to let people who believe X, Y, or Z define with they mean by X, Y, or Z and not call them A, B, or C. Make sense?

Talk at you later, Troy...maybe. :)

sdg,
dbh

[AlwaysLoved]

Amillennialism is evil for it denies the millennial reign of Christ on earth that is to come: the time of recompenses and reward for overcomer believers to return with and reign with Christ on earth. Read Revelation 20.3 which says the nations won't be deceived in the thousand years, so obviously this is not the thousand years now and hence, amillennialism is a heresy. Again, your beliefs show the immorality of your god which you project from your self. The Roman Church invented this heresy to control you as if the millennial kingdom was now so you better get in line with them.

Obviously the nations are still deceived for they war and we hear rumors of wars. Charles Spurgeon was not a Christian. He was an amillennial Calvinist: surely a sign of being unsaved the combination of these too teachings that contradict God's word. How odd it is to deny the dispensations of time: the dispensation under the law and the dispensation today of grace for now the veil is rent and the Holy Spirit can indwell the believer's spirit.

Revelation totally rejects your theory of amillennialism. Revelation 20, third last chapter of the whole Bible, hasn't occurred yet, for the saints aren't reigning. You have several false teachings in your profile which really show you are a false Christian. We have only touched on a couple of them. There are many more. You have no idea how unsaved you are. The Bible says we shall know you by your fruit. Your false teachings, your coyness and deflection are some of those false fruit. The 2nd coming of Christ according to Zech. 14.4, Acts 1.11, Rev. 1.7 commence His millennial reign with Jude 14,15, Matt. 19.28 and Rev. 20.2-7. Jesus is not reigning right now with an iron rod. How bizarre a depiction that would be!

Since you can't show any mischaracterization of Calvinism then why be coy about it? You are repeating the same sin from your first post. Calvinism tries to high jack the justification by faith, reformation. This has nothing to do with Calvinism. A couth attempt but nonetheless unrighteous. Your ilk latch onto the word "Reformation" as if it is valid for you. Do you see how Satan mingles and twists and maligns? Satan is the author of confusion and you worship him. You really do. Your conscience is ugly to Christians. But to you it may be perfectly fine. Everything you say and do is gross! I love being able to see this so easily. Thank you Jesus.

Let me know when you want to address these points. I am here for you. Whenever you are ready.

[David Hewitt]

Sigh, Troy, Charles Spurgeon was more a man of God than you are, I wouldn't doubt. He was not even Amillenial -- he was premillenial, though not a Dispensationalist, as if that really even matters very much.

You sir, are a troubler of the brethren:

Romans 16:17 ESV I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them.


I have attempted to interact with you, to deal with biblical texts, and you continue to speak untruths about me. You elevate secondary, even tertiary doctrines such as those on eschatology to primary doctrines (such as justification) and tell people such as myself that hold a different view from you, views that can indeed be substantiated by Scripture, that we are devil-worshipers and not Christians.

It is you sir who needs to re-examine what it means to be a Christian. You have not exhibited a Christ-like attitude toward me in any way since I have been here. Instead of asking for more information to clarify (http://www.gnpcb.org/esv/search/?q=proverbs+18%3A13&src=esv.org), to make sure you are not saying something incorrectly, you instead make absolute pronouncements about my and others salvation, attributing to us the worst possible motivations, acting like you are infallible and cannot be wrong. You make much the same error as the Pope in Rome. You should be ashamed of yourself, though I doubt you will be.

If there is a shred of Christian character in the moderators of these forums they would rebuke you, as would an elder in your church, assuming you even are part of a church that can begin to call itself biblical.

May God open your eyes to the truth and grant you repentance in this matter. I pray that He will.

This is my last comment here.

SDG,
dbh

[AlwaysLoved]

Spurgeon was amillennial. Go to your Spurgeon websites that's what they say. Premillennial is dispensational. We are in the premillennial dispensation. Spurgeon is like you, he refused to give his life to Christ and instead assumed he was irresistibly regenerated. God never saves a person with that attitude. It is pompous and popish. So what you think Christ is He is not. Spurgeon caused division and you cause division with this heresy you try to bring into the Church. Since you are unable to validate your view with Scripture realize you got a problem--overassuming. It is not secondary but primary how to be saved. You will always reject the millennial reign of Christ on earth from the 3rd Temple: this is your testimony. When the Son of Man returns to reign you will reject Him because you will continue to deny what He is doing in the millennial kingdom. Picture it. You will reject Him. It's easy to see. The proper Christian attitude is to point this out to you instead of being like you which is coy and couth. Jesus spoke plainly as this. Specifically you can't back up your claims lost in vagaries. You have decided on something and come hell or high water to rationalize it. This is what the flesh does. You don't let it die on the cross with Christ.

Just know this, since you have no verses to substantiate your view and I have given you verses in the word of God that show that your beliefs are false which you have not countered, then humbly accept you are wrong, that you are not a Christian but can yet give your life to Christ because God has given you the grace to be able to do so. That's how great God is! Even though you have been living a lie as the tares that try to look like the saved wheat all this time, God will still forgive you if you come to Him with an honest heart. Your god doesn't have this love. You haven't received this love because you say you can't. But you are wrong. You can for you're not Totally depraved. Let go of this idol and the false Christ you have been worshiping who will not reign for 1000 years on earth. Think how odd it would be for Christ to return with his saints (Jude 14,15) but then not to reign on earth for the 1000 years. Just as Genesis describes beginnings, Revelation is a book of the future. Apart from Rev. 1-6 the rest of the book of Revelation is future tense as one would expect from a book of Revelation. In your view only learned historians could interpret it to apply it to history, but God is no respecter of persons. The word of God is for us all. The book of Revelation at least to me is the easiest book of the whole Bible to read and can't be read the way you read it at all! You are stuffed with logical contradictions because you have been brainwashed by others who were brainwashed by Satan's deceptions. Your contradictions abound and bind you and restrict you unrighteously. If you were to be honest about this you would repent, but instead you shut your mind down to these contradictions because you prefer a selfish salvation. It really is as simple as that. Your interpretation of things are a manifestation of your dead spirit, separation and independency to God. You're a bad man.

Wake up!