Interesting reformed church visit today, a report card.

subllibrm said:
1. Calvin was not the author of TULIP.
2. My reformed friends dispute your application of limited atonement. The limit is not referring to availability but of effect. The opposite would be unlimited atonement, which would be universalism.
Click to expand...
1 John 2:2 He is the propitiation (atoning sacrifice) for our sins (Christians), and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.
2 Peter 2:1 But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction.

To take a life or death stand on the hill that Jesus didn’t die for the sins of the whole world when two different apostles said he did is ludicrous. Some people are so tied to a creed (whether Calvin penned the T.U.L.I.P. or not) that they must justify their belief for fear that if there is a disagreement on a single point, their theology will be destroyed. I believe only God grants repentance unto life (Acts 11:18), apart from man’s help because no man seeks after God (Rom 3:11). I believe the elect were “ordained to eternal life” (Acts 13:48) and “chosen before the foundation of the world” (Eph 1:4). We are saved by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. Is there any heresy in what I have said?
 
biscuit1953 said:
1 John 2:2 He is the propitiation (atoning sacrifice) for our sins (Christians), and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.
Click to expand...

What does "propitiation" mean, and how does it apply to every individual in the whole world?
 
Ransom said:
I've never heard of this song before and have no opinon.

Except that since you misrepresented the lyrics, your opinion is disregarded.
Click to expand...
My opinion is just as good as your opinion. My opinion is you have misrepresented my position because I didn’t include the entire unabridged lyrics. Your opinion is disregarded for misrepresenting my opinion. If you want to justify the lyrics go right ahead.
 
biscuit1953 said:
My opinion is you have misrepresented my position because I didn’t include the entire unabridged lyrics.
Click to expand...

My opinion is that you edited out all the lyrics that weren't "down down down" to make it look stupid.

You are correct that your opinion is as good as mine. Since I have no opinion on the song, my opinion is worth nothing.
 
Ransom said:
My opinion is that you edited out all the lyrics that weren't "down down down" to make it look stupid.

You are correct that your opinion is as good as mine. Since I have no opinion on the song, my opinion is worth nothing.
Click to expand...
If you were being honest, you know I wasn’t talking about just the lyrics. I was talking about the fact that I couldn’t even understand the words even with them in front of me while watching the video. I was talking about animal like growling sounds and was contrasting a classical hymn that edifies the body of Christ as opposed to absolute gibberish that needed an interpreter. I was giving a direct contrast between a hymn by Charles Wesley, rich in doctrine that was melodious, to wild gyrations and mind numbing repetitions that meant nothing, that was supposed to be edifying to the Church. I was talking about how Charles Spurgeon tied hymnology to scripture and doctrine that edified the entire body of Christ. You misrepresented my position.
 
Last edited:
biscuit1953 said:
If you were being honest, you know I wasn’t talking about just the lyrics. I was talking about the fact that I couldn’t even understand the words even with them in front of me while watching the video.
Click to expand...

Why is that anyone's problem but yours?

When I'm faced with music I can't understand and don't like, I don't listen to it. There's no need to make a public display of tearing my robes because the metal chick growls and I can't make the lyrics out. I'm not the intended audience.
 
Ransom said:
I've never heard of this song before and have no opinon.

Except that since you misrepresented the lyrics, your opinion is disregarded.
Click to expand...
One of these days I may go through all 849 threads and try to find one time where you ever admitted you were wrong about anything.

“There is nothing progressive about being pigheaded and refusing to admit a mistake.” C.S. Lewis

​
 
Ekklesian said:
Everyone believes in Limited Atonement. The disagreement is on the limiter. Is it man or God?
Click to expand...
The apostles were saying that the shed blood of Christ was sufficient, not only for our sins, but for the sins of the whole world. I have never heard a five pointer even admit that. Peter came right out and stated in unquestionable language that Jesus paid for the sins of even the false prophets and those that bring in damnable heresies with his blood. Is that a damnable heresy?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top