It has no resolution period. If it was a known fact, then there’d be no ongoing debate as to the veracity one way or the other. Anyone who says differently is full of poppycock. All we can do is put our trust and faith in God and hope for the best.
Is God angry with sin , and was sin the Sovereign plan of God ?
- Thread starter Leatherneck0311
- Start date
OK, let me rephrase: it has no known resolution. I’ve read all of the philosophical arguments for both sides. The fact that there are two sides proves my point. This isn’t an issue that can be resolved empirically.
I
Jhn 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. Calvinist change “world” to mean some, and “whosoever” to mean only the “elect”. / 1Jo 2:2 - And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for-the sins of the whole world. Calvinist deny that Jesus sacrifice was for everyone and change “ for the sins of the whole world” to mean for the “ elect” only. Changing the meaning and context doesn’t make them right it makes them deceived.
Heb 11:6 - But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to Godmust believe that he is, andthat he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. To even go to God you must believe( have faith) that He is.
If folks didn’t change meanings of words and the context of verses there would be nothing to disagree about. E.G. —>
They do not change the meaning of the world.I
If folks didn’t change meanings of words and the context of verses there would be nothing to disagree about. E.G. —>Jhn 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. Calvinist change “world” to mean some, and “whosoever” to mean only the “elect”. / 1Jo 2:2 - And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for-the sins of the whole world. Calvinist deny that Jesus sacrifice was for everyone and change “ for the sins of the whole world” to mean for the “ elect” only. Changing the meaning and context doesn’t make them right it makes them deceived.Heb 11:6 - But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to Godmust believe that he is, andthat he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. To even go to God you must believe( have faith) that He is.
They do not change the meaning of whosoever. If someone believes, they are a whosoever. Neither Calvinists nor non-Calvinists (except for universalists) believe that everyone in the world is a whosoever.
As I stated before, I was raised in a non-Calvinist Baptist church. It was not until my late teens/early adulthood that I encountered Calvinists. Having studied the issue thoroughly enough, I’ve come to the conclusion that it’s simply not knowable one way or the other, but in my heart, I hope Calvinism is not true, because I’d hate to think that there are babies being born into the world without a chance of salvation because they were not elected.I
If folks didn’t change meanings of words and the context of verses there would be nothing to disagree about. E.G. —>Jhn 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. Calvinist change “world” to mean some, and “whosoever” to mean only the “elect”. / 1Jo 2:2 - And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for-the sins of the whole world. Calvinist deny that Jesus sacrifice was for everyone and change “ for the sins of the whole world” to mean for the “ elect” only. Changing the meaning and context doesn’t make them right it makes them deceived.Heb 11:6 - But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to Godmust believe that he is, andthat he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. To even go to God you must believe( have faith) that He is.
No sadly not everyone is saved because they reject the truth.—>1Jo 2:2 - And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for-the sins of the whole world. They reject what God offered.
I admire your dedication and passion to this issue. It’s obvious that for you, Calvinism is not merely an academic debate, but the essence of your view of Christianity.No worries—>Rev 22:17 - And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say,Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.
And so there is a way into the fold other than the Door, and that is to die in infancy.No worries—>Rev 22:17 - And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say,Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.
Man, we're on the wrong side of the abortion debate!
Watch..
If Leatherneck tries to respond to the actual question, it will be by . . . changing the meanings of words and context of verses.
So you believe the same about "whosoever" as Calvinists do.
Why did you stop you should have read on a little farther in the same chapter.
Paul’s answer:
Last edited:
If anyone gets to heaven it will be through Jesus His is the only name given under heaven whereby men must be saved, and in Revelation it is Jesus and the Holy Spirit offering the water of life freely.—>Rev 22:17 - And the Spirit-and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say,Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.
What did I tell you?Paul’s answer:Rom 9:30 - What shall we say then? That the Gentiles,which followed not after righteousness, have attainedto righteousness, even the righteousness which is even the righteousness of faith.You cannot ignore the context of all scripture and force it into a few verses from Romans 9, well you’re not to supposed to.
“Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?“ The Calvinist stresses that God makes the clay into whatever He wishes, some vessels of honor and some of dishonor. While this is true, their error is in assuming that the clay has no choice as to which he will be.What did I tell you?
If we look up the Potter and the clay in the Old Testament to see what passage Paul is referring to, we wind up in Jeremiah 18, where God tells Jeremiah to watch and learn from the potter at the wheel. There we see that when the clay becomes “marred” in God’s hand, He reserves the right to start over so that He can still bring glory to Himself despite the rebellion of the clay. In other words, He has every right to be glorified by our lives, and will be glorified by our lives, whether by our obedience or by our rebellion. He also declares that if a nation or kingdom (the clay) repents, then He also will repent of the evil He is planning to bring on that nation or kingdom. God clearly teaches through Jeremiah 18 that the “clay” has a choice! (Don’t take my word for it; read it for yourself!). https://israeliteindeed.wordpress.com/calvinism/understanding-romans-9-without-the-calvinist-spin/
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2012
- Messages
- 11,061
- Reaction score
- 2,149
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
