I have talked many times to That man on RawChristainsuperhuman and he dont get it and wont get it. As you know God dont want him to get it Matthew 13:11 He replied, "The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them.
@rockstarcola100 Since before the beginning of creation God has purposed to make a people for himself. In the process of this purpose God is revealing to those he has called to be his people of how he, as Peter puts it, has 'According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness..' (2 Pet 1:3a). this life and godliness being all of Jesus who declared that he is the Way, the Life and the Truth-Jesus is everything to all they will ever want or need.
@rockstarcola100 it is in fact this truth which is spoken throughout the Bible, but best summed up by Jeremiah when he speaks of the name of him that would save his people: THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS (Jer 23:6). Which Jeremiah later when he speaks of those being saved as being called: The LORD our righteousness (Jer 33:16). Which is further revealed by Paul in 2 Corinthians 5:21
For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
@rockstarcola100 there is one major difference to be noted between Adam and Jesus: Jesus was always beholding the Father. Jesus, as the prophet Isaiah tells us, was filled with the Spirit of God. Jesus didn't fall because the Spirit of God was always with him. What is testified here is that man-even under the most perfect circumstances as Adam found himself in-will fall. the only righteousness that endures forever, without fail is that righteousness that is God's.
@rockstarcola100 with Adam a unique question is raised. How/Why did Adam-being a man who God stated had made upright (very good)-choose to rebel against the command of God? what needs to be really considered and meditated upon is what is the difference between Adam & Jesus? Both were without sin (until Adam rebelled). What was it about Jesus that kept him, during that hour of temptation, from falling into sin; whereas Adam in his did fall?
Yes, he set himself up perfectly for my following responses. I totally agree. It's the real reason why nobody heard from him again outside of the Youtube / Paltalk clique of reformers. He completely flopped.
My opinion is this, congragulations on your great "knowledge" about the bible. All that time spent compiling this video to flex your brain power against another's proves nothing but arrogance. Dang, concerned about the depravity of man? Get off your high horse and youtube, and go spread the gospel.
So according to your logic you would have to say that it is entirely just for you to throw your dog alive into a burning incinerator, to punish the poor animal for disobeying your (completely illogical) command! The dog deserves to burn for being what it cannot help being,according to your perverted theology. The fact that you build your theology on subjective statements from the Psalms (ripped out of context) tells us all we need to know about the satanic depravity of Calvinist 'thinking'.
@The1066Al You're being too easy on the Calvinists. In their view the dog was bred for the specific purpose of having it disobey your command so it could then be thrown into the fire - all done to show how "glorious" your character is. Calvinism comes from the mind of a depraved murderer - it's a doctrine of demons & long overdue to be tossed into the scrapheap of condemned heresies.
@JackMWolfe I couldn't agree more. As a Christian I've had enough of treating some theological positions with kid gloves, for fear of being accused of being 'unloving' (as I have been in the past concerning this debate). As we say here in England: I call a spade a spade. Likewise I call 'injustice' by its proper name, and don't wish to dress it up as 'God's sovereignty'. Calvinism is just a cover for a deep-seated, personal hatred of the human race.
@RawChristianSuperman: Your videos are also based on a false premise and you also use selected material. Face it dude, you got owned. This video is better, more entertaining, and also more accurate. It explains the points better than your pompous face flapping away in front of a cheap camera. You should go back to seminary, if you ever went in the first place, and take a few refresher courses. Please stop making videos, you are doing no one any good with you lies and inaccuracies.
No, I pretty soundly destroyed him with my own video responses. And...where is he now? Up and vanished like every other big talker once they abruptly run out of verses.
But hey, since the peanut gallery is full of armchair experts, how bout it small fry? Where is your 'sound rebuttal'? Your plethora of scripture? Step up to the plate.
This video explains the T well, but you know all the arminians are going to stop at the fact you used a dog to compare with an animal and wont see the obvious truth you presented. They will just say "Humans are different than dogs!! Thats an unfair analogy!"
Semi on-topic: from my studies of nutrition, the turkey ham is healthier, and given a choice I'd take the meat.
To address the topic: I have no difficulty with Total Depravity. I have only recently come to understand these doctrines, but they are all easily proved from the Bible.
Still waiting on your great comeback video, Mark. Over 6 months now. Bawk bawk bawk. You wouldn't have given me this long, not with all that boasting or elaborate gimmicks.
Omgosh!! Thanks for posting --- Brody is hilarious in illustrating how ALL we like sheep have gone astray. There is NONE that doeth right, no not one.
According to Romans Chapter 5, Christ died for the **ungodly** while we were YET **sinners** Christ died for us. We were DEAD in sins. With regards to salvation, we did not have "free will" ....in other words you didn't wake up one morning and say "hey i think i wanna be saved today!!"
@GreenCures Nobody comes to God on their own, God must call them. He convicts them of sin, shows them their need for a Savior, & calls them to repentance - but none of that negates the fact they can refuse His call. Salvation ORIGINATES with God's will but it ENDS with man's as each person must choose to either accept Christ or not. Salvation is a GIFT, & as with all gifts it can be rejected. God neither forces a relationship with Himself on anyone nor does He withhold it.
@GreenCures I don't disagree with any of that - God gets all the glory. A destitue pauper reaching out to accept a gift of bread or a drowning man grabbing a lifeline has no basis of boasting how he "saved himself" by the excercise of his free will - that's a mischaracterization by Calvinists to promote their theological rubbish. But the fact remains that they MUST choose to reach out & accept the gift when God offers it to them - He doesn't force anyone to be saved nor withhold it either.
It's so telling when men try and deny total depravity,you know they're just about to tell us how cool their free will is next.Why do people think their 'free will' is so great? I mean all my ''Free Will ever did for me is cause me to hate God,deny the truth and want Hell,it surly never chose to do anything Godly.My free will never caused me to choose Jesus either,it kept me from coming,it took God's will to save me.Then I prayed for God to replace whatever will I had with His will.
@CBALLEN "I mean all my ''Free Will ever did for me is cause me to hate God,deny the truth and want Hell,it surly never chose to do anything Godly"
Nothing has changed, & it even got worse - you now use your free will to ignore or change the scriptures, to preach a false gospel, to blaspheme the true God while promoting a counterfeit who has Satan's character, to mischaracterize other's beliefs & falsely accuse them, etc, etc. Like Judas, you'd be better if you had never been born.
@CBALLEN "Your god is Satan,only Satan is ignorant,same as your god."
You used your free will to post this, or are you claiming that the Holy Spirit inspired it & caused, even FORCED you to write it - guiding each keystroke? You blind fools who try to deny the existence of free will don't even comprehend the implications of such an idiotic belief - who else but YOU is responsible for posting your blasphemous gibberish?! Denying free will is like trying to deny the existence of air!
Reverend RawChristianSuperman, if you would not have been in such a rush to reply, you would have noticed that I wrote "in addition to the Scriptures". Although, equating antiquated methods of travel with the deficient biblical knowledge of men like Calvin, Turretin and the likes totally makes sense. I'm saying all this in light of the more reliable knowledge base available made up of men like Ruggerio, Hunt and yourself in this information age.
Since you replied to me without actually directing it to me, I think I owe you an answer.
When was the last time you actually took on the likes of myself, Lou Ruggerio, Chuck Smith, et all? Your beliefs are still based off the work of ancient dead men, while you'll find that ours has actually advanced in the past 300 years. Why do you think Matt Slick, James White, Sproul etc, WON'T debate publicly anymore? Too many beatings. Even October31st (Mark) has shied away from his boasts.
@RawChristianSuperman This whole thing is not about the edfication of the brethren but about U. It is apparent U R driven by pride & vainglory. From UR comments on UR profile 2 the videos & repsonses U make.
Notice UR reply: "When was the last time you took on the likes of myself..."
Isn't that just so reekingly prideful? I encourage U 2 take a moment 2 beat your breast & not even lift UR haughty eyes 2 heaven and cry out like that publican, 'God be merciful to me a sinner!"
You made the big claims of holding to Calvinism in spite of the "information age" and the facts given by my contemporaries that destroy this out of date nonsense dogma. It is you who glorifies ancient dead men and dare I say, esteems them as the mouth of God Himself. And you call ME prideful because I challenged you? You consider THEIR drivel divinely inspired, so don't even label me as haughty just because I slap them down and call them primitive--as they are.
I love the illustration with your dog. Don't eat the ham, eat the banana. It baffles me how anyone can deny that we are Totally Depraved. Even our good works are as filthy rags in the sight of God.
TheWoodsOfJordan has seen the light. I don't think he will be defending your stupid Calvinism any longer. Do you people actually teach this bullshit to your children? You disgust me with your bullshit.
In other words our lives should be marked by obedience to the law of liberty. Loving God and loving my neighbor just as Christ did is my passion and desire.
@AaronM14.Don't you think that everyone who is truly born of God's spirit lives by the same principle? Didn't Paul declare; Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come." Everyone who is in Christ practices the things of which you speak. Most are honest about their short comings and nevertheless strive and labor daily to be conformed to Christ's image. Its only those who proclaim they have achieved perfection that are suspect.
It depends on each soul. I mean see the fruits of Monty Collier and his group. It just never ceases to amaze me how someone who wears the name of Christ bring so much reproach to the church. I believe it's possible for someone to sin unto death and I believe Monty is passed that stage. I sincerely hope I'm wrong concerning Monty but his repentance is highly unlikely.
@AaronM144000.... Well, I am more apt to believe that Monty is in Christ than any man who claims they don't sin at all.. Seems to me that when a man convinces himself that he is sinless doesn't have the light of the Holy Spirit to point out his darkness. They have compared themselves with themselves and not compared themselves with God. I can't see how a man could ever compare himself to God, and proclaim that he was sinless. Those are they who are lost.
Josephus, a credible Jewish historian wrote Antiquities 1.1.4 "But when God came into the garden, Adam, who was wont before to come and converse with him, being conscious of his wicked behavior, went out of the way. This behavior SURPRISED God...I had before determined about you both, how you might lead a happy life, without any affliction..."
Josephus, a credible Jewish historian wrote Antiquities 1.1.4 "But when God came into the garden, Adam, who was wont before to come and converse with him, being conscious of his wicked behavior, went out of the way. This behavior SURPRISED God...I had before determined about you both, how you might lead a happy life, without any affliction..."
How did the angels make a choice to sin without a desire to do so? Hmm, they couldnt, so where did the desire come from in their perfect being? God had to put it there.
Remember in heaven God will take ALL desire to sin OUT of the believers, we will NEVER be ABLE to sin again.
If a free will open system we are only free to choose from a limited number of choices in reality. We are not free enough to fly to the moon but we can desire to fly to the moon if we wanted.
I never said calvies believe in an open system. The strawman I am refering to is that "man is not free to fly to the moon" which I have heard umpteen times come from the calvinists I've dealt with. According to them even missing a basketball shot is a sin and falling short of God's glory and was something Christ had to die for. This is ridiculous.
@AaronM144000 "man is not free to fly to the moon" you will have to explain this a little more, we flew to the moon, but I dont think it was outside of Gods decree.
Missing a basketball shot is due to the fall (loss of perfection) but sin, hmm, I have already shown just playing basketball is sin to the wicked.
according to this Pro 21:4 An high look, and a proud heart, and the plowing of the wicked, is sin. Is playing basket ball a sin to the wicked? (my grandma would have said playing backetball is sin period, LOL)
When we speak of freedom we refer to moral choices not capabilities. Man by his own self is not capable of flying to the moon and in that sense man has limited freedom but when it comes to moral choices man has contingency. And when I brought up the freedom to do between good and evil these non sensical calvinists bring up irrelevant examples like "man not being able to fly to the moon as if flying to the moon was a moral obligation"
Ok, "man not being able to fly to the moon as if flying to the moon was a moral obligation" I have never heard that one before so you had me lost.
But I am still trying to figure out what this has to do with our discussion. The wicked do make good moral choices, I would think Hitler loved his mother.That is not Total Depravity and thats not what Oct. was demonstrating in this video.
Either way Mark doesnt prove anything. Like I made it clear with the example of the man choosing to marry between a woman or a man shows that the compatibilist view fails the test. Alright before this digresses any further let move on to the next thread.
@AaronM144000 I'll take that as a no. The bride could not marry the bridegroom, untill the bridegroom called for the the bride. (Picture of salvation) In fact the groom had to carry the bride into the house.
I don't see what your point is and how it has to relate to compatibilism. Man by nature has to choose a woman to be his spouse cause it's the nature he's born with and God has designed it to be so.
@AaronM144000... May I interject?? I have found that most "sinless perfectionist" don't know exactly what sinlessness is. There is a reason Christ said "there is but one that is good"... God is the mark of perfection. All His thoughts, emotions, motives,and actions are pure. So His state of being is the plumb line of perfection. For one to say they are sinless, is to say they are exactly like God in every way. There is a distinct reason that Christ said there is only One good.
Yes and I am in union with Christ. So it is not I who lives but Christ in me. The Bible says as He is so are we in the world and we are the sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.
@AaronM144000..cont... For one to claim sinlessness is to say that every thought, emotion, motive, and action are pure. That the thoughts they have are the thoughts of God, without exception.That all their motives for every action is controlled by love and a denial of self. The man who is sinless, has no possessions, for he has forsaken them all for the good of others. Every action is of service to others, every one, and no action is a result of his wants or needs.
@AaronM144000.. cont... And another example.. Aaron, do you ever worry about paying your bills or about food on the table? I know I do! Has not the Lord commanded not to worry about such things. Has He not commanded us not to worry what tomorrow will bring? I highly doubt that any man will deny worrying about such things, and yet the Lord has commanded us not to. The mark of perfection is so high, there is not a man on earth who continually does good and who never sins.
We teach a perfection in love. And in perfect love we fulfill the whole law. We view the very essence of sin as SELFISHNESS and HATE towards God and neighbor, and utter FOOLISHNESS. Bearing in mind that we are image bearers of God we make every effort to try to abstain from sin. In other words holiness is the norm. Sin is the exception. Repentance is the exception handlers.
I had no choice. I felt You were just beating around the bush not addressing the point directly. It just so happens by the grace of God in me I am more linient than Paul who wanted to castrate the Judaizers in Galatians. :)
@AaronM144000 .. On that note, let me ask you Aaron, do the men you know who proclaim they are sinless compare themselves to the holiness of God? Or do they compare themselves to the world and to the letter of the Law? I think you will find upon further probing that those men would never compare their themselves with God. For if they did, they would default into wretches. They would beat their chest, unwilling to even lift their eyes to heaven.
Well Mark your analogy with your puppy choosing the turkey ham doesnt mirrow free will and contingency very well. If we are only accustomed to a certain nature we will never have contingency. Well answer me this. God tell man you can either marry a woman and consumate the marriage with her or marry a man and practice illicit sex. Do you believe man has contingency over here. Which is h most likely to choose?
There is no contingency with God, God has decreed ALL things.
You miss the point with this marriage thing, man does not have to marry a man to prove the sinful nature, ALL that he does is sinful, even good things by human standards. He can do nothing good in the sight of a Holy God. Pro 21:4 An high look, and a proud heart, and the plowing of the wicked, is sin.
@AaronM144000 A good thing like plowing a field to raise food for the family is sin for the wicked. God looks at that man plowing with disgust, what he is doing is repugnant and a stench in the nostrils of a Holy God.
So even something as wonderful as marriage(between man and women) to the wicked is still sin.
It's strange You quote Dr. Bob Morey in that God has a Free will and can do whatever he pleases with his creatures. And now you tell me God has no contingency. Second of all God has written the laws in our hearts, both Jew and Gentile. And Romans 2 says Gentiles do by nature things required by the law so they are w/o excuse. Romans1 says homosexuals do things which are against nature.
2 : not logically necessary; especially : empirical
3 a : happening by chance or unforeseen causes b : subject to chance or unseen effects : unpredictable c : intended for use in circumstances not completely foreseen
Humans are made in God's image. And you are right human nature is not sin nature. Sin nature is created by a human free will choice though persistant habitual sinning.
No, we get our sin nature from our father Adam, it is deepened by persistant habitual sinning. The image of God we still retain after the fall is our intellect,we think and reason. Righteousness is lost, the only way for us to be righteous again is through the righteousness of Christ, we MUST be clothed in HIS righteousness.
Demons do not and have never believed the Gospel of Christ.....they believe in the doctrine of the Trinity. They know the wrath of God, which is why they shudder. They're no more saved than Romanists. This is what James 2:19 tells us. It cannot, therefore, be assumed that they ever had a type of 'saving faith' without works.
Exactly. I was replying to those who think that James 2:19 somehow implies that the demons had faith on Christ but showed no works. Demons are demons and would never believe that Christ had died for their salvation.
Sorry, I wasn't really responding to anyone here......sometimes I live in my own head and respond to people I've encountered in the past.
@RawChristianSuperman: Please explain how we ought to interpret John 6. If it fits an Arminian paradigm so nicely, then please demonstrate. All I ever saw when I was an Arminian was either complete avoidance of or disdain for the chapter.
@afrikitty: Clark's primary area of expertise was in philosophy; he delved into theology. Norman Geisler, William Lane Craig, Alvin Plantinga et al philosophers do the same thing, but that does not make them Biblical theologians.
@ defendingcalvinism: I don't quite understand why you accuse Red Beetle of holding to federal vision when he's posted videos against it.
Reference: and because I *won't* make an unsubstantiated claim, for those interested in the veracity, here are links showing Ron Tolson (mentioned in below post) denies the Trinity and believes in 3 "Manifestations" of God. Tolson's church was founded by pentecostal "apostles lee and shirley pace." They believe in modern day prophets (and Liz, they also *don't* believe faith is assent).
Great video. Keep up the good work. Frankly, I'm getting tired of seeing all these alleged "refutations" of the great Doctrines of Grace which have no true basis in reality and in what we actually believe as Reformed Christians.
I believe theres a bit of confusion about the beginning of your video...theres choice, but not really, but there is, but not really, and I'm going to get you on that.
But you brought up john 6, and romans 3, and my retort will bury your doctrine...in love. You may be aware that Louis Ruggerio stopped James White dead in his tracks when White went to John 6 in 2003, and he hasn't recovered yet....Well I can go one up on Lou with that.
You also finished with some high G evasive maneuvers. ;)
@RawChristianSuperman First, Rev. Anderson, I have to say that your videos "refuting Calvinism" are in fact built upon ignorance of the Doctrines of Grace. Please, why are you fighting against it when you don't understand it? Secondly, your videos are filled with sarcasm and whit that don't help your case. To be honest, it's sad to see this kind of attitude from a Rev. who is trying to teach. Third, have you even read "Drawn by the Father" by James White? From what I have seen, I doubt you have.
@RawChristianSuperman Wow... First of all, Rev. I wasn't trying to defend the doctrines of grace in a single comment. The video does that. I was merely pointing out that your ATTITUDE needs to be fixed. Get the picture? Secondly, you didn't answer my question about reading "Drawn by the Father." What does it matter, AT ALL, if you have spoken to him or not? What does it matter if I have or have not? I asked if you READ his book. You dismiss his interpretation of John 6. Well... did you read it?
In other words, I have debated James White many years ago, I don't need to read his book to hear his positions, Louis Ruggerio debated him on John 6 too, specifically "being drawn by the father", White fails at defending verse 44.
Lou threw White a curveball with some verses he never heard before. It was funny listening to, the Calvinist interpretation of 6:44 is really easy to debunk.
Oh how sad! Thank you for openly proving to everyone here that you are intellectually dishonest. "Gee, I'm not going to actually READ White for myself (even though Drawn by the Father is only about 60-80 pages long)... I'm just going to declare him as "bunk" because someone else in a debate did something clever. Sad. And you call yourself a Rev.? I expected more from you.
But why should I have? You clearly don't even understand Calvinism as your videos show... again, very sad.
Why should I read Calvinist books and put money into his pocket? I find his very own editorials on the internet for free, I can listen to his diatribe every day hes on the radio for free, I have John Piper, and Matt Slicks articles for free as well, including Spurgeon, Calvin, Beza, Luther, etc..
Sparky, do you really think he has something we (the doctrinal masters) haven't heard up to 3,000 times before? You all drink from the same punchbowl. That's what makes this so easy.
@RawChristianSuperman As I said, these are all excuses to not be intellectually honest. Yes, I realize that there are things available for free; but to use those as an excuse to say "Well, I'm not actually going to take the time to READ his in-depth study" is just sad.
No matter how many MP3's, articles, or editorials you find online, you will never get the amount of depth and detail as you would find in a book dedicated to the subject. That is a fact.
Try this, buy it for me and I'll read it. If it's as god-awful of a book, stacked and loaded with eisegesis as nearly every bit of Calvinist material, I may even add it to my website and make a video.
Besides, why am I even surprised that you would call yourself a "doctrinal master"? It's truly unbelievable. If you are a "doctrinal master" then you should be able to fairly and properly represent Calvinism in order to refute it in your videos. As DefendingCalvinism here has shown, TWICE (with more to come), you clearly do not understand what you are fighting against. That's dishonest. And if you were a "doctrinal master" then you wouldn't be scared of reading his book dedicated to the subject.
Show me where I have not represented Calvinism accurately. Because DefCalv is about to get a doctrinal backhand of a reply, since it is becoming more apparent every day by my decade straight of daily debates that I know Calvinism better than its adherents.
If you wish to, by all means, step up to the plate and show me where the material contained in these videos is NOT a part of Calvinism. He hasn't.
@RawChristianSuperman I'm utterly shocked at your style of response. Your pride is so overwhelming you that you can't even SEE how you are misrepresenting the doctrine you so desperately hate. It's sad how you prefer to willingly fight a straw-man than actually learn what we have to say.
I see no difference between your method of "apologetics" than from what I see from atheists. And that, my friend, is a very sad thing. I pray that God changes your heart because it needs to be changed.
@RawChristianSuperman Wow... are you kidding me? Did you not read what I wrote a few comments back? "First of all, Rev. I wasn't trying to defend the doctrines of grace in a single comment. The video does that. I was merely pointing out that your ATTITUDE needs to be fixed. Get the picture?" Are you really so thin skinned that hearing that your attitude needs to change is considered "ad hominem"? Better is open rebuke than love that is concealed. Change your attitude; it's unbecoming of a Rev.
@RawChristianSuperman I sure do hope that people can see this little "back-and-forth" we have here. They will be able to clearly see that you can't even properly represent someone's COMMENTS, let a lone an entire doctrinal system, as the video above shows. You put words in my mouth; you assume to know what I am talking about; and you assume to know my motives... EVEN THOUGH I TOLD YOU WHAT THEY WERE!
@RawChristianSuperman The video speaks for itself, Rev. Your attitude and pride is getting close to pathetic at this point. You REFUSE to accept that you are improperly representing Calvinism. Why? Well, I can only conclude that your arguments hang on misrepresentation and you know this. Your dishonesty is unbecoming of any Christian, and I can only pray that God's grace will reveal how sad your actions are.
There has been no misrepresentation, that is merely a stalling effort at distraction on the part of DefCalv. If only you knew your doctrine better.
Fortunately for me I am in the final stages of editing my response video. If anything is to show, its that Calvinists will resort to any excuse and dance around the subject forever to avoid confronting verses.
Afterall, it's what you're doing, you made an offensive move, and I matched you on it, only to have you back down.
@RawChristianSuperman Amazing how prideful you are. As I said, I was pointing out that your attitude needs to change. Are you misrepresenting Calvinism? Yes. But that's not the point of my comment. YOU made that the point of my comment. Any honest minded person can see that. However, your "honesty" isn't as important as defending your theological views.
Again, pathetic. I'm done with this. You call yourself a reverend? I feel bad for your church. They are have a liar for a pastor.
No, I did not make that the point of your comment, you stated it quite fine all by yourself in your own opening words to me via your first post with my name in it....
"First, Rev. Anderson, I have to say that your videos "refuting Calvinism" are in fact built upon ignorance of the Doctrines of Grace."
Keep trying slither around it, honest Abe. Any more cheap attempts?
@RawChristianSuperman Wow... way to leave out how I qualified MY OWN WORDS in my next comment...
"I wasn't trying to defend the doctrines of grace in a single comment. The video does that. I was merely pointing out that your ATTITUDE needs to be fixed"
As I said, any HONEST person will see that you are putting words in my mouth at this point. Notice how I wrote "the video does that" in my comment. I was very clear; you are distorting my words, just as you distort Calvinism.
I'm actually ashamed of calling your reverend. I'm only doing so because it is a title you have apparently earned, despite the blatant lying.
Pride comes before the fall, my friend. I just pray that you don't fall too hard, or better yet that your pride is slain and that you don't fall at all. Grace be with you, Rev. I'm done with this fiasco. The honest person will see who is truly being truthful and who is distorting reality.
You can try to sneak around being passive aggressive all you want. If you were truly honest, you would admit that you tried to slap me down with your own opinions first before retreating with your hands in the air, trying to look innocent upon realizing that I am more than up for going verses-for-verses with you.
I had a hard time keeping it in myself, when I saw Mark give the example of the ham and the banana, tried to illustrate that this was a choice, then demonstrated that his dog could not make a choice, then tried to affirm that Calvinism doesn't deny that we can choose.
What a mess of contradictions.
I even had to make a video replying mainly to that one part. Needless to say, he never got back with me, and discontinued communication.
@RawChristianSuperman Oh, I'm sorry. I am not laughing with you as you suppose. I was only laughing because it had been several months that I had seen any of Mark's videos. When I saw this one it just reminded me of how much I have missed seeing them. I guess if you would have looked at my channel profile you would not have wasted your time trying to convince me of his alleged "contradictions". Have a good day Sir.
I knew you weren't laughing with me, if my dripping sarcasm wasn't obvious. I just couldn't let the opportunity pass, since your response was actually to me.
If I can't convince you of all the contradictory logic that Calvinism carries, perhaps you need to meet a friend of mine, a Mr. Webster. He wrote a best selling dictionary your ilk should read sometime.
@RawChristianSuperman If Mark's arguments cannot convince you otherwise about the futility and shallowness of Arminian theology, then perhaps your friend, Noah Webster, another fellow Calvinist, might be able to. Good day Sir.
Mark's arguments couldn't convince anybody, that's why the more prolific Calvinists avoid such gimmicks and positions.
I myself not being completely Arminian, care little about their depth. Since he was a Calvinist (though not a theologian), perhaps you would take Websters word for it on definitions like "contradiction" and related words like "hypocrisy" and see how terribly reformed theology fumbles when confronted with criticism.
@RawChristianSuperman I’m not here to defend Mark. I’m sure he’s capable of doing that himself. But to address your comment about how “reformed theology fumbles when confronted with criticism”:
Mine, Louis Ruggerio, Chuck Smith, I could go on, but your classic answer will be of course "They're not qualified" or maybe "They are all ignorant" followed by a tempered rant about their attributes.
The bottom line is, he tried to make me look silly, and I responded with a total humiliation. This is the reason he acted all tough and challenged me, and now...w-w-where is he? Where are his glib remarks and pithy comebacks? He doesn't even comment. He knows he was caught.
@RawChristianSuperman Oh that's right, according to your profile your a "veritable expert" in these matters because you've been doing this for 20 yrs. Regrettably, in addition to the Scriptures, I should have been consulting you, instead of Calvin, Turretin, Shedd, Berkhof, Hodge, Strong and all the other Reformed heretics concerning these things.
It's not just that I've been studying for over 2 decades, it's that I have access to more information at my fingertips in seconds than every name you just dropped ever had in their lives.
You are trusting the knowledge base and resources of people who lived at a time when horses and sailboats were the alternate methods of travel.
I suppose you would take their advice on medicine and nutrition too.
No, I did not make that the point of your comment, you stated it quite fine all by yourself in your own opening words to me via your first post with my name in it....
"First, Rev. Anderson, I have to say that your videos "refuting Calvinism" are in fact built upon ignorance of the Doctrines of Grace."
Keep trying slither around it, honest Abe. Any more cheap attempts?
@RawChristianSuperman I don't need to prove anything; the video has already done that. You are saying that I do because you are dodging the real issue, and that's just sad as well.
@RawChristianSuperman Lou Ruggerio does not know calvinistic doctrine and I've exposed him many times on Paltalk as well as youtube. If you believe that he was victorius over James White then your blind.
2ndly, I illustrated to you how one has a choice and chooses in accordance with his nature.
I don't understand the term "high G evasive maneuvers."
It's a convenient way out of something by saying someone doesn't know this or that doctrine. But it is very difficult to prove this when someone quotes actual subject matter. I get it often enough, but after I quote source material, I rarely hear back from my opponents when they make that their sole talking point.
I will gladly go futher and explain more in my video response...
Oh sheesh...this message is for Liz. I'm only posting this at the top b/c I'm not going to fish through the comments at this point.
You know, as I read your comments Liz, you seem to progressively go off the deep end. Who in the world here is "wanting to be like Monty?" Are you insane? I know this is a news flash for you, but the biggest problem people have with him is NOT even his theology in the first place! It's his character!
Secondly, I would like to for a minute point out your hypocrisy. You talk about not affiliating yourself with "heretics" and yet according to you (NOT me, mind you, because I consider him a brother) someone like Tali, who recently commented on your page, and who is an Arminian would be considered a "heretic," as with many others on your page.
And you have VIDEOS of Ron Tolson!! Who is a ONENESS PENTECOSTAL and who DENIES the TRINITY!!! A TRUE heretic!!! THAT YOU UPLOADED!
@Lethalhabit No. Man is NOT ABLE to do saving works, that's the definition of total depravity. We are reliant upon Christ alone. That's what the video was saying :)
@ironclad452 He said yes man can do good according to man but not SAVING GOOD?How about no matter what good man can do NONE of it can save him no matter WHAT he can or cannot do!!!!!!!!!!!!
@Lethalhabit Correct. No matter what man does, it cannot save him. But when one repents, it is God granting him repentence. When one believes, God is granting him the ability to believe. That is what "saving Good" means.
@October31st1517 So let me get what your saying so the only part God has in salvation is the fact that he GIVES you the ability to save YOURSELF?FALSE!
@Lethalhabit That's not what I said. We do not have the ability to save ourselves in any fashion, nor do we desire salvation. God must give this desire. If He does not, we will stay in the muck and mire of our sin. Look at the scriptures I give.
@October31st1517 Saving Good, I must guess is actually referring to Sanctification. We are not saved by Sanctification, which is a work the Holy Spirit does IN US. We are saved by what Christ did FOR US. Never forget that LethalHabit and NOBODY will ever be able to bamboozle you into believing anything else. Christ was the one who said "It is Finished!" He did all the work FOR US. We are saved by believing Christ's gospel.
@October31st1517 Mark NOONE goes to Hell for SIN!They go to hell for rejection of Christ sacrifice!"He that (believeth NOT is CONDEMNED ALREADY because he has NOT believed!)Man will go to hell because HE DID NOT BELIEVE!
Nobody goes to hell for rejecting the sacrifice of Christ. Many in the OT went to hell without even knowing about Christ. They go to hell because they have sinned against a Holy and Righteous Judge.
OT saints were saved by believing, but condemnation is demonstrated by unbelief, not brought about by it, just as salvation is demonstrated by good works and not brought about by it.
@ironclad452 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."Why does JESUS say they are condemned?Notice the word BECAUSE,(because THEY believed not),not because they were not picked to believe.
I believe under new covenant if we are in the holy faith in Christ we can be assured that we have been forgiven and cleansed of all past sins. Our sins are washed away by the blood of the Lamb only if we repent put our faith in Him and bring forth fruits in keeping with repentance. Which means we have to work out our salvation build ourselves in the holy faith relying solely upon the grace of God.
@AaronM144000.. I am really surprised your still on the Catholic train Aaron. Have you figured out Heb 9:12 yet? Have you figured out the phrase "obtained eternal redemption"? Let me ask you, can a man that is "eternally redeemed" be unredeemed? If he could, he wasn't "eternally" redeemed to begin with, was he? So if Christ "obtained eternal redemption" 2000 years ago for YOU Aaron, can you be unredeemed?
@AaronM144000.. No answer to my questions? Ah man, I thought you would have a good answer for me. Thats the good news Aaron. That Christ "obtained ETERNAL redemption" for all that are His, and He did so 2000 years ago.
Wow you're funny and I love the illustration you used with your dog.
Lol at "donate 20 dollars to save the whales" xD
raichuubaybee 1 month ago
I have talked many times to That man on RawChristainsuperhuman and he dont get it and wont get it. As you know God dont want him to get it Matthew 13:11 He replied, "The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them.
MrSlippin22 1 month ago
LOL like the arminians your Dog is totally Deprived! : )
MrSlippin22 1 month ago
@rockstarcola100 Since before the beginning of creation God has purposed to make a people for himself. In the process of this purpose God is revealing to those he has called to be his people of how he, as Peter puts it, has 'According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness..' (2 Pet 1:3a). this life and godliness being all of Jesus who declared that he is the Way, the Life and the Truth-Jesus is everything to all they will ever want or need.
HermitintheRain 3 months ago
@rockstarcola100 it is in fact this truth which is spoken throughout the Bible, but best summed up by Jeremiah when he speaks of the name of him that would save his people: THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS (Jer 23:6). Which Jeremiah later when he speaks of those being saved as being called: The LORD our righteousness (Jer 33:16). Which is further revealed by Paul in 2 Corinthians 5:21
For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
HermitintheRain 3 months ago
@rockstarcola100 there is one major difference to be noted between Adam and Jesus: Jesus was always beholding the Father. Jesus, as the prophet Isaiah tells us, was filled with the Spirit of God. Jesus didn't fall because the Spirit of God was always with him. What is testified here is that man-even under the most perfect circumstances as Adam found himself in-will fall. the only righteousness that endures forever, without fail is that righteousness that is God's.
HermitintheRain 3 months ago
@rockstarcola100 with Adam a unique question is raised. How/Why did Adam-being a man who God stated had made upright (very good)-choose to rebel against the command of God? what needs to be really considered and meditated upon is what is the difference between Adam & Jesus? Both were without sin (until Adam rebelled). What was it about Jesus that kept him, during that hour of temptation, from falling into sin; whereas Adam in his did fall?
HermitintheRain 3 months ago
This is real Good stuff. God bless brother!
HeavenBound2323 3 months ago
Great video. And you sir, are an outstanding teacher! I don't see your name or email or anything...
dab505279 6 months ago
Great video, it gets real at 2:50. Brilliant example of total depravity.
Judgement220 6 months ago
Perfect.
stegokitty 9 months ago
@stegokitty
Yes, he set himself up perfectly for my following responses. I totally agree. It's the real reason why nobody heard from him again outside of the Youtube / Paltalk clique of reformers. He completely flopped.
RawChristianSuperman 8 months ago
this is a great video!
nextluther12 9 months ago
Great Video !!!
JohnO318 11 months ago
My opinion is this, congragulations on your great "knowledge" about the bible. All that time spent compiling this video to flex your brain power against another's proves nothing but arrogance. Dang, concerned about the depravity of man? Get off your high horse and youtube, and go spread the gospel.
DrummerBoi181 1 year ago
So according to your logic you would have to say that it is entirely just for you to throw your dog alive into a burning incinerator, to punish the poor animal for disobeying your (completely illogical) command! The dog deserves to burn for being what it cannot help being,according to your perverted theology. The fact that you build your theology on subjective statements from the Psalms (ripped out of context) tells us all we need to know about the satanic depravity of Calvinist 'thinking'.
The1066Al 1 year ago
@The1066Al You're being too easy on the Calvinists. In their view the dog was bred for the specific purpose of having it disobey your command so it could then be thrown into the fire - all done to show how "glorious" your character is. Calvinism comes from the mind of a depraved murderer - it's a doctrine of demons & long overdue to be tossed into the scrapheap of condemned heresies.
JackMWolfe 1 year ago
@JackMWolfe I couldn't agree more. As a Christian I've had enough of treating some theological positions with kid gloves, for fear of being accused of being 'unloving' (as I have been in the past concerning this debate). As we say here in England: I call a spade a spade. Likewise I call 'injustice' by its proper name, and don't wish to dress it up as 'God's sovereignty'. Calvinism is just a cover for a deep-seated, personal hatred of the human race.
The1066Al 1 year ago
@RawChristianSuperman: Your videos are also based on a false premise and you also use selected material. Face it dude, you got owned. This video is better, more entertaining, and also more accurate. It explains the points better than your pompous face flapping away in front of a cheap camera. You should go back to seminary, if you ever went in the first place, and take a few refresher courses. Please stop making videos, you are doing no one any good with you lies and inaccuracies.
santarudolphguy 1 year ago
@santarudolphguy
No, I pretty soundly destroyed him with my own video responses. And...where is he now? Up and vanished like every other big talker once they abruptly run out of verses.
But hey, since the peanut gallery is full of armchair experts, how bout it small fry? Where is your 'sound rebuttal'? Your plethora of scripture? Step up to the plate.
RawChristianSuperman 8 months ago
This video explains the T well, but you know all the arminians are going to stop at the fact you used a dog to compare with an animal and wont see the obvious truth you presented. They will just say "Humans are different than dogs!! Thats an unfair analogy!"
MaharlikaAWA 1 year ago
@MaharlikaAWA THE GOD WILL JUST SAY "YOU ARE A FAGGOT"
Iadyboy 1 year ago
Semi on-topic: from my studies of nutrition, the turkey ham is healthier, and given a choice I'd take the meat.
To address the topic: I have no difficulty with Total Depravity. I have only recently come to understand these doctrines, but they are all easily proved from the Bible.
newbirth35 1 year ago
@newbirth35
Anything is provable when you start with a false premise and only take selected material as reference.
RawChristianSuperman 1 year ago
Still waiting on your great comeback video, Mark. Over 6 months now. Bawk bawk bawk. You wouldn't have given me this long, not with all that boasting or elaborate gimmicks.
RawChristianSuperman 1 year ago
Omgosh!! Thanks for posting --- Brody is hilarious in illustrating how ALL we like sheep have gone astray. There is NONE that doeth right, no not one.
According to Romans Chapter 5, Christ died for the **ungodly** while we were YET **sinners** Christ died for us. We were DEAD in sins. With regards to salvation, we did not have "free will" ....in other words you didn't wake up one morning and say "hey i think i wanna be saved today!!"
Not
GreenCures 1 year ago
@GreenCures Nobody comes to God on their own, God must call them. He convicts them of sin, shows them their need for a Savior, & calls them to repentance - but none of that negates the fact they can refuse His call. Salvation ORIGINATES with God's will but it ENDS with man's as each person must choose to either accept Christ or not. Salvation is a GIFT, & as with all gifts it can be rejected. God neither forces a relationship with Himself on anyone nor does He withhold it.
JackMWolfe 1 year ago
@JackMWolfe
Yep. Salvation originates with God, and can only be obtained through Christ alone.
Salvation **IS** a gift. Agreed.
A gift only God can give.
To Christ alone be all the glory.
Nothing in my hands I bring --- ONLY to the Cross I cling, for it is amazing, amazing grace that saved a wretch like me
GreenCures 1 year ago
@GreenCures I don't disagree with any of that - God gets all the glory. A destitue pauper reaching out to accept a gift of bread or a drowning man grabbing a lifeline has no basis of boasting how he "saved himself" by the excercise of his free will - that's a mischaracterization by Calvinists to promote their theological rubbish. But the fact remains that they MUST choose to reach out & accept the gift when God offers it to them - He doesn't force anyone to be saved nor withhold it either.
JackMWolfe 1 year ago
It's so telling when men try and deny total depravity,you know they're just about to tell us how cool their free will is next.Why do people think their 'free will' is so great? I mean all my ''Free Will ever did for me is cause me to hate God,deny the truth and want Hell,it surly never chose to do anything Godly.My free will never caused me to choose Jesus either,it kept me from coming,it took God's will to save me.Then I prayed for God to replace whatever will I had with His will.
CBALLEN 1 year ago
@CBALLEN "I mean all my ''Free Will ever did for me is cause me to hate God,deny the truth and want Hell,it surly never chose to do anything Godly"
Nothing has changed, & it even got worse - you now use your free will to ignore or change the scriptures, to preach a false gospel, to blaspheme the true God while promoting a counterfeit who has Satan's character, to mischaracterize other's beliefs & falsely accuse them, etc, etc. Like Judas, you'd be better if you had never been born.
JackMWolfe 1 year ago
@JackMWolfe Your god is Satan,only Satan is ignorant,same as your god.
CBALLEN 1 year ago
@CBALLEN "Your god is Satan,only Satan is ignorant,same as your god."
You used your free will to post this, or are you claiming that the Holy Spirit inspired it & caused, even FORCED you to write it - guiding each keystroke? You blind fools who try to deny the existence of free will don't even comprehend the implications of such an idiotic belief - who else but YOU is responsible for posting your blasphemous gibberish?! Denying free will is like trying to deny the existence of air!
JackMWolfe 1 year ago
Reverend RawChristianSuperman, if you would not have been in such a rush to reply, you would have noticed that I wrote "in addition to the Scriptures". Although, equating antiquated methods of travel with the deficient biblical knowledge of men like Calvin, Turretin and the likes totally makes sense. I'm saying all this in light of the more reliable knowledge base available made up of men like Ruggerio, Hunt and yourself in this information age.
Again, lesson learned. Thank you Reverend.
unicoestilo 1 year ago
@unicoestilo
Since you replied to me without actually directing it to me, I think I owe you an answer.
When was the last time you actually took on the likes of myself, Lou Ruggerio, Chuck Smith, et all? Your beliefs are still based off the work of ancient dead men, while you'll find that ours has actually advanced in the past 300 years. Why do you think Matt Slick, James White, Sproul etc, WON'T debate publicly anymore? Too many beatings. Even October31st (Mark) has shied away from his boasts.
RawChristianSuperman 1 year ago
@RawChristianSuperman This whole thing is not about the edfication of the brethren but about U. It is apparent U R driven by pride & vainglory. From UR comments on UR profile 2 the videos & repsonses U make.
Notice UR reply: "When was the last time you took on the likes of myself..."
Isn't that just so reekingly prideful? I encourage U 2 take a moment 2 beat your breast & not even lift UR haughty eyes 2 heaven and cry out like that publican, 'God be merciful to me a sinner!"
unicoestilo 1 year ago
@unicoestilo
You made the big claims of holding to Calvinism in spite of the "information age" and the facts given by my contemporaries that destroy this out of date nonsense dogma. It is you who glorifies ancient dead men and dare I say, esteems them as the mouth of God Himself. And you call ME prideful because I challenged you? You consider THEIR drivel divinely inspired, so don't even label me as haughty just because I slap them down and call them primitive--as they are.
RawChristianSuperman 1 year ago
Thumbs up for an excellent video.
NewDirection4us 1 year ago
I love the illustration with your dog. Don't eat the ham, eat the banana. It baffles me how anyone can deny that we are Totally Depraved. Even our good works are as filthy rags in the sight of God.
proginosko 1 year ago
TheWoodsOfJordan has seen the light. I don't think he will be defending your stupid Calvinism any longer. Do you people actually teach this bullshit to your children? You disgust me with your bullshit.
lotanddaughters 1 year ago
Brodey!!!!! the Banana!!!!
prchdaword 1 year ago 2
In other words our lives should be marked by obedience to the law of liberty. Loving God and loving my neighbor just as Christ did is my passion and desire.
AaronM144000 1 year ago
@AaronM14.Don't you think that everyone who is truly born of God's spirit lives by the same principle? Didn't Paul declare; Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come." Everyone who is in Christ practices the things of which you speak. Most are honest about their short comings and nevertheless strive and labor daily to be conformed to Christ's image. Its only those who proclaim they have achieved perfection that are suspect.
ShownMercy 1 year ago
@ShownMercy
It depends on each soul. I mean see the fruits of Monty Collier and his group. It just never ceases to amaze me how someone who wears the name of Christ bring so much reproach to the church. I believe it's possible for someone to sin unto death and I believe Monty is passed that stage. I sincerely hope I'm wrong concerning Monty but his repentance is highly unlikely.
AaronM144000 1 year ago
@AaronM144000.... Well, I am more apt to believe that Monty is in Christ than any man who claims they don't sin at all.. Seems to me that when a man convinces himself that he is sinless doesn't have the light of the Holy Spirit to point out his darkness. They have compared themselves with themselves and not compared themselves with God. I can't see how a man could ever compare himself to God, and proclaim that he was sinless. Those are they who are lost.
ShownMercy 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Josephus, a credible Jewish historian wrote Antiquities 1.1.4 "But when God came into the garden, Adam, who was wont before to come and converse with him, being conscious of his wicked behavior, went out of the way. This behavior SURPRISED God...I had before determined about you both, how you might lead a happy life, without any affliction..."
AaronM144000 1 year ago
@AaronM144000
Josephus was not a Christian
1689Baptist 1 year ago
@1689Baptist
I am well aware of that. That doesnt mean he's not a good reference. I have seen Christians from your calvinistic camp cite him to prove their point.
AaronM144000 1 year ago
@AaronM144000
Yes, for history not doctrine.
1689Baptist 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Josephus, a credible Jewish historian wrote Antiquities 1.1.4 "But when God came into the garden, Adam, who was wont before to come and converse with him, being conscious of his wicked behavior, went out of the way. This behavior SURPRISED God...I had before determined about you both, how you might lead a happy life, without any affliction..."
AaronM144000 1 year ago
Did God not create everything good in the beginning. If it was so how did the angels sin if they were created good?
AaronM144000 1 year ago
@AaronM144000
How did the angels make a choice to sin without a desire to do so? Hmm, they couldnt, so where did the desire come from in their perfect being? God had to put it there.
Remember in heaven God will take ALL desire to sin OUT of the believers, we will NEVER be ABLE to sin again.
1689Baptist 1 year ago
If a free will open system we are only free to choose from a limited number of choices in reality. We are not free enough to fly to the moon but we can desire to fly to the moon if we wanted.
AaronM144000 1 year ago
@AaronM144000
Thats silly, we are talking about good and evi, not do I want ice-cream or can I fly over the moon.
1689Baptist 1 year ago
@1689Baptist
I am talking abt the same strawman come from your calvinistic proponents. I am not making this up.
AaronM144000 1 year ago
@AaronM144000
Calvinist believe in an open system? Who?
1689Baptist 1 year ago
@1689Baptist
I never said calvies believe in an open system. The strawman I am refering to is that "man is not free to fly to the moon" which I have heard umpteen times come from the calvinists I've dealt with. According to them even missing a basketball shot is a sin and falling short of God's glory and was something Christ had to die for. This is ridiculous.
AaronM144000 1 year ago
@AaronM144000 "man is not free to fly to the moon" you will have to explain this a little more, we flew to the moon, but I dont think it was outside of Gods decree.
Missing a basketball shot is due to the fall (loss of perfection) but sin, hmm, I have already shown just playing basketball is sin to the wicked.
1689Baptist 1 year ago
@1689Baptist
Yawn!!!! Next?
AaronM144000 1 year ago
@AaronM144000
There is no need to get smart, you have proven nothing yet
1689Baptist 1 year ago
@AaronM144000
according to this Pro 21:4 An high look, and a proud heart, and the plowing of the wicked, is sin. Is playing basket ball a sin to the wicked? (my grandma would have said playing backetball is sin period, LOL)
1689Baptist 1 year ago
@1689Baptist
When we speak of freedom we refer to moral choices not capabilities. Man by his own self is not capable of flying to the moon and in that sense man has limited freedom but when it comes to moral choices man has contingency. And when I brought up the freedom to do between good and evil these non sensical calvinists bring up irrelevant examples like "man not being able to fly to the moon as if flying to the moon was a moral obligation"
AaronM144000 1 year ago
@AaronM144000
Ok, "man not being able to fly to the moon as if flying to the moon was a moral obligation" I have never heard that one before so you had me lost.
But I am still trying to figure out what this has to do with our discussion. The wicked do make good moral choices, I would think Hitler loved his mother.That is not Total Depravity and thats not what Oct. was demonstrating in this video.
1689Baptist 1 year ago
@1689Baptist
Either way Mark doesnt prove anything. Like I made it clear with the example of the man choosing to marry between a woman or a man shows that the compatibilist view fails the test. Alright before this digresses any further let move on to the next thread.
AaronM144000 1 year ago
@AaronM144000.. You abandoned our dialog? Why doesn't that surprise me.
ShownMercy 1 year ago
@AaronM144000 When it comes to a man choosing a woman your looking at it from a modern perspective. Do you know ancient jewish marriage customs?
October31st1517 1 year ago
@October31st1517
What is your point?
AaronM144000 1 year ago
@AaronM144000 I'll take that as a no. The bride could not marry the bridegroom, untill the bridegroom called for the the bride. (Picture of salvation) In fact the groom had to carry the bride into the house.
October31st1517 1 year ago
@October31st1517
I don't see what your point is and how it has to relate to compatibilism. Man by nature has to choose a woman to be his spouse cause it's the nature he's born with and God has designed it to be so.
AaronM144000 1 year ago
@AaronM144000... May I interject?? I have found that most "sinless perfectionist" don't know exactly what sinlessness is. There is a reason Christ said "there is but one that is good"... God is the mark of perfection. All His thoughts, emotions, motives,and actions are pure. So His state of being is the plumb line of perfection. For one to say they are sinless, is to say they are exactly like God in every way. There is a distinct reason that Christ said there is only One good.
God bless.
ShownMercy 1 year ago
@ShownMercy
Yes and I am in union with Christ. So it is not I who lives but Christ in me. The Bible says as He is so are we in the world and we are the sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.
AaronM144000 1 year ago
@AaronM144000..cont... For one to claim sinlessness is to say that every thought, emotion, motive, and action are pure. That the thoughts they have are the thoughts of God, without exception.That all their motives for every action is controlled by love and a denial of self. The man who is sinless, has no possessions, for he has forsaken them all for the good of others. Every action is of service to others, every one, and no action is a result of his wants or needs.
Do you know any like this?
ShownMercy 1 year ago
@ShownMercy
With man it is impossible but with God all things are possible. We can do all things through Christ who strengthens us.
AaronM144000 1 year ago
@AaronM144000.. cont... And another example.. Aaron, do you ever worry about paying your bills or about food on the table? I know I do! Has not the Lord commanded not to worry about such things. Has He not commanded us not to worry what tomorrow will bring? I highly doubt that any man will deny worrying about such things, and yet the Lord has commanded us not to. The mark of perfection is so high, there is not a man on earth who continually does good and who never sins.
God bless
ShownMercy 1 year ago
@ShownMercy
We teach a perfection in love. And in perfect love we fulfill the whole law. We view the very essence of sin as SELFISHNESS and HATE towards God and neighbor, and utter FOOLISHNESS. Bearing in mind that we are image bearers of God we make every effort to try to abstain from sin. In other words holiness is the norm. Sin is the exception. Repentance is the exception handlers.
God bless.
AaronM144000 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AaronM144000 you sinned with this comment
@1689Baptist
Yawn!!!! Next?
That was not said in love, now I am not offended by it but the point is you sinned.
1689Baptist 1 year ago
@1689Baptist
I had no choice. I felt You were just beating around the bush not addressing the point directly. It just so happens by the grace of God in me I am more linient than Paul who wanted to castrate the Judaizers in Galatians. :)
AaronM144000 1 year ago
@AaronM144000 .. On that note, let me ask you Aaron, do the men you know who proclaim they are sinless compare themselves to the holiness of God? Or do they compare themselves to the world and to the letter of the Law? I think you will find upon further probing that those men would never compare their themselves with God. For if they did, they would default into wretches. They would beat their chest, unwilling to even lift their eyes to heaven.
Who do you compare your self with Aaron?
ShownMercy 1 year ago
@AaronM144000
I asked you to explain your point b/c it wasnt making sense to me.
1689Baptist 1 year ago
Well Mark your analogy with your puppy choosing the turkey ham doesnt mirrow free will and contingency very well. If we are only accustomed to a certain nature we will never have contingency. Well answer me this. God tell man you can either marry a woman and consumate the marriage with her or marry a man and practice illicit sex. Do you believe man has contingency over here. Which is h most likely to choose?
AaronM144000 1 year ago
@AaronM144000
There is no contingency with God, God has decreed ALL things.
You miss the point with this marriage thing, man does not have to marry a man to prove the sinful nature, ALL that he does is sinful, even good things by human standards. He can do nothing good in the sight of a Holy God. Pro 21:4 An high look, and a proud heart, and the plowing of the wicked, is sin.
1689Baptist 1 year ago
@AaronM144000 A good thing like plowing a field to raise food for the family is sin for the wicked. God looks at that man plowing with disgust, what he is doing is repugnant and a stench in the nostrils of a Holy God.
So even something as wonderful as marriage(between man and women) to the wicked is still sin.
1689Baptist 1 year ago
@1689Baptist
It's strange You quote Dr. Bob Morey in that God has a Free will and can do whatever he pleases with his creatures. And now you tell me God has no contingency. Second of all God has written the laws in our hearts, both Jew and Gentile. And Romans 2 says Gentiles do by nature things required by the law so they are w/o excuse. Romans1 says homosexuals do things which are against nature.
AaronM144000 1 year ago
@AaronM144000 contingent
1 : likely but not certain to happen : possible
2 : not logically necessary; especially : empirical
3 a : happening by chance or unforeseen causes b : subject to chance or unseen effects : unpredictable c : intended for use in circumstances not completely foreseen
1689Baptist 1 year ago
@AaronM144000
4 : dependent on or conditioned by something else <payment is contingent on fulfillment of certain conditions
5 : not necessitated : determined by free choice
synonyms see accidental
1689Baptist 1 year ago
@AaronM144000
This is the only one that CAN be applies to God
5 : not necessitated : determined by free choice
But I said with God, I meant as God deals with man what Man sees as an accident God has determined.
1689Baptist 1 year ago
@AaronM144000
There is a difference between human nature, and the sin nature. Homosexuality is against human nature, but it fits just fine in the sinful nature.
1689Baptist 1 year ago
@1689Baptist
Humans are made in God's image. And you are right human nature is not sin nature. Sin nature is created by a human free will choice though persistant habitual sinning.
AaronM144000 1 year ago
@AaronM144000
No, we get our sin nature from our father Adam, it is deepened by persistant habitual sinning. The image of God we still retain after the fall is our intellect,we think and reason. Righteousness is lost, the only way for us to be righteous again is through the righteousness of Christ, we MUST be clothed in HIS righteousness.
1689Baptist 1 year ago
Demons do not and have never believed the Gospel of Christ.....they believe in the doctrine of the Trinity. They know the wrath of God, which is why they shudder. They're no more saved than Romanists. This is what James 2:19 tells us. It cannot, therefore, be assumed that they ever had a type of 'saving faith' without works.
kamaujackson811 1 year ago
@kamaujackson811 I fail to see the comparison my brother. God never provided a plan of salvation for the demons. Only humans.
October31st1517 1 year ago
@October31st1517
Exactly. I was replying to those who think that James 2:19 somehow implies that the demons had faith on Christ but showed no works. Demons are demons and would never believe that Christ had died for their salvation.
Sorry, I wasn't really responding to anyone here......sometimes I live in my own head and respond to people I've encountered in the past.
God Bless
kamaujackson811 1 year ago
@kamaujackson811 Ah.......Gotcha.
October31st1517 1 year ago
Looks like RawChristianSuperman got dogged!! Pun intended!
Also, I am a bit offended; my sons name is Brody. ; p
fivepointbaptist 1 year ago
@fivepointbaptist We did not name him. His previous owner did. ;)
October31st1517 1 year ago
@RawChristianSuperman: Please explain how we ought to interpret John 6. If it fits an Arminian paradigm so nicely, then please demonstrate. All I ever saw when I was an Arminian was either complete avoidance of or disdain for the chapter.
scourge39 1 year ago
@afrikitty: Clark's primary area of expertise was in philosophy; he delved into theology. Norman Geisler, William Lane Craig, Alvin Plantinga et al philosophers do the same thing, but that does not make them Biblical theologians.
@ defendingcalvinism: I don't quite understand why you accuse Red Beetle of holding to federal vision when he's posted videos against it.
scourge39 1 year ago
Reference: and because I *won't* make an unsubstantiated claim, for those interested in the veracity, here are links showing Ron Tolson (mentioned in below post) denies the Trinity and believes in 3 "Manifestations" of God. Tolson's church was founded by pentecostal "apostles lee and shirley pace." They believe in modern day prophets (and Liz, they also *don't* believe faith is assent).
riverpraise (dot) org/index (dot) php?page=29
riverpraise (dot) org/index (dot) php?page=30
skintightpotato 1 year ago
Great video. Keep up the good work. Frankly, I'm getting tired of seeing all these alleged "refutations" of the great Doctrines of Grace which have no true basis in reality and in what we actually believe as Reformed Christians.
CmRoddy 1 year ago
I believe theres a bit of confusion about the beginning of your video...theres choice, but not really, but there is, but not really, and I'm going to get you on that.
But you brought up john 6, and romans 3, and my retort will bury your doctrine...in love. You may be aware that Louis Ruggerio stopped James White dead in his tracks when White went to John 6 in 2003, and he hasn't recovered yet....Well I can go one up on Lou with that.
You also finished with some high G evasive maneuvers. ;)
RawChristianSuperman 1 year ago
@RawChristianSuperman First, Rev. Anderson, I have to say that your videos "refuting Calvinism" are in fact built upon ignorance of the Doctrines of Grace. Please, why are you fighting against it when you don't understand it? Secondly, your videos are filled with sarcasm and whit that don't help your case. To be honest, it's sad to see this kind of attitude from a Rev. who is trying to teach. Third, have you even read "Drawn by the Father" by James White? From what I have seen, I doubt you have.
CmRoddy 1 year ago
@CmRoddy
Good Lord, your response was so jam packed with scriptures and such powerful application of verses, I don't know what to say.
As for reading White's literature, I've actually spoken to him, have you?
RawChristianSuperman 1 year ago
@RawChristianSuperman Wow... First of all, Rev. I wasn't trying to defend the doctrines of grace in a single comment. The video does that. I was merely pointing out that your ATTITUDE needs to be fixed. Get the picture? Secondly, you didn't answer my question about reading "Drawn by the Father." What does it matter, AT ALL, if you have spoken to him or not? What does it matter if I have or have not? I asked if you READ his book. You dismiss his interpretation of John 6. Well... did you read it?
CmRoddy 1 year ago
@CmRoddy
In other words, I have debated James White many years ago, I don't need to read his book to hear his positions, Louis Ruggerio debated him on John 6 too, specifically "being drawn by the father", White fails at defending verse 44.
Lou threw White a curveball with some verses he never heard before. It was funny listening to, the Calvinist interpretation of 6:44 is really easy to debunk.
RawChristianSuperman 1 year ago
Oh how sad! Thank you for openly proving to everyone here that you are intellectually dishonest. "Gee, I'm not going to actually READ White for myself (even though Drawn by the Father is only about 60-80 pages long)... I'm just going to declare him as "bunk" because someone else in a debate did something clever. Sad. And you call yourself a Rev.? I expected more from you.
But why should I have? You clearly don't even understand Calvinism as your videos show... again, very sad.
CmRoddy 1 year ago
@CmRoddy
Why should I read Calvinist books and put money into his pocket? I find his very own editorials on the internet for free, I can listen to his diatribe every day hes on the radio for free, I have John Piper, and Matt Slicks articles for free as well, including Spurgeon, Calvin, Beza, Luther, etc..
Sparky, do you really think he has something we (the doctrinal masters) haven't heard up to 3,000 times before? You all drink from the same punchbowl. That's what makes this so easy.
RawChristianSuperman 1 year ago
@RawChristianSuperman As I said, these are all excuses to not be intellectually honest. Yes, I realize that there are things available for free; but to use those as an excuse to say "Well, I'm not actually going to take the time to READ his in-depth study" is just sad.
No matter how many MP3's, articles, or editorials you find online, you will never get the amount of depth and detail as you would find in a book dedicated to the subject. That is a fact.
CmRoddy 1 year ago
@CmRoddy
Try this, buy it for me and I'll read it. If it's as god-awful of a book, stacked and loaded with eisegesis as nearly every bit of Calvinist material, I may even add it to my website and make a video.
RawChristianSuperman 1 year ago
Besides, why am I even surprised that you would call yourself a "doctrinal master"? It's truly unbelievable. If you are a "doctrinal master" then you should be able to fairly and properly represent Calvinism in order to refute it in your videos. As DefendingCalvinism here has shown, TWICE (with more to come), you clearly do not understand what you are fighting against. That's dishonest. And if you were a "doctrinal master" then you wouldn't be scared of reading his book dedicated to the subject.
CmRoddy 1 year ago
@CmRoddy
Show me where I have not represented Calvinism accurately. Because DefCalv is about to get a doctrinal backhand of a reply, since it is becoming more apparent every day by my decade straight of daily debates that I know Calvinism better than its adherents.
If you wish to, by all means, step up to the plate and show me where the material contained in these videos is NOT a part of Calvinism. He hasn't.
RawChristianSuperman 1 year ago
@RawChristianSuperman I'm utterly shocked at your style of response. Your pride is so overwhelming you that you can't even SEE how you are misrepresenting the doctrine you so desperately hate. It's sad how you prefer to willingly fight a straw-man than actually learn what we have to say.
I see no difference between your method of "apologetics" than from what I see from atheists. And that, my friend, is a very sad thing. I pray that God changes your heart because it needs to be changed.
CmRoddy 1 year ago
@CmRoddy
So in other words, you either aren't equipped with sufficient knowledge yourself, or you prefer the good old ad hominem rebuttal.
RawChristianSuperman 1 year ago
@RawChristianSuperman Wow... are you kidding me? Did you not read what I wrote a few comments back? "First of all, Rev. I wasn't trying to defend the doctrines of grace in a single comment. The video does that. I was merely pointing out that your ATTITUDE needs to be fixed. Get the picture?" Are you really so thin skinned that hearing that your attitude needs to change is considered "ad hominem"? Better is open rebuke than love that is concealed. Change your attitude; it's unbecoming of a Rev.
CmRoddy 1 year ago
@RawChristianSuperman I sure do hope that people can see this little "back-and-forth" we have here. They will be able to clearly see that you can't even properly represent someone's COMMENTS, let a lone an entire doctrinal system, as the video above shows. You put words in my mouth; you assume to know what I am talking about; and you assume to know my motives... EVEN THOUGH I TOLD YOU WHAT THEY WERE!
As I said, change. that. attitude.
CmRoddy 1 year ago
@CmRoddy
Your own words, rod...."As DefendingCalvinism here has shown, TWICE (with more to come), you clearly do not understand what you are fighting against."
Now as I said, seeing your knowledge bank just hit empty after I pressed the issue, you may continue your retreat.
I'm even open to reading White's book, but you won't anty up.
RawChristianSuperman 1 year ago
@RawChristianSuperman The video speaks for itself, Rev. Your attitude and pride is getting close to pathetic at this point. You REFUSE to accept that you are improperly representing Calvinism. Why? Well, I can only conclude that your arguments hang on misrepresentation and you know this. Your dishonesty is unbecoming of any Christian, and I can only pray that God's grace will reveal how sad your actions are.
You are LYING about Calvinism.
CmRoddy 1 year ago
@CmRoddy
There has been no misrepresentation, that is merely a stalling effort at distraction on the part of DefCalv. If only you knew your doctrine better.
Fortunately for me I am in the final stages of editing my response video. If anything is to show, its that Calvinists will resort to any excuse and dance around the subject forever to avoid confronting verses.
Afterall, it's what you're doing, you made an offensive move, and I matched you on it, only to have you back down.
RawChristianSuperman 1 year ago
@RawChristianSuperman Amazing how prideful you are. As I said, I was pointing out that your attitude needs to change. Are you misrepresenting Calvinism? Yes. But that's not the point of my comment. YOU made that the point of my comment. Any honest minded person can see that. However, your "honesty" isn't as important as defending your theological views.
Again, pathetic. I'm done with this. You call yourself a reverend? I feel bad for your church. They are have a liar for a pastor.
CmRoddy 1 year ago
@CmRoddy
No, I did not make that the point of your comment, you stated it quite fine all by yourself in your own opening words to me via your first post with my name in it....
"First, Rev. Anderson, I have to say that your videos "refuting Calvinism" are in fact built upon ignorance of the Doctrines of Grace."
Keep trying slither around it, honest Abe. Any more cheap attempts?
RawChristianSuperman 1 year ago
@RawChristianSuperman Wow... way to leave out how I qualified MY OWN WORDS in my next comment...
"I wasn't trying to defend the doctrines of grace in a single comment. The video does that. I was merely pointing out that your ATTITUDE needs to be fixed"
As I said, any HONEST person will see that you are putting words in my mouth at this point. Notice how I wrote "the video does that" in my comment. I was very clear; you are distorting my words, just as you distort Calvinism.
CmRoddy 1 year ago
@RawChristianSuperman Change. your. attitude. Rev.
I'm actually ashamed of calling your reverend. I'm only doing so because it is a title you have apparently earned, despite the blatant lying.
Pride comes before the fall, my friend. I just pray that you don't fall too hard, or better yet that your pride is slain and that you don't fall at all. Grace be with you, Rev. I'm done with this fiasco. The honest person will see who is truly being truthful and who is distorting reality.
CmRoddy 1 year ago
@CmRoddy
You can try to sneak around being passive aggressive all you want. If you were truly honest, you would admit that you tried to slap me down with your own opinions first before retreating with your hands in the air, trying to look innocent upon realizing that I am more than up for going verses-for-verses with you.
RawChristianSuperman 1 year ago
@RawChristianSuperman I just saw this video for the first time and could not stop laughing.
unicoestilo 1 year ago
@unicoestilo
I had a hard time keeping it in myself, when I saw Mark give the example of the ham and the banana, tried to illustrate that this was a choice, then demonstrated that his dog could not make a choice, then tried to affirm that Calvinism doesn't deny that we can choose.
What a mess of contradictions.
I even had to make a video replying mainly to that one part. Needless to say, he never got back with me, and discontinued communication.
RawChristianSuperman 1 year ago
@RawChristianSuperman Oh, I'm sorry. I am not laughing with you as you suppose. I was only laughing because it had been several months that I had seen any of Mark's videos. When I saw this one it just reminded me of how much I have missed seeing them. I guess if you would have looked at my channel profile you would not have wasted your time trying to convince me of his alleged "contradictions". Have a good day Sir.
unicoestilo 1 year ago
@unicoestilo
I knew you weren't laughing with me, if my dripping sarcasm wasn't obvious. I just couldn't let the opportunity pass, since your response was actually to me.
If I can't convince you of all the contradictory logic that Calvinism carries, perhaps you need to meet a friend of mine, a Mr. Webster. He wrote a best selling dictionary your ilk should read sometime.
RawChristianSuperman 1 year ago
@RawChristianSuperman If Mark's arguments cannot convince you otherwise about the futility and shallowness of Arminian theology, then perhaps your friend, Noah Webster, another fellow Calvinist, might be able to. Good day Sir.
unicoestilo 1 year ago
@unicoestilo
Mark's arguments couldn't convince anybody, that's why the more prolific Calvinists avoid such gimmicks and positions.
I myself not being completely Arminian, care little about their depth. Since he was a Calvinist (though not a theologian), perhaps you would take Websters word for it on definitions like "contradiction" and related words like "hypocrisy" and see how terribly reformed theology fumbles when confronted with criticism.
RawChristianSuperman 1 year ago
@RawChristianSuperman I’m not here to defend Mark. I’m sure he’s capable of doing that himself. But to address your comment about how “reformed theology fumbles when confronted with criticism”:
Whose criticism? Geisler’s? Hunt‘s? Your’s?
That’s weak.
Mark made you look silly, bottom line.
unicoestilo 1 year ago
@unicoestilo
Mine, Louis Ruggerio, Chuck Smith, I could go on, but your classic answer will be of course "They're not qualified" or maybe "They are all ignorant" followed by a tempered rant about their attributes.
The bottom line is, he tried to make me look silly, and I responded with a total humiliation. This is the reason he acted all tough and challenged me, and now...w-w-where is he? Where are his glib remarks and pithy comebacks? He doesn't even comment. He knows he was caught.
RawChristianSuperman 1 year ago
@RawChristianSuperman Oh that's right, according to your profile your a "veritable expert" in these matters because you've been doing this for 20 yrs. Regrettably, in addition to the Scriptures, I should have been consulting you, instead of Calvin, Turretin, Shedd, Berkhof, Hodge, Strong and all the other Reformed heretics concerning these things.
Lesson learned.
unicoestilo 1 year ago
@unicoestilo
It's not just that I've been studying for over 2 decades, it's that I have access to more information at my fingertips in seconds than every name you just dropped ever had in their lives.
You are trusting the knowledge base and resources of people who lived at a time when horses and sailboats were the alternate methods of travel.
I suppose you would take their advice on medicine and nutrition too.
RawChristianSuperman 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@CmRoddy
No, I did not make that the point of your comment, you stated it quite fine all by yourself in your own opening words to me via your first post with my name in it....
"First, Rev. Anderson, I have to say that your videos "refuting Calvinism" are in fact built upon ignorance of the Doctrines of Grace."
Keep trying slither around it, honest Abe. Any more cheap attempts?
RawChristianSuperman 1 year ago
@RawChristianSuperman I don't need to prove anything; the video has already done that. You are saying that I do because you are dodging the real issue, and that's just sad as well.
CmRoddy 1 year ago
@RawChristianSuperman Lou Ruggerio does not know calvinistic doctrine and I've exposed him many times on Paltalk as well as youtube. If you believe that he was victorius over James White then your blind.
2ndly, I illustrated to you how one has a choice and chooses in accordance with his nature.
I don't understand the term "high G evasive maneuvers."
October31st1517 1 year ago
@October31st1517
It's a convenient way out of something by saying someone doesn't know this or that doctrine. But it is very difficult to prove this when someone quotes actual subject matter. I get it often enough, but after I quote source material, I rarely hear back from my opponents when they make that their sole talking point.
I will gladly go futher and explain more in my video response...
RawChristianSuperman 1 year ago
@RawChristianSuperman Ok. Looking forward to it.
October31st1517 1 year ago
And one last thing, now that I've had the chance to read all the comments...
I HAVE read the works of Sandeman :) In fact, I've read his entire Magnum Opus.
So, why don't YOU define it for us Liz :)
skintightpotato 1 year ago
Oh sheesh...this message is for Liz. I'm only posting this at the top b/c I'm not going to fish through the comments at this point.
You know, as I read your comments Liz, you seem to progressively go off the deep end. Who in the world here is "wanting to be like Monty?" Are you insane? I know this is a news flash for you, but the biggest problem people have with him is NOT even his theology in the first place! It's his character!
...(cont)
skintightpotato 1 year ago
(cont...)
Secondly, I would like to for a minute point out your hypocrisy. You talk about not affiliating yourself with "heretics" and yet according to you (NOT me, mind you, because I consider him a brother) someone like Tali, who recently commented on your page, and who is an Arminian would be considered a "heretic," as with many others on your page.
And you have VIDEOS of Ron Tolson!! Who is a ONENESS PENTECOSTAL and who DENIES the TRINITY!!! A TRUE heretic!!! THAT YOU UPLOADED!
Sigh :/
skintightpotato 1 year ago
(cont...) I would just like to add...for those who might be reading...the person who called Monty an a**hole and a "schmuck" was NOT ME!!! LOL!!! XD
skintightpotato 1 year ago
praise the Lord brother. Your videos are a blessing. Keep them coming.
BibleTruth9 1 year ago
SAVING GOOD
SAVING GOOD?.....So now salvation is by works?
Lethalhabit 1 year ago
@Lethalhabit No. Man is NOT ABLE to do saving works, that's the definition of total depravity. We are reliant upon Christ alone. That's what the video was saying :)
ironclad452 1 year ago
@ironclad452 This video is NOT teaching Total Depravity!
Afrikitty 1 year ago
@Afrikitty it's not?
ironclad452 1 year ago
@ironclad452 He said yes man can do good according to man but not SAVING GOOD?How about no matter what good man can do NONE of it can save him no matter WHAT he can or cannot do!!!!!!!!!!!!
Lethalhabit 1 year ago
@Lethalhabit I'm not seeing the distinction, brother.
ironclad452 1 year ago
@Lethalhabit Well said, well said, my brother. :-)
Afrikitty 1 year ago
@Lethalhabit Correct. No matter what man does, it cannot save him. But when one repents, it is God granting him repentence. When one believes, God is granting him the ability to believe. That is what "saving Good" means.
October31st1517 1 year ago
@October31st1517 So let me get what your saying so the only part God has in salvation is the fact that he GIVES you the ability to save YOURSELF?FALSE!
Lethalhabit 1 year ago
@Lethalhabit That's not what I said. We do not have the ability to save ourselves in any fashion, nor do we desire salvation. God must give this desire. If He does not, we will stay in the muck and mire of our sin. Look at the scriptures I give.
October31st1517 1 year ago
@October31st1517 Saving Good, I must guess is actually referring to Sanctification. We are not saved by Sanctification, which is a work the Holy Spirit does IN US. We are saved by what Christ did FOR US. Never forget that LethalHabit and NOBODY will ever be able to bamboozle you into believing anything else. Christ was the one who said "It is Finished!" He did all the work FOR US. We are saved by believing Christ's gospel.
Afrikitty 1 year ago
@October31st1517 Mark NOONE goes to Hell for SIN!They go to hell for rejection of Christ sacrifice!"He that (believeth NOT is CONDEMNED ALREADY because he has NOT believed!)Man will go to hell because HE DID NOT BELIEVE!
Lethalhabit 1 year ago
@Lethalhabit
Is unbelief a sin?
Nobody goes to hell for rejecting the sacrifice of Christ. Many in the OT went to hell without even knowing about Christ. They go to hell because they have sinned against a Holy and Righteous Judge.
OT saints were saved by believing, but condemnation is demonstrated by unbelief, not brought about by it, just as salvation is demonstrated by good works and not brought about by it.
God bless
ironclad452 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ironclad452 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."Why does JESUS say they are condemned?Notice the word BECAUSE,(because THEY believed not),not because they were not picked to believe.
Lethalhabit 1 year ago
@Lethalhabit 2 questions my brother. 1. Is unbelief a sin? 2.Was that not a sin that Jesus paid for as well?
October31st1517 1 year ago
@October31st1517
I believe under new covenant if we are in the holy faith in Christ we can be assured that we have been forgiven and cleansed of all past sins. Our sins are washed away by the blood of the Lamb only if we repent put our faith in Him and bring forth fruits in keeping with repentance. Which means we have to work out our salvation build ourselves in the holy faith relying solely upon the grace of God.
AaronM144000 1 year ago
@AaronM144000.. I am really surprised your still on the Catholic train Aaron. Have you figured out Heb 9:12 yet? Have you figured out the phrase "obtained eternal redemption"? Let me ask you, can a man that is "eternally redeemed" be unredeemed? If he could, he wasn't "eternally" redeemed to begin with, was he? So if Christ "obtained eternal redemption" 2000 years ago for YOU Aaron, can you be unredeemed?
Good luck.
ShownMercy 1 year ago
@ShownMercy
What gives me a funny feeling that we've had an encounter before but you were under a different username or should I say usernames.
AaronM144000 1 year ago
@AaronM144000.. No answer to my questions? Ah man, I thought you would have a good answer for me. Thats the good news Aaron. That Christ "obtained ETERNAL redemption" for all that are His, and He did so 2000 years ago.
ShownMercy 1 year ago