Calvinism's false gospel is exposed and proven to be false by looking at the meaning of the gospel in 1 Cor. 15 and comparing who Christ died for to Isaiah 53 and 1 John 2:2 and Romans 5:18
If Christ asks us to"luv our neighbor" & enemies and then we ask "who is our neighbor" and the answer is everyone. Then how could Christ dare ask us 2 luv everyone if he didnt luv them also. He couldnt ask us 2 luv those He didnt luv...hence God is LUV & Calvin& Augustine are a joke........
Wow.... who knew that John Rainolds, who initiated the translation of the KJV of the Bible was wrong? He was a Puritan. What about all the rest of the Calvinists who translated the KJV? Are you actually trying to convince anyone that all those Calvinists got the KJV exactly right while you claim their doctrine was wrong? Interesting! LOL.
Thank you from turning away from Calvinism. It is easy for us to judge him but remember what he came out of. There was so much deception during that time. Faith alone was new, and much of the rest of the church, as well was coming out of the dark ages.
@bibletardrage Wow. You don't know how little my God is Santa Claus. He gives good gifts, but absolutely no wish-fulfilment at all. Some of us have really painful lives, but we still wouldn't trade the reality of Him in our lives for everything we want or wanted without Him. We would still know we had missed the point of our lives. And being separated from the source of life forever would be pointless.
God offers salvation over and over in the Bible. He beseeches us, woos us, warns us and convicts us, but He leaves the response to us. The god who can't be bothered with that, who thinks that is a worthless thing, who thinks man being allowed to receive the gospel would besmirch his sovereignty, is a false god, who resembles Allah and the pagan Fates much more than anything the Bible says about our God.
"...not willing than any should peish, but that all should come to repentance."
The elect are not going to perish, no matter how they come about being the elect. God would not suggest that the elect were subject to perishing, so He is not having Peter tell us that He doesn't want the elect to perish, because the word elect then has no meaning at all.
Read the Bible as it is written, without the words of theologians binding your thinking to their own. Believe what God has said in it.
The salvation of the elect is not in question, but what that election is and how people become part of the elect. And when Peter said that, it was in the context of talking about salvation and judgment. He's talking about the Flood, then that ungodly men face "perdition," or eternal lostness. Then he says that we should not be4 ignorant of the fact that a day or a thousand years are the same to God. Then this talk about God's longsuffering. He is talking about longsuffering towards salvation.
2Pe_3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance
The usual argument against seeing this is that God is only longsuffering, "to us-ward," meaning to only the elect. But that doesn't make sense, since the elect, by definition, are those who, after everything is said and done, are the ones who will have been the ones who were saved. ...
Luk_13:34 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not!
"..would I...but ye would not."
Is that weak? If God wants it, why wouldn't He just set things up so He always gets His will, as Calvinists are always saying? Why not force them to come to Him? Or is He being deceiving?
If Christ asks us to"luv our neighbor" & enemies and then we ask "who is our neighbor" and the answer is everyone. Then how could Christ dare ask us 2 luv everyone if he didnt luv them also. He couldnt ask us 2 luv those He didnt luv...hence God is LUV & Calvin& Augustine are a joke........
caucazhin 2 days ago
Wow.... who knew that John Rainolds, who initiated the translation of the KJV of the Bible was wrong? He was a Puritan. What about all the rest of the Calvinists who translated the KJV? Are you actually trying to convince anyone that all those Calvinists got the KJV exactly right while you claim their doctrine was wrong? Interesting! LOL.
SkiesVibrant 1 week ago
Thank you from turning away from Calvinism. It is easy for us to judge him but remember what he came out of. There was so much deception during that time. Faith alone was new, and much of the rest of the church, as well was coming out of the dark ages.
messianicreformer1 2 weeks ago
@bibletardrage Wow. You don't know how little my God is Santa Claus. He gives good gifts, but absolutely no wish-fulfilment at all. Some of us have really painful lives, but we still wouldn't trade the reality of Him in our lives for everything we want or wanted without Him. We would still know we had missed the point of our lives. And being separated from the source of life forever would be pointless.
Mcfirefly2 3 weeks ago
@Mcfirefly2 PRAISE SANTA CLAUS! PRAISE HIM!!!
bibletardrage 3 weeks ago
God offers salvation over and over in the Bible. He beseeches us, woos us, warns us and convicts us, but He leaves the response to us. The god who can't be bothered with that, who thinks that is a worthless thing, who thinks man being allowed to receive the gospel would besmirch his sovereignty, is a false god, who resembles Allah and the pagan Fates much more than anything the Bible says about our God.
Mcfirefly2 3 weeks ago
"...not willing than any should peish, but that all should come to repentance."
The elect are not going to perish, no matter how they come about being the elect. God would not suggest that the elect were subject to perishing, so He is not having Peter tell us that He doesn't want the elect to perish, because the word elect then has no meaning at all.
Read the Bible as it is written, without the words of theologians binding your thinking to their own. Believe what God has said in it.
Mcfirefly2 3 weeks ago
The salvation of the elect is not in question, but what that election is and how people become part of the elect. And when Peter said that, it was in the context of talking about salvation and judgment. He's talking about the Flood, then that ungodly men face "perdition," or eternal lostness. Then he says that we should not be4 ignorant of the fact that a day or a thousand years are the same to God. Then this talk about God's longsuffering. He is talking about longsuffering towards salvation.
Mcfirefly2 3 weeks ago
2Pe_3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance
The usual argument against seeing this is that God is only longsuffering, "to us-ward," meaning to only the elect. But that doesn't make sense, since the elect, by definition, are those who, after everything is said and done, are the ones who will have been the ones who were saved. ...
Mcfirefly2 3 weeks ago
Luk_13:34 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not!
"..would I...but ye would not."
Is that weak? If God wants it, why wouldn't He just set things up so He always gets His will, as Calvinists are always saying? Why not force them to come to Him? Or is He being deceiving?
No, He is neither weak nor deceiving.
Mcfirefly2 3 weeks ago