Evil

Sethproton

Well-known member
how tired are you getting? REALLY tired?
lol that’s hilarious.
If civic wants to copy and paste pages and pages of irrelevant ideas/ free country- post away. I can’t say I’m going to be engaging in that though. I’m interested in how civic came to those conclusions themselves -not using the “even Arminius thinks this”


then please stop telling me how to respond. Thank




Of the only response someone has is a massive copy and paste- there’s nothing to respond to. That’s not the thoughts of that person- it’s just a massive copy and paste


tell me more about the things I don’t understand? You seem to be some kind of Oracle knowing all the things


that’s why I took the time to go verse for verse. It’s just not there Theo- can you show me? I’m sorry you’re taking it so hard.


That’s not my standard, I never said that. I said it’s interesting that a truth claim as huge as the decrees of God is nowhere to be found. Nowhere to be found. It’s interesting. But I’m still here looking and reading and searching the scriptures.
You have to get used to this kind of treatment here. Learn to ignore certain posters who only want to twist words, pretend not to understand your position and do what they can to personally provoke you, then claim that is what you are doing.
I want to commend you on your demeanor and approach here. You are doing well.
 

civic

Well-known member
You have to get used to this kind of treatment here. Learn to ignore certain posters who only want to twist words, pretend not to understand your position and do what they can to personally provoke you, then claim that is what you are doing.
I want to commend you on your demeanor and approach here. You are doing well.
that is ironic coming from the most heterodox poster on this forum

pot calling kettle..............
 

Sethproton

Well-known member
that is ironic coming from the most heterodox poster on this forum

pot calling kettle..............
Civic you are funny. You seem to feel an overwhelming need to make personal attacks against me, without any relevance to the topic of the thread.
 

civic

Well-known member
Civic you are funny. You seem to feel an overwhelming need to make personal attacks against me, without any relevance to the topic of the thread.
well you "twist" scripture to deny the resurrection, ascension, the gospel, the trinity, deity of Christ(fully God, fully man), Incarnation which was permanent, deny original sin, adhere to numerous other heterodox beliefs etc..........
 

Sethproton

Well-known member
well you "twist" scripture to deny the resurrection, ascension, the gospel, the trinity, deity of Christ(fully God, fully man), Incarnation which was permanent, deny original sin, adhere to numerous other heterodox beliefs etc..........
Ok. Let's address those
the resurrection was Jesus brought back up from death
The ascension was Jesus re-entering Heaven to be with the Father
the gospel is that Jesus died for sin and by faith we can be saved
the trinity is God in three persons, yet still one God
Christ always was and always will be God
The incarnation was for a little while, Bible says that for a little while, Jesus was lower than the angels
Original sin, if you mean the idea that each person is born guilty because of Adam, is not stated in the Bible
 

Beloved Daughter

Super Member
You have to get used to this kind of treatment here. Learn to ignore certain posters who only want to twist words, pretend not to understand your position and do what they can to personally provoke you, then claim that is what you are doing.
I want to commend you on your demeanor and approach here. You are doing well.

Seth, are you prevaricating.

Let's refresh and review.

sethproton;n119603 said:
You are not describing me.
I study context. I study lexicons. I study other places where the same words and ideas are.

I know that you don't. I seem to remember you telling another member of these forums that you come here just to cause division. I believe the poster who claimed it.


sethproton;n119603 said:
You are not describing me.
I study context. I study lexicons. I study other places where the same words and ideas are.
And i speak of all these things in my posts.
It is inaccurate to malign me the way you do saying I do not bring scripture into all conversations.

Again, if you studied those things, you wouldn't say things like this:



Thread Chosen to salvation.

Post 201


“Yes, I agree that they were chosen in Christ. But there is only one way that I have ever heard that makes sense of that. And it is not Calvinism. As a Calvinist you have already decided that God chose you to be saved, so you see that in every verse.
Mainstream Christianity interprets the verse to be showing God's foreknowledge. And at times I do see Calvinists denying that God has foreknowledge, but this is a verse that relies on His foreknowledge.
He foresees who will be saved, by coming to Christ, and He ordains that they will be chosen when they are in Christ.”
Red bolding mine.

Please provide the name and post of any Calvinist poster who ever said that God didn't have foreknowledge.

You didn't read that from any legitimate lexicon. No Christian whether Calvinist or Arminian would deny God's foreknowledge.


Learn to say what you mean. Don't drag nonsense into your replies.
 

Sethproton

Well-known member
Seth, are you prevaricating.

Let's refresh and review.



I know that you don't. I seem to remember you telling another member of these forums that you come here just to cause division. I believe the poster who claimed it.




Again, if you studied those things, you wouldn't say things like this:



Thread Chosen to salvation.

Post 201



Red bolding mine.

Please provide the name and post of any Calvinist poster who ever said that God didn't have foreknowledge.

You didn't read that from any legitimate lexicon. No Christian whether Calvinist or Arminian would deny God's foreknowledge.


Learn to say what you mean. Don't drag nonsense into your replies.
Not sure what you are objecting to or even what your are trying to show.
I warned the poster about something she has already seen in this thread.
Are you saying that i should not warn the poster about what goes on here?
Edit. By the way, I found it funny that you used a synonym for lying. Is that because you don't think that the mods are smart enough to know what prevaricate means?

And we have talked before about why you believe the poster who is prevaricating about me. You like his doctrine, so you choose to believe him
 
Last edited:

Beloved Daughter

Super Member
Not sure what you are objecting to or even what your are trying to show.
I warned the poster about something she has already seen in this thread.
Are you saying that i should not warn the poster about what goes on here?
Edit. By the way, I found it funny that you used a synonym for lying. Is that because you don't think that the mods are smart enough to know what prevaricate means?

And we have talked before about why you believe the poster who is prevaricating about me. You like his doctrine, so you choose to believe him

The Mod's are plenty smart. I respect their judgement. I also know that they know the difference between lying and truth-telling. Let's see what the dictionary says.

prevaricate
[prəˈverəˌkāt]

VERB
prevaricating (present participle)
  1. speak or act in an evasive way.
    "he seemed to prevaricate when journalists asked pointed questions"
    synonyms:
    be evasive · be noncommittal · be vague · be ambiguous · evade/dodge the issue · beat about the bush · hedge · hedge one's bets · fudge the issue · fence · parry questions · vacillate · shilly-shally · cavil · waver · quibble · temporize · hesitate · stall (for time)·

    [more]

    Now please tell us which Calvinist said that denying foreknowledge of God.









    See? I did not say you were lying. Learn English Seth.
If you can't, then that proves that, at a minimum, you don't know what Calvinists believe and you intend to sway others by saying things that are not true, but perhaps an extreme exaggeration.
 
Last edited:

Sethproton

Well-known member
The Mod's are plenty smart. I respect their judgement. I also know that they know the difference between lying and truth-telling. Let's see what the dictionary says.

prevaricate
[prəˈverəˌkāt]

VERB
prevaricating (present participle)
  1. speak or act in an evasive way.
    "he seemed to prevaricate when journalists asked pointed questions"
    synonyms:
    be evasive · be noncommittal · be vague · be ambiguous · evade/dodge the issue · beat about the bush · hedge · hedge one's bets · fudge the issue · fence · parry questions · vacillate · shilly-shally · cavil · waver · quibble · temporize · hesitate · stall (for time)·

    [more]

    Now please tell us which Calvinist said that denying foreknowledge of God.









    See? I did not say you lying. Learn English Seth.
Interesting that by your preferred definition you are prevaricating, being evasive, ambiguous about lying.
I am good at English, been speaking it for decades.

As far as foreknowledge, surely you are aware that some Calvinists teach that the Greek word translated foreknow, actually means to forelove?
 

Beloved Daughter

Super Member
Interesting that by your preferred definition you are prevaricating, being evasive, ambiguous about lying.
I am good at English, been speaking it for decades.

As far as foreknowledge, surely you are aware that some Calvinists teach that the Greek word translated foreknow, actually means to forelove?

I believe you've been speaking it for decades, the problem is, you never learned to use it carefully and properly.

If you cannot prove your statement, then just admit that you made a mistake and move on.

Here are your words again: "And at times I do see Calvinists denying that God has foreknowledge. . .

Now you claim to use all these tools to help you understand the Bible. So, here is the rub. The Bible explicitly says God has foreknowledge and here you are claiming you see Calvinists denying that.


This is your statement:

sethproton;n119603 said:
You are not describing me.
I study context. I study lexicons. I study other places where the same words and ideas are.
And i speak of all these things in my posts.
It is inaccurate to malign me the way you do saying I do not bring scripture into all conversations.

You have stated this on numerous threads. This is from November 2020.
Yes, I agree that they were chosen in Christ. But there is only one way that I have ever heard that makes sense of that. And it is not Calvinism. As a Calvinist you have already decided that God chose you to be saved, so you see that in every verse.
Mainstream Christianity interprets the verse to be showing God's foreknowledge. And at times I do see Calvinists denying that God has foreknowledge, but this is a verse that relies on His foreknowledge.
He foresees who will be saved, by coming to Christ, and He ordains that they will be chosen when they are in Christ.
Next time consider what you are going to say and make sure it is accurate before you put it out on the forums..... for someone like me to come along and prove that there might be a gigantic problem with your claims.
 
Last edited:

Sethproton

Well-known member
I believe you've been speaking it for decades, the problem is, you never learned to use it carefully and properly.

If you cannot prove your statement, then just admit that you made a mistake and move on.

Here are your words again: "And at times I do see Calvinists denying that God has foreknowledge. . .

Now you claim to use all these tools to help you understand the Bible. So, here is the rub. The Bible explicitly says God has foreknowledge and here you are claiming you see Calvinists denying that.


This is your statement:



Next time consider what you are going to say and make sure it is accurate before you put it out on the forums..... for someone like me to come along and prove that there might be a gigantic problem with your claims.
Honestly, I have been engaging with you because of the absurdity of your posts, just for amusement, but i have no idea about what the context was for the statement you are quoting and claiming it is my statement.
Still, I just answered the issue in my statement: some Calvinist claim the Greek word translated foreknow, actually means forelove.
Possibly that was what I was referring to? But if you point me back to the thread and post # I will re-read and see what i can remember
 

civic

Well-known member
Ok. Let's address those
the resurrection was Jesus brought back up from death
The ascension was Jesus re-entering Heaven to be with the Father
the gospel is that Jesus died for sin and by faith we can be saved
the trinity is God in three persons, yet still one God
Christ always was and always will be God
The incarnation was for a little while, Bible says that for a little while, Jesus was lower than the angels
Original sin, if you mean the idea that each person is born guilty because of Adam, is not stated in the Bible
I will demonstrate how all of your heterodox beliefs are connected to one another just by denying Jesus is our present Mediator. We will see how it connects to such doctrines as the Incarnation, deity of Christ, humanity of Christ, the gospel, the Resurrection/Ascension, Kenosis, the Trinity and other important doctrines of the Christian Faith.

In another thread you denied that you believed like the JW's in the resurrection thread and of course I knew better because we have had the conversation numerous times and I have a good memory. So here are your own words below from the old forum.

Originally Posted by civic

[The JW’s are emphatic on the point that Jesus could not have been raised in a physical body and they go out of their way to make sure of this. “He Jesus merely materialized flesh and blood to be seen and believed” (Make Sure of all Things p.314 1953 Ed.) “We deny that he raised in the flesh, and challenge any statement to that effect as being unscriptural.” (The Finished Mystery p.57 1917) “Having given up his flesh for the life of the world, Christ could never take it again and become a man once more” (You can live in Paradise on Earth p.169 1982)


Sethproton responds :

As much as it embarrasses me to have to agree with this statement, i think it more closely represents what I see in scripture than what i've been taught for 40 years. Of course the JW's have other doctrines which I don't see in the word.

http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthre...a-human-body&p=3454460&viewfull=1#post3454460



Refuting seth on our PRESENT Mediator

Here are my top 10 reasons from the text proving Jesus is still a man and our Mediator.


1 Timothy 2:5

For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,

1- It declares there IS One God AND One Mediator
2- This Mediator is in heaven
3- This One Mediator who is in heaven is a man
4- This was written decades post Resurrection/Ascension
5- One must deny the One God if they deny the One Mediator
6- To have one without the other cannot be found in the text
7- To argue against a present mediator who is a man is to be DISHONEST with the text
8- To do so is only for a person with a bias or agenda
9- This single text alone crumbles his theology on His present manhood and role as Mediator.
10- And last but not least it proves His bodily Resurrection and Ascension as a man. The icing on the cake



Results of your heretical view on Jesus 2 natures being permanent and denting the essential doctrine of the Incarnation.

1-Jesus is no longer a man but a spirit like JW's teach
2-Jesus physical body was shed like a garment
3-Jesus Resurrected body is not physical
4-Jesus didn't mean He was really flesh and bones post Resurrection and denied being a spirit
5-Jesus is no longer our Mediator since He is no longer a man
6-You deny Jesus is Impeccable
7-You are kenosis
8-You deny original sin
9-You believe pelagianism is true
10-You deny the Incarnation which was permanent
11- You deny the gospel which its core is the Resurrection
12- You deny Jesus has come in the flesh(and remains so) which is the spirit of antichrist teaching

hope this helps !!!
 
Last edited:

civic

Well-known member
Ok. Let's address those
the resurrection was Jesus brought back up from death- you left out BODILY- a glorified human body
The ascension was Jesus re-entering Heaven to be with the Father- you left out bodily again
the gospel is that Jesus died for sin and by faith we can be saved- you left out the bodily Resurrection at the center of the gospel message
the trinity is God in three persons, yet still one God- you deny the Person of Christ that He is fully God, fully man permanently.
Christ always was and always will be God- you deny this too by saying Jesus was not OMNI ALL during His earthly ministry hence KENOSIS heresy
The incarnation was for a little while, Bible says that for a little while, Jesus was lower than the angels- no it was/is permanent. He is still a man and God.
Original sin, if you mean the idea that each person is born guilty because of Adam, is not stated in the Bible- which makes you pelagian.
see my comments in red above.
 

Sethproton

Well-known member
see my comments in red above.
You keep adding the word "bodily" because that is your doctrine. It is not stated that way in scripture. interesting that you insist I am straying from the Bible, but you add words that are not there to prove you are right.
We have talked about this for years how you add words to the Bible and then call me a heretic because i won't add those words.
 

civic

Well-known member
You keep adding the word "bodily" because that is your doctrine. It is not stated that way in scripture. interesting that you insist I am straying from the Bible, but you add words that are not there to prove you are right.
We have talked about this for years how you add words to the Bible and then call me a heretic because i won't add those words.
No its the bible as Paul mentions bodily/body numerous times in the Resurrection chapter in 1 Corinthians 15.

You really need to think things through before commenting.

And the funny thing is I already know where you are going before you even post. I'm a really good chess player and I always know your next move. I've been dealing with cultists for over 40 years now and I know all of the objections with the Trinity, Deity of Christ, the bodily Resurrection etc........

I have heard them over and over again for the past 4 plus decades. Apologetics on those 3 doctrines is what I have been studying on a daily basis since 1980. The Trinity, Deity of Christ and the BODILY Resurrection/Ascension of Christ.

hope this helps !!!
 

civic

Well-known member
This is how the Devil works, He must be your teacher, He takes pieces of truth and them uses them to build ideas contrary to the truth.
You have bits and pieces right about me, but you have intentionally added and twisted them into things I never said.

Over the years I've tried my best to clarify for you what i really believe, but your one goal seems to be to defame me.
You live in your imagination about what i have said and what i believe. You quote me word for word, then say it means something different from what i actually wrote.

This is also your Bible study method
Actually its just the opposite seth. Your belief comes directly from the spirit of antichrist as per 1 John 4:2-3 and 2 John 7.

BTW- I promise you that not a single Arminian or Calvinist would agree with you. They will 100% agree with me on the Trinity, Deity of Christ and the Bodily Resurrection/Ascension of Jesus.

Once again you must have a memory issue as all of the old posters(many still here) agreed with me and opposed you on the old forum with the Resurrection thread and called you out saying you were outside of Christ with your false teachings. They all agreed with me.

hope this helps !!!
 

civic

Well-known member
@Sethproton your bait and switch tactics do not work and neither does your constant moving of the goal posts when you have been refuted. Many posters see you do this on a regular basis on this forum.
 

Sethproton

Well-known member
Actually its just the opposite seth. Your belief comes directly from the spirit of antichrist as per 1 John 4:2-3 and 2 John 7.

BTW- I promise you that not a single Arminian or Calvinist would agree with you. They will 100% agree with me on the Trinity, Deity of Christ and the Bodily Resurrection/Ascension of Jesus.

Once again you must have a memory issue as all of the old posters(many still here) agreed with me and opposed you on the old forum with the Resurrection thread and called you out saying you were outside of Christ with your false teachings. They all agreed with me.

hope this helps !!!
piffle
 

Sethproton

Well-known member
@Sethproton your bait and switch tactics do not work and neither does your constant moving of the goal posts when you have been refuted. Many posters see you do this on a regular basis on this forum.
bait and switch? This is laughable. That is your stock and trade. But most of us know that is how the devil works.
 
Top