Is Calvinism heresy ?

Leatherneck0311 said:
Scripture says God cannot be tempted to commit evil neither tempts He any man
Unchecked Copy Box
Jas 1:13 - Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil,neither tempteth he any man: Yet Calvinism with its twisted belief of “preordained”has laid Adam’s disobedience squarely on God along with every sin and rebellion ever committed by satan and mankind. So personally since the Calvinist denies and changes the truth of scripture I would believe it is heresy.
Unchecked Copy Box
Tit 1:2 - In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world Began;
Unchecked Copy Box
Heb 6:18 - That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie,we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us:
Click to expand...
Are you saying if you accept the teachings of Calvinism....you're not saved?
 
CookedGoose said:
I'm curious, did God tempt (peirazo) the army to do it?
Click to expand...
Leatherneck0311 said:
Immaterial God punished rebellion and sin. You cannot convince me that God commits evil or tempts men to commit evil just as scripture says
Click to expand...
In other words Leatherneck won't answer because the conflict with his position is obvious to all (every single person).

Could I convince you "peirazo" has numerous translations and "tempted" may not be the best one in every case?
 
CookedGoose said:
In other words Leatherneck won't answer because the conflict with his position is obvious to all (every single person).

Could I convince you "peirazo" has numerous translations and "tempted" may not be the best one in every case?
Click to expand...
Nope, the conflict is not with my beliefs it is a conflict with the scripture that you ignore and or do not believe because it does not support your false beliefs about God.
Unchecked Copy Box
Jas 1:13 - Let no man saywhen he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil ,neither tempteth he any man: Calvinist biggest strengths are taking scripture out of context, changing the meanings of words in scripture that expose their deceptions, conflating, proof texting, and ignoring the scriptures or casting doubt on their meanings to stay stuck in the darkness.
 
Last edited:
CookedGoose said:
Could I convince you "peirazo" has numerous translations and "tempted" may not be the best one in every case?
Click to expand...
Leatherneck0311 said:
Nope
Click to expand...
Strong's 3985 peirazo = endeavor scrutinize entice discipline examine prove tempt try.
I only have access to Strong's, maybe someone with a newer lexicon could post its translations, but I'm guessing it won't be radically different than Strong's.

Leatherneck on the other hand will only accept "tempt" (2nd to the last) and refuses to accept "scrutinize" (2nd to the 1st)
Why is that?

Either Leatherneck is a Greek scholar and recognizes a hidden error in Strong's translations or he has discovered Strong's translations expose his own doctrinal conflict.

So Leatherneck, are you a Greek scholar? Didn't think so, therefore you're hiding a doctrinal error.
 
CookedGoose said:
I've never said that, in fact I "rely" on Strong's, next

Diversion duly noted.
Click to expand...
Sure lol . If that’s the case then you believe world in John 1:29, John 3:16 and 1 John 2:2 is everyone and includes all mankind / every person / every human .

game, set and match


cosmos from Thayers- the inhabitants of the world ie the whole human race, the whole world .

. the inhabitants of the world: θέατρον ἐγενήθημεν τῷ κόσμῳ καί ἀγγέλοις καί ἀνθρώποις, 1 Corinthians 4:9 (Winers Grammar, 127 (121)); particularly the inhabitants of the earth, men, the human race (first so in Sap. (e. g. )): Matthew 13:38; Matthew 18:7; Mark 14:9; John 1:10, 29 ( L in brackets); ; Romans 3:6, 19; 1 Corinthians 1:27f (cf. Winer's Grammar, 189 (178)); ; 2 Corinthians 5:19; James 2:5 (cf. Winer's Grammar, as above); 1 John 2:2 (cf. Winer's Grammar, 577 (536)); ἀρχαῖος κόσμος, of the antediluvians, 2 Peter 2:5; γέννασθαι εἰς τόν κόσμον, John 16:21; ἔρχεσθαι εἰς τόν κόσμον (John 9:39) and εἰς τόν κόσμον τοῦτον, to make its appearance or come into existence among men, spoken of the light which in Christ shone upon men, John 1:9; John 3:19, cf. 12:46; of the Messiah, John 6:14; John 11:27; of Jesus as the Messiah, John 9:39; John 16:28; John 18:37; 1 Timothy 1:15; also ἐισέρχεσθαι εἰς τόν κόσμον, Hebrews 10:5; of false teachers, 2 John 1:7 (yet here L T Tr WH ἐξέρχεσθαι εἰς τόν κόσμον; (so all texts in 1 John 4:1)); to invade, of evils coming into existence among men and beginning to exert their power: of sin and death, Romans 5:12 (of death, Wis. 2:24; Clement of Rome, 1 Cor. 3, 4 [ET]; of idolatry, Wis. 14:14). ἀποστέλλειν τινα εἰς τόν κόσμον, John 3:17;
 
Christian said:
Sure lol . If that’s the case then you believe world in John 1:29, John 3:16 and 1 John 2:2 is everyone and includes all mankind / every person / every human .

game, set and match
Click to expand...
This is a pretext you're bringing in. "All mankind" includes any number of groupings of people, each individual is 1 possibility among many. Interestingly it's Paul who disagrees with your monolithic/overly simplified view in Romans when he says
"For there is no distinction between the Jew and the Greek, the same Lord is Lord of all."

Peter also disagrees with your view in Acts 15 when He says "the Holy Spirit has come to the Gentiles"
Unless you're a universalist you have to admit not every single Gentile is saved. You also have to admit Peter didn't mean that. Therefore your monolithic view is not biblical unless you can show even 1 place where it's described (which you can't).

It's a contextual argument, not the mathematical one that's presented.
Christian said:
cosmos from Thayers- the inhabitants of the world ie the whole human race, the whole world .

. the inhabitants of the world:
Click to expand...
The inhabitants of the world includes every single person, but only mathematically. Contextually it could mean numerous subsets and be just as accurate, yet you're rejecting all of them in favor of no subsets, and no distinctions. By definition all "context" is being thrown away.
 
CookedGoose said:
This is a pretext you're bringing in. "All mankind" includes any number of groupings of people, each individual is 1 possibility among many. Interestingly it's Paul who disagrees with your monolithic/overly simplified view in Romans when he says
"For there is no distinction between the Jew and the Greek, the same Lord is Lord of all."

Peter also disagrees with your view in Acts 15 when He says "the Holy Spirit has come to the Gentiles"
Unless you're a universalist you have to admit not every single Gentile is saved. You also have to admit Peter didn't mean that. Therefore your monolithic view is not biblical unless you can show even 1 place where it's described (which you can't).

It's a contextual argument, not the mathematical one that's presented.

The inhabitants of the world includes every single person, but only mathematically. Contextually it could mean numerous subsets and be just as accurate, yet you're rejecting all of them in favor of no subsets, and no distinctions. By definition all "context" is being thrown away.
Click to expand...
There is no math involved .

next fallacy
 
CrowCross said:
Are you saying if you accept the teachings of Calvinism....you're not saved?
Click to expand...
I doubt Calvin was saved . No murderer has eternal life in them . He persecuted believers . Just the opposite of Jesus who said to love your enemies, pray for them and give them the cloak off your back. His actions describe a wolf in sheeps clothing not a saint , A Holy one set apart who loved others . John 8:44

oops

next
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top