Trolls

Tercon

Well-known member
Somebody, help me here, I thought only Calvinists & Arminians only could post in this forum?
From the title, that would be a logical assumption. However, in my understanding, that is ignored as long as the posters in the sec/atheist forums do not come over to debate the Christians over their doctrines. By definition, those folk are not saved, and their "contributions" consist mostly of trolling the Christians.

BTW both Arminians and Calvinists are generally believed to be saved people in this forum. Of course, there are the exceptions to that.........
Where's the rule book, because I believe harassment is not allow, correct?
Let me add that universalists and other cultists should not post here.

2 Corinthians 6:14​

New American Standard Bible 1995​

14 Do not be [a]bound together with unbelievers; for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness?

If we were to use that kind of reasoning, then only atheists and unbelievers could post in the Atheism/Agnosticism/Sec Humanism forum. It sounds more like a "safe space", than the Church's work and the business of the Body of Christ. I quite enjoy my belief's being challenged, because steel sharpens steel. You can't grow in the faith, without being challenged in your faith. And if what you believe is true, then you should have no problem defending its truthfulness. And if you can't, then that indicates there is a problem that needs correcting.
 

Ladodgers6

Well-known member
If we were to use that kind of reasoning, then only atheists and unbelievers could post in the Atheism/Agnosticism/Sec Humanism forum. It sounds more like a "safe space", than the Church's work and the business of the Body of Christ. I quite enjoy my belief's being challenged, because steel sharpens steel. You can't grow in the faith, without being challenged in your faith. And if what you believe is true, then you should have no problem defending its truthfulness. And if you can't, then that indicates there is a problem that needs correcting.
I don't mind debating with people, but they become trolls, that's where I draw the line. For example, why would I debate with anyone, if they have no clue of the topics? Other than, to troll other posters. That's what I meant in my OP.
 

TheTruth

Active member
Where does scripture state Jesus did not for goats?


True.

The question is where does scripture state that Jesus did not die for them.

For some theological reason, some think that Jesus' death automatically saves without faith, without godly sorrow, without broken and contrite heart.

Where do you think faith, godly sorrow, broken and contrite hearts came from?
 

TheTruth

Active member
From our response to God's reproof.

If everything that's good comes from God, say like 'faith, godly sorrow, broken and contrite hearts', then we should not be taking credit for those things as though they came from us. If God caused that "reproof", then it should be credited to Him and not the one being reproved.
 

PeanutGallery

Well-known member
From yourself? Of your Self-righteousness, as a Filthy Rag??
You'd be surprised how powerful the word of God is.

Heb 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
 

PeanutGallery

Well-known member
There it is...robbing God of His glory.
There it is ... giving God the glory for his word:
Heb 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
 

PeanutGallery

Well-known member
If everything that's good comes from God, say like 'faith, godly sorrow, broken and contrite hearts', then we should not be taking credit for those things as though they came from us.
Who said that a broken and contrite heart takes credit?

If God caused that "reproof", then it should be credited to Him and not the one being reproved.
Who said anything about taking credit for God's reproof?[/QUOTE]
 

ReverendRV

Well-known member
You'd be surprised how powerful the word of God is.

Heb 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
I'm not surprised at all about that...

But you said it's due to your response. Are you changing your Mind and saying it's due to something else?
 

preacher4truth

Well-known member
There it is ... giving God the glory for his word:
Heb 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
If you responded to God you were already a believer. You weren't then saved by nor for your response, as you suggested, but by God.

Give Him all the glory.
 

preacher4truth

Well-known member
I'm not surprised at all about that...

But you said it's due to your response. Are you changing your Mind and saying it's due to something else?
Yes, he is changing his tune but acting like we were in the wrong for challenging his "response salvation" gospel.

Maybe this will be his step in the right direction. Salvation isn't a reward for responding positively.
 
Top