Unforgiving servant, question for calvinists

[Septextura]

yes. totally corrupt adamic souls.

Nope. All Christ's sheep are good and all the Devil's goats are bad. It's really simple.

 

[Septextura]

A more relevant question to ask would be, what constitutes, or defines the “sheep”? If we want to be classed among the “sheep,” what would we need to do? The scripture you quoted tells you:

Matthew 25:

35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.

In other words, it is all about doing, not just having faith or believing.

Oh, there will be plenty of doers screaming Lord, Lord... at the Bema seat. It doesn't mean you are one of His sheep.

You have to be among the ones the Father gives Him. And the Saints will persevere and do their Master's will.

 

[zerinus]

Oh, there will be plenty of doers screaming Lord, Lord... at the Bema seat. It doesn't mean you are one of His sheep.

Their problem was not doing, but not doing.

You have to be among the ones the Father gives Him. And the Saints will persevere and do their Master's will.

You are now ignoring the very scriptures that yourself had quoted in Matthew 25. And in case that wasn't enough, here is some more for good measure:

Matthew 7:

24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:
25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.
26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:
27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.

 

[Septextura]

What is the will of the Father?

John 6:40
And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

And for our reprobate audience, let's go back to

Matthew 7
15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

What kind of tree was the adulterer Joseph Smith?

 

[armylngst]

Or maybe you don't. Pitting one scripture against another doesn't solve your problem. I can turn that statement around to you. Matt. 10:22; 24:13; Mark 13:13 proves that you don't understand what you are talking about. So where do we go from here? I have three scriptures against your one. So I win by three to one.

Matthew 10:21-22, when taken together, as they are a full sentence, kind of destroys your argument. "21 `And brother shall deliver up brother to death, and father child, and children shall rise up against parents, and shall put them to death, 22 and ye shall be hated by all because of my name, but he who hath endured to the end, he shall be saved."
This is talking about the end times. This is not talking about salvation specifically, but about those who in the end times are persecuted, and tormented, and those who are truly God's will endure to the end and be saved. Jude 24-25 is kind of a praise to context like this. God will keep you, just endure through all that is coming. Read the letter to the church at Smyrna.
Matthew 24:11-14 "11 `And many false prophets shall arise, and shall lead many astray;12 and because of the abounding of the lawlessness, the love of the many shall become cold;13 but he who did endure to the end, he shall be saved; 14 and this good news of the reign shall be proclaimed in all the world, for a testimony to all the nations; and then shall the end arrive.
Funny how so far none of your verses do anything to Jude 24-25, and in fact becomes stronger because of Jude 24-25. This is once again, dealing with the end times. (You did know that, right? Or do you just cut up the Bible verse by verse, and pull one out of a hat. Two down, one more to go. You are hanging on one verse, and given what that verse is, it appears to be the same conundrum. It has absolutely nothing to do with your argument. You failed to turn the argument against me, because you don't know the gospel, and you don't know scripture.
Mark 13:12-13 "12 `And brother shall deliver up brother to death, and father child, and children shall rise up against parents, and shall put them to death, 13 and ye shall be hated by all because of my name, but he who hath endured to the end -- he shall be saved."
Oh wow, the same as the first verse, so I actually got two for the price of one.
You really need to learn the various contexts in the scripture. This is, once again, dealing with the end times. The remnant of believers that remain will be purified by persecution and torment, and those who endure to the end, they are the true believers, and they will be saved. Why? Jude 24-25.

 

[Theo1689]

Or maybe you don't. Pitting one scripture against another doesn't solve your problem. I can turn that statement around to you. Matt. 10:22; 24:13; Mark 13:13 proves that you don't understand what you are talking about. So where do we go from here? I have three scriptures against your one. So I win by three to one.

<Chuckle>

Is THAT your poor excuse for "exegesis"?

Um, okay.... I guess we can play by your "home field rules".....

Is salvation, "not by works"?:

Eph. 2:8 ... And this is not your own doing ...
Eph. 2:9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
2 Tim. 1:9 who saved us ... not because of our works
Tit. 3:5 he saved us, not because of works ...
Rom. 4:5 And to the one who does not work ... his faith is counted as righteousness,
Rom. 4:6 ... the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works:
Rom. 11:6 But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works;

We "win", 7-1.

How about whether there is more than one "god" or not?:

Deut. 4:35 ... the Lord is God; there is no other besides him
Deut. 4:39 ... the Lord is God... there is no other.
Deut. 32:39 ... and there is no god besides me;
2 Sam. 7:22 ... neither is there any God besides thee, ...
2 Sam. 22:32 For who is God, save the LORD?
1 Kings 8:60 ... the Lord is God; there is no other.
1 Chr. 17:20 ... neither is there any God besides thee, ...
Isa. 44:6 ... I am the first, and I am the last; and besides me there is no God.
Isa. 44:8 ... Is there a God besides me? yea,there is no God; I know not any.
Isa. 45:5 I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God besides me:
Is. 45:21 ... there is no God else besides me;
Isa 45:22 ... for I am God, and there is none else.
Isa. 46:9 ... for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me,
Mark 12:32 … for there is one God; and there is none other but he:
1 Cor. 8:4 … and that there is none other God but one.


"Only one god" wins, 15-3.

So if THAT is how you want to treat Scripture, Mormonism fails.

Have a nice day!

 

[armylngst]

Okay, you added more text to your post after I had given it my first reply. The highlighted bit is what you added afterwards, which requires a further reply. You are now turning what Jesus said in Matt. 10:22; 24:13; Mark 13:13 on its head. Jesus said, “he that endureth to the end shall be saved”. In other words, Jesus makes salvation conditional on “enduring to the end”. You turn Jesus’ statement on its head. You say, “he that is already saved will automatically endure to the end”. You see the problem there? I trust Jesus’ own words, as plainly expressed by himself, more.

(I edited it almost as soon as I had posted it, because I realized that you wouldn't get it.) Jesus did not make salvation conditional. There is always a deeper understanding to what people say, such as intent.) You seem to completely ignore context, and add to scripture. You aren't trusting in Jesus' own words, you are trusting your personal understanding of what you believe He said, since you are divorcing it completely from context. They aren't his words, they are your words, with you saying this is what Jesus said.

 

[zerinus]

What is the will of the Father?


And for our reprobate audience, let's go back to


What kind of tree was the adulterer Joseph Smith?

Joseph Smith was not the subject of the conversation, your misreading of the Bible was. When losing the argument, resort to ad hominem. Nothing unusual about that. Seen it all before.

 

[rhomphaeam]

Joseph Smith was not the subject of the conversation, your misreading of the Bible was. When losing the argument, resort to ad hominem. Nothing unusual about that. Seen it all before.

Albeit, that as you say, the subject of the conversation was not about Joseph Smith, can I ask you if you are a Mormon?

 

[zerinus]

Albeit, that as you say, the subject of the conversation was not about Joseph Smith, can I ask you if you are a Mormon?

Or more correctly, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The answer is yes, I am. What conclusion do you intend to draw from that?

 

[rhomphaeam]

Or more correctly, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The answer is yes, I am. What conclusion do you intend to draw from that?

I can only draw the material fact of your answer! Facts are necessary when establishing meanings that will build on them. That could also include stating conclusions if they exist.

I asked for the reason of establishing the fact.

Now I would like to have a conversation with you. Perhaps a separate thread would serve the purpose as I don't want to ingress onto this thread. I have read the entire thread and been somewhat surprised by what I have read. By which I mean across the board. It is, however, your own assertions, grounded as they necessarily must be from the Scriptures on a forum where the Calvinists bite buttocks and the Arminians may still deface a Mormons precepts of necessity of orthodoxy that interests myself. My desire is to begin with pointing out that Mormonism must necessarily favour the free will school and perseverance to the end. So my first question would be from whence did the burning of the heart witness derive its origin?

As I say a new thread may be the polite and proper way to address the question if you are minded to do so.

Just for the sake of transparency I am a Calvinist.

NB And, I don't bite buttocks!

 

[zerinus]

I can only draw the material fact of your answer! Facts are necessary when establishing meanings that will build on them. That could also include stating conclusions if they exist.

I asked for the reason of establishing the fact.

Now I would like to have a conversation with you. Perhaps a separate thread would serve the purpose as I don't want to ingress onto this thread. I have read the entire thread and been somewhat surprised by what I have read. By which I mean across the board. It is, however, your own assertions, grounded as they necessarily must be from the Scriptures on a forum where the Calvinists bite buttocks and the Arminians may still deface a Mormons precepts of necessity of orthodoxy. My desire is to begin with pointing out that Mormonism must necessarily favour the free will school and perseverance to the end. So my first question would be from whence did the burning of the heart witness derive its origin?

As I say a new thread may be the polite and proper way to address the question if you are minded to do so.

Just for the sake of transparency I am a Calvinist.

NB And, I don't bite buttocks!

Thank you for your interest. If you want to discuss the subject of Mormonism in particular, there is a special subforum devoted to that subject which can be seen here:

Mormonism

Feel free to start a thread there, and I will be happy join you there and address your questions.