No. You rarely share scripture. If you do it is without context. Many here recognize your error and incapacity to understand God's word.
Nice try. I don't point at one sentence and create a doctrine around the one sentence. It's quite interesting to see people make entire doctrines from 1 John 2:2 and 2 Peter 3:9. Since holding the views they espouse goes contrary to many other passages you have to either ignore all of scripture or cherry pick other sentences out of context to try prop up the obvious contradiction. Then...when that fails you just call upon church traditions to overrule scripture completely and thus diminish scripture to secondary status. Just act like a Pharisee.
hahahaha That's a good one. You know, I first thought it said born again as Arminians.
By the way, George Whitefield is a kind of hero of English Calvinists because there is a famous (among Calvinists) biography written about him and his constant theological war against the Wesleys. I may be wrong because it is all about Protestant infighting but it looks like the Wesleys won the war if adherent numbers are anything to go by. Whitefield didn't leave a large group of Calvinistic Methodists behind while John and his brother Charles left behind a thriving community of Arminian Methodists which persist to today. As Protestant sects go theirs is rather friendly and fairly interesting. They are like Anglicans with good manners
You realize that God used Whitefield to establish the Great Awakening, don't you? Never, in the history of North America, has there been such a powerful revival.
Very true that you do not point to one sentence as the basis for a doctrine you rely on one word misconstrued and improperly defined for that. The whole structure of doctrine that you build depends on "all" meaning "all kinds of people" and "sheep" meaning "the elect of God who are foreknown from eternity" and you have some other trigger words that set your posts off on an adventure in misuse of holy scripture and the English language.
Why do you focus on 1 John 2:2 and 2 Peter 3:9? Is there something in those verses that upsets your theology? The Lord is not slow to fulfil his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance. Oh I see, it says "all" and your post is triggered by that word so you need to pretend it says "all kinds of people" instead of all. So sorry to trigger that. How do you fair with the other verse? He is the expiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. now that one presents a problem for your posts because it says "the whole world" and probably means exactly what is says but you cannot abide the verse saying that Christ is the expiation for the sins of the whole world because that is intolerably consistent with this threads topic title! Away with those words, it must be changed! You'd write if the courage could be mustered to consistently apply the system of theology that you present in CH. But instead it is likely your posts will say "you're taking that out of context!" So we'll get the popcorn and watch the "context" fly like pigs do.
All scripture speaks of the Sovereign work of God in graciously choosing sinful people to redeem. There is no verse that goes against what God chooses to do for those He has Redeemed.Very true that you do not point to one sentence as the basis for a doctrine you rely on one word misconstrued and improperly defined for that. The whole structure of doctrine that you build depends on "all" meaning "all kinds of people" and "sheep" meaning "the elect of God who are foreknown from eternity" and you have some other trigger words that set your posts off on an adventure in misuse of holy scripture and the English language.
Why do you focus on 1 John 2:2 and 2 Peter 3:9? Is there something in those verses that upsets your theology? The Lord is not slow to fulfil his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance. Oh I see, it says "all" and your post is triggered by that word so you need to pretend it says "all kinds of people" instead of all. So sorry to trigger that. How do you fair with the other verse? He is the expiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. now that one presents a problem for your posts because it says "the whole world" and probably means exactly what is says but you cannot abide the verse saying that Christ is the expiation for the sins of the whole world because that is intolerably consistent with this threads topic title! Away with those words, it must be changed! You'd write if the courage could be mustered to consistently apply the system of theology that you present in CH. But instead it is likely your posts will say "you're taking that out of context!" So we'll get the popcorn and watch the "context" fly like pigs do.
Once again your error is to think that because God chooses some to inherit eternal life who do not deserve it and by most standards are rather wicked people you erroneously think that is the one and only way God works in the matter of calling, election, and salvation. It doesn't dawn on your theological system of thought that God also calls people by ordinary means and some respond while others turn away or are turned away by other things. Like the Lord Jesus explained in a parable sometimes the gospel lands in shallow or hard hearts and if it sprouts up into faith it lasts only for a short time and persecution as well as hardship kill it while sometimes the gospel call lands in busy care filled hearts that respond only to have other cares extinguish its growth and leave the called with a strangled unproductive response to the gospel of salvation. nevertheless sometimes the call lands in good hearts well suited for its reception and there it produced lively faith that yields good works and an abundance of fruit. But your theology will somehow make the parable teach that only God's arbitrary election based on nothing in or about the elect, which election you allege was predetermined in eternity, is operative and that the condition of the heart that receives the gospel is an irrelevance. Such is the way that your theology twists what is taught in holy scripture.
All our righteousness is as filthy rags. By all God's standards we are wretched. This is why the famous Reformed hymn writer wrote:
Talk about out of context! I bet you trot out that phrase at every opportunity never thinking for a moment about its context and what it is about. No wonder your theology is so distorted. It relies on trigger words and little snippet phrases taken from holy scripture, lifted from their context and applied willy nilly to everything that threatens the distorted image of God that your theology creates. In your system God is not Love he is Sovereignty and he does not save he elects and chooses and the gospel is not good news it is a taunt for the unsaved and a reminder for the elect that they are worthless rubbish deserving only of judgement and destruction and eternal burning, torment and suffering but who are saved by an arbitrary act totally unrelated to anything in them (like quality of the heart into which the gospel is received) and anything that they do (like good works of righteousness because "all our righteousness is as filthy rags") it all comes down to an eternal election made without reference to the elect but only and wholly by God's "good pleasure". Well with a theology like that it is no wonder that you rely on trigger words and phrases that mean nothing like what you claim.
Not silly at all.
God was glorified in them YTG. God used them in mighty ways.
First, you are clueless about Reformed theology.
