Please note that as so very few comments genuinely keep their discussions to what I have actually written, then they won’t be recorded here. Your comment may be either positive or negative, but if it is simply a way of using my website to present your own views, then I won’t publish it. This is not a public forum.
For my conditions, please follow this link – Website conditions for the Comments page
The 2018 comments have been archived now. They may be accessed at this link. – Comments 2018 Archived
The 2019 comments have been archived now. They may be accessed at this link – Comments 2019 Archived
The 2020 comments have been archived now. They may be accessed at this link – Comments 2020 Archived
The 2021 comments have been archived now. They may be accessed at this link – Comments 2021 Archived
Instead of using a dedicated Comments page, this page will now include comments, news snippets, and opinions. Not every comment will be published however. I will decide whether or not to include comments, and will remove any that become obsolete. Any who wish to reply or comment on this page must use the Contact page. I will not reply to all comments (many of which already end up in the Spam folder without opening). I will not include your name, company, website or email address. All links to external sites will be removed.
230118 18th January 2023 – (from ?) Subject: “Why do calvinists believe lies?“ Good article! When one understands Calvinism’s the underlying doctrine – one can recognize a certain percentage of Calvinist statements do take the form of lies. Take for example MacArthur’s statement: “We have been chosen in Christ….” MacArthur knows if he says “I have been chosen in Christ” he is telling a bold-faced lie against his own doctrine – because the doctrine stipulates no human is granted CERTAINTY concerning his election.
We are *NOT* bidden to distinguish between reprobate and elect – that is for god alone, not for us, to do . . . (Institutes of the Christian Religion, 4. 1. 3.)
We must thus consider both god’s *SECRET* election and his *INNER* call. For *HE ALONE* knows who are his. (I have added its source – Institutes 4, 1, 2 – Editor)
When MacArthur says “WE” are chosen – he is using the word “WE” as a replacement word for “The Elect”. “The Elect” are chosen for salvation.
But per the doctrine – MacArthur is not granted knowledge of who the elect are.
MacArthur doesn’t want to tell the TRUTH to his audience because he is concerned he might lose a percentage of them – as soon as they discover – the doctrine also stipulates they have the higher probability of having been created/designed as CHAFF believers – and will have the higher probability of waking up in a lake of fire – for his good pleasure.
MacArthur doesn’t want to lose people – because he would then be faced with having to acknowledge it was infallibly decreed that he lose them. (And it wouldn’t put as much money in the offering plate, either! – Editor)
This is one simple little example of how Calvinists become conditioned to communicate using deceptive language tricks designed to hide dark aspects of the doctrine they don’t want to face – and don’t want others to see.
Thank you for your interesting comment.
1/. Yes, calvinism is dependent upon its lies. It is certain that Calvin did teach clearly that “we are not enjoined here to distinguish between the elect and the reprobate (this belongs not to us, but to God only)” (Institutes Bk 4, Ch.1, Section 3).
And Calvin did also teach that “he alone “knoweth them that are his” (2 Tim. 2:19)” (Institutes Bk 4, Ch.1, Section 2) That is, not only are we not required to determine between the elect and the reprobate, it is also impossible for us to know this anyway because, according to Calvin, God alone is able to know who are his elect.
However, Calvin himself has told a big lie here. 2 Timothy 2:19 says “The Lord knoweth them that are his.” If you check all Bible versions, not one of them adds the word “alone” or equivalent. The Bible does not teach that only God (and no-one else) may be embued with this knowledge. Calvin was a liar who twisted Scripture to suit his selfish ideas.
2/. True, no-one can be granted certainty concerning his election. Not one single calvinist can know for certain if he himself is one of the elect until he demonstrates this by persevering to the end. Even Piper admits that if he falls away before the end, then he was never saved in the first place. You must persevere to the end before you may be declared elect! But how many calvinists actually teach this up front?? They don’t because they are too scared to promise such uncertainty!
3/. The false teachers of 2 Peter 2:1 include calvinists who use carefully sculpted statements (“feigned words”) to win you over to their heresy (2 Peter 2:3). That is, they are experts at verbal gymnastics!
4/. Calvinists are fond of quoting Spurgeon who said “Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else.” But, when have you ever heard a calvinist preach the calvinist gospel to the lost that God has chosen his elect and that they will only go to heaven if they are one of the chosen ones? They put on a charade of preaching the biblical gospel, not calvinism itself! Yet MacArthur teaches that there is “the general outward invitation of the gospel” (the ineffectual biblical gospel) which goes to all mankind, and there is the “effective call” (the effectual calvinist gospel) of God that goes “to the predestined and results in justification”.
5/. Calvin also taught in Bk 4, Ch.1 of his Institutes that salvation could only be found in the Catholic Church. Note that he never left the catholic church and declared his catholic baptism as essential for his eternal salvation.) No matter what denomination you belong to, Calvin would condemn you (as he condemned the Anabaptists) if you renounced the catholic baptism. That is, you cannot be saved if you were not baptised in a catholic church!
221129 29th November 2022 – (from Ralph) From what I have read on this website, it has become obvious to me that you don’t understand Calvinism. Here is a bedrock understanding (very simplistic, so nothing in depth) of calvinism. Man cannot save himself. Total inability. Jesus said as much when His disciples asked Him “Then who can be saved”. And they were astonished when they asked. Based on what they heard, they were thinking, no one can be saved. Jesus said, that with man it is impossible. (Full stop. This mean man is totally incapable, last I checked the definition of impossible.) Jesus doesn’t continue on with how man can somehow do it, but says with God, God can make that impossible possible. So if God doesn’t act, salvation isn’t happening. Which is fine. We live in God’s creation, so it is God’s rules.
To the website in question.
You keep bringing up Ephesians 3:17 “That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith”
This has nothing to do with asking Jesus into your heart.
(I will not print the rest of the document as it is long-winded and illogical. You are obviously annoyed that someone should declare Friel to be a heretic, but if you wish to defend against all my statements with a long statement of your own, then I am free to pick and choose what I will publish and answer to.
For much of it you have merely re-stated your view without any explanation at all, and you quote “facts” without any statistical evidence presented!
For example, you said: “It isn’t in the Bible.” Neither is the Trinity! Do you deny the Trinity then? “It doesn’t make sense. I mean, I really can’t add anything to it.” In other words, you are unable to defend it! If you could, you would. “Did you know that in most meetings where this occurs, at the end of a year, maybe…” Any statistics to prove you’re not lying?? No? Then your statement is useless!
And you twist meanings to suit your needs; see point 5 in my response below.
If you want a calvinist soap-box, then put it all on your own website.)
Response: Unfortunately for you I understand calvinism all too well, having spent the first 19 years of my life being declared one of the elect in a calvinist church, then finally being saved by calling upon the name of the Lord to be saved as per Romans 10:13.
1/. Note that when the disciples asked Jesus “Who then can be saved?” Jesus had to remind them that man on his own cannot save himself but that it is only possible with God. Thus it is necessary for man to call upon the name of the Lord (Romans 10:13) in order to be saved; it is impossible for him to be saved without calling upon the name of the Lord. The Bible does say that man is incapable on his own to be saved, yet with God man can be saved to the uttermost. It does not demonstrate that man cannot choose to call upon the name of the Lord for salvation. You have failed to demonstrate your point.
2/. You’ll probably try Romans 3:11 to try and prove that man cannot seek after God, when it merely states that no-one seeks after God. This cannot be equated with “cannot seek after God”. Why does Jeremiah 29:13 say that “ye shall seek me, and find [me], when ye shall search for me with all your heart” if it is impossible to seek after God in the first place?
3/. No matter what spin you put on Ephesians 3:17 (“That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith ….”), it nevertheless teaches that Christ must dwell by faith in the hearts of believers, those who have been saved. It doesn’t matter what verbal terminology you use to describe the process of salvation; the end result must be that Christ dwells in your heart by faith. That is, it is the consequence of being saved!
I prefer to say that man must call upon the name of the Lord to be saved (Romans 10:13). This must rest upon man’s desire to do so by his own free will. If it were by God’s will alone that man did so without any free will to choose otherwise, then man would not need to call upon the Lord because that would be totally unnecessary. So if an evangelist chooses to proclaim that we should ask Jesus into our hearts, then as long as it is understood to equate to calling upon the name of the Lord to come into their lives as Saviour, then stop quibbling over terminology.
4/. Actually, I don’t go on about Ephesians 3:17. If you check my website, I would consistently use Romans 10:13 as the basis for man calling out to God to save him. But I am intelligent enough to see that it is the understanding of the gospel that is important, that it must represent a genuine commitment from the heart as per Romans 10:9 – That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. Also note that no matter what terminology you use, if it is not a genuine commitment from the heart, then it will not save.
5/. Friel says “People who ask Jesus into their hearts are not saved and they will perish on the Day of Judgment.” This statement is very clear: if you choose to ask Jesus into your heart, you cannot be saved! He allows for no exceptions here! This is heresy indeed! You said in Friel’s defence, “He has already said that there may be FEW exceptions, but generally, a lot of those people who “asked Jesus into their hearts” turn and walk away.” But Friel’s statement above admits no exceptions at all. It is absolute. If they ask Jesus into their hearts, they are not saved! (And if he says something different elsewhere, he is therefore inconsistent, while biblical truths are never inconsistent. You calvinists are all the same: twist the meaning so that it is a bit more supportive of your heresies. As false teachers you are good at feigned (that is, carefully sculpted) words (or statements) as per 2 Peter 2:3. If you have false logic here, then what hope is there for good logic anywhere else in your statement?
6/. Typical calvinist distraction heresy, focusing on a red herring side issue. What does it matter exactly what words are used when calling upon the name of the Lord to be saved? Why not try to defend your real problems? Why don’t you try to explain, for instance, why calvinism teaches that a man has to be born again before he can believe and then call upon the name of the Lord to be saved? Why don’t you try to explain why Spurgeon (as an allegedly good calvinist) taught that the regenerated man had eternal life before he was able to come to Christ to receive eternal life? And, the biggy: why is calvinism forced to teach that God is the author/decreer/creator/ordainer of sin/evil because the calvinist God cannot permit absolutely any other will or opinion from any other being in all the universe? And that this makes the calvinist God the only wilful sinner in the universe and the only one who can be legally condemned to hell for eternity? These are the real issues; leave the distractions and focus on the real heresies of calvinism.
7/. And, as for that justification Vs sanctification issue, note this from my Friel article: “The Gospel Coalition National Conference is a new calvinist organisation, so typically it preaches daily or ongoing justification. “As we sin daily, so he justifies daily, and we must daily go to him for it.” “
(Justification Vs Self-justification, The Gospel Coalition National Conference 13/04/2011) Once off justification?
221123 23rd November 2022 – Comment from “John”, not printed because it fails to refer to any of my documents, nor does it demonstrate anything I have written. It is no more than a vindictive verbal spray written by another incompetent calvinist who is so incensed that he resorts to throwing a name-calling tantrum because he cannot find anything biblically wrong with what I say. Please follow Website conditions for the Comments page in order to present an intelligent comment! And, why not try to read the Bible for yourself, instead of parroting the inane nonsense of that fool, Calvin, who was biblically illiterate.
Response: 1/. You say my comments concerning calvinists are inflammatory, but you provide not one single example from my writings to support this accusation. Most likely you were unable to provide such. Certainly, however, I am strongly opposed to the false doctrine of calvinism and if this inflames your anger, then it may do you some good to consider my statements carefully. I have used the Bible extensively (sola scripture; the Bible alone) to support my statements. You should also use the Bible alone to assess my statements, but you haven’t bothered to do this, have you?
2/. Just what have I said that is blasphemous against the most high God? I accept that I have made damning accusations against the calvinist God but they cannot be declared blasphemous because the God of calvinism is not (and cannot be) the God of the Bible. Name me just one blasphemous statement I am alleged to have made against the true God of the Bible and I will demonstrate it to be against the God of calvinism, not the God of the Bible.
3/. You say I will answer to God one day for what I teach. Yes, and so will you (2 Corinthians 5:10). It is God who will decide what is true and what is apostate.
4/. You say I have charged God with wrongdoing. But, as I noted above, it is always the calvinist God whom I have charged with wrongdoing. Look at “Calvinists teach that their God is the only wilful sinner in the universe!” to see what I say about the calvinist God and sin.
5/. So I serve satan, do I? This is a statement commonly said of me by countless calvinists without any documentary support, particularly biblical. And yet, as a doctrine of devils, calvinism itself is clearly serving satan by teaching the blasphemy that the God of the Bible is the author/ordainer/decreer of evil/sin. Try reading “Calvinists teach that their God is the only wilful sinner in the universe!” and please carefully check out my documentation! Even Calvin taught that logically God must be the author of all evils. In “Concerning the Eternal Predestination of God” he said: “But the objection is not yet resolved, that if all things are done by the will of God, and men contrive nothing except by His will and ordination, then God is the author of all evils.“ (P 179)
6/. You have failed to demonstrate any of your statements with documentary support from my website. In particular, for a cult that claims “sola scriptura” (the Bible alone), you (along with all calvinists) appear to have an aversion to using biblical truth. Calvinists are good at twisting biblical meanings, like the false teachers with their “feigned words” (carefully sculpted statements) of 2 Peter 2:3, and are equally good at avoiding Bible passages that clearly oppose their false doctrines.
7/. Please do yourself a favour and do not object without proper documentation to support your statements. State what I have written that is so objectionable and give logical and biblical reasoning as to why you consider me to be wrong. Any fool can declare another to be likewise a fool, but it takes intelligence to demonstrate such through proper and reasonable debate supported by suitable documentation.
221119 19th November 2022 – “finding” (Geoff) i like what am hearing i haven’t been to a denominational gathering in years, am not a Pentecostal, catholic or 7 day Advents they all think there wright and the other has it wrong, but the church is the people i gave my life to Jesus and God’s working on me through the Holy Spirit ; i think that there are people save in all denomination church’s that have a one on one relationship with God through Jesus.. nice to know there are like-minded people out there that live in Werribee/ hoppers
Response: Yes, you are right. The denomination name doesn’t matter as long as they preach the true word and the biblical gospel. However, preaching true to the word of God is becoming rare today, strongly suggesting that this is the great apostasy (Greek apostasia = “a falling away”) that Paul said would come before the revealing of the end-times antichrist (see 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4).
221102 2nd November 2022 – “Todd Friel” (Thomas) Actually Todd is right. There have been many that ask Jesus into their hearts, but under a false pretense. Some say it as a just in case there is a God. Others do it as an insurance policy, but the truth is the are just as lost as before they said those words. They must truly believe that God became man and entered our world in the form of Jesus Christ. That He was born of a Virginia, that He lived a sinless life. That He became a sinless sacrifice for the sin if all mankind. That He died and rose again and that He went to prepare a place for ALL the true Christians of the world. When a person understands and believes all of that he can now receive the Lord Jeus Christ as his Lord and Savior. Did the thief on the cross ask Jesus into his heart? No! He simply believed! Asking Jesus Christ into your heart only came into play during the 20 century. So your case for Todd Friel to be a heretic, teaching falsely is wrong. If you must ask Jesus Christ into your heart to be saved, then all those before Christ will go to HELL. However.. Abraham believed. Nothing else. Abraham believed!!!
Response – Thank you for your comment. I do not agree with you concerning Friel but it is good to get a rational statement for once. (If you write as a calvinist, you would probably have to agree with Friel.) On the other hand, I do agree with much that you have written.
1/. Asking Jesus into your heart is still based upon scriptural premises. The Bible says “That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith” (Ephesians 3:17). And noting “heart” (kardia) in the NT primarily deals with the intellectual and spiritual aspects, not the physical heart, this verse still teaches that Christ dwells in the heart (intellect; spirit). It matters little what terminology we give to the process. It merely means that we are asking Christ to dwell in our lives. To dismiss it because it doesn’t match up with our exact required wording is illogical. I’ve heard people call the car distributor a “thingy” but nevertheless they still clearly meant the distributor.
2/. I do agree with your comments re asking to be saved as “an insurance policy”. I make it clear on my website (“Yes, you might have prayed the sinners’ prayer, but did you mean it, or was it just taking out eternal life insurance for when you die?” – Are you a real Christian or just a fake) that asking to be saved must not be as an insurance against eternal punishment by a God whom they may not believe in but ask to be saved just in case. Try reading that post to see where I really stand.
3/. In spite of so many people making non-genuine commitments to be saved, Todd Friel is still wrong because, as a good calvinist, his foundational premise is that no-one has the right to ask Christ to be saved. You may only be saved if God has firstly chosen you for salvation; you have no personal say in it at all. He believes that unless God has chosen you for salvation, you cannot be saved regardless of whatever semantics you used in calling upon the name of the Lord, because his Jesus only died for those whom his God has chosen for salvation, and no others (that is, limited atonement).
4/. Friel believes that you can only believe in Christ after you have been regenerated (born again) by God’s spirit. Therefore, on this basis, anyone who by their own free will calls upon the name of the Lord to be saved (or whatever other terminology you consider equivalent), cannot be saved and is heading for hell unless God has made the first move by choosing to regenerate them by his will alone.
5/. In that same document of Friel’s, he says “So, what must one do to be saved? Repent and trust. (Heb.6:1)” Hebrews 6:1 says “Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,” It appears from this that Friel’s gospel is based upon seeking perfection. Isn’t this a gospel of salvation by works? See if you can find anywhere that Friel believes in any form of calling upon the name of the Lord to be saved (Romans 10:13) unless that person has already been born again through God’s election!
6/. The thief on the cross didn’t just believe. He acted upon that belief by asking Jesus: “Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom” (Luke 23:42) The actual words used in a sinner’s prayer are of little account. The bottom line is that believing is in itself not enough; even the devils believe and tremble! (James 2:19) Thus, by whatever name you give it, you must act upon that belief in such a way that submits to the authority of Jesus Christ. Yes, you must believe (Acts 16:30-31) but the genuine Christian will always act upon that belief.
7/. I have also written in Are you a real Christian or just a fake: “Note that while good works themselves cannot save you, they are the evidence of your salvation in Christ. Faith without any works is demonstrated to be dead (James 2:17-26). Your commitment itself to the Christian life won’t save you, but it will demonstrate the genuineness of your saving faith in Christ.”
8/. Just a final note. You said: “When a person understands and believes all of that he can now receive the Lord Jeus Christ as his Lord and Savior.” Romans 10:9 makes it clear that we must believe in our heart and confess with our mouth “that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.” Some of your requirements above are not essential knowledge for salvation itself but must be learned as we grow in Christ.
221012 12th October 2022 – (Andy): Sir, your statement on the home page of your website “100% Bible Based Teaching”
Then you offer such a theologically poor and unbiblical description of Free Will v Free Agency.
Perhaps more study is required.
Response – You say that I “offer such a theologically poor and unbiblical description of Free Will v Free Agency” yet you are unable to provide even one example to demonstrate your apparently erroneous claim. I rest my case!
I end up writing like this every time a calvinist complains. They never present any relevant scriptural basis. (Or any basis for that matter!)
To you who are reading this, note well the lack of intellectual calibre of the calvinist! “Perhaps more study is required” you say. Perhaps? Or did you mean “possibly”, or even “maybe”? And by whom? Yourself?
Perhaps you should read my article more carefully; you might learn something useful. (Or did you actually read it before you whinged?)
So note carefully: Calvinists so often gripe about what I write but have never yet been able to prove me wrong (particularly scripturally).
“sola scriptura” (the Bible alone) for the calvinist? Don’t make me laugh!
221008 8th October 2022 – “Question” (Julie): I awoke with john 6:44 on my mind in the middle of the night. I began to do some searches on it and came across your site. I agreed with what you said and it caught my interest to find out what your locations was. I still don’t know where hoppers crossing is.
Response – Thank you for your encouragement. I assume you checked out what I said against the truth of the Scriptures, testing (proving) all things as per 1 Thessalonians 5:21. Only the Bible is the infallible word of God.
I can relate to waking up in the middle of the night with a verse or maybe a biblical truth on my mind. Often I’ll get up and search or maybe write the thought down to check on in the morning. I am sure that God sometimes brings things to my attention that way, so I choose to not ignore such thoughts that crop up in the night.
Hoppers Crossing is a suburb on the west of Melbourne (capital of Victoria, Australia).
220918 18th September 2022 – “Just found you tonight” (name not supplied): So thankful for the Godly wisdom the Holy Spirit as given you. I’ve got a lot of reading to do that you have made available here on your website. Be blessed.
Response – Thank you for your encouragement.
220902 2nd September 2022 – “Commentary on the Gospels” (Doyle): Would you be able to recommend a commentary/study guide on the four gospels that is written from a traditionalist perspective?
Response – My apologies for slowness of this reply (due to family member in hospital). Commentaries as such are merely a person’s interpretation of the Bible, and are all too often tainted with the restraints of the writer’s denominational beliefs. I tend to look first at what I feel about a particular passage, with assistance from the original language meanings and any applicable cultural aspects. I look at where the same terms (especially in the original languages) are used elsewhere in the Bible (for consistency of meaning). Overall consistency is an important aspect of biblical interpretation. Biblical meaning must be consistent from start to finish, so any inconsistency can indicate a lie somewhere.
Once I have gained a reasonable view of a passage, I then may check with a number of commentaries to see what they think. I may not agree with some of their views but in order to oppose those views I must be able to defend my views as biblically preferable.
220811 11th August 2022 – Are there any calvinists willing to take on the challenge of explaining these quotes from calvinists?
Calvinists have a problem with free will. They say it isn’t taught in the Bible yet advise people to use their free will to ensure God’s grace or their election.
Calvinist Paul Tripp says that if you don’t know how to access God’s grace, you’ll be left feeling discouraged. “If you convince yourself that your problem is in your relationships, your location, or your situation, you’ll quit seeking grace and you’ll try to find an easy way out.”
But, don’t calvinists teach that God’s grace is irresistible? So how can you quit seeking grace if you are one of their God’s chosen ones? And if you are not one of the chosen ones, then no amount of seeking will gain a shred of grace, will it? Clearly such irresistible grace can be resisted by the free will of man to choose!
R C Sproul wrote (in “Chosen by God” P 169) concerning assurance of salvation: “If you are not sure, you would be well advised to make sure. Don’t ever assume that you are not elect. Make your election a matter of certainty.”
But shouldn’t he be teaching that you are either chosen (and saved) or not chosen (and not saved)? After all, how can you change that which God has allegedly already chosen for eternity (with no option of change permitted for any person)? How can a genuine calvinist make his/her election a matter of certainty? Clearly Sproul is teaching here the free will of man to choose whether or not he wishes to be saved.
The trouble with calvinists is that they have different and inconsistent views depending upon their audience at any one time.
220802 2nd August 2022 – “So, if my father was a Nazi, and my grandad was a Nazi, yet I come out and declare it as evil, I’m still held as non relevant because of my families past beliefs. I’m judged not on what I believe, but what they believed. Are you now relevant for everything your family tree believed? Based on this, why would anyone want to read anything you write because of your families mid guided thinking in any area?”
1/. This comment is typical of the lack of ability of calvinists to logically present an argument in their defence. And my response is also typical of my reply to calvinist comments in general. He would lose a debate every time if he argued as such. He has failed to demonstrate in any way where I may be found wrong because he has quoted nothing I have written to prove it wrong! It is clear that he couldn’t actually find anything wrong with what I said, because if he had, he would certainly have quoted it.
2/. The writer is obviously uneducated. He has failed to provide the information I require for Comments. He has not named the document on my website to which he is referring. He has not quoted anything I have written that he objects to. Therefore I can correctly assume that this is a case of misrepresentation of this site.
3/. Because he hasn’t provided any argument demonstrating me to be wrong, then I may assume that my statements are correct and that he himself is wrong.
4/. He has said that the comment subject is “Macarthur”. Is he declaring Macarthur to be a Nazi? Or is he claiming that Macarthur’s father and grandad were Nazis? And therefore evil? What is he talking about? Does he actually know what he is talking about? (By the way, I have never mentioned Nazis in any document referring to Macarthur or his family!)
5/. He would do well to check out what he thinks he has read on my site. If he thinks Macarthur has been maligned, then let him demonstrate it. I am reasonably certain which document he is referring to, and can assure him that my query concerning Macarthur’s suggested culpability has been well-documented. Perhaps he would do well to actually read this document properly before shooting off his mouth in irrelevant comments.
6/. In general this comment is typical of calvinist objections. They cannot find any biblical (sola scriptura) support for their objections so they resort to name calling and false innuendoes. Comments like this one demonstrate calvinism to be a non-biblical doctrine for illiterates who cannot read the Bible for themselves, with people who are unable to do proper research.
220604 4th June 2022 – from Robert (Comment not printed – see below)
1/. This writer has labelled his comment “Ephesians 3:17” which does not appear in the title of any of my documents. Nor has he named any document where it may be found, nor has he quoted anything I have written using this verse. And I will not print long-winded comments that fail to directly address my comments on my website.
2/. I have not printed his comment as it is largely an apologetic for his personal calvinist views and opinions. His main comment regarding Ephesians 3:17 seems to be that “That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith” (KJV) “has absolutely nothing to do with someone being saved”. However, if you remove the calvinist heresy of their God selecting people randomly regardless of their wills for heaven (unconditionally), then it has a lot to do with salvation. He also writes that “Paul is writing to those already saved“. Therefore Christ dwells in their hearts because they are saved? Sounds like it has a lot to do with being saved, doesn’t it? After all, without salvation, Christ wouldn’t be dwelling in their hearts. Come on, stop your verbal gymnastics (“feigned words” of the false teachers – 2 Peter 2:3).
3/. He wrote “God has already determined, before the world began, who He would save or not save, Eph 1:11, 2Thes 2:13-14. The thing is I can show plenty of predestination verses, but you have to make up things to validate “free will” salvation, by this meaning people have to “do” or “say” something that “allows” God to save them.” Please note that the election (choosing) by God to salvation does exist, but it is according to His foreknowledge (1 Peter 1:2a) and His predestination of His people is also by His foreknowledge (Romans 8:29). The verses you quoted therefore do not demonstrate any opposition to the free will of man to choose this day whom he will serve. This is why calvinists hate the foreknowledge of God so much they make every effort to redefine it as something else. But it is simply God’s knowledge beforehand of what choices will be made in the future.
4/. Like calvinists in general, this writer has failed to quote even one statement of mine to justify his claims. It is the approach of the weakling who expects to lose if he declares his hand too early. It is difficult to defend against someone who refuses to say what his problem really is. He is hiding behind the absence of truth.
5/. He has said, “I don’t care about the verses you will want to show me, I am very aware of them and after studying them realize that your camp teaches the verses completely out of context and you have no comprehension as to the actual meaning. So, please, just deal with what I listed, if you even reply.” But he hasn’t been able to quote anything I’ve written, let alone name the document he allegedly found the non-quote in! So why should I bother doing what he is so incapable of doing?
6/. And he has even said why he doesn’t know much about what I’ve written. He said “I only read a small part of your tirade.” And just what “tirade” is he referring to? Apparently he read so little he doesn’t even know the title of the document, let alone quote something from it. Clearly he has great delusions, this calvinist. And, like a true calvinist, he probably reads the Bible the same way: read a small part and claim to know it all!
7/. And he even says “If I so desired, I could show your error on every verse you cite.” Well, you have failed miserably so far. Why not try to read the Bible for yourself and better determine what it actually says? I have documented many verses that calvinists refuse to answer because there is no satisfactory answer, in “Impossible questions for calvinists”, Parts 1 to 6. Pick some and try them for yourself. But you won’t, will you, because you can’t. And your silence will demonstrate your inability to respond.
Leave a ReplyWant to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!