<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Q2IBvETGVD0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

In The Final Analysis:

Calvinism takes the blame away from Satan for deceiving mankind and places the blame on God for sending people to Hell through "His own design." Through his teaching, Calvin used Bible text much like Satan did in the Garden of Eden to make God out to be "the bad guy". :nono:

In The Final Analysis:

Calvinism takes the blame away from Satan for deceiving mankind and places the blame on God for sending people to Hell through "His own design." Through his teaching, Calvin used Bible text much like Satan did in the Garden of Eden to make God out to be "the bad guy". :nono:

Hi Starman,
"Calvinism negates the Gospel of Salvation that was proclaimed by The New Testament Jesus Christ and which was entrusted to His Disciples in The Great Commission."
That’s very interesting considering almost all of the greatest evangelist were considered Calvinist. See Below
Arthur W. Pink (evangelist & scholar)Benjamin Keach (1689 Baptist Confession)
Charles Spurgeon (Baptist preacher)
George Whitefield (evangelist & preacher)
John Calvin (preacher & Bible scholar)
John Foxe (Foxe's Book Of Martyrs)
John Gill (renowned theologian)
John Knox (founder of Presbyterianism)
Jonathan Edwards (evangelist)
Martin Luther (Protestant Reformer)
Matthew Henry (bible commentator)
William Carey (missionary)
D.A. Carson
D. James Kennedy
James Montgomery Boice
James White
John F. MacArthur
John Piper
Martyn Lloyd-Jones
R.C. Sproul
Augustine of Hippo,
Adonirum Judson,
William Carey,
Richard Baxter,
John Bunyan,
Andrew Fuller,
Luther Rice,
J.L. Dagg,
Daniel & Abraham Marshall,
J.I. Packer,
Ian Murray,
Tom Nettles,
Tom Schriner,
Tom Ascol,
Timothy George,
Mark Dever,
Al Mohler.”
These are some heavy hitters to dismiss so casually. Like D James Kennedy that created Evangelism Explosion!
So what I am hearing, and correct me if I am wrong is that you don’t understand Gods character and nature?
God is not the Author of evil, evil originated with Satan in his heart, but he certainly planned for it and uses it for his honor and glory.
Calvin teaches, “For the proper and genuine cause of sin is not God’s hidden counsel but the evident will of man,”1 though in context he also states that Adam’s Fall was “not without God’s knowledge and ordination
• August 12: “God created [Satan and his demons] knowing what they would become and how, in that very evil role, they would glorify Christ. Knowing everything they would become, God created them for the glory of Christ.”
• August 19: “God is sovereign over Satan, and therefore Satan’s will does not move without God’s permission. And therefore every move of Satan is part of God’s overall purpose and plan.”
• August 26: “[E]verything that exists—including evil—is ordained by an infinitely holy and all-wise God to make the glory of Christ shine more brightly. . . . Adam’s sin and the fall of the human race with him into sin and misery did not take God off guard and is part of his overarching plan to display the fullness of the glory of Jesus Christ.” John Piper
libertarian freedom is incoherent and unbiblical. And as we saw [in chapter 4] God does bring about sinful human actions. To deny this, or to charge God with wickedness on account of it, is not open to a Bible-believing Christian. Somehow, we must confess both that God has a role in bringing evil about, and that in doing so he is holy and blameless. . . . God does bring sins about, but always for his own good purposes. So in bringing sin to pass he does not himself commit sin. If that argument is sound, then a Reformed doctrine of the sovereignty of God does not imply that God is the author of sin.
Remember God allowed Satan to practically destroy a just man.
Gen 50:20 As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result, to preserve many people alive.
Gen. 2:9 (created tree of good AND evil) Who? God
Duet. 6:22 {and the Lord showed signs and wonders, great and sore [Heb. ra (evil)], upon Egypt,....KJV}
7:15, 28:5 {The Lord shall smite thee in the knees, and in the legs, with a sore (Heb. ra) botch that cannot be healed........KJV,
28:59, 29:21, 32:23 {I will heap mischiefs (Heb. ra) upon them; I will spend My arrows upon them. KJV}
Josh. 23:15 {.....so shall the Lord bring upon you all evil (ra) things.....}
Isaiah 45:7 in the King James Version reads, “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.” How does Isaiah 45:7 agree with the view that God did not create evil? There are two key facts that need to be considered. (1) The word translated “evil” is from a Hebrew word that means “adversity, affliction, calamity, distress, misery.” Notice how the other major English Bible translations render the word: “disaster” (NIV, HCSB), “calamity” (NKJV, NAS, ESV), and “woe” (NRSV). The Hebrew word can refer to moral evil, and often does have this meaning in the Hebrew Scriptures. However, due to the diversity of possible definitions, it is unwise to assume that “I create evil” in Isaiah 45:7 refers to God bringing moral evil into existence.
Other passages dealing with God causing evil, calamity, etc.
Gen. 19:24
Ex. 4:21, 7:3, etc.
Duet. 32:39
Josh. 11:20
2 Chron. 25:8
Job 1:8, 11, (notice Satan said to God, "Put forth YOUR hand...."), 12, 16, 5:18, 6:4, 7:14, 9:12, 10:16, 17, 12:9, 14-25, 16:7-14, 19:6-13
Ps. 39:9, 90:3, 105:25-36, 135:6, 139:12
Is. 14:24-27, 30, 43:13, 54:16
Jer. 25:9-38
Dan. 4:35
Matt. 10:34, 35
John 12:40
Rom. 8:20, 9:18, 21-22, 11:32
Eph. 1:11
God is not responsible for the sinfull actions of man or Satan he just uses them. Had he not there would be no plan of salvation or a need for one!

In The Final Analysis:

Calvinism takes the blame away from Satan for deceiving mankind and places the blame on God for sending people to Hell through "His own design." Through his teaching, Calvin used Bible text much like Satan did in the Garden of Eden to make God out to be "the bad guy". :nono:

"We only use the term "Calvinism" for shortness. That doctrine which is called "Calvinism" did not spring from Calvin; we believe that it sprang from the great founder of all truth. Perhaps Calvin himself derived it mainly from the writings of Augustine. Augustine obtained his views, without doubt, through the Holy Spirit of God, from diligent study of the writings of Paul, and Paul received them from the Holy Ghost and from Jesus Christ, the great founder of the Christian Church. We use the term then, not because we impute an extraordinary importance to Calvin's having taught these doctrines. We would be just as willing to call them by any other name, if we could find one which would be better understood, and which on the whole would be as consistent with the fact." (C.H Spurgeon)

Calvin did a lot of good and as for blaming Calvin, for burning Michael Servetus at the stake Michael Servetus was a notorious heretic as he denied the deity of Christ and the Trinity. Servetus was arrested in France but he was able to escape France and made his way to Geneva. One day when Calvin was preaching walks in the notorious heretic Michael Servetus. The authorities immediately arrested him. Many uninformed Christians believe that Calvin put Servetus to death. This is untrue. On the other hand, John Calvin tried to win Servetus to Christ. While Servetus in prison, John Calvin went to his prison cell many times and tried to win him to Christ. But Servetus still denied the deity of Christ and the Trinity. He was condemned to death not by John Calvin but by a Judge, John Calvin was only a witness of his false heresies but not a prosecutor. The day he was put to death Calvin again went to Servetus and shared the gospel but it was in vain.

I am not all hung up on Calvin no more so than I am with Luther or anyone else but he was a great mind. Blame Augustine or Blame the Apostle Paul or blame God for his inspired word.

You know Arminian theology has some commonality with catholicism, perhaps its a little to close to home?

"We only use the term "Calvinism" for shortness. That doctrine which is called "Calvinism" did not spring from Calvin; we believe that it sprang from the great founder of all truth. Perhaps Calvin himself derived it mainly from the writings of Augustine. Augustine obtained his views, without doubt, through the Holy Spirit of God, from diligent study of the writings of Paul, and Paul received them from the Holy Ghost and from Jesus Christ, the great founder of the Christian Church.

So Calvinism is influenced by Augustine, a Roman Catholic, who prayed to the Virgin Mary for intercession. In your opinion is that a diligent New Testament view of being led by the Holy Spirit of God, Paul's preaching and Jesus' giving approval to pray to Mary?

So Calvinism is influenced by Augustine, a Roman Catholic, who prayed to the Virgin Mary for intercession. In your opinion is that a diligent New Testament view of being led by the Holy Spirit of God, Paul's preaching and Jesus' giving approval to pray to Mary?

No and you know better. You know full well my position on Roman Catholicism. I am saying this is cleary what Paul taught. Augustine was just credited for teaching it. Also he was part of the universal Catholic church as the Roman Catholic church didnt emerege for about another 570 years. Praying to Mary didnt start till 1854 Augustine died in 430 A year before the first proclamation of infant baptism regenerates the soul.

No and you know better. You know full well my position on Roman Catholicism. I am saying this is cleary what Paul taught. Augustine was just credited for teaching it. Also he was part of the universal Catholic church as the Roman Catholic church didnt emerege for about another 570 years. Praying to Mary didnt start till 1854 Augustine died in 430 A year before the first proclamation of infant baptism regenerates the soul.

Please stop infusing your Wikipedia-laiden trype regarding RCC history. All Carholics know that when a Protestant throws emphasis on "roman" it's derogatory. Your assertion that the RCC wasn't established until 900-1000 is disengenuous at best.

Please stop infusing your Wikipedia-laiden trype regarding RCC history. All Catholics know that when a Protestant throws emphasis on "roman" it's derogatory. Your assertion that the RCC wasn't established until 900-1000 is disengenuous at best.

Fixed

Please stop infusing your Wikipedia-laiden trype regarding RCC history. All Carholics know that when a Protestant throws emphasis on "roman" it's derogatory. Your assertion that the RCC wasn't established until 900-1000 is disengenuous at best.

That’s like saying a 99 year old man and an embryo look the same!
Your also claiming a secession from Peter which can’t be proved, what can be proved is the history of the church and how today’s church of Rome is nothing like the first century church, as today’s practices did not exist then and are so far from the original church it’s not the same church. To say the universal church and the Church of Rome are one in the same is shameful and disingenuous, if you know any of the history of the church and the Church of Rome.

today’s practices did not exist then and are so far from the original church it’s not the same church.

Since your other go-to resource seems to be YouTube, watch this video (I have posted it before)

The Catholic Mass in 155 A.D. - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2J_bamuM_4k)

It sure resembles what I saw at Mass yesterday. If 155AD isn't old enough for you, research the Didache. Will your CRE service look like what Justin describes? If not, why?

Since your other go-to resource seems to be YouTube, watch this video (I have posted it before)

The Catholic Mass in 155 A.D. - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2J_bamuM_4k)

It sure resembles what I saw at Mass yesterday. If 155AD isn't old enough for you, research the Didache. Will your CRE service look like what Justin describes? If not, why?I seem to recall us discussing this before. Justin's description of worship/fellowship is to vague to prove anything.

I seem to recall us discussing this before. Justin's description of worship/fellowship is to vague to prove anything.

I admitted I posted this before. Vague? Not at all. As a Catholic, Justin's letter mimicks so closely the order of the Mass. You attend a Mass (at an orthodox Catholic parish) and you will see. Matter of fact, hand to God, you join me one Sunday for Mass (and breakfast afterward if you are interested) and I'll join you the following Sunday for a service at your church.

I admitted I posted this before. Vague? Not at all. As a Catholic, Justin's letter mimicks so closely the order of the Mass. You attend a Mass (at an orthodox Catholic parish) and you will see. Matter of fact, hand to God, you join me one Sunday for Mass (and breakfast afterward if you are interested) and I'll join you the following Sunday for a service at your church.What time is the Mass and what church?

What time is the Mass and what church?

pm'd