Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Calvinism’

The Truth vs. ‘Traditionalism’ In the Calvinist Baptist and Presbyterian Church (Universal Church)

In reply to the Baptist traditionalist at of the Southern Baptist Convention, who spoke against the doctrine of predestiny (or just “destiny”) a.k.a. Calvinism and speaking as if its teachers/believers of such are being unfair by not promoting anti-Calvinism (yes, that absurd) at the blog post https://soteriology101.com/2015/06/22/calvinism-in-the-southern-baptist-convention/

 

What do you mean by “doctrinal bias”? You’re obviously not saved. It isn’t their BIAS, IT’S WHAT THEY BELIEVE IS WHO GOD IS AND HOW SALVATION CAN ONLY WORK. It’s not a preference of opinion or a sway or an illogical view like YOUR BIAS.

Truth is not about giving equal time to any belief, to conservatism and liberalism or whatever, it’s about WHAT, IS, THE, TRUTH. HOW, DOES, A PERSON, GET, SAVED FROM AN ETERNITY IN HELL. NOT, “Oh you’re hurting my feelings by only saying what you believe the truth way and life is”. Huh? Christ didn’t say to preach opinions and diverging views on salvation. You’re crazed and sinful. Scripture says there will be blemishes among the church, ugly spots, sure that can mean certain leaders and teachers, but if you admit THE MAJORITY of the true church, which comprises Calvinist Baptists and Presbyterians preaches 95 percent that GOD’S WILL IS ALWAYS DONE, and you claim without evidence that “many” Southern Baptists “embrace” (how about BELIEVE, CAN YOU SAY BELIEVE?), obviously your way of hyping a minority view, then WHO COULD THE BLEMISHES, the ONES CAUSING DISHARMONY, DISCORD, DIVISIONS BE? It’s those denying the majority belief. And wow, lol, “traditionalism” eh? Are you Catholic? Are you a Pharisee? Tradition vs God’s word eh? Truth is certainly a tradition, but calling some view a pretentious name just as atheists will call themselves “Freethinkers” or the “rational” ones doesn’t change the fact that they are illogical slaves. The fact is: salvation is promised by God to those who cannot earn it and never would based on HIS CHOICE, HIS WILL, HIS PLANS, HIS SON’S SACRIFICE, HIS BLOOD AND SUFFERING AND DEATH AND RESURRECTION, not our whims and corrupt feelings and will, on our unreliable inconsistent choices. You want the gospel to be, “Congrats, you have a choice, free will, are allowed to be complete king over your own life, oh and Christ died some sort of death they say to make that happen, now if you pick my view you’ll have some neat friends and we can watch sports, drink and smoke together and sing Grateful Dead songs and classic rock and think about all kinds of worldly things rather than those booooooring Bible songs and studying doctrines all day on bleah, “destiny” and “God’s will”, how boring that kind of Creator and Savior are! Oh yeah so on the gospel, so you can lose your salvation if you feel like because God is a respecter of persons, knows your will is equal to His, and that true Father’s who love their sons and daughters and the angels eternally wouldn’t torment them with his horribly boring (oh how I fear the possibility God is an eternal bore!) so called “love” but let you dig into that cool place, do-what-you-feel-like land of the free called Hell where you can never get out of, but just ignore that contradiction, wait, I shouldn’t have mentioned that because I should stay true to being intellectually dishonest. Man but my teaching is so much easier to accept than that maddening destiny stuff where God faults us for every little thing even though He says He’s controlling every single thing! So yeah, the good news is you can go to Heaven if you accept Christ as Lord, Lord, Lord and savior and go to Heaven or Hell if you feel like it and get born again a few times in a row in case you backslid and lost your salvation by accident. So, yeah, you might go to Hell, you might not get saved, yeah, good news, uh, yeah, so uplifting and something to shout on the rooftops and get persecuted, tortured and brutally murdered over and have your family including kids and pets destroyed over. Hey now lets have some worldly fun to cheer ourselves up with after that little talk.”

Wow, so you want that crazy gospel, that crazy life to be the optional “traditional” way offered and taught to Christ’s children, to His sheep? Save that for the goats and go join the liberals and libertines. Go to Four Square and Pentecostal crazed churches where you can go crazy all you want babbling such incomprehensible babble all day and not need a translator or proof it’s of God.

And NO, God doesn’t simply, “control all things” and “your will”, the Bible says He accomplishes his will, plan through indirect ways including direct, but He doesn’t hypnotize anyone. He absolutely uses force, but salvation isn’t “forcing a sinner to love God or face the facts begrudgingly”. That’s how your kind thinks because God has kept you blind and your heart hardened and mind unrepentant so that you don’t have God’s love in you. To you it’s an inconvenience and annoyance, a cruel “fact” of life you hope to eternally ignore so you can promote your own so called “truth” and “love” and “reasoning”. But you hate all three true versions of each so much so you simply refer to some “many”, to three Christians, avoid SCRIPTURE and true reasoning, and an appeal to tradition, like a cultic Catholic or Pharisee or Ultra Orthodox Judiaiser. People like you are the true Pharisees who make up or pander to the countless rules of men but despise the core laws of God, to love Him with all your being and to love your neighbor as yourself and do to others as you’d have done to you. Like it or not God already chose who he’d save and had nothing to do with some kernel of goodness or foreseeing they’d choose to love him, will force every rebellious knee to bow, and He will force the goats out and throw them in Hell and keep his own children pure and in ecstasy forever. If you want Hell as an eternal choice, you’ll get more than that, that will be all you have, Hell and nothing else, as Christ said, whatever you have will be taken away and even what’s left over will be gone. You’ll have less than nothing in Hell forever. So if you don’t want that, then take God’s threat fully seriously for once and truly repent if you can and stop obsessing on having to give up sinful friends, thinking and living.

Advertisements

TO ATHEISTS, TO JEWS, TO MUSLIMS, TO MORMONS, TO WICCANS, TO SEVENTH DAY ADVENTISTS, TO JWS & CATHOLICS

June 15, 2016 10 comments

“You have disregarded the command of God to keep the tradition of men.” – Yeshua/Jesus (rebuking the Pharisees)
.
Which “command” or “Law” came first in history? The “10” and two highest (and “Golden Rule” which even atheists won’t) dispute, or all the other books; Quran, “Sacred Tradition”, Joseph Smith’s, White’s, the Talmud, and so on? And what word before Genesis to Revelation will you compare that came before? What word survived Noah’s Flood? As for those who say, “The Bible is altered, it’s missing books, and which translation to believe?”: what books can you prove are missing that matter and why would that prevent you from obeying the Law or G.Rule, and how does it prevent you from understanding, “Don’t lie” or “steal” or “murder”? As for “which religion to believe?”: the one that doesn’t contradict the commands and gospel! The one that says not to be bitter, stingy, to help the poor and needy and to even be honest with evil men and to control the thoughts of your heart and not be like a wild animal, but to use reason/logic and to try and be perfect. The religion that acknowledges that you must be born again (receive a perfect spirit of your own that will stay pure and immortal) to become fully immortal one day, and trust Jesus, God’s son in the flesh, suffered the punishment of unimaginable pain and being shunned by God (yet not forever), for the sins of many people and races, for you, if you with sorrow for breaking God’s Law and tormenting his Spirit of mercy and peace by doing so ask for his forgiveness and believe God will then forgive your sins throughout all time and keep his promise to perfect your heart, mind and transform your flesh into what will be immortal and what will never sin again.

For you who in your confusion and false salvation claim salvation is seperate from eternal life and that “salvation is not eternal”, prove to YOURSELF, with careful study, patience and prayer that confusion is true. How is being saved from Hell not the partner of being born again? How if Jesus’ self sacrifice covedered the sins of those born before and after his life on Earth does is not cover FUTURE SINS? Where in Scripture does it teach that after being born again and becoming “a new creature in Christ” that Paul said nothing in Heaven or the earth can overcome, or where in the parable Jesus explained of God the sower of seeds that the seeds which bear good fruit (obedience to God with love for Him) will NOT mature but will rot and be burned up due to man’s free will or due to “Satan”? If the “free will” of man, which God says is “a slave to sin” BEFORE, BEFORE! he is forgiven and Satan can defeat God’s promise to secure for himself eternal children (including his faithful angels), then throw out the Bible, God is a liar, Satan is the winner and “the sting” and “curse” of death is what is truly eternal, inevitable and sure, NOT God’s “eternal life”, Son, any prophets or word, not his salvation or eternal life, not even his forgiveness of sins.

Why would, as Pentecostals teach, eternal life be something you only get after you die? Does man’s “free will” that Pentecostals and Arminians teach trump’s God’s will cease after he dies so that he can no longer command God to send him to Hell? Their teaching is confusion and has no basis in any Scripture, rather it is a lie that contradicts God’s word.

How can you miss the symbolism God used in the literal story where God saves for Himself some humans and angels, like Noah to Paul and so on, like angels Michael and Gabriel and so on, but rejects of HIS own will (not man’s choice with man’s God-limited will) and rejects others, permanently? Where in Scripture does it hint Noah or Michael will one day fall? It doesn’t, because there is no fall in the flesh or by the spirits of the forgiven that will prevent them from full immortality. And there is one more proof in Scripture that makes it clear that salvation is eternal: everyone who know’s the parable of Lazarus and the rich man knows the rich man is eternally in Hell, that a rift impassible prevents him from going to Heaven, even from getting relief for a moment, but who realizes or remembers the rift between Heaven and Hell is impassible on the side of Heaven too? Jesus even said that Abraham could not, or anyone rather give to the rich man that drop of water he wanted. How then can “man’s free will” break God’s promise and send him past the impassible to get eternal death, the “second death”, which is eternal torment and God showing no compassion to your feelings and thoughts forever and refusing to verbally respond to you nor even give you “a sign”?

The complacent will think, “who cares?” and the cultist think, “I’ll understand later” and the arrogant “scholar” deceive himself into thinking he still has some leverage over God. But this message is first for thosd whom God will unblind, not those as with the Pharisees Jesus said that God would keep heart-hardened and blind.

Is it “too good to be true” as a Muslim woman replied? What? Too good to be true that God would forgive some and not others? As opposed to what else? That He would send everything He let be in Hell forever, or the other extreme: every rich one and tyrant to Heaven and everything else?!

Finally, to atheists, what morality (laws) do you obey, and obey perfectly so that you cannot be called a hypocrite and why do you follow those laws? Or, do you just do whatever you feel like if you think you might not suffer for it, and are therefore no better than a “religious hypocrite”?

Judgement Day approaches, death is not far, if you think your life truly precious, then treat it as such.

Demons Pretending to Be Angels and the Free Will Heresy

June 14, 2011 13 comments

On Coast to Coast AM last night, George Noory had on “Doreen Virtue” which C2CAM says, “is a spiritual doctor of psychology and a fourth-generation metaphysician who works with the angelic, elemental, and ascended-master realms.” In other words, truthfully, “she communicates with demons which she has deluded herself into thinking are angels and so called ‘nature spirits'”. Doreen herself on the show acknowledged that demons can pretend to be angels and that people should not romance them for pleasure.

On the show, Doreen claimed that we must ask angels for help to get help from them, which reminded me of Mormons and other Free Will Christians, and suspected that that is why she said that, and then no surprise to me she confirmed it by saying that that was necessary or it would be a violation of our free will, however, she contradicted herself afterwards by saying that the only time they could help without our asking for it was “if it isn’t your time” (to die). It’s a contradiction because it implies that GOD’S WILL supersedes our own, and that isn’t compatible with the heretical “free will” nonsense teaching that I’ve been observing and learning about as I keep hearing the world talk about it. Basically, the world’s free will doctrine is that human free will is a sacred thing that must not be violated and that God won’t violate it (and many non-Christians believe that Earth aka Gaea and/or ‘Mother Nature’ also has a will of its/her own), yet, it’s a lie, and like so many lies, contradicts itself. Here is how it contradicts:

1) Wills are always in conflict everywhere, generally speaking, and depending on the personality of the ones who are not getting there way, it can lead to sin, crime, hateful arguing, rather than one side peacefully giving in to the other. So, to act like human’s wills can’t be violated as if it’s some physical law, is nonsense. It’s clearly observably wrong to claim our wills cannot be gone against successfully. Clearly not everyone’s will can be done as they want it to be done and there will always be unfilled will until there is perfect peace (which God says he will bring about, except in Hell). For the Free Will Christians who believe the Bible, who claim that God can’t go against our will, they are clearly wrong, since the Bible repeatedly claims God does that all the time. Some Christians try to brush that off with the ridiculous explanation that God isn’t really going against anyone’s will (how ridiculous!) when he punishes them, because they want to be punished. That is dumb, absolutely dumb. Sure, some people in bitterness say, “bring it on” or “I don’t care” but that’s because THEY DON’T KNOW THE WRATH in store for them. Like one proverb in the Bible says, “A servant cannot be corrected by mere words.” That (rebellious) servant can’t be corrected by mere talk because they aren’t feeling any pain and will especially dismiss warnings if they are feeling pleasure. It’s the same with a rebellious child or any person with a bad habit and who is having “a good time”: unless there is a painful negative consequence, emotionally or physically, they won’t stop. Further, why do so many people, when committing a crime, try to hide that they are committing a crime, or run when they think they are in danger of getting caught for that crime, or lie in court over whether they committed one or not? OBVIOUSLY, it’s because they don’t want to feel pain for what they did, not “BECAUSE THEY WANT TO BE PUNISHED”. But in order to defend their backwards doctrine, that is how absurd and childish heretics must think: backwards, backwards to the point of embarrassing absurdity that even kids who aren’t brainwashed can recognize is obviously stupid and illogical reasoning that goes against what even stupid people know is stupid.

2) If God’s will is also sacred and cannot be violated, then how can everyone else’s will also be sacred and forbidden from being violated being that God’s will is often not the will of man or anything else? That is a clear contradiction. And it is obvious that if anyone’s will is going to always be done, it’s going to be the all-knowing all-powerful eternal Creator’s, not the created things that like ants compared to him. The Bible even says that God’s will is always done in Heaven, and has us pray that it will always be done on Earth, and even Jesus said to God, “…but your will (be done), not mine.” Doreen tried to dismiss the Bible and untrustworthy because, “it’s been rewritten many times,” the cliche attack of an ignoramus who doesn’t know or refuses to acknowledge that the Bible is backed up by many old copies of itself showing that it has been copied very accurately in all the places that matter most, and that there is no evidence of loss of text. Her logic is also wrong in what she implied, which was that many copies necessarily lead to errors. She also stupidly implied that God can’t preserve his own word. With such an unreliable God why does Doreen pretend to love and honor him and that he’s in control? If he can’t preserve his own word, his laws, his commands to love, then how can we? And why follow him if he can’t keep track of what he says or if we can’t? Again: contradictions. That is the lot of liars: lies and contradictions.

3) Why would there be an exception like Doreen claims, that “unless it’s “not your time” angels can’t help you”? Is it just because she said so? Because some angel supposedly told her so. And so what if one did? Can demons pretend to be angels? She herself said so, so then she cannot simply claim, “angels never lie.” And being that humans can repeatedly make the same mistakes and be deceived till death, for years, she can’t claim, especially as a religion-ignorant, which she clearly is, that she is undecievable, immune to be fooled, tricked. Further, some demons, not merely staying in one place and keeping to themselves, go out of there way to lie to humans and deceive them, and having lived for thousands of years, have mastered deception and know how humans react to all kinds of situations and suggestions. And how long has Doreen lived in comparison to such demons? She sure has not lived long enough to become a master of the truth, nor has she studied well enough as was indicated by her evil broadside attacks against Christians, like that they “blackmail” people into believing there religion and her illogical vague statement that “preaching fear” is negative energy (a meaningless statement) with the implication that that is bad. And guess what Doreen is doing by making those claims? According to her vague nonsense, she’s also “preaching fear”. It’s also a clear lie to claim as she did, that all Christians do is talk about fear. Truly she’s a lying ignoramus. Who doesn’t know that millions of Christians have said and still do, “God is love” or “For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that whoever believes in him will not perish, but have everlasting life” or “love your neighbor as yourself” or “Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.” or “love your enemies” and “bless those who curse you” and the most famous of all, “Do unto others as you would have them do to you,” all of which are verses from the Bible. Yet she slanders all Christians, including the children, as “preach”ers “of fear” and negativity. Clearly it’s Doreen who is the preacher of fear and negativity by mainly focusing on what she perceives are “negative” things about Christians and mainly finding fault with them, when clearly they have done much good and continue to do so (I’m talking about true Christians, but even Free Will ones do some good, though at the expense of the truth about how to get saved and to lead people away from true salvation, though not all realize they are misleading people).

4) Doreen Virtue also made clearly wrong claims, which is that angels can’t help you unless you ask for it: but as she herself would know, angels are always helping people without them asking for it, and some don’t even believe in angels when they are helped by them. Many people also don’t pray for the help of angels, but ask for God’s help, knowing that he uses angels to do things for him, yet Doreen says to pray to the angels. Why would you pray to the angels rather than God who is in control of them? If you want a coworker to be friendly to you or to help you who is in a different state, do you pray to the coworker or to God? But Doreen hates God, so refuses to go to him for help, but instead wants to worship what he created.

5) Concerning again Doreen’s claim that angels need our permission to help us, how can she say that when surely she hears stories all the time of people being helped by angels and not knowing they were angels or being helped without asking? That could be seen a deliberate deception or insanity for her to ignore what she repeatedly sees contradicts her “free will” belief, which is really about pride and a childish attitude of rebellion towards God. And if angels need our permission, then doesn’t God? Does God need our permission for anything? Obviously to say he does is stupid. That’s lying say that I need the permission of a toy I made, even a living one with a mind, to do anything to it, or that a parent needs the permission of the child to move it somewhere, teach it something, feed it something, give it a gift, love it or even talk to it (which leads to a paradox: how can you ask for permission to talk without first talking if not given permission to talk?) And if a parent doesn’t need its the permission of its children for anything but a few exceptions, how much less does God the creator and sustainer of all things need it? And consider the evil consequences of this free will logic, at least Doreen’s: Humans must ask each other for permission to help each other in all circumstances, including to save each others lives. Consider how many more people in the world would be ignorant, sad, injured and dead from such a law. But many people realize the evil of such bad logic, and have made “good Samaritan” type laws as are mentioned on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Samaritan_law. It’s noteworthy that Wikipedia however, doesn’t point out the origin of such laws: God’s word.

“Do not let anyone who delights in false humility and the worship of angels disqualify you for the prize. Such a person goes into great detail about what he has seen, and his unspiritual mind puffs him up with idle notions.” – Colossians 2:18

“the devil took [Yeshua] to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. “All this I will give you,” he said, “if you will bow down and worship me.” Jesus said to him, “Away from me, Satan! For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.’” – Matthew 4:8-10

“I will keep on doing what I am doing in order to cut the ground from under those who want an opportunity to be considered equal with us in the things they boast about. For such people are false apostles, deceitful workers, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.” – 2 Corinthians 11:12-14

“who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’ Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?” – Romans 9:20-21

Update: 6-16-2011

Yesterday, after having written the above (except Romans 9:20-21 which I added while adding this note), I finally realized the solution to what was a long and great mystery to me: “Is the human will and all wills “random” (because random would seem to be the result of ‘not controlled’, in other words, not a machine that is just programming or being moved around by God directly or indirectly), and is randomness necessary, and if random, how could God predict what would happen in the future correctly? And is a random will necessary for self-awareness and responsibility for the actions of the person who makes choices using their will?” God’s word had the answer all along. First of all, it makes it clear that God predestines everything (and the claim that God doesn’t predestine anyone to Hell is stupid). God doesn’t destine some things and others allow to be loose, random and free to do whatever. Second, there is no evidence that a will must be random in order for a person to be aware of themselves and that their choices and to be responsible for them.

“To humans belong the plans of the heart” – Proverbs 16:1

“A person’s steps are directed by Yahweh” – Proverbs 20:24

“In Yahweh’s hand the king’s heart is a stream of water that he channels toward all who please him.” – Proverbs 21:1

Categories: angels, Free Will, Logic and Religion, Logic Fallacies Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

False Teacher – Chuck Missler’s False Gospel Given On Coast to Coast AM

May 20, 2011 11 comments

Chuck Missler last night was on Coast to Coast AM. He appeared to be a loving saved Christian, but then I noticed at one point where he was using Coast to Coast to preach, gave a typical Arminian gospel (which is a misleading one that leads people to Hell and makes them “twice a child of Hell as … you” to quote Jesus), which is “accept that Jesus died on a the cross for you” MINUS ASKING GOD TO FORGIVE YOU. As usual, Christian-hater and fundamentalist-hater George Noory, who hates to listen to Christian preaching, and who knows that most of his audience does too (and is successful because he twists, avoids, and marginalizes it, like Chuck Missler does), stopped his Christian guest short (Chuck) when Chuck was preach his version of the gospel. It is possible that Chuck was going to say after saying that you must accept the lord’s death, that you must also ask him for forgiveness, BUT Chuck had two hours to make that point and was not shy to take advantage of the show, and it’s a crucial part of the gospel, yet Chuck did not mention it. This is how Arminians are. Why? It’s because being that they believe that they have goodness in them, they have pride, pride that they can have eternal peace apart from God’s goodness produced by this goodness in them, so then, they believe that they don’t truly need God’s forgiveness for eternal peace or perfect peace, and they also believe in their own goodness so much, they can’t accept that God would hate anyone. They also no doubt to me believe that they don’t need God’s forgiveness, because, “God doesn’t hate anyone.” No doubt to me they also believe that God wouldn’t hate anyone, because he already took his anger out on Jesus (which if they believe, is truly twisted: because they are saying that God hated his own perfect Son, but not those who refuse to ask God to forgive them for disobeying him/being imperfect) or on the sins that Jesus suffered for (which would be nonsensical, because sins don’t feel pain, they are actions, not living, or “objects of wrath.”) They are also evil in that they can’t accept that God would even hate a person if they weren’t good. So for all those reasons, is why they stop short at “Jesus shed his blood on a cross for your sins” and some perhaps, won’t even mention that Jesus suffered, or will avoid it, because it’s “distasteful” to them or they can’t believe that God would deliberately make anyone suffer, or that Jesus needed to. Or, they may believe that Jesus volunteered to suffer, and therefore was punishing himself, not God, but because they don’t think the suffering was important, but rather the blood-shedding on a cross and for many, baptism (which many Arminians obsess on as being necessary for eternal peace). They also believe that they have a completely free will, which can’t be influenced (which is an insane belief since it goes against common sense). They believe this because they hate God and want to be his equal, which is why they call themselves “sovereign”, and so they also believe that God can’t destine anyone, avoid talking about the parts of the Bible that mention destiny, or miscontrue it as “election” (that God elects whom he will save because he saw in the future that they would do good), and hypocritically, though they acknowledge that God is sovereign, refuse to accept that God has the same “rights” they they believe he gave to them, that he can hate whom he wants to, and decide what the future of his life will be (which includes how the lives of others will be).

These teachings of theirs are contradictory, because they admit that they have disobeyed God, admit that it’s so bad in God’s eyes, admit that they must repent, and that sin angers God so much, that he punished his only begotten son, a perfect son, Jesus, who was also God, severely, and so severely that figuratively, God says that, “he became sin.” But despite that, Arminians repeatedly fail to say that we must ask God to forgive us. This explanation I have given, makes it clear that Arminians are prideful and self-righteous (and again, they admit that they are good apart from God, or can be).

And because of they refuse to acknowledge that they are evil, that they need God’s goodness done in them to be good, and Christ’s good life up to his sacrifice as an appeasement to God for our lack of a good life and none sacrifice and inability to sacrifice ourselves without it being never-ending, they refuse to accept what is logical and reject common sense, and so are prone to all kinds of other errors, and life all those who are unsaved, often make hypocritical compromises, which leads to them further contradicting their main beliefs.

Chuck also believes that all the saved Christians will be raptured into Heaven so that they don’t have to go through the tribulation, taking this verse out of context:

“in a moment, in a glance of an eye, at the last trumpet. For a trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall all be changed.”

The context is made clear by Paul:

1Co 15:35 But someone will say, How are the dead raised up, and with what body do they come?
1Co 15:36 Foolish one! What you sow is not made alive unless it dies.
1Co 15:37 And what you sow, you do not sow the body that is going to be, but a bare grain (perhaps of wheat or of some of the rest).
1Co 15:38 And God gives it a body as it has pleased Him, and to each of the seeds its own body.
1Co 15:39 All flesh is not the same flesh; but one kind of flesh of men, and another flesh of beasts, and another of fish, and another of birds.
1Co 15:40 There are also heavenly bodies and earthly bodies. But the glory of the heavenly is truly different, and that of the earthly different;
1Co 15:41 one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for one star differs from another star in glory.
1Co 15:42 So also the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption;
1Co 15:43 it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power;
1Co 15:44 it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
1Co 15:45 And so it is written, “The first man, Adam, became a living soul,” the last Adam was a life-giving Spirit.
1Co 15:46 But not the spiritual first, but the natural; afterward the spiritual.
1Co 15:47 The first man was out of earth, earthy; the second Man was the Lord from Heaven.
1Co 15:48 Such the earthy man, such also the earthy ones. And such the heavenly Man, such also the heavenly ones.
1Co 15:49 And according as we bore the image of the earthy man, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly Man.
1Co 15:50 And I say this, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does corruption inherit incorruption.
1Co 15:51 Behold, I speak a mystery to you; we shall not all fall asleep, but we shall all be changed;
1Co 15:52 in a moment, in a glance of an eye, at the last trumpet. For a trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall all be changed.

If you can’t tell what the context is: it’s the second resurrection. The first resurrection happens when Christ returns, destroys the anti-Christ, false prophet, beast, and hundreds of millions or billions of evil people, and reigns for a thousand years. That happens AFTER the tribulation, or completes it. Here is the reference in the Bible to this first resurrection: “Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. The second death has no authority over these, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and will reign with Him a thousand years.” – Revelation 20:6.

Chuck was also being a hypocrite when George Noory told him that he was concerned that Harold Camping’s false prophecies (or predictions or interpretations of the Bible about when the end of the world would be) would lead some to suicide, and Chuck said he was concerned that it would lead some to disbelieve the Bible and that atheists would use it to blaspheme God. Yet Chuck is doing little different by also giving a false timing for the rapture. What will all those Christians who go through the tribulation think, and how will they feel, without that stable goodness of God in them, when the anti-Christ bludgeons them and persecutes them, and Jesus doesn’t come to take them out of their worry or doesn’t affirm that their complacency is a good thing? Will the majority of them think, “Oh no, the Calvinists were right” or “The Baptists and Presbyterians were right?” No: they will “fall away” and “betray one another” and some or many will rationalize taking on the mark of the Beast because they can’t believe that God will have left them behind, and that as many of them believe I’m sure, the mark is really “a computer chip that is implanted into you”, and some will probably realize they were wrong, and out of greater hatred for God for not giving them there way, will take the mark in an attempt to harm God through such provocation. Some will probably disbelieve the Bible and commit suicide, seeing how bad the world gets or because of the severe persecution, and not having God in them to help to “not fear those who kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul.” (Matthew 10:28)

The Arminian’s Confusion Over The Will and Man’s Sovereignty

Many Christians and pseudo-Christians, like Mormons, are Arminians, or have Arminian-like beliefs. The Mormons no doubt have them because their founder, the narcissist sociopath Joseph Smith, knew of a major split between various Christians, that which was between those who believed in predestiny and those who believed that man was in control of his future and Joseph also believed that the U.S. Constitution, was divinely inspired, though it was really a creation of deists, perhaps influenced by what they learned from some Indian/Native American tradition or laws. The U.S. Constitution that mankind had “inalienable rights”. Inalienable means “Incapable of being repudiated or transferred to another” and repudiated in part, means, “reject as untrue”. And “right” in that context, means, “An abstract idea of that which is due to a person or governmental body by law or tradition, nature or God.” And the Deists believed that mankind had the right to liberty and to pursue a life of happiness. The Bible does teach that you have the option to attempt to have liberty, which means, “freedom from servitude, confinement or oppression” and to try to be happy, and that it is natural to be happy over certain things, but it doesn’t teach that liberty and happiness itself are something you will have in life, though it seems that most people get to experience being happy at least one time in their life, the exception being maybe babies that are born severely deformed or incomplete, or people who are always in severe physical pain. A confused person, like a narcissist might think that liberty and happiness was guaranteed to him by God and also a person who resents God’s authority and control over them, and so it shouldn’t be a surprise such people would obsess over their “rights”, and even turn them into major religious teachings like Arminus (the founder of Arminiasm) and Joseph Smith did. Joseph Smith’s cult has their own fancy phrase for the will, calling it “free agency” in an attempt to make themselves sound wise and to distinguish themselves from other cults and the Christians (and which is a term that leads to further confusion). Joseph Smith even made his own attempted replacement or out-doing of the Bible, called “The Book of Mormon”, and stupidly included the words “rights” and “liberty”, repeatedly, and ended up sounding like a poor imitator of various speeches made by the “founding fathers”. The Book of Mormon ended up being littered with punctuation and grammar errors and major plagiarism from the Bible that he attempted to out-do. Joseph Smith also tried copying it’s literary style, and failed often due to his ignorance of Old English grammar. He even copied the italics in the King James Bible into the Book of Mormon, making it even more obvious that he wasn’t divinely inspired, but a forgetful and lazy idiot, and whose fatigue (caused by his making his long rambling work while sinning and desiring to sin), hindered him. And so again was fulfilled these verses: “Let God be true and every man a liar.” (Romans 3:4) and “For the wisdom of this world is nonsense in God’s sight. For it is written, ‘He catches the wise with their own trickery’.”

As I’ve taught before, there is no conflict between “free will” and God destining everything he made. The confusion is over what “will” means and what it is, something which opinionators and God-haters keep misdefining. A will doesn’t mean “a thing which is free and makes choices freely without influence”, which is where the illogical term “free will” comes from. And if the will is free, then “free will” is a redundant phrase. But the will is a part of the human mind that makes choices, but choices which are influenced, and choices which aren’t always able to be fulfilled, and choices which God does not have to respect or love, if they are against what he says is good. And God can influence people perfectly, and doesn’t need to do so directly in all instances, for him to cause to happen what he wants to. He can get what he wants indirectly, in various ways. He designed the universe and gave it the direction he wanted, knowing what would happen, and what would happen when he permitted things and commanded things and directly intervened. So, he has pre-destined everything, and there is no getting around that. No scheme will change that, and no teaching will make it less true; God is sovereign, and his will never fails, and we are under his influence, in this universe, which belongs to him, not us.

Update: 5/20/2011, 11:20

George Noory has yet another Christian on named Dr. Joye Jeffries Pugh, who is also teaching the rapture is a non-judgment day event, who at 8:44 AM I just learned was most likely saved (I’ve been talking to her). She taught that the rapture happens after the tribulation as far as I can remember from the show, but I’m not sure. I’m trying to find out now.

Additional Information:

The Last Days Explained

Categories: False Christians Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Arminian and Universalist Christians Refuted׃ The Limited Love Arminians

September 2, 2010 4 comments

I was studying Arminianism again, and found two websites which, big surprise, made claims without evidence.

The first one:

“As informed by St. Augustine, this view espouses the notion that God, out of love, has sovereignly chosen to save a few (the elect) and has, in like manner, not chosen (not elected) the many. We have trouble with this, since it limits God’s love.”

My reply:

1) And whatever you a mere man or others have trouble with means God is wrong? How are people blind to such arrogant, childish, criminal reasoning? “Mom, dad you’re not doing what I want, this troubles me, therefore… ur bad.” I don’t think so.

2) It’s Arminians and Universalists who limit the greatness of God’s love to their personal feelings of what great love is:

How is God’s love “limited”? Do you mean, “it’s not great” or literally it must apply to everything? If you mean it’s not great, aren’t you blaspheming? For if God’s Son had only sacrificed his son for one person, who in the Hell are criminals to say “that’s not great,” you’ve love is limited, let alone, “you trouble me God”? Who are you to condemn God for his will for not fulfilling your desires? But does the Bible say Jesus only died for one? No, it implies millions, and yet you cheapen every one of those he suffered and died for, as if it were some easy thing that you could do. Talk about disgusting arrogance! On top of that, does he say that he will only love those he died for? NO! IT TEACHES HE WILL KEEP THEIR CHILDREN AS WELL, AN INFINITE AMOUNT OF EVER MULTIPLYING CHILDREN! SO YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS SAYING “LIMITED”!

3) Were you are so simpleminded, so childish in logic, that you literally meant that God should love everything? Do I even need to point out how such a claim contradicts itself? Focus: “everything”? “Every, single, thing”? If you can’t figure out why that is an evil thing to say, you need to pray for wisdom with humility, not false humility, without bias.

4) God has trouble with your blaspheming.

Then I came to another website and read some screed (yes I picked up that word off that bitter atheist I mentioned some posts ago, but it fits so well for what I read, part of which I quote here):

“It is not our intention to go into a detailed complicated theological analysis of each point in each belief system, but only to highlight and summarise the core differences between them.”

But then the fools near the end of their screed say,

“The God of Calvinism sacrificed his son Jesus Christ to die on the cross for his Elect only, and he predestined only his Elect to be saved. This must also mean that he predestined, knowingly and willingly, to cast the vast majority of humanity (the non-Elect) into hell to be tortured forever. This makes the God of Calvinism an evil god, infinitely and unimaginably more evil than Hitler could ever be.”

My reply:

1) Let me guess why you Royal “It is not our intent” Jeeve’s Bring Me More Wine Snobs didn’t get into analyzing each point, not even with a single sentence… because you’re confused, blind, ignorant morons who know Calvinist doctrine refutes whatever argument you can come up with; because you know many verses in Scripture contradict your bitter lies. What verses teaches God goes along with man’s will over his own, anywhere? But plenty can be shown that it’s just the opposite, and I’m not repeating for your lazy selves since they are easily found.

2) Where’s the evidence that God is evil to predestine? NONE. Therefore you’re blaspheming, and of all things to blaspheme over: God’s character and will; could you be anymore evil than that? Talk about “hypocrisy” and “blasphemers”.

3) Doesn’t the Bible say that we should suffer for doing evil if it is God’s will? How is that not a big enough hint that God is right now matter what he does?

4) How Arminians and Universalists, do you reason, God is evil if he predestines people to Hell because, WELL JUST CUZ! CUZ IT’S “MEAN”, but not for making even a single being he knew would sin and end up in pain? Contradict yourselves much? Ignore verses that refute you much?

5) “Mean” and “evil” and “cruel” to who? Who gave you narcissists and you arrogant babblers the right to speak for millions of ever multiplying Calvinists? Did we say God is cruel or evil? So what business do you have declaring for all, speaking for all of us you claim are evil on top of it, as to what we think of God, how we feel about him, you arrogant snobs? Talk about “arrogant” and “vain”! GOD, IS, GOOD, GOD, IS, LOVE. Stop calling him evil and a cosmic rapist.

6) Why did you leave out that Jesus of his own free will and out of love, volunteered to be sacrificed Mr’s and Ms’ We Have Free Will and Unlimited Love But God’s Is Limited? Did you forget that extremely unfathomably great act of love? You didn’t think it was worth mentioning? What a strange thing to not mention in your summary of the different types of Christians for people who without their mouths put love and freedom on a pedestal above God.

7) If God predestines “the elect” to be saved, is he evil for going against their will to be saved? According to your demonic logic he is.

8) If God doesn’t go against anyone’s will, you must not believe “predestine” when you read it. You’re truly deluded.

9) Where does God mention “second fruits”? If the elect are both the first and the second (in contrast to Christ being a kind of firstfruit according to God), then where is this “second/third” you imply exists? Where’s your verses to show for it? None: you just babble in vain pretending you’re right.

10) ” to cast the vast majority of humanity”: LIE. Did you notice any verses in Scripture that say that the elect will have kids to no end?

11) ” to cast the vast majority of humanity” as opposed to what, ONE PERSON? So if God sends one person or a small amount of people to Hell, theeeeeen it’s okay if he predestines to torture forever? And why bother saying “elect” when you’re problem is with sending most people to Hell, and not “electing”? Or is “electing” an evil bug to you too?

Your, “Our will is ours! You can’t touch it God!” belief and teaching = life-destroying pride. You false Christians pretend to love God, and their arguments are pretentious, hypocritical, confusion that makes God the author of confusion and lies.

Related Post:
A “Calvinist” Message to Arminians׃ “Eternal” means “ETERNAL”

Unholy Ian Punnett and Monica Holy: Two Confused ”New Age” Teachers

July 12, 2010 8 comments

Tonight, the heretic Ian Punnett had on an “afterlife paramedic” named Monica, who said that “on the other side” (some vague place where spirits can be seen) “there is no right, there is no wrong” and that “there’s an equal shift of giving and receiving”. So it’s not wrong to lie or steal or abuse anyone, and of course, stereotypical meaningless vague New Age babble about giving and receiving stuff in equal amounts. It’s a common tactic of Satan to try and comfort people by talking about “balance” and “equality” and being vague about what is meant and avoiding specific details, the idea being to make it harder for people to spot obvious contradictions. It would be like a liberal saying, “Children are equal to adults” and not saying in what way or literally meaning what they said. Monica might as well have said, “Everything is equal”, which would have been just as false and without evidence.

Ian asked her if there was a maleveolant force, and she said that she’d experienced “various dark energies in various forms”. Yet more vaguenes with no reference to Satan or other demons. She didn’t say, “Yes I saw a bad person” or “bad being” or “evil”, which would have directly contradicted her statement about there being no right or wrong, so she used the vague word, “negative”, a word which weasels (like fake Christians and anti-Christians) often use in place of “evil”, “wrong” and “bad” in order to avoid being being accused of “judging” or “condemning”. False Christians will also use “Satanic” in addition to “negative”. It stems from their hatred, ironically, of God’s laws, which also ironic, is a Satanic attitude itself, and definitely “negative”.

At about 1:12 A.M. (mountain time), after I had written the above: Almost immediately after a commercial break, Monica told Ian, “I found… an equilibrium” and a few seconds after that she’d encountered a “negative energy” and called it “an equilibrium setting”. Just as I said, “equality” is used as a catch word (by such non-Christians).

1:27 AM: More narcissist, word salad New Age babble from Monica: After being asked by Ian if there was a Heaven or Hell, she gave the cliche, “I believe Hell is of our own making… it really is… there’s different levels of frequency where emotions are concerned… there’s vibrating… there’s lower frequency emotions.” Again, it’s also a typical tactic of Satan to use “high words” that people don’t understand, and applying them in ways that make them seem understandable but are vague and nonsensical, and then getting other ignoramuses to repeat them in those wrong ways, and worse, which inflates their pride because they think they are saying something profound and wise. George Noory does it when he uses the word “dimensional” in a sentence like, “Are these beings dimensional or are they physical” which makes an illogical contrast between dimensional and physical, as if they were opposite and incompatible things, when they are not. Dimensional simply means,
having dimensions” not “spiritual” or “from another universe” or
from another dimension (that we can’t perceive)” as George incorrectly implies it means.

It’s really sad that so many people are confused like this and buy into the kind of nonsense that Ian, George and Monica put out, and wor3savesave resse, binds people more greatly on their way to Hell.

At about 1:48, Monica said that she believed that people chose to be born in their circumstances (for example homeless or disabled), and Ian replied, I find the idea of predestination very Calvinist, it’s very old school, I don’t know if I can accept that. Ian’s complaint was absurd and nonsensical since Monica was saying that we with out will were choosing our circumstance before hand, not “God does”. That is just another example of how stupid and ignorant and nonseniscal Ian’s reasoning is when it comes to anything that has to do with religion in general. He’s clearly, to those who can see, spiritually blind.

It would have been appropriate however, if Ian had asked Monica, “So you’re saying that if a little kid is sexuallyy abused, it’s okay, because they wanted to be sexually abused? Or if someone is raped it’s not really raped because they wanted to have sex?” So Monica not only has said that there is no right or wrong wherever it is she believes that spirits exist, but has also implied that there is no right or wrong where physical beings exist. Yet more justification criminal behavior.

Monica also said that dogs can see the “infrared plane” and that she had heard that it was a plane (as in a spiritual plane of existance). The infrared is actually a form of light, not a place or plane. Ian shamefully didn’t correct her, or was ignorant about this too. “Plane” is another one of those catch words that ignorant people fancy using, especially those who regard themselves as “spiritual”. To say “plane” in reference to spiritual places seems to me to be a Dungeons and Dragons invention, a fancy word in place of “place”. It’s also nonsensical since it implies that spiritual places are flat, or have flat surfaces. It reminds me of people who supposedly believed that Earth was flat. No surprise that make-believe books are part of the source of such New Age beliefs.

Hypocritical Arminians of Bible.ca Refuted

November 30, 2009 Leave a comment

I meant to post this last year, but hard drive failures and my lap top screen being cracked on my main laptop, harassment from neighbors and cyber stalkers caused me to lose track of my original refutation of bible.ca’s ranting against Calvinists, but I recreated it about an hour or two ago, and expanded it, here it is:

According to Bible.ca:

“1. Every Bible passage that says, “If you hold fast the word” must be deleted. To the Calvinist, there are no ifs. These passages make no sense to them.”

My response: Because you said so. For the Arminian, there is no grace, no verse can be literal enough when it plainly states that salvation cannot be earned, so they have to resort to making a mere claim, and pretending any verse is evidence of their mere claim.

“2. All passages for watchfulness should be deleted: “be faithful unto death and I will give you the crown of life”. Why be faithful if you already have and can’t lose?”

My response: All passages referring to God implying and stating that salvation cannot be earned should be deleted, and no one should be faithful to God if they can’t take credit for having saved themselves by some supposed goodness of their own. “Pride comes before a fall” is deleted from their hearts.

“3. It would certainly lessen a Christian’s fear of sin and lead to increased sin.”

My response: Your personal certainty is Scriptural evidence, let alone any kind of evidence? And you are, who that I should care about your certainty, your feelings? And no, what increases sin is not the belief that God is forgiving, merciful, doesn’t abandon those he loves and doesn’t break his promises, but telling people that if they sin that they don’t need to trust in Jesus as having told the truth when he said taht he suffered and died for all their sins, that you don’t need to have faith in God, trust him, and can doubt his word, believe that God was a liar, believe that it’s good to interpret God’s word so that it suits your personal pride, and can just ask for forgiveness again and expect to be forgiven despite your your doubt and arbitrary beliefs.

“Historically, such an increase of sin based upon this theology has been documented.”

And so well documented Mr. Pretentious that you conveniently didn’t show any of this documentation, nor did you even mention a single reference to any of this supposed documentation. The only increase in sin was your lie upon lie, and preaching out of jealousy of those who preach the truth out of love. I can imagine your insane “refutation” now:

“Just believe me and you’ll be forgiven of your sins, you won’t increase in sin at all after wards, but those faithless Calvinists who do whatever sure will.”

The real iffers are you Arminians, who have many among you who’ve said to those who’ve spoken the truth, ” ‘If ‘ you’re right, but where’s your proof? ” despite the “proof” repeatedly being shown to you. Maybe this will get through to you, (and though bible.ca didn’t use the “race” argument I call it, some do, so I’ll set them straight now):

“Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one gets a prize? Run in such a way as to get the [one] prize.” – 1 Corinthians 9:25

I’m guessing that many Arminiests use this verse or would given the right circumstance, to show that eternal life can be earned, at least one, maybe two of them have use these verses on me as evidence of this. But they are taking them out of and twisting the meaning of those verses by themselves. The previous two verses say:

“To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some. I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings.” Not,

“I’m working for salvation because God’s not in control of my will or anything else and I have some goodness in me that allows me too, and I decide my destiny, no fate but what we make.” or some other nonsense like that. Further, Paul is talking about a single prize for multiple runners in a race, if this were about eternal life than he’s saying that only one person will get eternal life. Obviously then Paul is not speaking literally but metaphorically. But some Arminian might say, “Yes he didn’t mean just one person will get eternal life, it was a metaphor,” but that argument is false because there is no evidence he’s talking about earning eternal life as I pointed out, further, I didn’t say that merely because Paul was speaking metaphorically that that meant he wasn’t talking about salvation, my point is that he clearly didn’t make a two-sentence teaching that was self-explanatory and obvious as many Arminians think or would claim it is.

So what did Paul mean then? Paul next said,

“Everyone who competes in the games goes into strict training. They do it to get a crown that will not last; but we do it to get a that will last forever.”

Are Arminians training to get eternal life, or working for eternal life and / or trying to keep it by obeying God’s law? They aren’t “training” to get it. Paul is saying that the competitors concentrate to win, possibly suffering even to win, he mentions training because some races are short, but training often takes a long time since no one is born in shape and people don’t spend their lives running around to win races, and in the same way no one is born being religious and perfectly obedient to God, knowing and understanding his word or having instant preaching skills. It takes time, a long time to know and understand God well, to obey him well, and to get good at leading people to Christ who have different beliefs and widely varying intellectual and language skills. And what is this eternal crown? A crown is an object of glory symbolizing a person’s very high status. Paul even said,

“But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, now crowned with glory” – Hebrews 2:9

and Peter said,

“And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the crown of glory that will never fade away.” – 1 Peter 5:4

Jesus called it “the crown of life” (Revelation 2:10), a statement which supports Peter’s comment about this crown being so glorious that he refers to it not merely as a “glorious crown” but “of glory”, as if to say “of God’s glory”, however according to Scripture God will not share the glory that radiates from himself, so this type of glory God will give could only be something similar, and incredible, but not so similar as to be not a big difference. The similarity being that the glory will be incredible like God’s. It is also clear that this glory will radiate outward from around our heads because God doesn’t say, “a robe of glory” or “belt of glory” or “ring of glory”.

But what about this verse:

“Hold on to what you have so that no one will take your crown.” – Revelation 3:11

Though that verse isn’t talking about eternal life, why did Jesus say that Jesus already had their crown? It was because the way they were living at that time was leading them to getting this special reward. However, if they stopped being as obedient as they were or turned from God, they wouldn’t obtain it. So, this isn’t a reward that can be earned with a few good deeds or easy obedience, unlike what I assumed at one point (assuming isn’t good), which was that they had already earned this special reward.