You all condemn homosexuality because they exchange the truth of God for a lie. True, they have. But you all do the exact same thing. It's called hypocrisy. Everything you teach is the exact opposite of scripture. You say man is born in sin and totally depraved, blah, blah, blah, when in reality he is born innocent and with a MORAL CONSCIENCE (John 1:9, Rom 1:19, Eccl 7:29, Deut 1:39, Luke 18:16). He becomes wicked through a progression of evil (James 1:14,15). How can man repent of a nature he is born with? It just gives him an excuse: sin is a calamity he is born with and not rebellion. All Satan's doctrines do this: they give you an excuse and absolve you of responsibility, provide an alternative to obedience and take away your ability to forsake your sins in repentance. Beware the Leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees, Jesus said, and he was right. It leavens the whole lump. And it has. I ask people why they think they can fornicate, be homosexuals etc and still enter the kingdom. They simply list all the false doctrines you teach. That's their excuse: original sin, Eternal Security, Imputed Righteousness, Total Depravity, Not of works, etc, etc.
Allbright wrote: The reason every Christian knows that man has "no freedom of the Will" - Is because man is under the dominion of sin. Condemnation of man is because he is guilty of sin. Human "freedom" has nothing whatsoever to do with his guilty fallen reprobate existence. Only Jesus makes any difference to that status. That's why HE had to pay the price on the cross for the elect. Man cannot do anything whatsoever to claim atonement because he is permanently under the dominion of sin.
Rubbish, rubbish, rubbish. Man absolutely has free will. The inherited sin idea, that man's nature is somehow corrupt at birth is a gnostic fallacy. Look up it up. No one taught this garbage until spawn of Satan Augustine arrived with his pagan ideas, which he devised to justify his own addiction to sin. Reformed Theology is just Pharisee-leaven repackaged for an alternative to obedience: it's junk theology and Roman Catholic dogma, twisting the scriptures to negate repentance and faith proven by deeds. You won't hide behind Augustine, Calvin or Luther's coat tails at the judgment. God will judge each according to their deeds, regardless of what they believe.
SteveR wrote: Agree edit: I noticed one of those attacking the WCF claimed infant baptism was in question. Infant Baptism was well established in the Reformed Churches prior to the WCF, the only disagreements were in the mechanics and if private baptisms were acceptable. It seems the enemies of the WCF only have lies and deception as their tools
CAB wrote: Moving this discussion to one of the proper threads.. You are the one heterodox, teaching Limited Penal Bloodless Atonement here for how many years? Now claiming to champion blood atonement, but still claiming it's penal, when it's not, and you've not even tried to defend it as penal. I have laid out my position clear as a bell on the 5 points of Calvinism, and so far you and I have only talked about the third point, your no-double-jeopardy bloodless penal atonement, the 3rd point of the TULIP. Anyone can go back and read my posts and see clearly where I'm coming from. I'm not trying to be subtle about my position at all. I've spoken clearly on all 5 points, and nobody has challenged me on any of what I've said. Why? Because my position is totally Biblical and irrefutable. For this I am hated and challenged by dirty tricks, name-calling, blowing smoke, and such other things. Yes, I do think you are some kind of paid agent on this board, and I have my reasons for thinking that, as you well know. Teen Christian, this is the proper thread to discuss doctrine, not the Pat Robertson thread.
Your false views have been answered time and again. You just can't acknowledge it.