In reply to my response to his answer, my young correspondent wrote the following (he is very inconsistent in his use of underlining and quotation marks, but I understood what he was saying and found no reason to unduly put the discussion on a wrong footing of personal attack):
Ok, I am only going to deal with a few points for now, because I am still deciding whether or not to continue this discussion. I would give you a reason, but you would just come to your own conclusions anyway and tell me that I think either this or this and that what I say cannot be what I mean, so I won't bother. But I will say that, you NEED to look into the mirror of God's word man. You are nothing but hateful, arrogant, rude and prideful. I could name a few, but I won't.
Ok, I am only going to deal with a few points for now, because I am still deciding whether or not to continue this discussion. I would give you a reason, but you would just come to your own conclusions anyway and tell me that I think either this or this and that what I say cannot be what I mean, so I won't bother. But I will say that, you NEED to look into the mirror of God's word man. You are nothing but hateful, arrogant, rude and prideful. I could name a few, but I won't.
You say, "Calvinism IS grace. Calvinism has NOTHING to do with legalism, but rather opposes it. Calvinism is the foremost opponent of what is known as Christian Liberty. Calvinism DOES NOT believe in 'the open exaltation of salvation by flawless deeds and works of human merit.", [sic] but rather that man is unable to come to God on his own due to the amount of sinfulness and blindness as a result of the fall of man and that He is saved only because God has grace on Him." But, you don't really believe that. I don't? And how is that? I say that I do, but you do not believe me? Why? Please tell me and show me why I d not believe this. You are either lying about what you believe, How am I lying about what I believe? or you are woefully deceived How is that? (the only other alternative is that you are a fool, but I can see that is not true and will not even consider it to be true). From what you have written, is it really that much of a stretch that I could be? *grin*
You believe what Calvin taught. You believe what "the reformers" believed. You believe what Spurgeon believed, and this is what it is: The word of God, pure and simple.
Unfortunately, Spurgeon knew no more about grace than you, ____________. He thought that grace was on the throne by conquest, sitting there "by right." He thought that God ~owes~ the elect salvation, because Jesus earned it and it is their "by right." From this, once again, can be seen your ignorance. You have shown clearly that you know nothing of neither myself, Calvinism, nor Spurgeon. Spurgeon did not believe that God owes man anything, nor that God is obligated to save anyone. You may be able to twist spurgeons words with others and pit them against his, but you cannot do this with me.
You, like Spurgeon and Calvin, believe that grace was EARNED by the vicarious obedience and death of Jesus Christ. You, like Spurgeon and Calvin, believe that it is ~only~ the FLAWLESS MERIT OF OBEDIENCE TO THE LAW OF GOD that saves man. If by this you mean through CHRISTS flawless merit or obedience to the law of God, then yes. If it were not by these means, then how is it that men are saved?
Spurgeon believed that the law of God was vindicated, kept flawlessly and His wrath eternally satisfied Yes, substitutionary atonement -- and that in whatever way it may be called "grace," God owes the elect because, in Christ, the law of God is vindicated, kept flawlessly and imputed to them. That's what you believe, ____________. Once again I will state for clarity, I DO NOT believe that God owes man anything. Nothing, No, Zero. Zilch. Nada.
You know RP, I was going to go on, but it doesn't change. I don't need to have this conversation with you, because it seems that you know me better than I know me. *grin* And I don't need to say anything, because your just going to tell me that I don;t believe that I have said or that I believe something else, so as for now I am done. I was really hoping that we could discuss this topic, but it seems that we cannot. If you ever want to lose the chip on your shoulder, surrender the pride to the Lord and come down off of that horse of yours, then we may be able to discuss this as two adults. But as long as you are going to tell me what I believe, I will have no part in that. It is neither edifying to the Lord nor to myself.
Have a good one*grin*
I must confess that I was disappointed that my correspondent chose to seque out of the discussion with this post, especially since he was the one who initiated the contact and suggested that we discuss the matter. But, I cannot control how others think, so my only option was to reply and hope that he might retain some of what I was trying to say to him.
The next post (#5) contains my reply...
You believe what Calvin taught. You believe what "the reformers" believed. You believe what Spurgeon believed, and this is what it is: The word of God, pure and simple.
Unfortunately, Spurgeon knew no more about grace than you, ____________. He thought that grace was on the throne by conquest, sitting there "by right." He thought that God ~owes~ the elect salvation, because Jesus earned it and it is their "by right." From this, once again, can be seen your ignorance. You have shown clearly that you know nothing of neither myself, Calvinism, nor Spurgeon. Spurgeon did not believe that God owes man anything, nor that God is obligated to save anyone. You may be able to twist spurgeons words with others and pit them against his, but you cannot do this with me.
You, like Spurgeon and Calvin, believe that grace was EARNED by the vicarious obedience and death of Jesus Christ. You, like Spurgeon and Calvin, believe that it is ~only~ the FLAWLESS MERIT OF OBEDIENCE TO THE LAW OF GOD that saves man. If by this you mean through CHRISTS flawless merit or obedience to the law of God, then yes. If it were not by these means, then how is it that men are saved?
Spurgeon believed that the law of God was vindicated, kept flawlessly and His wrath eternally satisfied Yes, substitutionary atonement -- and that in whatever way it may be called "grace," God owes the elect because, in Christ, the law of God is vindicated, kept flawlessly and imputed to them. That's what you believe, ____________. Once again I will state for clarity, I DO NOT believe that God owes man anything. Nothing, No, Zero. Zilch. Nada.
You know RP, I was going to go on, but it doesn't change. I don't need to have this conversation with you, because it seems that you know me better than I know me. *grin* And I don't need to say anything, because your just going to tell me that I don;t believe that I have said or that I believe something else, so as for now I am done. I was really hoping that we could discuss this topic, but it seems that we cannot. If you ever want to lose the chip on your shoulder, surrender the pride to the Lord and come down off of that horse of yours, then we may be able to discuss this as two adults. But as long as you are going to tell me what I believe, I will have no part in that. It is neither edifying to the Lord nor to myself.
Have a good one*grin*
I must confess that I was disappointed that my correspondent chose to seque out of the discussion with this post, especially since he was the one who initiated the contact and suggested that we discuss the matter. But, I cannot control how others think, so my only option was to reply and hope that he might retain some of what I was trying to say to him.
The next post (#5) contains my reply...
