Replies

To RnMomof7-the problem comes with using the word 'Eternal'when referring the 'begetting' since it does occur IN time (Psa.2:7,Heb.10:5)

If you have it occuring in some point in Eternity you have a second 'created' lesser god, which is the Arianian heresy.

This 'proof text' (Psa.2.7) was twisted to suit the philosophers fancy: the word DAY was translated as 'eternity' (or 'eternal') and the verse was taken slap out of its context, which dealt with the first coming and the second coming of Christ. There is no reference to anything before Genesis 1 found anywhere in the Psalm

Calvin, the first real Protestant pope, was always fascinated by 'decrees' because he fancied that he was a Christian dictator ruling a 'Christian City'(Geneva, Switzerland) He never checked out the word one time in any Bible at which he ever looked...

But you see, Calvin had this problem: how could he justify his 'Decree of Reprobation' unless he swore on a stack of Plato and Augustine that the 'non-elect' were damned BEFORE Genesis 1, along with the election of the 'elect'.Simple: he pretended since both of these 'decrees' took place in Eph.1:4-which says nothing about any Decree of Reprobation-all of God's 'decrees took place before the 'foundation of the world'(Gen.1:1)

....Is this true? Of course not. It is only true if you are a lazy, stupid intelellectual in need of a course on remedial reading.

None of God's 'decrees' are fixed or eternal or permanent if CONDITIONS accompany them...You see, often what God 'decrees' can be altered by a man's WILL. (tell that to a Calvinist and watch him blow his lid!)

On second thought, don't tell him that. Take him to the Holy Bible (AV1611) where the poor, Biblical illiterate can stumble over the Scripture (1Pet.2:8)and break his fool neck (Matt.21:44)

Never mind Calvin and 'Calvininism'They got a few things straight, but not a great deal when to came to salvation and the new birth. Their 'fixed' 'eternal decrees' are about as 'eternal' as the Third Reich. Even the Decree of Salvation is conditional: look at Jn.1:12-13,5:24,3:36,5:40,and 6:29)

You cannot be one of God's 'elect' unless you receive His 'ELECT; you will find that one Isa.42:1-4

Who is on the Lord's side? Let him come unto me!'

(Peter Ruckman, Bible Believers Bulletin,Vo.3.p.457-58,)

Even so, come Lord Jesus

One of Calvin's 'hang ups' wias the ridiculous piece of philosophical speculation which stated: All the decrees of God are eternal.'Being unable to understand eternity (Isa 57:15) or 'eternal'(where it dealt with what God 'decreed'), all Calvinists applied this dictum to Psalm 2 and got the ridiculous, dogmatic statement on some 'day' (see the text) before Genesis 1, God begat another God... Amazing what us Calvinists must believe. Well, I don't believe it in this way nor do I expect to apply such solutions. Again, you misrepresent Calvinists and place words in our mouths. You are sadly misinformed that all Calvinists have a common theology outside the TULIP. There are, on other scriptural matters, "Calvinists" who I find as unorthodox as I find you and who embrace many of the same ideas as you do. You probably don't even grasp yet that some "Calvinists", probably still a majority even though we others are gaining ground, are only four-pointers and deny Limited Atonement. My own Baptist church is four-point. I've decided not to dispute it with them as I don't consider this belief absolutely central to good preaching and Gospel teaching. Merely to an accurate and full theology of scripture.

(Peter Ruckman, Bible Believers Bulletin,Vo.3.p.457-58,) I note that you seem to quote Ruckman exclusively. I'm afraid you modernist defenders of the KJV have been mislead by Ruckman on a number of issues. He may be better than the ridiculous Riplinger but that's not much of a commendation. My claims for the superiority of the KJV are based on the far sounder and more thorough scholarship of earlier generations. The best single example would be Dean Burgon of Chichester, a thorough defender on all aspects concerning the Authorized. Ruckman is something of a huckster and an opportunist with very some questionable scholarship over the course of his career. However, I would say the same of Boettner, a modern Calvinist who is greatly admired by a few Calvinists here at FR.

Modernists! God help us all.