Slave of Christ. Husband. Father of two. Particular Baptist. I have determined to know nothing except Jesus Christ and Him crucified.
Joined March 2010
- Tweets15.1K
- Following2.6K
- Followers1.8K
- Likes38.1K
It feels good when you can finally get around to unpacking the books… the process is slow when there is so much to do in life.
How should we view “Imprecatory Psalms”? Berkhof states the following:
1.) Orientais love the concrete, and therefore sometimes represent sin in the concrete form of the sinner.
2.) These imprecations embody the desire of the OT saint for the vindication of the righteousness and holiness of God.
3.) They are not utterances of personal vindictiveness, but of the Church’s aversion to sin, embodied in the sinner.
4.) They are, at the same time, a revelation of God’s attitude to those who are hostile to Him and His Kingdom.
Young person, you have a moral obligation.
With this silly “Apple Pay” sound bite prank going viral, where attention-seeking influencers target older folks with the fake sound, you have a moral obligation to explain to your older family members and friends how that system works before they get caught up with that nonsense. Tell them that it’s not merely about proximity. Show them how you can’t just hold your phone up to a register’s card reader and pay for something without intentionally bringing up the Wallet app and activating the NFC function.
Don’t let them get fooled by these punk kids looking for clout at their expense.
This is an embarrassing post for an official NHL team account. It’s one thing to make this post if this was during OT or a very close game…
It’s another to make this post when you got blown out 5-1 pretending as if this goal would have made a difference.
In Joel’s pseudo-intellectual mind, if you don’t agree and subscribe to his very particular flavor/definition of Christian Nationalism then it must mean that you don’t want a Christian nation.
This has Papist “submit-to-the-true-church” energy.
There are flavors of Christian Nationalism that the majority of Biblically minded Christians would affirm, and gladly so actually. It’s your version, the ever-shifting view of you and your buddies, that we reject.
What should we repent of? Your view will change by next year. Should we repent again when that happens? Have you been publicly repenting since the Joel of 2024 held vastly different views from the Joel of 2026?
Should we expect to be on a never ending treadmill of penitence, à la Roman Catholicism, as we grovel and bow to your constantly shifting standards?
I’m also convinced that Joel really, and I mean to an exceedingly high degree, loves the sound of his own voice through that microphone.
Credo Calvin retweeted
This is an AI reproduction of Curt Daniel’s new chart (on pp. xxvii–xxviii) comparing Mainline Calvinism with Hyper-Calvinism. Sorry about the size. Too much information is pushed into a tight space.
Hey @SteadfastBibles and @CambUP_Religion, any chance we could ever see a collaboration to make the Pitt Minion, Clarion, and Aquila in the LSB translation?
Whoever has friends over there who can set up a meeting between the two, do it!
This is still true. The use of this term earns you a block.
I don’t care about your theological indignation towards what you think Calvinism entails; if you use this term you don’t deserve a seat at the table of discussion.
Screenshot this and go cry in a corner. Here I stand.
Oh no!
Anyway…
Don’t get it twisted. Blake blocked me a while back (check the date on the second screenshot that I snapped back when it happened) because I said he was not fit to give advice on raising children because he is not a father. I’m sure he unlocked me just to post this little jab and not look like a hypocrite.
But I will keep him blocked because his opinions on theology have proven to be one of the worst I’ve ever seen on this platform, and that says a lot considering how low the bar is around here.
This is your brain on rabid and wild-eyed anti-Calvinism. This dude would rather go to hell and be separated from God for an eternity than believe in God as affirmed by Calvinism.
So, regarding @ManCity, if we live in a just society then the starting point of punishment should be restitution of all they stole, plus more.
4 then it shall be, when he sins and becomes guilty, that he shall return what he took by robbery or what he got by extortion, or the deposit which was entrusted to him or the lost thing which he found,
5 or anything about which he swore falsely; he shall make restitution for it in full and add to it one-fifth more. (Lev. 6:4–5a)
Along with this, their titles between 2010 and 2018 should be stripped. In fact, even their titles after 2018 should be stripped as well since it would be hard to argue that they could see the success they saw since 2018 without the cheating they committed in the 2010-2018 years. @EddyEkofo, I'm sure you could agree with this.
This ignores the distinction between the Decretive function of God’s will and the Preceptive function of God’s will.
New standing policy.
This kind of response to an attempt at good-faith dialogue will get you blocked. If you delete your account and then make a new one after a few months away then that one will get blocked too.
A point of clarification here regarding the question.
It is rather loaded in a sense. God’s drawing doesn’t “fail.” It is more proper to speak of “calling” as two distinct types of calling, a general one and an effectual one. And even then, the general call doesn’t “fail.” God simply chooses for that general calling to not be effectual. There is no attempt at calling only to be thwarted and fail, in other words.
But regarding the idea of these two callings in Scripture, we know that the way different authors use the term in is different. When Matthew describes Jesus using the term “called” (Matt. 22:14), He is speaking of a general call, made to all around. But Paul, by contrast, uses the term differently. When Paul speaks of “calling,” he is speaking of something effectual.
Paul, a slave of Christ Jesus, called (Rom. 1:1)
among whom you were also are the called (Rom. 1:6)
To all who are beloved of God in Rome, called as saints (Rom. 1:7)
God, who gives life to the dead and calls into being that which does not exist (Rom. 4:17)
God… works together for good, for those who are called according to His purpose (Rom. 8:28)
and those whom He predestined, He also called; and those whom He called, He also justified (Rom. 8:30)
not because of works but because of Him who calls (Rom. 9:11)
Even us, whom He called… from among Gentiles (Rom. 9:24)
For the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable (Rom. 11:29)
Paul, called as an apostle (1 Cor. 1:1)
To the church of God… called as saints (1 Cor. 1:2)
God is faithful, through whom you were called into fellowship with His son (1 Cor. 1:9)
God… set me apart from my mother’s womb and called me through His grace (Gal. 1:15)
These examples can be multiplied over and over again.
But for a more explicit and direct answer, just look at 1 Cor. 1:22–24.
22 For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom,
23 but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness,
24 but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. (1 Corinthians 1:22–24, LSB)
What is the difference here between the person who sees the gospel of Christ as the power and wisdom of God? It is in verse 24. “To those who are the called.” That is the effectual call. That is effectual grace. If every single person is given this exact same type of grace then every single person would see the gospel of Christ as the power and wisdom of God, and no one would see it as a stumbling block or foolishness.
Oz, efficacious is the better word, I'll use it, no issues.
But the substance is what my post named. Dort says God works so the elect are "certainly, infallibly, and effectually" converted, bending the will to faith in a way that cannot fail. Whatever you call it, for the elect the grace cannot finally be refused. That is the claim.
So the question it turns on: where does Scripture give two drawings, one that can fail and one that cannot? John 6 gives one, and defines it, "taught of God" (6:45). Then men who held the scriptures refused that teaching to His face (5:40).
The second drawing, the one that cannot be refused, is what the system adds to protect the first.
The text gives me one, and it gets resisted.
Did you read the essay?
Do not rebuke an older man harshly, but plead with him as a father (1 Tim 5:1). Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger (Eph 6:4).
Yet how many of us are guilty of treating others harshly & provoking others to anger? We should take these exhortations more seriously.
Yea, hath God said?
Listen to me:
You were never born guilty due to the fall of Adam.
You were never born condemned, deserving of hell, unworthy, or a wretch.
Jesus never mentioned the fall of Adam and never taught any theology of original sin or total depravity.
You were born human with a heart capable of divine love and capable of missing the mark.
Your identity is that of a child of God and you have been born in his image.
God has created you just as you are and he loves you!
Jesus has invited you into his kingdom and to an abundant life.
Jesus was sent to perfectly reveal the love, character, and kingdom of God and calls us to live and to love according to his way, his truth, and his life!
This is quite possibly the weakest reason I’ve ever seen for someone to block me. I’ve been blocked for being a jerk, I fully admit. But I don’t think I was out of line here at all.
I have to wonder how many others who responded with correction were blocked? @JimmyParker87 @ThePastorBurris, did he block you guys?
Just because you phrase the question a certain way doesn’t mean people must answer it in that way, especially when they have legitimate reasons not to. I’ve seen your responses to people who say both are important and do not want to place one above the other.
You act like a jerk and act as if they can’t read the question, when their answer shows they certainly did read it as intended. They just answered in such a way to also correct the hidden assumption within the question.
This is similar to Spurgeon being asked which is more important to the Christian life, prayer or Bible reading and his response was “which is more important to breathing, inhaling or exhaling?”
The point is that both are equally as important. One can also argue, contrary to what you’ve told other people, that personal scripture reading and mediation is absolutely commanded in scripture. The difference is that corporate worship parameters are more explicitly laid out.
