Below is Isaiah in his prediction of Christ, note sin in v10/12 but iniquities plural in v11.

I disagree it illustrates the effectiveness of God's calling by demonstrating that God's calling works on the Elect, but mans sinful presumption does not work. Thereby excluding the non-elect as is shown in Matt 7:21-23.

Man cannot/does not resist grace when God is calling His Elect. God IS love and knows best, which man perceives only by grace and the Holy Spirits indwelling.

"ALL those whom God hath predestinated unto life, and them only he is pleased, in his appointed and accepted time, effectually to call, by his word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ; enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God" (W/Conf 10)

Note well
2Cor 5:14 For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead:
- Constrained by divine love.

15 And that he died for all, that THEY WHICH live should NOT henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.
- Grace and the Holy Spirit helps you achieve this.

16 Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more.
- The flesh is an old influence still in the children of wrath, - Not in the believer.

17 Therefore *IF* any man be IN CHRIST, he is a NEW CREATURE: old things are PASSED AWAY; behold, all things are become NEW.
- Observe the change.

18 And all things ARE OF GOD, who hath RECONCILED us to HIMSELF by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;

According to arminian Yamil NOBODY in the Bible is saved.

This ensures the erroneous arminian teaching that God cant save without mans prior permission and cooperation. (Viz. Synergism)

We can observe this in the Yamil follower "Ezekiel Jeremiah" quote
"would be foolish enough to say that God got what He desired concerning the times Hosea wrote of."

Again we see the idolatrous inferior god of the arminians defeated in his purposes, and brought down to the level of sinful man.

The usual problem with the heretic is that he overemphasizes the human whilst understating the divine. This of course is simply indicative of a lack of truth and understanding.

The arminian heresy was rejected in the 5th century and the 17th century, and of course all True Believers since then, and now can always perceive the error.

The problem here is that the arminian Yamil argues not against the word "election" - But against the word UNConditional.

The reason behind this is to ensure the arminian doctrine of salvation by works. Human works!!!

This heresy rejects the Sovereignty of God and the depraved state of the sinner. Thus arminian Yamil's effort is to elevate himself, whilst lowering God at the same time.

The arminian conviction is that salvation is then not all of God and Grace, - but includes the human input of cooperation and permission, without which God is powerless to save.

This the sin of vanity and presumption is rebellion against Scripture and God. Truly a heretical dart aimed at the Crucified Christ.

___________________________

Thanks for the insult Yamil, I'm very glad you disagree with me.

But the worst name you could call me is arminian, synergist or free willer, - then I'd really be in a foul mood too.

What the true Calvinist always tries to teach you poor heretics, is that God is Sovereign and quite capable of saving any sinner, even without their permission or cooperation. But it's exasporating work. It just seems you always want to demote God and DIY salvation all by your self?

"I say that man, before he is renewed into the new creation of the Spirit's kingdom, does and endeavours nothing to prepare himself for that new creation and kingdom, and when he is re-created has does and endeavors nothing towards his perseverance in that kingdom; but the Spirit alone works both blessings in us, regenerating us, and preserving us when regenerate, without ourselves..." Martin Luther (Bondage of the Will)

"Faith in the living God and his Son Jesus Christ is always the result of the new birth, and can never exist except in the regenerate. Whoever has faith is a saved man." - C.H. Spurgeon from His sermon Faith and Regeneration

This of course is the arminian - synergist method.

As you can see it is the wrong way round.
John 3.3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God."

NO mortal can prove the existance of God, today, or at any time in history.

Where in Scripture OT or NT does it command/declare we are to sing these points? It appears that the omission of these teachings from the Psalms, brings you to conclude that if you do not specifically sing them, - you are not praising God? Do they negate Psalms for you?

TULIP1 has already pointed out below that the Psalms indeed the whole Bible is about Jesus.

BTW - WHOM did Jesus praise whilst HE was on earth. Do you follow Him?

God's specific personal selection of Praise is recorded in history. You will find it in the Bible. In Hebrew it is called the Book of Praise. In English we use the Greek term PSALMS.

Whose choice will you use in worship, God's, or the evil hearted sinners?

Finally cbcpreacher, thankyou in your post this time, for not vilifying me quite so much. And I'm not upset about your taking a stand, simply debating the issue.

NO "body" goes to hell.

It's a "spiritual" destination for the unsaved.

Quote
"The more he studied, the more Pearson saw the Bible not as the literal word of God but a book by men about God -- primitive men prone to mistranslations, political agendas and human emotions."u/q

As soon as you remove God as the author of Scriptures then you reject His authority and look for a new and nicer one. The Liberals do this all the time.

Rev 1:18 "I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death."

BTW "Catholicism is the opiate of the Mass."

Eph 5:19 Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord;

I sincerely hope you dont disobey this "imperative" Mike.

I can see no reason whatsoever that the word "praise" cannot be incorporated into the lyrics of a psalm of praise to God.

Indeed if I recall from my hymn singing days there are not a few instances, of using the term in hymns written by mortals too.

"Praise the Lord, praise the Lord, Let the earth hear His voice!
Praise the Lord, praise the Lord, Let the people rejoice." Fanny Crosby.
Is this a summons to the people, - or is she hoping the Lord will receive this?

Mike as I have intimated before - If you and others want to reject the personal selection of God, as recorded by HIM in HIS Word then OK! If you prefer the more modern idiom to the ancient "Book of Praise" then thats YOUR choice.

Clearly this is a phenomena of the specific denominational type which he belongs to, we have seen it before on site.

Thus if someone DARES to disagree with you then attack with nasty expletives and derogatory, disparaging remarks.

The hate filled heart rears it's ugly head in venom again from this denomination's disciples.

I suppose next he will suggest that this is "love thy neighbour" and in fact that he is a pious Christian.

And why? Because I sing Psalms???

Strange world isn't it!!!

God be with you cbcpreacher.
Please don't condemn people for obeying these Words of the Lord, in the way HE recorded.

Psalm 7:17 I will praise the LORD according to his righteousness: and will sing praise to the name of the LORD most high.

Psalm 9:2 I will be glad and rejoice in thee: I will sing praise to thy name, O thou most High.

Daddy of them all.

= 1689 Baptist came from Westminster. Reformed folks who want to get all wet.

= Savoy is "modified" from the Westminster.

= Belgic is also "Reformed" document.

I notice that all your info comes from "Baptist" sources?????
Surprise! Surprise!

For example

""Baptists make no effort to trace a historical succesion back to the age of the Apostles. Their only claim is that at every age in church history there have been groups that have held to the same doctrines that Baptists hold today. These groups may or may not have been connected and they have been known by various names. There were the Montanists (150 A.D.), the Novatians (240 A.D.), Donatists (305 A.D.), Paulicians (650 A.D.) , Albigenses (1022 A.D.), Waldensians (1170 A.D.) and the name Anabaptists came into prominence just before the time of the Protestant Reformation.""

Of course the other denominations reject this; - Not so surprising. For example the presbyterians associate themselves in history with the Waldensians too.

So your "hypothesis" is disputed by many historians and theologians. We are not surprised that "Baptist history" - IS written by "Baptist historians"

But please, - by all means furnish this "Hypothesis" to Baptists, if you want to.

Try comprehension again

1] Anabaptists founded in Europe 1521.

2] ***American*** Baptists is the info URL I provided in the post.

We must continue to preach the Truth, share the Faith, and by grace the Lord will convert the sinner.

Sorry Yamil

That historical quote was from a BAPTIST! *See above.

Therefore it is one of your own that teaches that.