/christianity/ - Christian Theology & Philosophy

Calvinists will call every non-elect "reprobate", connecting it with the concept of total depravity. I even had a calvinist professor look at our Christian class and call us all reprobates, despite 2 Corinthians 13 which teaches that Christians cannot be reprobates.

The calvinist reads Romans 1 as figurative regarding the entire race, or about the first man Adam, not individuals becoming reprobate.

Another view is that reprobate is a category beyond unsaved. Not only is a reprobate an unbeliever, but he will never turn to God. Angry meme man Anderson thinks concludes that you have to be a reprobate to be a fag, and believes that a reprobate will never be saved, so he has zero evangelical interest in them.

I think that reprobate is something beyond unsaved, but doesn't imply unable to turn. Prima facie it seems like Anderson is right, but 1 Cor 6 mentions the conversion of fags. It's still naturally less likely for a reprobate to turn in this view because of what the Bible says about the hardening of the heart.

If you’re worried you might be a reprobate you’re not a reprobate.

>>5423

There is nothing controversial about it, it's just the nature of imageboards to attract spergs who sperg out over anything and everything whenever wherever and they just can't let that bone go.

Otherwise this >>5506

Stop being a sperg, go to confession and pray. That is all. Stop opening this thread every 2 weeks, PLEASE!

Thank you and may the Lord have mercy on us all.

I was thinking about this recently because I was reading the book of Samuel and it seems to me like Saul is a good example of a reprobate. He started out good, but when he spared king Agag despite the fact that God had commanded that Agag be killed.

Thus the spirit of God left Saul and he became reprobate, he talks about how he can't hear God and Samuel talks about how God is no longer with him and won't help him or answer him. It's a frightening thing for a Christian. . .

And I hear and see a lot of people who say things like God doesn't answer them in any clear way, and it makes me think there are perhaps many reprobates around and it's more common than is often thought

>>5527

Saul is in heaven. When Saul sought after a witch, Samuel told him from heaven that he would be with him soon.

You can’t lose your salvation.

It appears there is a difference between an indwelling of the Holy Spirit and having the spirit come upon you. It would have to be this way otherwise Samuel wouldn’t have assured King Saul that he’d be going to heaven.

I think the lesson here is that God can stop having a plan for you while you are on earth, despite the fact that he will never go back on his promise that he will save you from eternal wrath if you call upon His name.

1 Samuel 28:19 Moreover the LORD will also deliver Israel with thee into the hand of the Philistines: and to morrow shalt thou and thy sons be with me: the LORD also shall deliver the host of Israel into the hand of the Philistines.

>>5449

1 Corinthians 6:9 does not include sodomites. “Abusers of themselves with mankind” are whores.

This can be confirmed by 1 Timothy 1:10 where he writes “them that defile themselves with mankind”, which is a whore.

1 Timothy 1:10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

1 Corinthians 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

>>5531

Who told you that? They both mean sodomites

the word literally translated is "male bed".

>>5423

Reprobates “don’t even want to retain God in their knowledge”

Basically, if you’re afraid of being a reprobate, you’re not a reprobate. It’s just a way of diagnosing outsiders, which I understand in light of how anti-Christian the world has become, though I do disagree with the general theology

>>5529

I don't believe in once saved always saved, but I haven't really looked into the scripture on this issue, it seems something to devote a whole thread to, which I think I'll do once I read up properly, or you could start one in the meantime. I always thought Saul died and went to hell because God turned his back on him

>>5564

How did you theme biblehub?

>>5564

Come back when you back up what you say with scripture.

>>5596

His argument is equal to yours in that regard, each definition fits the context of the two verses where the word is found.

Why do Greek scholars universally define it to mean homosexuals? What do you know that they don't?

>>5449

>Calvinists will call every non-elect "reprobate"

That's the definition of reprobate in every theology, friend

>The calvinist reads Romans 1 as figurative regarding the entire race

That isn't "figurative", it's the natural meaning of the text

>>5620

>1

Incorrect

>2

Figurative and the natural meaning aren't incongruous, you must mean that the figurative reading is the one that is natural.

You understand that there's a alternative non-figurative reading, right? The people it refers to are those reprobates, rather than being figures of all humanity.

>>5423

>How does one know if they're a reprobate?

One doesn't. One simply is or is not.

>>5531

The NT was written in Greek, not English. It absolutely does not say "abusers of themselves with mankind". You can not discern the meaning of the bible by looking at where else a translator used a phrase or term. You need to look at the actual source and the meaning of the words. The bible says "μαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται". Look up the meaning of those words. You are repeating blatant lies told by faggots who wish to continue to sin and still call themselves Christian.

https://christianstudies.wordpress.com/2011/06/04/does-the-greek-word-malakos-refer-to-homosexual-acts/

>>5575

The Dark Reader browser extension darkens all of my pages.

>>5596

I did.

>>5622

>Incorrect

No, Anon, you are simply ignorant. Consider the category of elect as meaning "those who will ultimately be saved", then the reprobates are "those who will ultimately be damned". This is the meaning of these terms since the dawn of Christian theology, and that's exactly why Anderson uses the term 'reprobate' to describe gays, even if he doesn't realize it.

>Figurative and the natural meaning aren't incongruous, you must mean that the figurative reading is the one that is natural.

When I said natural meaning, I meant it would jump out to the average layman clear as day. The issue is that there are not multiple valid interpretations of this passage, and the correct interpretation is not 'figurative' in any way. The start of the passage identifies the group being discussed simply as men, which makes the natural, literal interpretation that Paul is talking about mankind, not a small sub-section of humanity. The "alternative" interpretation (which is in reality a gross novelty of modernity) suddenly vanishes from a reading of the text once they enter Romans 2 and Paul starts accusing members of the Roman church of being like the group in Romans 1. I have never seen any reason to believe that anybody before the modern era attempted to limit the scope of Romans 1 to just being some men. I imagine the first time it happened was probably the same as most times it happens today, that is to justify homosexuality by saying that only for some people is it an expression of sinful nature.

>>5706

>>5706

Fags are reprobates and are irredeemable. If 1 Corinthians 6:9 were talking about reprobates, it would say reprobates. That’s why “homosexual” is not the correct translation. If “homosexual” were the correct translation, then fags would have a part in God’s plan, but they are reprobate and therefore do not have a part in God’s plan.

I’ve quoted Romans 1:24-28 before. It’s clear fags cannot even enter a church.

To hammer this home, the very same writer of 1 Cor and Romans 1 also wrote 2 Cor 13, which within a different context reaches for “reprobate” yet again. So if 1 Cor 6:9 really means “homosexual” it would have never been written by Paul because they are reprobate. Get what I mean?

You don’t need to reach for man’s words to know God’s words. You need to be SAVED to understand God’s words. The “natural man” can’t understand the Bible. This is why I personally do not reach for internet articles or study notes to understand God’s Word nor do I accept man’s word as supportive evidence for how to interpret Gods word.

1 Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

2 Corinthians 13:5 Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?

Romans 1:24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

Romans 1:25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

Romans 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

Romans 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

Romans 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

>>5767

>Fags are reprobates and are irredeemable

And yet you provide nothing to support this assertion. Just evidence that faggotry is sin. Of course it is. And if you do not repent and cease your faggotry, you will not go to heaven.

I wouldn't think they would know, The only sin that can't be forgiven is the rejection of the Holy spirit drawing you to salvation over and over, not believing in the one God sent, condemned already..

>>5423

<it invariably devolves into puritanical veiws or absolutism issues

>puritanical

<think idiotic soccer mom blowing everything out of proportion

<did you hold hands before marriage? REPROBATE

>absolutism issues

<theres also more sin to pile on and go further

<how can one become literally irredeemably too far gone?

<to truly be reprobate would be to be a demon made flesh

<this is not possible

>>5533

>the word literally translated is "male bed".

?? Why is it crazy to think that would apply to whores? Do we have the same definition of whore?

So does incest count as something Reprobates do?

>>5506

I hear this a lot. If I may ask, what makes you say that?

>>5536

What are sins that are considered something reprobates do? Sodomy, bestiality, and pedophilia?

bu mp

If someone is reprobate, they will never be saved. Simple.