|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/8/2008 12:46:12 PM
|
|
|
Odeliya
Posts: 2390
Joined: 8/10/2005
Status: offline
|
Appreciate the elaboration on the topic, FG.
Rwe, thanks for comment on my post. You both are doing a better job then i would have, buit I am reading the whole debate with interest.As well as of course, dear C side arguments are very interesting and thought provoking.
Bob and Carico, dont be silly  - the point of the debate is not to change anybody's view but to learn in the process. Even though there was once a girl here that switched camps, remember her, old-timers ? Debbie.
_____________________________
Proverbs XI:14 Where no counsel is, the people fall: but in the multitude of counselors there is safety.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/8/2008 12:59:51 PM
|
|
|
umcbee
Posts: 1774
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
rwe2156,
quote:
Read the Westmin Confession.
Simply giving a disclaimer or saying it isn't so doesn't get it for me.
My faith is in the Bible and God, not a doctrine.
KJB replies :
quote:
You have faith in the will of men.
Show me and the thread where rwe has even implied such ?
quote:
It is you that has faith that the will of each man will save each man as each man faithfully turns to Christ to save himself.
No one from the free choice side has ever said that they place any faith in the will of man ; nor that the will of man has anything to do with the salvation of man ; nor that the will of each man will save each man as each man faithfully turns to Christ to save himself .
quote:
The will of man is the solution.
Why must you continue to misrepresent and try your level best to belittle the non-reformed ? Everything in the above quotes from you is totally untrue . If it were not for these misrepresentations , you would have no argument at all in defence of your theology nor against the theology of those who disagree with you . I suggest you honestly face the theology and doctrinial issue's you oppose with some intelligent argument instead of rhetoric .
You quote these various confessions as if they were on par with Scripture or carried some spiritual authority ; when in fact they are composed purely of presuppositions .
_____________________________
kingbee
Never let your education get in the way of your learning.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/8/2008 1:35:22 PM
|
|
|
umcbee
Posts: 1774
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SureHope
quote:
ORIGINAL: FreeGrace
quote:
ORIGINAL: SureHope
God made certain that there would be sin, but is not the author of it.
If He is the One who "made certain there would be sin", then just who is the author of sin? Whoever "makes certain" that something happens is the author of it.
Did anyone else create the world knowing full well that sin would be a part of the creation? Or was it God alone that created the world? Since we know it was God alone who created the world, your statement above makes God the author of sin, which He is not.
God approved of the existence of sin, otherwise there would not be any sin. Yet, He is not the author of sin. It is a mystery that no thoughtful theologian can claim he understands.
Very true SH , there is no answer in Calvinist theology for the theological hole Calvinism has dug for itself when it comes to the subject of sin (nor other subjects for that matter) ; however , pleading mystery does not provide any escape nor relief from said hole .
And again , the theory of determinism in Calvinism and the Westminister Confession does not allow for the language of "approved nor allowed"
Either God has decreed or determined whatsoever happens as per the Westminister Confession (which you and Calvinism adhere's too) or , He has not as per free choice theology . Right now you want to straddle the fence when confronted with the inconsistency and contradictory doctrines of Calvinism and use language like "allowed or approved" , which have nothing in common with the meanings of "decreed nor determinism."
_____________________________
kingbee
Never let your education get in the way of your learning.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/8/2008 1:40:28 PM
|
|
|
TheosCentric
Posts: 1948
Joined: 2/26/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: FreeGrace
quote:
ORIGINAL: Odeliya
quote:
From the point of view that you present, it sounds as if you're saying that God owes his creatures salvation. God doesn't owe us anything.
I would agree. God doesnt owe us . He owes Himself, to be Just. To me the following is inconsistent with God’s nature as we know it:
God selects some for damnation. They are not better or worse then those who are selected for salvation. That is, to me not something a Loving, Just God would do.
Anothing thing- people are punished for condition they are born with. That is like punishing a blind man for being born that way.
I still do not fully understand the point/all reasons for giving us FW, but it does at thing point sounds much more Just then creating people for Hell based on nothing but- supposedly- divine choice.
Del, you've expressed this problem very well. Since none of the reformists can give any reason for WHY or HOW God chooses, other than to just claim "He is God, He is sovereign, and He can and will do as He pleases", their pov comes up making God look rather "fickle".
There is no reason for His choices, none at all. They sure can't say they deserved His choice. Of course, the FW pov also notes that Christ's death on the cross for everyone was not done because anyone deserved it.
The FW pov shows God to be all loving- Christ died for the whole world, and all gracious- believing the gospel doesn't earn us anything, nor makes the believer deserving of anything.
BUT, the FW pov shows that God is just. He created man to seek Him, and He made Himself evident so that no one would have any excuse for not seeking Him. Therefore, His justice is satisfied when He justly sends unbelievers to hell. They had no excuse. They were able to believe. They simply refused to do so.
God's reason for choosing anyone is simply because He is God.
If it is because of something that man has done, then that makes God's Salvation a works-based salvation.
Simple logic there, but you still want to resort to accusations.
_____________________________
"Missions exists because worship doesn't." -- John Piper, Let the Nations be Glad
God at the Center
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/8/2008 1:41:35 PM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 5511
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: FolkSingerBlues
Perhaps God knows that there is no way for love to be expressed unless there is choice.
Ah... The old "if you love somebody, set them free, if they come back they really love" view...
What's next? Figuring out God with Hallmark cards? :P
John
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/8/2008 1:47:29 PM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 5511
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rwe2156
Seems to me ability is proven by the fact that God gives a command to repent,
God has a desire for men to repent, God waits on his creation to repent, rejoices
when he repents, and even changes his mind when he repents.
What is the need to change the mind that is able to repent?
John
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/8/2008 1:57:22 PM
|
|
|
umcbee
Posts: 1774
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: TheosCentric
quote:
ORIGINAL: FreeGrace
quote:
ORIGINAL: Odeliya
quote:
From the point of view that you present, it sounds as if you're saying that God owes his creatures salvation. God doesn't owe us anything.
I would agree. God doesnt owe us . He owes Himself, to be Just. To me the following is inconsistent with God’s nature as we know it:
God selects some for damnation. They are not better or worse then those who are selected for salvation. That is, to me not something a Loving, Just God would do.
Anothing thing- people are punished for condition they are born with. That is like punishing a blind man for being born that way.
I still do not fully understand the point/all reasons for giving us FW, but it does at thing point sounds much more Just then creating people for Hell based on nothing but- supposedly- divine choice.
Del, you've expressed this problem very well. Since none of the reformists can give any reason for WHY or HOW God chooses, other than to just claim "He is God, He is sovereign, and He can and will do as He pleases", their pov comes up making God look rather "fickle".
There is no reason for His choices, none at all. They sure can't say they deserved His choice. Of course, the FW pov also notes that Christ's death on the cross for everyone was not done because anyone deserved it.
The FW pov shows God to be all loving- Christ died for the whole world, and all gracious- believing the gospel doesn't earn us anything, nor makes the believer deserving of anything.
BUT, the FW pov shows that God is just. He created man to seek Him, and He made Himself evident so that no one would have any excuse for not seeking Him. Therefore, His justice is satisfied when He justly sends unbelievers to hell. They had no excuse. They were able to believe. They simply refused to do so.
God's reason for choosing anyone is simply because He is God.
If it is because of something that man has done, then that makes God's Salvation a works-based salvation.
Simple logic there, but you still want to resort to accusations.
Where's the accusations Theos ? All I see FG saying is what you said : God's reason for choosing anyone is simply because He is God.
_____________________________
kingbee
Never let your education get in the way of your learning.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/8/2008 2:32:21 PM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 7898
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: TheosCentric
quote:
ORIGINAL: FreeGrace
quote:
ORIGINAL: Odeliya
quote:
From the point of view that you present, it sounds as if you're saying that God owes his creatures salvation. God doesn't owe us anything.
I would agree. God doesnt owe us . He owes Himself, to be Just. To me the following is inconsistent with God’s nature as we know it:
God selects some for damnation. They are not better or worse then those who are selected for salvation. That is, to me not something a Loving, Just God would do.
Anothing thing- people are punished for condition they are born with. That is like punishing a blind man for being born that way.
I still do not fully understand the point/all reasons for giving us FW, but it does at thing point sounds much more Just then creating people for Hell based on nothing but- supposedly- divine choice.
Del, you've expressed this problem very well. Since none of the reformists can give any reason for WHY or HOW God chooses, other than to just claim "He is God, He is sovereign, and He can and will do as He pleases", their pov comes up making God look rather "fickle".
There is no reason for His choices, none at all. They sure can't say they deserved His choice. Of course, the FW pov also notes that Christ's death on the cross for everyone was not done because anyone deserved it.
The FW pov shows God to be all loving- Christ died for the whole world, and all gracious- believing the gospel doesn't earn us anything, nor makes the believer deserving of anything.
BUT, the FW pov shows that God is just. He created man to seek Him, and He made Himself evident so that no one would have any excuse for not seeking Him. Therefore, His justice is satisfied when He justly sends unbelievers to hell. They had no excuse. They were able to believe. They simply refused to do so.
God's reason for choosing anyone is simply because He is God.
As I said, that's no reason. You make God appear to be "fickle", just as I said you do. "Simply because" answers nothing. It is merely a shroud under which to hide from problem your theology creates.
quote:
If it is because of something that man has done, then that makes God's Salvation a works-based salvation.
Your error is forgetting that because God planned it that way (man must respond and believe the message), "works based" is irrelevant. The Bible has clearly contrasted works from faith, so your charge continues to be empty.
quote:
Simple logic there, but you still want to resort to accusations.
Simply illogical, spock.
Did you read post 32697 re: Rom 8:24? What is your response? If Jesus was warning the non-elect, WHY bother?
If He was warning the elect, again, WHY bother, since they've been chosen and are NOT in danger at all?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/8/2008 2:40:19 PM
|
|
|
Diolectic
Posts: 644
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Iowa
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Caricoquote:
ORIGINAL: Diolectic
What would you tell a widow who lost an unsaved husband?
An honest Calvinist:
God hated your husband.
Your husband was created and born as a vessel of wrath.
God did not "elect" him for His own Glory.
He had no hope even from the beginning of creation.
It wouldn't have mattered if you prayed or not, He would have still ended up in hell no matter what.
God ordained him to hell.
Your husband is in hell for a glorious purpose...ect...
If these are true, why would you withhold the truth from her?
Or if she becomes saved and finds this "truth out" it is most ofensible and she would Hate God for these reasons.
I hate the god and many other Christians do too,, how do you figure that?
Don't you say that if one hates this god which you describe, he is not elect?
I guess I am not elect, for I despise this god which you describe.
How then do I have a relationship with HIM through Christ?
No, I'd tell the widow that God knows the hearts of men better than humans do. Would you add your doctrine which explains how God knows the hearts of men better than humans do?
Would you tell the widow, it is God who made her husband to be totally depraved, just because of a great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great relitive sinned?
Would you tell the widow, it is God who made mans heart to be wiked by creating man with a sin nature?
Would you tell the widow, that God might have hardend His heart to shiw His power I him?
Thereis no gettinnpg around why people are in hell eith your theology/doctrine.
It is the reasons which I gave.
Why would you hide that so called "truth" from unbelievers?
quote:
But non-reformists don't appear to believe that. I say that nothing should have been reformed in the first place.
quote:
So they'll tell the widow that her husband was a bad man and those who accepted Christ are better than he was. Sorta.
They who accepted Christ were more obedient, less proud (we humbled ourselves & admitted that we were sinners, They who refuse are proud. Her husband was to proud to admit he was a sinner).
They who accepted Christ love the truth as oppose to those who will not be saved.
Yet, all these tributes belong to those before redemption.
Sinners are able to be obedient, humble, & to love truth. You can not deny this.
I would tell the widow the truth, that her husband was a sinful man as all men are & as I was.
I'd also tell her the responsibility of man to obey the command to repent(Acts 17:30) which the husband refused to do(you would tell her that God didn't want to let him repent because God did not give him the gift of repentance).
I'd also tell her if she does not repent, she to will face judgment as her husband is.(Luke 13:4-5)
I'd also tell her that her husband refused to believe the evident truth, he he would not submit to God as commanded, he chose not to have faith to be saved(you would tell her that God didn't want to let him believe because God did not give him the gift of faith).
Face it, according to y'all theology/doctrine, the only reason people are in hell is because God wants them there. Its all God & nothing of man. As you always claim.
If it is all God & nothing of man, where does the responsibility of man come in?
quote:
Calvinists teach mercy, non-reformists teach fundamentalism and self-righteousness. Calvinists teach nonsense & contradiction to reality, non-reformists teach judgment and humility.
Yes, we preach judgment, but not fault finding, the law reveals fault by itself, we do not need to.
I do not teach self-righteousness, but self abasement.
We can not be self-righteous if we choose to humble ourselves of our own volition.
When have you hear any christian teach self-righteousness?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/8/2008 3:00:25 PM
|
|
|
bob97
Posts: 1971
Joined: 6/24/2006
From: Kansas
Status: offline
|
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: bob97
Your correct Carico...this thing could go on for another 5000 pages and still no winner.
How can you even say that Carico is correct, when he/she continues to repeat the gross error of "non-reformists will go on believing that man saves himself"? I know you know better than that.
It's becooming quite apparent that Carico will probably never understand the truth.
FG...are you saying that you and only you understand the truth? Can you say that with 100% certainly?
Bob
_____________________________
The LORD clears the road for me!
The LORD is my high ridge, my stronghold, my deliverer!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/8/2008 3:03:23 PM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 7898
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
Rom 9:30-32 says that the Gentiles, though not pursuing righteousness, did attain it. How? By faith.
The passage also says that Israel , who DID pursue righteousness, did NOT attain it. Why not? They didn't pursue it by faith.
How did Israel pursue righteousness? "As though it (righteousness) were by works" (the Law).
JRom 10:3,4 says that Israel did not know about God's righteousness (by faith) and was "seeking to establish their own (righteousness).
On what basis was Israel seeking to establish their own righteousness? By the Law, not by faith.
Rom 10:9,10
What is the precondition for being saved? The reformed will tell you there is no precondition for being saved. God alone chooses to to save, and that NOT based on any preconditions.
Yet, Rom 10:9,10 clearly shows a precondition for being saved.
"if you confess Jesus is Lord"
"if you believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead"
These are preconditions for being saved.
Rom 10:16 says that not all Israel heeded, or accepted, the good news. To the question, did all Israel hear the good news?, Paul answers in:
Rom 10:18 "indeed they HAVE".
To the question of why Israel did not accept the good news, Paul answers in Rom 10:21.
"All day long I (God) have stretched out My hand to a disobedient and obstinate people."
In the light of reformed theology, WHY would God bother stretching out His hand to any of the non-elect, since it was He who chose to create them for hell?
Can any of the reformed answer this, or explain the WHY?
Rom 11:5-7 speaks of the "remnant according to God's gracious choice". Here is where the reformed get all excited about the fact that God has preserved a remnant that He chose. They can't explain why He stretched out His hand to the non-elect, but they are at least happy that He chose a remnant, of which they are a part.
But, notice that v.6 contrasts the 'basis of grace" with the "basis of works". Hmm. Didn't we note a similar contrast in Rom 9:30-32? Yes, we did, where righteousness is based on faith, not on works.
So, the remnant is chosen according to those who believe, not without any reason that the reformed cannot come up with. To them, it is an arbitrary choice, but this passage says differently. Also, 11:6 relates back to Rom 4:4,5 where Paul contrasted works with faith.
Now, from v.7, what was Israel "seeking for"? Righteousness. Where were they seeking it? The Law. Did they obtain it from the Law? No.
Those who "were chosen", how did they obtain righteousness? By faith (9:30-32)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/8/2008 3:05:46 PM
|
|
|
Diolectic
Posts: 644
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Iowa
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHequote:
ORIGINAL: Diolectic
Yes, it is with others theology, I'm fine with God and His Word.
You demonstrated that you will not read what is plainly posted so whatever you are fine with doesn't really matter... If you are purposely selective that's just another issue.. What do I not read that is plainly posted? Is it y'alls interpretation of Scripture, or what you say?
How am I selective?
quote:
quote:
Arbitrary: Depending, according to, based on, subject to individual will, discretion &/or preference; not governed by any fixed rules; On what grounds do you base God's will and purpose as being arbitrary If it is only His will based on whim, & a purpose that was randomly chosen for no reason at all.
I’ve ask the question of what criteria does God use to elect.
No one gave me specific criteria accept "for His glory and an unknown purpose"
God has revealed His criteria and what His purpose is.
No one will give those reasons.
If God does not base His will on criteria, a standard in which things must be judged, that is the definition of arbitrary.
God can not choose(elect) with out reason & purpose, merely because he could or would. In other words, God can not exhibit his own sovereignty without any other reason than "just because HE wants to and that HE can"
God can not do anything He wants, just because He is God. He must stay with in the bounds of law which He set.
God has His own reasons for all that He does which are based upon standards which are also outside of Himself, which He has set up according to His character.
God's character is:
selfless, Justice, righteous, loving(agape)(loving kindness), compassionate, peaceable, gentle, and easily entreated, full of mercy, without partiality...ect...
God's judgment is according to all these.
In judgment, God will adhere to Equity, Mercy, balance & just weights(severity of the punishment compared to the crime), And, yes, fairness(which takes in to consideration of he limits of the offender; inability exempts from duty), impartial judgment ...ect...
To define impartiality, it does not mean to choose for no reason at all, but lack of favoritism.
However, there must be reason for an impartial judgment. This judgment can not be arbitrary!
Impartial judgment weighs out certain criteria for and against, then makes a decision based on that criteria.
If it is all God & nothing of man, God is not judging us righteously, but only making random arbitrary decisions based on whim.
In reality, God's own boundaries, which He also set for us, were set long before we were created. For these, our boundaries are reflections of His Character. God will not deny Himself & go beyond His own character.
quote:
Who cares what George Washington said, he's not God... He surely will not be my Advocate when the times comes.... You wouldn’t want a god who would step outside the bounds of justice,law, & reality which y'alls interpretation of Scriptures has Him doing.
quote:
quote:
It is according to obedience to the responsibilities we must meet in order to receive eternal life, which are repentance & faith .Smell like salvation via works... These are not works contrary to salvation.
These works are nothing to boast about, read Luke 17:10.
Furthermore, these responsibilities are most humbling.
So, why does it matter if what I said smells like salvation via works(responsibilities)?
quote:
quote:
It is after one obeys & submits to the responsibilities, then He receives the spirit for assistance to keep living a holy life in sanctification. Quacks like it...
btw.... Why does one need the Spirit after they already obey and submit? If one can raise themselves from the pit of sin surely they can keep out of it and move on... To comfort & help us
For power(Acts 1:8)
To teach us & to bring us into the truth (John 16:13 & 1John 2:27)
We receive the Holy Spirit as a seal of our redemption & asurance of salvation(2Corinth 1:22 & 5:5, Eph. 1:14 & 4:30 & 1John 3:24)
quote:
quote:
I've heard Calvs/Refs say... I have seen you selectively quote what is plainly written so please understand when I do give what you heard any credence.. What is it that I selectively quote?
what was plainly written?
Was it what others said, or quoted from Scripture?
quote:
quote:
Because He was the best one to meet the requirement for the office. And He was born into the family.
Same reason that God puts others in power.
If one can not meet the requirement for the office, God will not promote him.
Furthermore, Egypt needed a governor. The bible is rather clear on this...
Romans 9:17 For the Scripture says about Pharaoh, "I have raised you up for this very purpose, to demonstrate my power through you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth. It is not said that Pharaoh was born for that very purpose, but was raised to the throne for a particular purpose.
That purpose was so God might show His power in Pharaoh. It is not said that God raised him up to destroy him.
God's power might have been shown by Pharaoh yielding to his power.
Pharaoh's own conduct made it necessary for God to abase him/judge him.
God did not raise Pharaoh up just to destroy him, that would be ridiculous. Reality shows that is not right, how is it right for God?
Only one who is sick in the head would raise somebody up for the only reason of destroying him, just so they can look good.
The destruction came upon him because, in that position, Pharaoh resisted God because of pride in which he hardened his own heart, from God telling him what to do.
When it says that God hardened Pharaoh's heart, it is like what I do to someone externally, that person hardens his heart. It called offense, God offended Pharaoh, and Pharaoh hardened his heart.
It ain't like God supernaturally hardened Pharaoh's heart.
That would be God making someone to do what HE does not want them to do.
God commanded Pharaoh what God wanted him to do, let HIS people go.
Why do you thing that God would Harden Pharaoh's heart for any other reason but out of judgment for hardening his heart first?
quote:
You say that God put Pharaoh where His is so that Pharaoh may not repent and have the most amount of accountability and judgment. This is contrary to God's character.
I said why God put him there and it was for the reason stated in Roman 9:17 Your telling me that God is such an ogre, that He would purposefully put someone in a place which would give more accountability just so He can judge them more harshly??
Do you not know God's mercy is in His judgment?
Do you not know God Takes no pleasure in judgment?
I say that if Pharaoh was set any were else, He would have more accountability than were God did actually set him. For God is infinitely mercy, even in judgment.
Your telling me that God creates vessels of wrath, not out of judgment, but they are born as such.
That would mean, vessels of wrath are doing God's will by resisting Him.
Therefore, resisting God is not their sin.
God would have no right in condemning anyone who does His will, for condemnation is for people who can resist him & does.
I know, your thinking Romans 9:17!
However, that is because Pharaoh could resist God & did, then Romans 9:17; Pharaoh can not resist God because of judgment for resisting HIM first.
quote:
quote:
Furthermore, you have it is as God points people to disappoint Him. This is nonsense. God's power was seen... No disappointment... God commanded Pharaoh to let His people go, Pharaoh resisted God. This is disappointment.
quote:
quote:
My point is that GOD WILL NOT even attempt to save, He will not even lift one finger, just because he don't want to. He could save everyone, yet He doesn't... He could have filled the ark with people and not animals, yet He didn't... He could have picked EVERYONE to be His chosen people, but He didn't... Your whole premise is an compassionate, apathetic god who will not hear the cries of His own concerning saving the non-elect, all because He will not, He does not WANT to. God's only true reason for condemning people to hell his because He ultimately wanted them there from the foundation of the earth.
Fact is that God can not save because of resistance by choice. People refuse to repent and to put their faith in/on Him so that God is unable to forgive them and give them eternal life, for God gives to every one according to their works.
Prov, 21:13, Matthew 18:35, Mark 12:26
quote:
quote:
What would you tell a widow who lost an unsaved husband? That her husband is in God's hands... am sure most folks watching the event of Christ's death would figure both thieves were bound to hell, yet because we have some insight to the situation we know different... Why not tell her the truth which I put down? That is what you believe from what I've heard from y'all.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/8/2008 3:06:11 PM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 7898
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: bob97
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
ORIGINAL: bob97
Your correct Carico...this thing could go on for another 5000 pages and still no winner.
How can you even say that Carico is correct, when he/she continues to repeat the gross error of "non-reformists will go on believing that man saves himself"? I know you know better than that.
It's becooming quite apparent that Carico will probably never understand the truth.
FG...are you saying that you and only you understand the truth? Can you say that with 100% certainly?
From all of Carico's posts, I can, with 100% accuracy, state that Carico has no clue of the truth of the FW pov.
Why would you conclude from my remarks re: Carico that I think that I alone understand truth? That seems quite a leap to me. Can you explain yourself a bit here?
Let me ask you: do you agree with the posts of Carico, specifically about what Carico claims to be the pov of others?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/8/2008 4:17:19 PM
|
|
|
tdd1975
Posts: 418
Joined: 2/12/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
Read my signature, brother.
We must live in the tensions.
God seems to respond to man but at the same God must be in control.
Overbalancing is not the answer.
We will get nowhere arguing Scriptures.
Its much easier to drive our stakes in deep and camp out than to seek the truth, friend.
_____________________________
The Truth is between the tensions. The "contradictions"only reflect our lack of understanding.
So we choose sides. God help us.
You aren't living in the tensions. You have chosen sides.
We aren't to pit scripture against scripture but we are to live by every word of God.
The same God that said He is not the author of sin (which we both agree with) also said that every good and perfect gift comes from Him.
When you take credit for your own repentance, you deny the second.
It is by God's will not ours through his word that He begot us.
To take credit for anything that has been given to us as a gift is to rob Him of glory.
_____________________________
(Isaiah 33:17) Your eyes will behold the king in his beauty;
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/8/2008 4:23:50 PM
|
|
|
Diolectic
Posts: 644
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Iowa
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tdd1975
The same God that said He is not the author of sin (which we both agree with) also said that every good and perfect gift comes from Him.
When you take credit for your own repentance, you deny the second. No, because repentance can not be a gift. IF it is, that would make God fully & directly responsible for the repentance of the world, just because HE didn't want to give it.
Then comes the question, By what criteria does God use in choosing whom He will give Repentance?
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
That's why I've always maintained that Arminians are secular humanists who pay Jesus lip service. 
