What A Sovereign God Cannot Do....

[trofimus]

The Arminian system of belief is idolatry to its very core.

I really do not think so. This is also exaggerated claim.

When I read the original points of Arminius, I see no idolatry in them. Yes, I do not agree with some, I do not agree with some of his formulations, but still, no idolatry. And in fact, he did not say it as extremely "pro free will" as the "free will" proponents today, at all:


-----------

Article I — That God, by an eternal, unchangeable purpose in Jesus Christ, his Son, before the foundation of the world, hath determined, out of the fallen, sinful race of men, to save in Christ, for Christ's sake, and through Christ, those who, through the grace of the Holy Ghost, shall believe on this his Son Jesus, and shall persevere in this faith and obedience of faith, through this grace, even to the end; and, on the other hand, to leave the incorrigible and unbelieving in sin and under wrath, and to condemn them as alienate from Christ.


Article II — That, agreeably thereto, Jesus Christ, the Savior of the world, died for all men and for every man, so that he has obtained for them all, by his death on the cross, redemption, and the forgiveness of sins; yet that no one actually enjoys this forgiveness of sins, except the believer.

Article III — That man has not saving grace of himself, nor of the energy of his free will, inasmuch as he, in the state of apostasy and sin, can of and by himself neither think, will, nor do anything that is truly good (such as having faith eminently is); but that it is needful that he be born again of God in Christ, through his Holy Spirit, and renewed in understanding, inclination, or will.

Article IV — That this grace of God is the beginning, continuance, and accomplishment of a good, even to this extent, that the regenerate man himself, without that prevenient or assisting, awakening, following, and co-operative grace, can neither think, will, nor do good, nor withstand any temptations to evil; so that all good deeds or movements, that can be conceived, must be ascribed to the grace of God in Christ.

Article V — That those who are incorporated into Christ by a true faith, and have thereby become partakers of his life-giving Spirit, have thereby full power to strive against Satan, sin, the world, and their own flesh, and to win the victory, it being well understood that it is ever through the assisting grace of the Holy Ghost; and that Jesus Christ assists them through his Spirit in all temptations.

Jacub Arminius.

-----------------------

Actually, I agree almost with everything. The only problem I have is that he taught the grace is resistible (but I am not sure if he meant it also for the chosen ones) and that he was not sure if the true faith can be lost. Thats all.

Now look at today's proponents of him, how far they got, almost nothing in their words is biblical...

 

[ForthAngel]

I really do not think so. This is also exaggerated claim.

Now look at today's proponents of him, how far they got, almost nothing in their words is biblical...

Maybe I should use the term Pelagians then? Seems that is closer to what most here on the Arminian side believe.

 

[trofimus]

Maybe I should use the term Pelagians then? Seems that is closer to what most here on the Arminian side believe.

Hm, I have never read anything by Pelagius... so I do not know. Maybe its time for me to find some of his writings, if Church have not destroyed them.

I think that todays "free will arminians" actually do not care about history or what Arminius or Pelagius taught. It seems to me they have no system and have only some vogue ideas they heard somewhere in the church or in the culture, at the best.

And that both Arminius and Pelagius would be horrified if they heard what these proponents of them are teaching.

 

[peacefulbeliever]

Its your opinion. But the election is and exists. It is true:

"knowing your election, brothers loved by God..." 1 Thes 1:4

"Therefore, my brothers and sisters, make every effort to confirm your calling and election..." 2 Pt 1:10

"Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election ..." R 11:5

"What then? Israel has not obtained that which it seeks for; but the elected has obtained it..." R 11:7

" The church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, greets you." 1 Pt 5:12

Those that believe in the Lord Jesus Christ are the elect through faith.

Israel did not believe in the Messiah . . . salvation was offered to the Gentiles - now all who believe are God's elect.

For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people. Titus 2:11
For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. Titus 2:11

 

[trofimus]

Those that believe in the Lord Jesus Christ are the elect through faith.

Israel did not believe in the Messiah . . . salvation was offered to the Gentiles - now all who believe are God's elect.

For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people. Titus 2:11
For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. Titus 2:11

Sure, the ones who believe are the elected of God. I have no problem with that.

 

[trofimus]

Jacob Arminius:

- lost his father in infancy. A compassionate clergyman educated the boy. While Arminius was at the University of Marburg, the Spanish destroyed his native town. He returned home to find his mother, brother and sister among those who were massacred

- the ecclesiastical senate of Amsterdam made a fateful request when they asked Arminius to respond to the teachings of Dirck Coornhert. Coornhert was a God—loving man, who had risked his life for his country and the Reformation, but rejected some of Calvin’s doctrines on predestination, justification, and punishment of heretics by death.

- weighing the arguments, Arminius thought Coornhert right, but would not commit himself until he had made a diligent study of the scriptures, the early church fathers, and later divines. As a result, he adopted the theory of predestination which bears his name

- for fourteen years Arminius’ ministered at Amsterdam with success and popularity, although his theological views sometimes brought him into collision with Calvinist ministers

- his efforts to turn the students from scholastic quarrels to Bible studies, and his views on predestination, led to accusations that he was introducing innovations. Arminius endured these attacks peaceably, and did not publicly defend himself until 1608

- in 1609 his health broke down, and, suffering great pain, he died at the age of forty—nine, remaining cheerful to the end, and acquiescent to the will of God

https://www.christianhistoryinstitute.org/study/module/arminius/

-----

I would have no problem to call him my brother and I would be actually proud to be his friend. If not as good theologian as Calvin, he seems to me to be a better person.

 

[ForthAngel]

Hm, I have never read anything by Pelagius... so I do not know. Maybe its time for me to find some of his writings, if Church have not destroyed them.

I think that todays "free will arminians" actually do not care about history or what Arminius or Pelagius taught. It seems to me they have no system and have only some vogue ideas they heard somewhere in the church or in the culture, at the best.

And that both Arminius and Pelagius would be horrified if they heard what these proponents of them are teaching.

I probably agree with this to an extent.

 

[ForthAngel]

I would have no problem to call him my brother and I would be actually proud to be his friend. If not as good theologian as Calvin, he seems to me to be a better person.

Just to be clear, I still stand by my statement on the previous page. It describes the free-will view of today whether Arminius believed it or not. I have never studied Arminius in depth myself. They may be Arminians as much as I am a Calvinist, but the debate is still labeled Calvinists vs Arminians. Those are the unfortunate labels we are using. I haven't read much of Calvin, only a bit. I've studied Irenaeus more than Calvin. I'm not his disciple any more than I am Calvin's. So again, I am a Calvinist as much as they are Arminians. I prefer reformed, so if they have a better term for themselves, they should speak up. Beyond the terminology, I stand by everything I said. Maybe they would prefer Synergist? I'd be happy being called a Monergist.

 

[peacefulbeliever]

You've maligned your character all by yourself. You're the one telling everyone that Calvinists don't believe in free choice, free grace, or evangelizing. That's on you! That's on you because we have told you for weeks now that is not true, and yet, you spent three days finding sample after sample of the same lies by people just like you.

You say that you believe in free choice but not free will.

free - exempt from subjection to the will of others; not under restraint, control or compulsion; determining one's own course of action.
choice - act of choosing; the voluntary act of selecting or separating from two or more things that which is preferred; the determination of the mind in preferring one thing to another
will - the power of choosing; the faculty or endowment of a person by which it is capable of choosing; the faculty or power of the mind by which we decide to do or not to do; the power or faculty of preferring or selecting one of two or more objects

How can you exercise free choice when your choice is not exempt from subjection to the will of another, it is under restraint and control and it is not by determining your own course of action by choosing the thing that is preferred - that subjection being irresistible grace? How can you believe in free choice - the act of choosing freely but not in free will - the act of being capable of selecting one of two or more options.

May I ask what you believe the difference is between the two? Trying to follow the logic here.

 

[peacefulbeliever]

Actually, I was answering Peace about the difference between God predestining people, not plans. And then went on to show we still agree on the word of God about him not letting anyone who wants to be saved get saved.

And I responded to your answer.

We did???? Did I miss something? I believe God will save ANYONE who calls upon him . . .

I'm burnt out from answering the same questions over and over again from those who don't want to believe in reformed theology. And I answered Peace because she is peaceful.

You tend to keep saying the same things over and over again.

Thank you Lynn. Although at times, I can get a little heated and I do tend to repeat myself!!!

 

[kaylagrl]

You've maligned your character all by yourself. You're the one telling everyone that Calvinists don't believe in free choice, free grace, or evangelizing. That's on you! That's on you because we have told you for weeks now that is not true, and yet, you spent three days finding sample after sample of the same lies by people just like you.

AND you're the one who said you have no idea what to do with yourself after a woman you loved and respected attacked "my beliefs." That too is a lie in two ways.
1. I never attacked your beliefs. I told you again and again that what you are saying about MY beliefs are WRONG! And once you continued on blindly still calling them "your beliefs," then it was obviously lies! Personally, I don't do that to someone I love and respect. Most people actually listen to people they love and respect, (agreeing is optional), but not you.

2. Apparently, you did know what to do with yourself because you spent 3-4 days googling to find whatever agreed with you to throw it in our face as to why we're wrong again. You could have been learning why you upset me, but, nope! Much more important to defend what you think is wrong with what I believed as you continue to lie about what I believe. What Calvinists, in general, believe! In that, it's a pattern of lies, not merely one lie.

And that's what you chose to do, and it's no mistake. Now you're just filling the forum with garbage to defend your position. Not God anymore. Your position. Not God anymore. Your "religion."

And I have not been talking about you behind your back. You're right here, watching it. (Unless you have eyes in the back of your head.)

To everyone else, have I gone behind Kayla's back on this? Have I PM'd anyone to talk about Kayla, like she seems to be claiming now?

Because, man! Three weeks of this crap, and the only thing even my husband has heard about all this is me constantly asking if someone can be so blind that they cannot see that the Reformed do believe in free choice, God's grace and the need to evangelized? I don't talk behind anyone's back. I say it right in front of them on purpose!

Right! Calvin and Wesley are both dead. Except to you, they are the only voices to either POV. You wouldn't even listen when we all told you we aren't much on knowing what Calvin thought. We don't care. We care about what Wesley thought less. The only reason you care about Wesley suddenly, (because you didn't even know your beliefs were from him until I told you that, so it's not like you can't see me), is to prove you're right at any cost.

Now you're just going smug, as if we should be willing to keep playing this game with you, and to prove it? You've basically just said, "If you don't play, I win."

No. You lost last week, when you tried lying about the other belief to prove you have the only right belief. And, by design, this site is for adults, so triple-dog-dare-yous don't work.

This wasn't a game, except to you. This is about God to most others on both sides of the debate.

As for what religion you practice? Now I see it clearly. That's why I'm still here. To make sure no one else follows you or believes you, since you are determined to lie about any belief you disagree with.

Quote "You've maligned your character all by yourself. You're the one telling everyone that Calvinists don't believe in free choice, free grace, or evangelizing. That's on you! That's on you because we have told you for weeks now that is not true, and yet, you spent three days finding sample after sample of the same lies by people just like you. "


Baloney Lynn. I have never said you dont believe in evangelism,I said there was no point in evangelism if people are elected to go to heaven or hell.Thats common sense,period. How can you believe in choice/grace? As Desertrose said your definition is different and you and preacher know it.You do not believe grace is free for ALL! You believe grace is limited to the elect and that is not the same thing.So NO ONE lied about what you believe. Its a conclusion to what you are saying,its common sense. You yourself even had to ask fourth to clarify a question you had. So you smash everyone over the head with what you believe then have to ask another member to tell you what you believe.smh


Quote "AND you're the one who said you have no idea what to do with yourself after a woman you loved and respected attacked "my beliefs."

Nah,I know what I believe. No one here shakes my beliefs,you included. I have always believed that Jesus saves ALL who believe. Always believed it,grew up on it. So dont flatter yourself,Im good.



1.1. I never attacked your beliefs. I told you again and again that what you are saying about MY beliefs are WRONG! And once you continued on blindly still calling them "your beliefs," then it was obviously lies! Personally, I don't do that to someone I love and respect. Most people actually listen to people they love and respect, (agreeing is optional), but not you.

Lynn you do this whole song and dance when anyone begins to question Calvinism and come to conclusions about it. As long as I was hearing and not questioning or drawing conclusions you were fine.When I stepped outside the line you blew a gasket. And you turned nasty.


2. Apparently, you did know what to do with yourself because you spent 3-4 days googling to find whatever agreed with you to throw it in our face as to why we're wrong again.

Of course Im going to post people with my POV I told you in the beginning that I did not agree with Calvinism. I began a thread on free will and was attacked on all sides.I wasn't giving a definition,I gave a definition and it wasn't a good enough definition,then I was Arminian even though I said I disagreed with certain beliefs of theirs. You continually refer to anyone who doesn't see your POV as Arminian even though you've said several times how "p*ssed" {your word not mine} you are that people are calling you something you are not. I guess that only works one way.


Quote "You could have been learning why you upset me, but, nope!"

Are you kidding me?! I have asked question after question,you just dont like the conclusion because it disagrees with your belief. I was more than willing to listen,I asked questions,went through a butt load of definitions and where I got stuck was the same place you are stuck and had to ask forth for a better explanation. How hypocritical is that? You dont know but your mad at me because I dont know! Thats beyond silly.


Quote "Much more important to defend what you think is wrong with what I believed as you continue to lie about what I believe. What Calvinists, in general, believe! In that, it's a pattern of lies, not merely one lie."

Pot meet kettle. Your the one blowing a gasket and calling people names because they disagree with you.I have NOT lied about Calvinism. You cannot say you believe that God elected people then turn around and say they have free choice,will,grace. Both cannot be true Lynn.Its not a lie. They contradict themselves. I dont understand why you say it is a lie!?



Quote "And that's what you chose to do, and it's no mistake. Now you're just filling the forum with garbage to defend your position. Not God anymore. Your position. Not God anymore. Your "religion."

You're defending your belief and you expect no one to defend theirs? You think you're speaking for God?! With the attitude that you have shown to others here? This is you,Christlike?! Lord have mercy I wouldn't want to see you mad if you see this as Christlike. What I fill the forum with is my business.If its within the rules then Im free to post my POV as you are.



Quote "And I have not been talking about you behind your back. You're right here, watching it. (Unless you have eyes in the back of your head.)

You have been talking to others in posts ranting about "she this and that" liar and on and on. You are sniping behind my back.Yes,you are.


Quote "To everyone else, have I gone behind Kayla's back on this? Have I PM'd anyone to talk about Kayla, like she seems to be claiming now?"

Never said you PMed anyone. Could care less if you did. But you dont need to snipe about me in posts to other people. Thats behind a persons back.


Quote "Because, man! Three weeks of this crap, and the only thing even my husband has heard about all this is me constantly asking if someone can be so blind that they cannot see that the Reformed do believe in free choice, God's grace and the need to evangelized? I don't talk behind anyone's back. I say it right in front of them on purpose!"

You cannot say you believe in people being elect and then say they have free choice! Do you not see that those ideas contradict each other?! My land!! I cant understand why YOU are so blind to this! If God knows who the elect are why do you need to evangelize? Those who are suppose to come will whether they are evangelized or not. Lynn I dont know if you're being obtuse on purpose or you honestly cannot see the contradictions in what you are saying.Im hoping its the latter.


Quote "Right! Calvin and Wesley are both dead. Except to you, they are the only voices to either POV. You wouldn't even listen when we all told you we aren't much on knowing what Calvin thought. We don't care."

And I dont get that either. Why do you not care? Calvin expounded on what you believe concerning election. Why would you say you are Calvinist?Reformed and not care about what Calvin said and wrote? Azusa Street was a revival that Pentecostals point to as a new fire that revived what happened at Pentecost. I would be odd for me to say I didn't care about it as a Pentecostal.



Quote " The only reason you care about Wesley suddenly, (because you didn't even know your beliefs were from him until I told you that, so it's not like you can't see me), is to prove you're right at any cost."

No Lynn, Wesley expounds well on free grace.Im not Methodist,nor am I Wesleyian. Im Pentecostal. Wesley may well have had an influence but Methodists as a general rule do not believe in speaking in tongues,nor do Weslyans,of which I am neither. I have always believed that Jesus died for all,always believed man had a choice,always believed it was the Holy Spirit that draw men. I did not google Wesley and say "well looky there,now I know what I believe!" Didn't happen. Been preaching the same message,singing the same message for years and years,Jesus saves whosoever will. Yes,Wesley expounded well on the subject and he believed what I have believed all my life.Its not about proving Im right,its about what the Bible says,period.


Quote "Now you're just going smug, as if we should be willing to keep playing this game with you, and to prove it? You've basically just said, "If you don't play, I win."

Baloney! Its always been a matter of what Gods Word says Lynn. I cant help it if you dont understand. What do I WIN being right? No,its a matter of the truth of the Word. Truth wins,I win nothing.But I will stand for what I know is right and I will not back down. So you might as well skip this thread because Im going to keep saying Jesus saves the whosoever wills.


Quote "No. You lost last week, when you tried lying about the other belief to prove you have the only right belief. And, by design, this site is for adults, so triple-dog-dare-yous don't work."

I lost last week? News to me,you'll have to explain that one. And Im not like you Lynn Im not trying to prove Im right,Im providing what the Bible says.I cant help that you think its me trying to win something or be right. I stand on the Word of God which says Christ died for all who will believe. Its no game,its the Word.


Quote "This wasn't a game, except to you. This is about God to most others on both sides of the debate."

If this was about God you wouldnt be telling people how p*ssed you are,shouting people down,calling people liars and generally throwing an adult tantrum. If you really believed what you believe and were Christlike you'd say "Kayla I get that you are getting stuck,I'll pray God opens your eyes to this truth."But you do not. You have been spiteful and hateful simply because I have questioned your contradictory beliefs.

Quote "As for what religion you practice? Now I see it clearly. That's why I'm still here. To make sure no one else follows you or believes you, since you are determined to lie about any belief you disagree with.

I have not lied about your belief. You want to make sure no one believes me? I believe Christ died for all,that His blood was shed for the whole world and that He wishes that none would perish. I believe man is drawn by the Holy Spirit to believe and anyone who calls on His name will be saved. If you dont want people to believe that you take that up with God. Because that is what His Word says. And I would be careful of barring the door of salvation to anyone. You are not God.

 

[kaylagrl]

You say that you believe in free choice but not free will.

free - exempt from subjection to the will of others; not under restraint, control or compulsion; determining one's own course of action.
choice - act of choosing; the voluntary act of selecting or separating from two or more things that which is preferred; the determination of the mind in preferring one thing to another
will - the power of choosing; the faculty or endowment of a person by which it is capable of choosing; the faculty or power of the mind by which we decide to do or not to do; the power or faculty of preferring or selecting one of two or more objects

How can you exercise free choice when your choice is not exempt from subjection to the will of another, it is under restraint and control and it is not by determining your own course of action by choosing the thing that is preferred - that subjection being irresistible grace? How can you believe in free choice - the act of choosing freely but not in free will - the act of being capable of selecting one of two or more options.

May I ask what you believe the difference is between the two? Trying to follow the logic here.


[/SIZE]

Right,well Ive said the same thing and been called a liar. I hope you will give her a more kind answer Lynn!

 

[SovereignGrace]

The death that passed upon all men because of sin is separation from God. It leaves us apart from God but does not render us unable to see the Light God has provided. If we die in this state of separation we will spend eternity apart from God in a state of eternal condemnation.

The spirit/soul of man never dies. The body dies because it comes from the earth but the soul/spirit of man is everlasting which is why heaven and hell are eternal.

Jesus explains this in Luke 16:26 in the great gulf between the redeemed and the condemned. Ephesians 2:13 we are made near by the blood of Christ. In Hebrews we are told we are now able to enter into the presence of God and encouraged to enter boldly.

None of this negates the necessity of Christ's blood to atone for our sin or the grace of God. It does refute the mythology that man is unable to respond to the gospel until he has been regenerated.

The ministry of the Holy Spirit is to take the word of God and convict men of their sin before God, to reveal to them the perfect righteousness of Christ and the judgment of God upon sin. John chapter 3 teaches that God lights all men and the latter part reveals that all men either turn to the Light or turn away from the Light loving this world and its pleasures more than the God Who created them.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Then we have not been given life from death, as Jesus avers in John 5:21.
We have not crossed over from death to life, as Jesus avers in John 5:24.

What other thoughts do you have that mangles God's word, Brother?

 

[SovereignGrace]

Ummm, Max asked a good question. One I cannot answer.

BUT, you didn't answer it either. Why would Satan bother with people if they're already blinded? They're right where he wants them.

The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.[2 Cor. 4:4]

Notice, it says Satan has blinded, past tense, already a done deal, the minds of unbelievers. Now, the question remains, when were unbelievers blinded? Were they blinded after they came to 'the age of accountability', as the non-Cals(most do) aver? I don't think you can find scriptural proof to support it. So, then were they blinded in Adam, as when he fell, we fell in him? I think so. It was through Satan that Adam fell, and we fell in Adam, and were born blinded by Satan.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Hey, I'm not mad at Calvinsts, I consider them my brothers and sisters in the Lord...

I just think we have some difficult issues here.



But to be fair, there are difficult issues on both sides of this debate.

And, I too, consider you my Brother in Christ. Even if you only have one eye.

I love you my Brother. Please tell me if these one eye jokes get too old. I mean nothing by it.

 

[SovereignGrace]

God predestined a plan for salvation before the foundation of the world. That plan was to offer salvation through faith in his Son, Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ paid the ultimate price for our salvation and eternal life . . . His life, His resurrection - all God's plan and purpose predestined for all men; some will accept Jesus Christ as their personal savior - some will not. Those who believe (have faith in) the gospel of Jesus Christ become a part of the called out, the chosen, the elect, the purchased possession, sons of God because of God's grace - Yes - for none of us deserved it.

Now this plan is set forth before all men . . . but God only gives grace, his undeserved favor toward man, to the individual that was predestined, called, chosen; i.e. elect - then that individual can't resist grace and therefore since it can't be resisted you have to do what God says to do, i.e. believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and that God raised him from the dead. THEN God looks down upon others and says, "hmmmm, I don't want you or you or you so I'm not going to give you grace therefore you won't be able to decide whether you believe in my Son or not!!" Is that basically what you believe?

The plan was not that which was predestined. It was actual ppl.

 

[SovereignGrace]

In Romans 9:13, we read that God loved Jacob but hated Esau. Some people think this means that God actively chose Jacob to go to heaven and Esau to go to hell.
The word hated didn’t have the same meaning to the biblical writer as it does to us. To the biblical writer, you “hated” someone when you chose another person for a position of more favor or honor. For example, in Genesis 29:31, we are told that God saw that Leah was hated by Jacob, so He opened her womb. Yet we have every indication that Jacob was fond of Leah. He loved Rachel more, but he treated Leah with kindness. (Before Jacob died he asked to be buried with Leah.) Luke 14:26 gives another example of the biblical use of the term hated. Jesus said that we should “hate” our parents for His sake. He certainly wasn’t telling us to dislike them or to wish them evil. He only asked that we regard them as less important than Him, which is completely reasonable given who He is.
When the apostle Paul declared that God “loved” Jacob but hated Esau, he was affirming that the Lord had chosen Jacob, not Esau, to be the channel through whom He would carry out His covenant promises to Abraham (Genesis 12:3). God’s choosing had nothing to do with election to heaven or hell.
The election of Esau and Jacob as described in Romans 9:13 had to do with privilege and covenant blessing, not with individual salvation. The door of salvation was open for both of these men and to all of their descendants. God offers salvation to all.

https://questions.org/attq/what-did-paul-mean-when-he-wrote-that-god-loved-jacob-and-hated-esau/


Again,salvation is open to all,a call to all who thirst. You cannot shut the door on lost souls. Jacob and Esau is not about their salvation but about blessing and whom God chose to use. The Bible does not teach God has shut the door to half the world and they cannot receive salvation. You are misunderstanding the Scriptures because you are reading them through a Calvinistic lens.

If hate doesn't mean hate, then how can love mean love? You can't have it both ways.

Also, God doesn't shut the door of salvation. That's another thing were get falsely accused of believing. The door to salvation is open to ALL who want to pass through it.

Sadly, many don't want to pass through that door.

 

[Angela53510]

Lynn you have maligned my character and called me everything but a lady. You've charged me with being a liar,you've talked behind my back and made a joke of my posts. If this is is the religion you practice I want none of it. Desertrose asked several times if she was considered a sister/brother in the Lord by Calvinists/Reformed. If the answer is yes,you and preacher have one funny way of showing it.I cannot imagine how you would treat someone who is not Christian coming to your church if you would treat Christians here that oppose what you believe so viciously. I was honest with you,I asked questions,I told you where I was getting "stuck" and to this you call me names,charge me as a liar and worse. No,thank you,I want none of what you believe if this is the way you treat your sisters and brothers in Christ.


ps. I could care less if you answer the question,but since both you and preacher who are so outspoken have avoided answering 3 times my guess is you cannot answer it. Both Wesley and Calvin are dead,no point to be made there. Calvin has also been challenged,and is still being challenged today,no point made their either.

First, I want to answer your claim that Lynn has talked behind your back. That is a complete and total lie. Lynn and I have become fairly good friends. I can show you reams and reams we have written to each other about gardening. Even when I asked her a while back for some good books on Reformed theology, she gave me one book and some generic names like John Piper (I already have at least 10 of his books!)

As someone following these discussions with interest, Lynn and several others have said the same thing over and over in every thread, which you somehow don't seem to understand. It is very simple.

Lynn (and others!) are tired of you saying:

"This is what YOU believe and I don't agree with it!"

This is the equivalent of building a straw man of rumour and innendo, and then knocking it down. It is also the WRONG way to conduct a debate!

The right way is to say, "This is what I believe, what do you believe?" Then the other person states what they believe. There may be some clarifications, and certainly disagreements about the nature of what the other person believes, hopefully using the Bible, rather than 50 copy and pastes, like you have done, KG.

I'm new to this game, but I am getting resentful of you stuffing words in people's mouths about what they believe. We are diverse people, we have different angles in things. But we do believe God is sovereign.

I personally find the entire title of this thread to be appalling. What kind of God do you serve who is not Sovereign, KG? I cannot believe it is Jesus Christ that you are serving at all!

Or would that be putting words in your mouth? Not sure, since it seems like you do not serve the same God I do, after reading a lot of the pages of this thread!

 

[Desertsrose]

Hi SG,

Could it be both? This part: predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will?

He made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His kind intention which He purposed in Him with a view to an administration suitable to the fullness of the times, that is, the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things on the earth.

In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will, to the end that we who were the first to hope in Christ would be to the praise of His glory. Ephesians 1:9-12

 

[Depleted]

You say that you believe in free choice but not free will.

free - exempt from subjection to the will of others; not under restraint, control or compulsion; determining one's own course of action.
choice - act of choosing; the voluntary act of selecting or separating from two or more things that which is preferred; the determination of the mind in preferring one thing to another
will - the power of choosing; the faculty or endowment of a person by which it is capable of choosing; the faculty or power of the mind by which we decide to do or not to do; the power or faculty of preferring or selecting one of two or more objects

How can you exercise free choice when your choice is not exempt from subjection to the will of another, it is under restraint and control and it is not by determining your own course of action by choosing the thing that is preferred - that subjection being irresistible grace? How can you believe in free choice - the act of choosing freely but not in free will - the act of being capable of selecting one of two or more options.

May I ask what you believe the difference is between the two? Trying to follow the logic here.


[/SIZE]

I get out of bed, open up the closet, and choose the rust color shirt, the turquoises, or the purple shirt. Perfectly free to choice any of them. There won't be a skin-tight tiger shirt where have my breast will pop out. There won't be a see-thru shirt where my nipples are the starts to the show. I'm not wearing a shirt so ripped up it shows my stomach and chest. I can choose, but picking those shirts are outside my will.

As for God, my will is directly covered under sinner. So all my actions align with sinful. I was born with it, didn't decide it. So, I can choose to cheat, choose to be haughty, can do gossip very well, but I'm not choosing God and I'm not willing him to save me. Without him choosing me, it wouldn't dawn on me that I'd want him to save me. That's the difference.