5 Points of Arminianism

It seems to me that you and cook's argument is that whatever God does is just, but mine is that whatever is just, God does.

Can man's injustice be God's justice?

didn't you say yourself that what seems just/unjust to man may not be the reality. Yet, persist in suggesting that it is me that is rejecting reality, or as another puts, 'rejects scripture'.

Obviously it has become emotional for you at this point so I apologize. I don't recall suggesting anything about anyone rejecting reality or being unscriptural. I merely offered another way to see things. You don't. Okay by me.

I know that. I'm just covering all the bases, going for the world series.

I think you made it.

And yet, God can be revealed to them whenever they look at Creation because they're able to see God because God created it that way.

2 Tim 2:4 - Saved, according to Strong's concordance, means "deliver"/

There is a deliverance from ignorance, when a born again child of God comes unto a knowledge of the gospel.

2 Pet 3:9 - 2 Pet 1:1 lets us know who Peter is talking to in 2 Pet 3:9, and it is those that have obtained like precious faith. Paul even includes himself in this warning, by using the word "usward". Peter is warning them when they commit a sin to repent, because they will perish=death=separate themselves from their fellowship with God, temporary, until they repent.

Eze 33:11 - The wicked in this scripture is God's disobedient people (the house of Israel), not the unbelieving wicked.

The remnants commission is to preach to the disobedient House of Israel, not to the natural man that cannot discern what they are preaching.

Do what you gotta do to hold to your Calvinism, Forest.

extremism
are you implying I'm be hostile towards Jews, and also implying I'm not a good Christian because I haven't given you the understanding you want, , ? I told a little joke to humour you, i also told you that the elect in my book means the spirit that lives in you,

You did not ask me give a account on this, you asked me to clarify what I wrote, what is so difficult to interpret about my Quote you cant not understand,

If you had asked to give meaning, I would have but your question seamed argumentative, to me, and it seems you are in an argumentive mood for some reason, so what's the point in giving you more meaning, in this state of mind, because giving account of your faith to someone in argumentive mood will get mocked, sharing your faith should be in confidence should it not

You could have said could I have clarity what you mean, but you never, you said could you clarify,

I did exactly that, I said it looks easy to understand to me.

Did you read Eph 2:1, that a person is spiritually dead, unable to respond to spiritual things, until God quickens him to the new spiritual life.

The root supports the wild vines as much as the natural vines. If the root is cut off, then all the vines wither away. The natural vines are just as secure as the wild vines if they remain rooted or are grafted back into the root. The wild vines, having no natural origin to the root, must be grafted in in order that the root, which sustains itself, nourishes itself, keeps the vitality of the vines.

Eph 2:1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;

It does not say "unable to respond to spiritual things, until God quickens him to the new spiritual life."

Lol. You definitely misjudged me. The essence of my request was with a pure heart, and arguing with you wasn’t even a thought. I do argue with fascists but I don’t get that vibe from you. I was simply asking for clarity, but don’t worry, that train left the station. Relax, I’m actually one of the good guys here.

How does a person decide?

Answered.

Yes. I want to see how many others believe they were “persuaded” by their intellect, to “decide” to Spiritually birth themselves.

It’s like an automobile manufacturer producing only a few good cars while the overwhelming majority of the other cars they manufacture are junk, and deeming themselves to be glorious because of this.

You know it is not very nice to twist or be disingenuous about my words if you are loosely quoting me in this statement.

I have never ever stated a person birth`s themselves.

I never stated that being persuaded was only based only on intellect.

I never stated it was an active decision, quite the opposite, there is a difference between passive and active.

I guess nuance is a challenge.

Not impressed.