Search results

Correct....

Why is it that many on this forum resist so adamantly the Biblical teaching of man's responsibility? People hate to be held fully responsible for their actions. People will not have a just God to hold them accountable for their choices and actions through their entire lives. Part of the Adamic...

Here is where we disagree. Please read Acts 28 below: 26 " 'Go to this people and say, "You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving." 27 For this people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed...

Indeed. I'm glad we agree. So, when God does brings someone the light (i.e. the gospel truth), don't excuse those who reject it by suggesting they were born unable to clearly understand or respond to that light.

This is exactly why I can't affirm God as described by Calvinists. I understand that they don't think God is evil, but if I were to accept their beliefs about God I would have to believe that God is evil and I would not CHOOSE serve that "God." People believe things everyday but still choose...

I agree. Faith comes through revelation, just as trust is built for your wife through revelation (getting to know her). I believe God is clearly making himself known (Rm 1) and the gospel itself only builds upon what is already revealed in creation, thus creating a very powerful and...

I agree, that is what I was meaning...I left out the word 'show,' I should have said 'what things do you do to show you trust your wife?' Is trust something that happens to you? You grow to trust your wife which lead you to allow her to travel over the weekend. What 'happened' to you to make...

Can we use the word "trust," Luke? The word "faith" has too many variants and often carries some baggage with it. For example, one might speak of the Christian Faith...but that has to do with doctrinal beliefs, not putting our trust in another person (which is what this discussion is about)...

No bible for it? "...choose you this day whom ye will serve..." Joshua 24:15 "The Lord said to Moses, “How long will these people treat me with contempt? How long will they refuse to believe in me, in spite of all the signs I have performed among them?" Numbers 14:10-12 "...They exchanged the...

Very well stated. No one even touched the main points being made here...

The same word, "MANY" is used to describe both being represented...just as in the other verse the same word 'ALL' is used to describe both. And not only here but also in Romans 11:32. It is really difficult to deny, which is why I'm sure some even from your own Calvinistic camp don't even try...

It is funny how you can read this and see something totally different than what I see. I guess God just predetermined us to see this differently? :) The same MANY that died is the same MANY to which grace abounds. That seems pretty clear to me, as all people are certainly 'many' in numbers...

Ok, so you say, "I think your definition is flawed and here is why..." You don't say that I deny the doctrine of federal headship and then ridicule me for pointing out your error. I never provided a definition of federal headship but I suppose I'd agree with any notable Calvinists or...

Now, brother, I will admit there is some subjectivity to this debate. I will also admit that our view appeals to mystery regarding certain aspects of how the human will functions (just as Calvinists must appeal to mystery on other points). But the straw man fallacy that I pointed out above...

Ok we have a disagreement I say the same 'all' represented by Adam is the same 'all' represented by Christ and you say Adam represented all and Jesus represented a preselected few. Let's go to scripture and see what it says: "...the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also...

Incorrect. I affirm federal headship. I just do so consistently in that the same 'all' being represented by Adam is the same 'all' represented by the second Adam (Christ.) And NO that doesn't necessitate universalism...not if you affirm the ancient and very common understanding of...

That explains why men sin and need a savior, it doesn't explain why God decided that the consequences of the fallen condition would be the inability to respond to God's appeal to be reconciled from that fallen condition. You have yet to address THAT point. You simply keep restating the...

So, they are accountable simply because they KNOW what they are doing is wrong even if they can't help but do it? So, once again, what do they have to account for? It sounds like to me you believe that man is punishable for God determinations, not that man is actually responsible for his own...

Accountable for what exactly? It says they are 'without excuse,' in Romans 1, but what is it that you believe they don't have an excuse for specifically? I ask because I can't think of a better excuse in the world than the Calvinistic dogma of Total Inability. Again, you are not addressing...

That's fine, but its not just about being in a state of unbelief, it is about being in a state that can't believe even when God reveals himself that is the issue. Adam is not the one who decided to seal all men over in a condition that is totally unable to respond then judge them for not...