Search results

I wasn't referring to hypercalvinism here. Though the calvinist position does get ambiguously confusing to me when I see someone, possibly taking the side of calvinism, writing the following and you agreeing with it - Am I to read the above as God actively forming but not hardening initially -...

Not really. It's not just our interpretation that God knows the end from the beginning and yet Rom 9:11 places God's election of grace before His factoring in human acts of good or evil - both of which occur before the foundation of the world but having a relative sequence to each other...

We're referring to the logical order of God's decrees in His mind and not as per our human time.

How does one explain the inconsistency in God's nature to decree one thing first and then desire the exact opposite? God very well can decree as He pleases - but once He has decreed it, He cannot desire against what He Himself has sovereignly decreed. God can very well counsel/decree to harden...

Not at all. This is what single predestination holds - giving the freedom to the non-elect to determine their destiny by providing the means to it. Double predestination holds that the father determined that the second son would not attend school and not do his homework at the same time that he...

The way I believe Romans 9 should be read to make for the most consistent interpretation is to not assume the hardening of the non-elect was a predestined act of God. Choosing the elect and consequently the non-elect is a sovereign act of God that precedes all other acts - and His (single)...

Just so we can all be on the same page, let's agree on semantics - needn't be absolutely perfect but just close enough to have working definitions as used in this context. God's desires/wants are not the same as God's counsel/determined will [referred here earlier]. God can desire obedience to...

I'm going to be on and off the next few days....I'll simply quickly note that God is neither obligated nor does He have to do anything to actively save anyone to begin with. I'm only saying it's a contradiction for God to predestine condemnation and then desire for those predestined to repent...

if God does not offer even the beginnings of the path to salvation to the non-elect given His predestined condemnation, how does the calvinist read God's desire for them to repent and live?

I don't believe God ever needs a plan B either - but we do have to go where logic and Scriptures take us. Before "Let there be light" doesn't conclude much more than being before human time - but there are several things happening in God's mind sequentially, all before human time, before the...

Then why desire them to repent and live? And what of the Hebrews and 2Pet falling away passages? These are the 2 main reasons from Scripture why I am convinced calvinism has got this particular doctrine alone terribly wrong. Claiming to be logically consistent, it falls short - it factors in...

And how did God factor in the fact that everyone is innately evil without factoring in the future EVIL of Adam(a person) that led to the fall? Again, I really don't care much for man and his self-determinism. I must deny double predestination because the necessary implications are that God does...

I'd say we mean the same thing and wish not to get lost in the semantics. We could go on arguing whether God needs any rights to be Himself when He's ultimately sovereign - but I get what you mean and let's agree on that. I do not believe Jesus lacked any of His attributes as God while in the...

I'm not jumping in whole into this discussion just yet - but as a clarification on semantics, I'd say Jesus did not lack any of His own attributes as God - He merely chose not to manifest them at different times of His choosing while in the flesh.

That comes across as rude - i thought we were doing so well. If you don't have time to engage with every argument, nobody's forcing you to stay here and discuss. But we are equals here, none required to be approved and validated by a superior other. I have maintained I will answer your every...

That's the argument of the JWs to prove Jesus is not God :) We hold that God can willingly set aside His own attributes, even be set a little lower than the angels for a time, without denying His own sovereignty or contradicting His nature as He so pleases. God is no less God if He can and yet...

I don't follow this reasoning - then in what sense was Rom 9:11 meant if not for God not foreseeing man's actions though He very well could have. If you're arguing semantics, I'm more than willing to alter the language - but as to the implications itself, God did not treat any of man's good or...

Why so? In fact, we just concluded that it needn't necessarily be so from a purely logical perspective as per single predestination. My not choosing something does not mean I've chosen the opposite - it just means i haven't chosen anything. John Bunyan best described it as - not choosing to use...

No complaints there at all :) I too believe that man with his darkened mind is incapable of seeing the path apart from God enlightening him with the knowledge of the truth - don't you see God doing so in Heb 6:4, 10:26? And secondly, why must this be an act of predestination - what stops God...

There a couple of issues that I've disagreed with in past posts that are still being argued by you without having addressed it. I've been answering all the questions you've raised and it would help conclude easier if it works both ways. 1. If God predestines a man unto salvation, that man is...