Search results

Reformed, would you say that God's call to follow Christ is his call to eternal life, or is there a call to eternal life, then another call to follow Christ? I think this rabbit trail is the result of a misunderstanding of my perspective regarding John 6, but I do think we should all be able to...

This part of Frames quote seems incomplete: I don't believe MOST open theists would accept this categorization of their view. As stated above, its less about denying that God has knowledge of all things, and more about what His knowledge is based upon.

Open Theism is to Arminianism what Hyper-Calvinism is to Calvinism. Both are perversions based on taking a particular doctrine 'too far.' Though both could be argued to be the logical ends of the system, most scholars from both perspectives would be quick to deny such assertions. With that...

I could say the same to you...which is usually an indication of an argument not worth making. Actually, it just means that when God calls us to follow him, in WHATEVER capacity, that is also to call to eternal life. He doesn't call you to eternal life and then to follow him. His call to...

So, what are you saying? That God would call an unregenerate/unsaved man to be his divinely appointed apostle for real? Don't you agree that he was included with them only for the purpose of fulfilling the plan? Surely you don't think Jesus called him in the same "irresistible" manner he did...

You are right. I did. I apologize. I didn't think that was insulting (as 'looking down you nose' is), but apparently you took it as such and for that I'm sorry. I just didn't want to ignore your posts and for you not to know why. Ask around, most people don't like tackling very long posts...

Why..Why do you have to make this personal? You don't know me. You have no idea what my intent is. Maybe I just really don't like having to wade through tons of content in order to reply to you? Could that be it? Or does it have to be pride? And you are able to tell that by what I write...

Reformed, we disagree on some matters obviously, but you have thoroughly earned my respect. You make some important distinctions and are obviously very well versed in theology. My hats off to you brother...

I can appreciate that distinction... I do understand there are various degrees of this perspective. The same is true on our side of the isle. I agree with that assessment and respect your stance. Apparently we don't disagree on this point. If indeed that is all they are saying then I have...

I was poking fun with Luke and his deterministic views in light of this OP. I believe men actually have choices...available options from which to select. Luke believes all choices are determined by man's desire/nature which is determined by God to be such and could not be otherwise.

I have never said they do make decision out of nothing. They make them out of their wills, just like God makes his decisions. And I never said they didn't base those decisions on reasons. The reasonings of the will are numerous and unmeasurable, thus I appeal to mystery as to all the...

Biblicist, as I mentioned on another thread, brevity is your friend. Please don't consider my unwillingness to tackle one of your dissertations as a victory on your part, as any of us could overwhelm our opponents with a flood of words in defense of our perspective. I address Compatibilistic...

Several points here: 1. I never said the word 'author' because I know Calvinists avoid that term (not sure why), but for some reason that word is excluded, while just about any other implication about God's complete control over evil choices is still maintained. 2. It doesn't appear...

Hmmm, good question...I wonder why God predetermined some men to act like that and didn't give the ability to choose to act more manly, like he determined you and John Wayne to act!? :love2:

Your answer is in the question...notice what YOU wrote..."the choices one makes." The agent, YOU, are MAKING or CREATING a CHOICE. You said it yourself. The other THINGS are just THINGS...they influence and speak to the chooser but HE and only HE is RESPONSIBLE for that choice. You chose to...

Whose will is determined by his maker...that is what you are presuming onto the word "self." You completely disavow even the possibility that a creature could have been created to be free... Equivocation. You seem to think that our dependence on our Creator for existence equals our dependence...

As I predicted, you are making your laps...I say laps not lap because wow, that is like a flipping novel. I got about a 3rd of the way through the first one... Can I make a friendly suggestion? If you want others to stay engaged with you pick one or two key points and keep things brief. It's...

Winman, sometimes you know how to get to the point of the matter in a much clearer fashion than I ever could...thanks :wavey:

Ok, Let's start with the first one regarding the scope of Sovereignty. We all affirm that God is sovereign, we just disagree regarding the scope of that sovereignty...agreed? Calvinists tend to believe they hold to a greater or higher scope of Sovereignty than do non-Calvinists. I disagree...

I don't believe I am being ambiguous. Are you still having trouble relating the meaning of my analogies to our respective views, or are you simply denying that the analogies correctly illustrate my point? I'm not opposed to explaining further but I'd like to know you are actually engaging me...