Search results

Interesting. The typical calvinist response to "arminians" who state that Matt 23 is illogical is: God's ways are not our ways. But if it's related to Arminius, it's not God's ways are mysterious; it's illogical. Do you seriously wish to discuss these things, or do you just want people to agree...

I think if you'll look into it further, you'll find that Arminius emphatically denounced and repudiated pelagianism.

In order to make that statement, which you have NOT shown to reflect Arminius' writings, you must necessarily ignore the words that immediately preceeded what you chose to focus on: But in his lapsed and sinful state, man is not capable, of and by himself....but it is necessary for him to be...

We've had one or two on this board over the years, though I can think of none currently visiting us. Exactly. And as we continue to share passages of Arminius' writings, we may possibly see differently. Or I may concede. But it will be fun and interesting to do so in a civil manner.

Arminius also wrote: But in his lapsed and sinful state, man is not capable, of and by himself, either to think, to will, or to do that which is really good; but it is necessary for him to be regenerated and renewed in his intellect, affections or will, and in all his powers, by God in Christ...

Rule #1: always treat the weapon like it's loaded.

Do you believe Calvin should be held responsible for hyper-calvinists?

Not quite accurate. Arminius wrote: 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 any thing that is truly good (such as saving Faith eminently is); but that is...

This "action" that you attribute to the arminian -- what action would that be?

My apologies; very little free time for the last couple of days. I'm reading over what's been posted. My initial, off-the-cuff response to Brian is this: Matthew 23 may be used by some as a defense for arminianism; but it seems more a defense that would be used by pelagians, or semi-pelagians...

Hank - referring to the "Arminian Trifecta" thread - if I'm the one you had in mind regarding aggravating or causing hard feelings, or that I'm the one that others are reacting to ... I'd appreciate any feedback to improve the situation. My apologies if I've offended or caused offense. -Don

Which is why I usually don't get involved in this debate area.

Oh, I dunno. I've been a member of this board longer than most. I've watched quite a few discussions; just don't recall seeing this verse debated before. As for the aecond point, yes, I'll be happy to google that; but don't forget your own words: "With the help of some of my Calvinistic friends...

Actually, they do. You may have paid for them; you may have the bill of sale showing ownership; but they follow whoever feeds them. My calves know my voice; and they know that when I say a certain phrase a certain way, there will be food. They've gotten out a few times and mingled into the...

Please enlighten me. First, I've never seen this passage used as a defense of arminianism, pelagianism, or semi-pelagianism. Second, I'm dense enough that I don't see how this could be used as such a defense; nor as an argument for or against calvinism. Please walk me through it.

The biggest problem with her statement was saying she would represent the American people, but not the president. Did she mean *all* Americans, including those that voted for Trump and ensured his winning the election? Not that it matters now....

Because I learn a lot watching these threads.

I look forward to watching this thread.

Salty - in the second part, there are some glaring errors. For example, premarital sex - how does a baker know a couple is having premarital sex? When compared to a same-sex couple who ask for a wedding cake, it's blatantly obvious that the same-sex couple is marrying each other, and therefore...

The basic concept of net neutrality is that all data on the internet should be treated equally. The current definition, and the emphasis lately, adds "by ISPs." ----- I understand your argument about devices; what I'm bringing up is the philosphy regarding actively lobbying for net neutrality...