Search results

NO, it isn't the same "result". What you are suggesting is called an "argument from consequences"...and it is fallacious. Yes, the "result" is the same, sure...but you are using the result or the conclusion in order to justify what are otherwise un-supportable premises...Namely, the one you...

Excellent article...thanks :thumbsup:

Well...Rahab was eventually made an Israelite, so she became a party to the whole of God's Revelation. She responded to the news of the coming of the Israelites with fear..."The beginning of wisdom", but she isn't an example of anyone who was "saved" outside of full and complete knowledge of...

Yes..."Hos Seriously???" I read what you said...Incredulity is not an argument....please supply something other than an argument from incredulity....Seen it, it's elementary..... Calvinists need to give us WAY more than this.... So, Yes.. start responding to the multiplicity of...

Sigh....:tear: By definition......that IS, a "response". Calvinists have always been too smart by half...throwing out the baby with the bath-water, because you are so overly obsessed with the bath-water, as though God were impotent and with no power to save.....:rolleyes: Sheesh!!... God is...

O.K. fair enough:type:

No, you don't...and that is because you jump to unnecessary conclusions about what they are actually trying to say. You don't listen. Skan is many things...but not the heretic you think he is...But you don't know that because you don't pay attention to him. You THINK you know what he is...

Skandelon.... When you are finally finished debating with Icon......Oops, I mean "Van" (they are indistinguishable).....you might get yourself back to your intended OP: I find that to be an interesting topic: When you could return to it.

You have answered your own questions here. Bron, I think your question you ask here is self-evident: No, but you already know this, I think. It isn't. No, you absolutely aren't. But I think you already know this. This isn't a secret and esoteric doctrine, only known to those "privy" to...

Absolutely...."Here we go, agan".... God both Hates "Evil" (given Calvinism), and "Evil" is also his own Divine will....This is absurdity. Ever and anon.....I think this is your only defense of it....and it isn't even a defense...and it rings hollow. It makes no sense. And "Ever and...

.....................

nvm........

...................

Welcome to the world of responding to Yeshua...My advice....don't even bother. He/She merely asserts some propositions as fundamentally true, even the one being debated, and then concludes that the debate is over, since he/she has already assumed the conclusion. I do not know whether he/she...

I don't think that this "Theoretical" scenario is possible...but engaging in such questioning can be fruitful. My immediate answer is that, no, God will not credit their faith in what "general" revelation they have as righteousness. I think the NAME of Jesus Christ is absolutely necessary...