Search results

Faith in Christ is only good because God declares it so. It's not any more inherently good than faith in anything. Faith is a filthy rag, just like anything we attempt, but God in his mercy chooses to credit it to our account as righteousness. Was Rahab 'good' simply because she feared the...

More than that, if a Calvinist, who believes that God hasn't chosen to save some for His own Glory, and he is praying for a non-elect reprobate then ultimately he is praying for something that would lesson God's Glory. Thus, for the Calvinists, a prayer for someone who God hasn't chosen is...

Yes and Yes, but we don't believe this work is irresistibly applied, as Calvinists do. We are hoping, as Paul did in Romans 11:14, that their wills are provoked and they may turn from their unbelief and be saved. Even Calvinists don't believe that God is saving people who are not willing...

##***bump***

On what exegetical basis to you NOT link two chapters from the same gospel which both refer to 'those God has given Him?' :confused:

I haven't read all the replies, so I apologize if this is repetitive... The seriousness of sin is measured not by the act itself, but by the one who is offended. Consider the difference in punishment if I throw my shoe at my buddy, versus throwing my shoe at the President, as an example...

:thumbsup: :thumbs: Just trying to continue with the irenic attitude of the thread. :wavey:

I agree. The Double Predestinarian view, though troubling and clearly false (IMO), is the more logically consistent of the two options. The term "equal ultimacy" is sometimes used of this view that God works equally to keep the elect in heaven and the reprobate out of heaven. R. C. Sproul...

I understand what you are saying, but I'm baffled because this is the first I've ever heard you or anyone on this forum argue this point...and as I pointed out in the post you haven't responded to yet, those articles you sited never seem to make the point you are making in this thread (i.e. the...

And I responded to what he said with a follow up question. Heir wrote: And I asked: So, wouldn't that necessitate conversion for anyone in hear shot of the gospel being proclaimed? Or, in this view, is God still actively blinding/hardening the non-elect from hearing the gospel so as to...

All good points Heir, but wouldn't you agree that the Gospel is referred to in scripture as being 'powerful,' 'effective', 'like a double edge sword, etc? Wouldn't you agree the Gospel was produced, preserved and proclaimed by the work of the Spirit Himself? Wouldn't you agree that the gospel...

I just can't understand what the issue is here. The current President and most other elected officials held to the same view at Dan Cathy when they were elected. Why are people acting as if this is news? Why don't they go talk to all the democrats in Congress who still believe marriage is...

So, wouldn't that necessitate conversion for anyone in hear shot of the gospel being proclaimed? Or, in this view, is God still actively blinding/hardening the non-elect from hearing the gospel so as to prevent their regeneration? If so, isn't that a form of double predestination, a view most...

While I'm waiting for a response I thought I should go ahead and make a few observation on these articles. First, thank you for posting them. They are very informative and well written, and they make a point that I've argued several times with "high Calvinists" on this forum. "Reformed...

So, let's be very clear. You believe God is preventing non-elect people, who would have willingly believed the Gospel if not hidden in parables? I thought Calvinists believed that God would never turn away people who want to come to Him, yet you seem to be saying that God is preventing people...

Right. I'm not sure why you'd think I'd disagree with that? No, actually, I don't see any discernible difference in my view from what you are saying, which leads me to think you may be overly disagreeable. But maybe I'm not understanding what it is you're attempting to say.

I was responding to his accusation of ME blaming God, when I was simply speaking of the implications of HIS system. In Calvinism God ordained/decreed/decided to make all of mankind totally depraved from birth as a result of Adam's sin, thus making them unable to respond to HIS own genuine...

Let's make something clear. I reject Calvinism BECAUSE I refuse to 'blame shift man's sin to God,' which I think is exactly what Calvinism does. They do so while quoting verses like Romans 9:20-21, where God is certainly 'blamed' for wrath /hardening and giving men over to their disobedience...

Right, but does that change the fact that HE is the one who determined what those consequences would be? Didn't God decide when Adam ate of the forbidden fruit that all mankind would be born enemies, unable to willingly respond to God's genuine appeal for reconciliation? Yes or no, and why?

I agree. That is the second fold of sheep that Jesus speaks of in John 10. John 17:20 points to this as well. :thumbsup: He is pointed out as the exception later in John 6, just as he is in John 17. And you seem to be disagreeing for no good reason. Sometimes I get the feeling you just like...