Search results

Non-Calvinistic Baptist scholars such as Hobbs, Rodgers, Mullens and those who helped to write the Baptist Faith and Message did not support the foresight faith view of election, nor do I or most non-Calvinistic scholars I know. I used to think the foresight faith view was the only alternative...

Yes, well, I'd say "without something outside himself causing him to choose what he chooses"... We believe the agent causes the choice. An actor determines his act. So we are not advocating uncaused choices, but instead "self caused choices." Compatibilitist attempt to make the same claim by...

First, let's all agree that "true love," is whatever God says it is, whether "effectually caused," or a "free response." The only point of debate is what does scripture reveal about "true love." Obviously I believe scripture teaches my view of love. Plus, in regard to the idea that one must...

No, that's the Calvinistic view. I wouldn't call it meaningless, it would mean whatever God effectually made it to mean...I guess. I believe it wouldn't be a genuine love. It would be more like his 'making the stones to cry out.' The rocks may be actually singing His praises, but wouldn't...

I believe Van was speaking of men's consequences upon the salvation of others, not merely the divine orchestrating of events to effectuate the preordained plan. The only one really having any consequence on anything, in your system, is God. We've been down this path before, but there is a view...

No, actually we argue, as Calvinists do, that our view is best supported by scripture. This argument is simply another justification for why our interpretation of scripture is most likely the correct one. A created being made to love or hate, through effectual means, is certainly viewed by...

1. Luke, your initial post in this thread is probably the best explanation I've read from someone of the Reformed tradition. Kudos! 2. I do believe Van's point regarding consequences is valid. Regardless of how you want to couch it, the future is set and there is no influencing the outcome...

I just read an article on a church leaders web site which talked about the value of reaching out to men. They used this stat: "If a child comes to Christ first, there is a 6% chance the entire family will. If a wife/mother comes to Christ first, there is an 18% chance the entire family...

This is a confusing statement Van. You need to unpack it and reword it. It doesn't address the issue at hand, or if it does it does so in such a convoluted manner that no one can understand what you mean.

1. I said you seemed defensive, which you do. 2. You didn't ask a question in your previous post, as I already told you. 3. I did attempt to answer your question in my last post, but as evidenced by the many responses on this forum, you questions aren't exactly easy to understand. Your...

Van, your view is not clear. Can you point to a scholar who expounds on this view so we can read it and better understand what you are attempting to say. I agree with many of your comments. I do believe it is God who credits our faith as righteousness and places us in Christ. I don't believe...

True. A blog or Wikipedia might be a better place to gain understanding of this issue if you are very sensitive to disagreement or conflict. Though that shouldn't be an excuse for us to treat each other with blatant disrespect or distain. We could try to do better on that...

I think some of it is pride and sin, but some of it is just the nature of the board and written responses. Tone can be read into a post that is not intended and things can get out of hand real quick. Also, some guys can take and give little jabs and jokes better than others. Like Jhb's post...

Bro, you are sounding a bit defensive. If you look at your last post, the one I replied to, you didn't even ask a question. I don't even understand what that means. Your question is very convoluted to me. I think you've over complicated this, but I'll try the best I know how: We enter Christ...

I'm with 12Strings on this, I'm not seeing the distinction. I never said we 'incorporated ourselves into Christ.' I believe that God does that as a result of faith in Christ. The corporate view is really just a perspective shift. Its understanding the intent of the author as either speaking...

So, how exactly do we differ on this point?

You did not describe what I said you drew conclusions based on your misconceptions and you have yet to provide your interpretation for the banquet parable. I explained clearly my perspective, why don't you do the same, please.

On that point, we agree.

Correct, which ironically is the same mistake Calvinists make about most of the passages they use as proof texts for their views. :thumbsup:

Van, you just falsely quoted me. I am not known for my brevity so I'm quite sure I've written enough for you to actually quote the words that I write rather than making up some. In the parable the Groom (God) selects who will receive the invitation, which ends up being EVERYONE (many are...