Search results

Exactly, so why would you assume Christ fails when we reject his genuine appeal to be reconciled?

Calvinists often equate God's choice to bless Jacob over Esau with to God's choice to save Jacob and not Esau, but Hebrews 12:16 says, "See that no one is sexually immoral, or is godless like Esau, who for a single meal sold his inheritance rights as the oldest son. Afterward, as you know, when...

Why Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Rahab, Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, David, Samuel? Hebrews 11 tells us: "Without faith it is impossible to please God..."

It's interesting how 'Calvinists' are quick to suggest that Jesus would be failing if His desire is not effectually brought to pass, yet they themselves affirm that even born again believers continue to sin. Does God fail when believers sin? We know he doesn't want his children to sin, so I...

So, in this parallel analogy you have equated living with being regenerated (born again) and believing with breathing, right? And you have the drowning man living, just not breathing...in the same way you have the spiritually dead man who has now been made alive (regenerated), but not yet...

Do you believe someone can genuinely want to come to Christ and find salvation but not ever be saved? Defend you position.

So someone has to be given life to respond to the life giving message? Scripture teaches us to believe so that we may have life, not the other way around. Life comes to those who die. We die when we surrender, let go, stop trying, give up (none of which are boast worthy responses). Is the...

For His Glory.

1 Corinthians 1:27: But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. I guess that means the one's God chose to save will never be able to understand their salvation. Good thing He put Calvinists here too, so that...

And yet for some reason Calvinists insist on teaching that God's chosen means of speaking to man (by making an appeal to all his enemies to be reconciled to Him) through the GOSPEL is incapable of eliciting a response without a prior work of regeneration. So, the person has to be virtually...

:thumbs: True. Thanks for the discussion. :)

A linguist or a mind reader? Either way you appear evasive to me. :) Now who is making the command? ;) It's all related because it all has to do with the same principle regarding the fact that obedience to God is more important than following a set of rules...but you already know that...

Your reading tone into my words. I say 'just answer the question,' and apparently you hear, ":mad: JUST ANSWER THE QUESTION JERK!!! :mad:" To prove to you that was not my intent let's suppose you lived during the time of Abraham and God came to you and asked you to kill your son. Would you do...

So, it is ok to kill someone if you know they will be raise back to life? Does that mean it would be okay to lie if you know God is going to accomplish good from it (i.e. saving the Israelite spies)?

It was a polite request that over time has gained some candor in hopes of an actual response. I never said "thought." There was no equivocation in the supposition. If God himself appeared to me and you convincingly, as He did Abraham, and requested us to sacrifice our children, you would put...

Oh come now, we are having a discussion about ethical dilemmas of which I'm supposing on you. Please don't dodge the question using such clear diversionary tactics. If it helps suppose it is some Random guy...oh, I know, we can call him "Abe" and his son, "Issa." Now, answer the question...

John, Let's cut to the chase. If God appeared to you in person and told you to sacrifice your son to him by tying him to a log taking a knife and stabbing him until he stopped breathing what would you say to Him? And don't say God wouldn't do that because that is what He did to Abraham...

I know that which is why I wondered why you were taking issue with my point. We SHOULDN'T be in disagreement on the point I made but yet you chose to take issue with my words... Enough, I'm getting off this merry-go-round...we get no where and are left feeling dizzy. :wavey:

1. It's not my definition. 2. You are avoiding my question Actually, I'm the one arguing for the nature of God, you are the one arguing for the rule of law or 'ethics.' (i.e. it is never the right thing to deceive someone else). So, you are the one putting ethics, or morality above the...

Sadism is by definition taking pleasure in the pain of others. If indeed a doctrine teaches that God pleasures in the torment of others then they would support the idea that God is a sadist. Those are just facts. My doctrine teaches that God does not take pleasure in the perishing of wicked...