Search results

The point is how does one move from being natural to being spiritual. You all think we do nothing and are mere pots in the potters hand and if he wants to cleanse us and use us it is totally on Him to do that, but that is NOT what scripture teaches. You use Romans 9 as a proof text to support...

But the difference is that we don't draw a conclusion on this point, we merely appeal to mystery. Calvinists draw a conclusion that because free independent decisions are not explainable by human logic that the other option must be true, which is that God has causally determined all choice...a...

Quote chapter and verse. You want Christ and you were a natural man so your statement as it stands is false. I think you meant to say, "The bible teaches that the natural man IF LEFT TO HIMSELF will never want Christ," which is a statement we can both affirm. You just falsely believe the...

So men are born able to believe lies but not truth that is revealed by God himself with the intent to make an appeal for reconciliation? Interesting.

Which is NO FREEDOM at all when someone else is determining your wants. If I drug a child from birth with a chemical that makes him hate his parents and all authority figures to such a degree that he will NEVER obey anyone, there is no one in this world who would hold that child accountable...

Yes, exactly. We appeal to mystery prior to drawing unbiblical conclusions. Calvinists draw unbiblical conclusions and then appeal to mystery when pressed. Arminians: Appeal to mystery regarding how any free moral agent makes free moral choices, we just know the choosers make choices, period...

What use is there in speaking of what one wants when even what they want is determined by God? You think this approach avoids the inherent problem of your system? It doesn't. It only serves to subtly bury the blatantly obvious issue of divine culpability. Regardless of how you word play it...

Well, when I was a Calvinist I was pretty darn sure I was right back then too. Truth be told if my world view is right then I believe there is a chance for me to convince you to change your mind, and if your view is right then you believe God may have decreed for you to help change my mind, so...

Translation: I regularly come to a debate forum but if I happen to come across someone who is as sure of his position as I am mine I won't bother to engage. :rolleyes: So, can we assume by this post you won't be back here to 'preach to your respective choir' anymore or is this just a diversion?

Been down that road... change my wording to "ability to be willing" and it stands the same. Nitpicking the analogy? Ok, I'll play. ;) Instead the dog is drugged by the master with a chemical that causes him to love his pole and his chain...better? Does it change anything regarding the...

If it doesn't nullify it, then it redefines it. Can you think of any scenario where a similar view of 'responsibility' is used while still being referred to as 'responsibility?' I doubt it.

Then your view of responsibility is flawed, IMO. If someone is 'responsible' then they are 'response able' (able to respond). Calvinism removes that ability thus cannot consistently maintain any real since of 'responsibility' without completely redefining the word itself. Even the...

I will allow Paul to answer: "They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved." (2 Thess 2:10) It's certainly not because God hasn't done all that was needed. It is not God's failing or lacking or shortcoming that causes some to reject. The Gospel is plenty clear and...

You're question seemed to presume that the Gospel could be proclaimed and the Holy Spirit not be at work, when the Gospel ITSELF is a WORK of the Holy Spirit. It would be like me not crediting your posts on this forum to you unless you personally called someone on the phone and explained the...

Let me get this straight. Are you saying the GOSPEL is not a work of the Holy Spirit?

I think we would all agree with this statement. The question is what is the nature of God's action. Are all God's acts of self-revelation effectual in intent? In other words, when God sends mankind an invitation for a response, is it sufficient to enable that response, OR must God effectually...

I think I understand what you mean, but if it's 'solid' then it is correct. If it's in error then it can't be 'solid.' A solid hermeneutic always leads to correct interpretation, IMO. I just did. And I believe the basis of their understanding is correct, I just took issue with the reason...

I don't disagree with this. Men must respond to God's revelation of himself. The revelation of the gospel is what is necessary for saving faith in Christ, which is the goal and the subject of soteriology...which is what Paul is explaining in Romans 3. The difference between righteousness by...

My view reads, "no one understands" until God sent the Word to explain it to us in human terms, and 'no one seeks God,' which is why he is actively seeking us. Proof that we don't seek God is not proof that we can't respond to a God actively seeking us through the powerful Holy Spirit wrought...

Who cares about their ability to come unless you've first established their NEED to come? There is much debate on the difference between guilt and culpability etc...but Baptists have consistently supported the doctrine which teaches that men are born in need of a Savior. An infant who dies...