Search results

We all believe that salvation is "all of God" If one does not....their Salvation is questionable. I, a non-Cal for one, understand and take this verse very seriously and have no issues with it....but it is not as though one has to have a Calvinist point of view to believe this. It says...

I am with you here: nothing gets my goat more than that (which I think to be a lame excuse) were one to use the kjv, the worst that could happen is that they would expand their vocabulary some and gain knowledge of some earlier forms of speech and older words. How is that a problem...

You were not quoting from the link inasmuch as the link does not say that Arminians hold to this as you claim: the link clearly states in reference to Arminian theology: Unlimited (or universal) atonement Christ's death was suffered on behalf of all men and benefits all men alike. God then...

The "climate issue" is only supplied assuming some sort of "canopy theory" of the pre-flood world, or something to that effect. It may or may not be accurate...I think the theory has legs. I agree that hunting had a major effect on them as well.

O.K. I'll bite: even though I never go onto or respond to the KJVO threads: The reason why is that just because we are KJVO does not mean that we desire to make it a subject of doctrine (it isn't). We just want to peacably be permitted by those who would burn the KJVO's at the stake to leave...

Climate did not necessarily kill off all of the dinos either....IOW...the change in climate is just that, the change in climate...God wanted to save the dino...because he wanted to save the dino...knowledge that future climate changes will inevitably result in their death does not preclude his...

Why assume that? It seems to assume motive. Maybe he saved them to....save them....They then eventually died off, but that doesn't imply purpose. Then again, I maintain that Dinos of some sort survived for a long time after the flood. Why did God save the dodo? Because he liked the dodo!:laugh:

This sermon is based upon these Scriptures apparently: 2 Opinions 3: 16-22 It is based almost wholly upon: mins. 12-19 His personal philosophy of epistemology and ontology He briefly mentions Elisha's servant and conveys something about man's natural state of Spiritual...

We are saying the same thing two different ways.....Icon refuses to accept that this is a perfectly logical outcome of Calvinist teaching....He does not believe that this is the case....What I am suggesting is that the above is a perfectly logical implication of Calvinist dogma

Many people believe very plausibly that Job is ante-dilluvian....Some make Job to be a contemporary of Shem, Abraham or the earliest patriarchs...Both points of view are viable I believe...IT IS, the oldest Book of the Bible though..fascinating too!! Just read Scarletts article about Job being...

I believe similarly to Scarlett on these issues...Earth's new atmosphere due to a "canopy" of ice or water being brought down....prevented many of the species to survive....I also think that man hunting down remaining Dinos...now somewhat smaller....has had a major effect on them... I actually...

Of course you do not believe that it is the case...we KNOW that...do you not understand what is occurring when someone is conveying to you that the logical outcome of a system of belief necessarily implies a certain conclusion? If the conclusion is unacceptable...(this one is...) then either...

Icon...while I can appreciate how you feel....You must understand something; You might just as easily hear dozens of sermons and teachings or even read dozens of catechisms that are NOT from a Calvinist perspective. Could you not? What then? I assure you, there are wise and godly and gifted...

Incidentally the Flesch-Kincaid readability scale does not consider the kjv "12-grade level." I think you had a knee-jerk reaction (understandably) as soon as KJV!! popped on your screen. I know how annoying a militant KJV onlyist can be. But we are not that sort....there was nothing...

Oh, no, why don't you explain and interract with those passages sir...do tell us...I have read this entire thread numerous times... I have already requested that Old Regular respond to the passage he brought up...so why don't you? Don't just say..."You don't get it" why not interract with the...

You double-down!!! This is more or less ostensibly what you think. Why don't you simply say so in so many words? "The non-Calvinist position is the result of the Noetic effects of sin wherein (possibly) regenerate persons have substituted the truth of God for a lie because of inherent...

O.K. one at a time: No, they don't...but they understand that Regeneration shares a perfect positive correlation with Salvation. O.K. This is where we would like for you to supply Scriptures which suggest that "regeneration" as opposed to: say-repentance or Faith are conditionals for...

That's obviously what it is...those stupid non-Cals simply have not reached the level of intellectual enlightenment necessary to comprehend Biblical basics such as Salvation and what-not. Obviously, the remnants of the Noetic effects of sin further Sanctification will fix this no...

I have to generally agree with Tom here: While I personally am passionate about apologetics...and study it ceaselessly...it is let us call it: a "secondary" discipline so-to-speak. What we have to do is to understand that there are those with legitimate questions about the intellectual...