Search results

12strings, just to be more clear. I was in NO WAY suggesting that you were not dealing with objectivity and grace. You are one of the most objective and gracious posters here, so I just didn't want you to think that was about you personally... It was more an observation about the 'tendency'...

Forest, I think we over complicate things: The gospel was preached and recorded for all mankind so that they may believe it and by believing be brought to life. The truth shall set you free. Read John 20:31: "But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of...

You are probably right. We all read things through lenses and when you know someone is coming from a particular view point (anti-Calvinistic in this case) then a Calvinist (generally speaking, not in reference to you at all) would tend to read him without much objectivity or grace. I imagine I...

When you allowed the personal attacks get to you and started resorting to those methods rather than sticking with the issue at hand. :) We all do it sometimes, well at least I have done it and I always regret it. Its hard not to defend yourself when attacked, but that is what Christ calls...

No, that doesn't make sense to me either. Back when I was a Calvinist that is exactly what I thought too. I thought the fore-seen faith view of election was ridiculous...I still do. I honestly thought that was the only viable option to Calvinism, which is why I was a Calvinists. I had...

Yes, there is certainly mystery as to why God might choose to create this versus that, but I don't believe we can conclude with any level of certainty that there is no 'room in his character' for a variety of options. For example could God have made the rose without thorns? Could he have made...

Listen, I hear a several Calvinists attempt to maintain that men do make a choice, but this seems to just be some kind of subtle attempt to maintain some form of human culpability. EITHER God makes the choice as to what individuals will certainly be saved, OR... God chose to permit...

I honestly see your point and I agree with your main premise, and I really can't speak for Olson because I'm not aware of his full intent. BUT, I really didn't take it in the same way you did when I read the whole article. Going back to my previous example. Would you say that Jesus believed...

I agree, otherwise we'd be universalists, but my point is that God is the one who determined for men to have free will, not man, and it wasn't some higher power that made God desire to save some and not all, it was God's choice. Surely you wouldn't suggest God could not have done otherwise...

I'd quote the verses again and again if I thought it would help you. And we know that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself and makes the appeal for ALL God haters to be reconciled to him. And you confess that those who choose to receive Christ are also better than those who do...

I like this illustration. It is a good analogy to explain contra-causal freedom. The agent chooses to act from among his desires...and in doing so is the one who decides what his 'greatest desire' actually is. This makes much more sense than the desire dictating the agents act, as if the...

This is the debate fallacy called "you too" where one avoids dealing with the argument presented against their own system by pointing out similar, yet different, problems with their opponents system. There is a significant difference in one 'not preventing' and 'causing' moral evil, you can't...

I disagree. While there are certainly some poorly worded statements, I think he does clearly address a 'solution' or common approach to reconciling the NT with the OT: Without doubt the earliest baptists (including Baptists) were “New Testament Christians.” They did not think everything in the...

Certainly you must grow tired of purposefully misrepresenting others? Here are Olson's actual words from the article where he defend Openists from being misrepresented as 'process theologians' because he is educated enough to know the difference: "Throughout this controversy several...

So, are you suggesting that the gospel is not "the Life-giving Word of God" which "always precedes life?" Read John 20:31: "But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name." As to the rest of the quote...

I'm sorry but that is factually incorrect. Are you telling me that a non-regenerate man has the same ability to willingly believe as a regenerate man does in your system? I think not. The non-elect reprobate doesn't have ANYTHING he needs. He is blind, deaf and dumb...no DEAD to the things...

Allow me: “…This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.” - 1 Tim 2: 3, 4 "This is His commandment, that we believe in the name of His Son Jesus Christ...”1 John 3:23 "God is now declaring to men...

You've never showed mercy to someone who turned up their nose to you in rebellion? I have. Just because someone has the ability to reject the mercy I offer doesn't mean I never offered it. Even you believe the gospel appeal is for all man, right? Well, isn't that merciful of God to offer...

Going off this verse alone we can see that non-Calvinists believe mankind is worse than Calvinists do because we affirm that all men have been given much more than the Calvinists do. We believe God has enabled all men and thus they have been 'given much'. We believe they do clearly see and...

We aren't talking about the fact that all have sinned and fall short of God's glory and thus need a savior, we agree on that point. We are talking about what God and by virtue of His revelation, man believes regarding the LEVEL of guilt associated with any particular act of rebellion. Consider...