Search results

By 'straight' you mean like you want me to. Just because my answers don't fit into your pre-erected straw-man's suit doesn't mean I'm avoiding your question. Just deal with the actual answers instead of putting words in my mouth over and over to try to make our view sound preposterous. People...

Again, we may be speaking past each other. Do you agree with my definition of 'understanding?' Because someone can have an understanding of something and think it is foolish. For example, having been a religion major, I understand Buddhism but I still find it foolish. See the difference?

Agreed. I just reject the concept that someone must be saved (spiritually indwelled) before they can understand the truths revealed in scripture. Understanding is different from acceptance. Some think that if someone REALLY understands a truth that they MUST accept it, and that is simply...

Aaron, by the way, you didn't deal with any of the content of this post. You just keep re-asking the same questions over and over as if I'm going to eventually give you the answer you want to hear. Please deal with my explanations above avoid setting up straw-men.

Sounds like you are you asking if a man must be regenerated before he can receive the gospel and I think you know I have rejected that view of Calvinism...so I'm not sure why you keep asking. Let's cut to the chase Aaron, we've been down this road before. We both believe God intervenes to...

Just a quick add on: Could a lost person understand the mysteries revealed in scripture without the revelation of scripture? NO. But we must acknowledge that scripture itself is a work of the Spirit bringing discernment for all to be able to read it (hear it) and understand its truth. No one...

I understand your point, I just don't think that was Paul's point. Follow me here. The spirit was inspiring Paul to write I Corinthians, right? So, wouldn't that be the means God has chosen to 'spiritually discern' those mysteries? According to the following verses, even the brethren of...

I don't think the bible is teaching that lost people can't understand the scriptures, I think it teaches that without God's work in discerning these the mysterious truths by inspiring the writing of scripture no one could understand it. In other words, the mysteries would not be known if not...

This one seems to be going down hill fast so I'm going to close it here. Feel free to start a new thread but try to leave the personal stuff out of it and discuss the topic only....PLEASE. May I also recommend using your ignore feature for posters who come across to you as particularly...

They can, but they chose not to. They 'traded the truth in for a lie.' And according to Paul "they will perish because they refused to love the truth as so be saved." 2 Thess 2:10

I understand your question. It is not a new one. In fact it has been asked here numerous times. And I'm trying to explain to you is that your drive to explain a truly free choice (i.e. "why did you chose to believe and others don't?") in this manner is really just a game of question begging...

This is a popular approach for Calvinists, but they fail to see that they are actually committing the fallacy of question begging. Allow me to explain. In essence you are asking me to define what determines my freedom, which presumes determinism. As I've said time and time again, "What...

Because God's plan to 'make the rocks cry out' is not his primary desire. Of course God has the ability to MAKE worshippers, whether from rocks or flesh. But scripture seems to indicate that God is 'seeking' those who believe and worship him, not that He is deterministically causing them to...

I meant to reply to this point... Arminians DO NOT believe "one can earn their own salvation." That is a misrepresentation.

Well, if you read through that thread I linked to in my reply you will notice that many here would vehemently deny that is a "hyperist" view. When I said "doesn't REALLY love or desire their salvation," I'm referring to salvific love and sovereignly will. As I acknowledged before, I know...

Christos, I have taken the liberty to repost my response here so you won't miss it...

I see that you ignored my response to your similar accusation above and continue to persist without support for your argument. My friend, why does the non-Calvinistic interpretation of scripture bother you so? Is it perhaps you don't really understand it? Maybe you missed my response to...

You do know we are in agreement on this point, right? I mean, you do understand that our point of contention is about the effectuality or irresistibility of the means God uses to intervene, right? Again, you do understand that we agree here as well, right? When you say "nothing we can do on...

glf, with all due respect, you need to be more specific. Above your reply there are three separate posts from me (2 addressed to you and one to Christos), and I am not sure to what point you are addressing in this comment. You accuse me of "pouncing" (another word for replying to an argument...

And where does it say that man will become unable to respond to God's powerful appeal to be reconciled? Where does it say that an natural born enemy can't be reconciled even after God makes this powerful, life-giving, gospel appeal for reconciliation?