Search results

Completely in agreement concerning God's working in the elect. But there is also faith that falls away after a while - hence obviously not of God. Hence that proving even the non-elect can believe for a while (subsequent to God changing hearts etc. but without it being worked out by God in...

Amen. And I'd agree. The problem arises when not everyone agrees with your universal without-exception post. For one would say God doesn't love all sinful and finite people and another would say Christ did not pay the debt for all of us. And that's how you end up discussing Scriptures to grasp...

Right. And I thought I just did that by quoting Matt 23:37 and you again kept asking "which verse states that" - so had me confused. Lamenting is some variant of expressing grief. Jesus weeps over Jerusalem (Luk 19:41). In Matt 23:37 Jesus equates His grief as comparable to a hen willing to...

Whoa, isn't that too quick to declare another interpretation in a debate forum as cursed? What do you understand by one having their own faith? One acknowledging out of full persuasion that they can do nothing to save themselves and that only Christ must work out everything in them unto...

Demanding prooftexts doesn't persuade anyone or move any discussion along, right? What verse states "Jesus is God" or some variant of the Holy Trinity - where does that leave us really?

I understand why it's untenable in your belief system - again, that's not a contradiction in mine since the Christian's choosing can be determined way before any man is born or done any good or evil given that I see God capable of causing one to believe in the truth at any time of His choosing...

Is that word-for-word what I'd written? God loves all through a multitude of sins until a measure of sin is filled up (Gen 15:16, Matt 23:32) at which point God turns in His wrath to harden and destroy them. He calls for repentance and desires them to be saved from destruction until they reject...

Unless you're asking for proof-texts, I'd say Matt 23:37 conveys it. The argument could be made that faith is required of man as per the law of faith just as righteousness was required of man as per the law of works - God Himself fulfills both in His elect as per His promise. But that's not to...

Why is the "creation-beginning" interpretation hogwash and how exactly did you arrive at your interpretation? Matt 19:4, 19:8, Mark 13:19, John 8:44 - how do you determine when this 'beginning' is from? I'd actually say John 6 describes the beginning to just be the beginning of that conversation...

Not rewrites but capturing entire truths. Your sentences could be extended further... 1. God loves humanity...until man fills up his measure of sins at which point God turns in His wrath against Him. God also shows mercy to all humanity...until He takes it away from some while promising for His...

Completely in agreement. I too see reprobation in Scriptures. What I don't see is predestined reprobation. On the contrary, such a hardening always follows such a person filling up their measure of sins (Matt 23:32, Gen 15:16) - but predestination is before any person's good or evil.

Very interesting. I'd like to spend more time on this myself. But you'd agree that "(my) faith (proceeding out) of Christ" and "Christ's faith" have very different connotations, right?

For context, I would be considered falling under the calvinist camp on most of these debates though I am more lutheran when it comes to election (single predestination). To your question, I'd pick the difference between the old covenant and the new covenant - the old commanded man to keep God's...

You're preaching to the choir here on election - I am in complete agreement with all the above. It's just that the calvinist system is quick to conclude the direct opposite with regards to predestined condemnation of the non-elect - and that needn't necessarily be true or logically consistent...

Why do you see God sanctifying us as the first step? We are finally saved unto eternal life through sanctification - where does it say in Scriptures that the whole process of redemption begins with sanctification though? In fact, Rom 6:22 places sanctification after one's being set free from sin...

Why is it totally untenable? And I'd appeal not to close the doors on arguments especially on a debate forum - that's how dogma sets in without scope for reconciliation, right? Anyhow, is it untenable because there's an incorrect assumption that regeneration = salvation ? What if I were to...

I do not agree with most points posed by those debating against you here - I am a firm believer of regeneration preceding faith - and yet I do find valid questions being raised that we do need to respond to convincingly in order to persuade. If I'm being fair, I would have to acknowledge there...

This is quite an interesting perspective. Of course, this is how we ought to perceive of God in the obvious metaphors of Scriptures (God being a lion etc.) but I wasn't aware we were to do this for other non-metaphoric passages too. Perhaps that's where the debate lies - as to what's metaphoric...

Could you clarify what you mean by us understanding only human will but not divine will - we surely do understand enough to know what we mean when we pray, not my will but thine be done. Though we may not exactly know what that will might be, we still know we're praying for only one of the two...

The entire complexity of the issue could be captured if the wealthy man dangled a coin each in front of two hopeless beggars and predetermined the first to take it assuredly. How would we explain the wealthy man's predetermination in light of say the second beggar walking away without taking the...