Hi Whetstone;
Stating something like 'this poster did a poor job at answering my questions' isn't demeaning or unloving to you. I think you read into my comment just a bit.
No I didn't I read it just as you meant it as if my answers weren't good enough for you. Isn't that what you meant? For instance; I answered your question with a simple no with an explanation.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#1- If God elected to pass over fallen angels in offering Christ's salvation, would He be 'unloving' to pass over electing a human?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. The fallen angles already had eternal life they didn't need saving to begin with, even though they already had it they lost it because of there choice to follow Satan.
You are just being the typical Calvinist who feels they are absolutely right and every one who disagrees with them is wrong and poorly educated. You asked above; Would God be unloving and I answered no. How is that poor?
This logic is baffling. Humans had eternal life before they sinned too. The fall of the angelic race is identical to the fall of the human race. To deny the parallel is to deny scripture.
"This logic is baffling." Yes it is to most men it is shear foolishness. That's the way it is with the foolishness of God, and what most men think of it.
As far as denying your parallel. We have no idea of what rules the angles had to live by. They are completely different creatures some having a face on all sides of there heads some have six pairs of wings. Strange creatures to say the least, in comparison to man. The rules of heaven, just aren't discussed much. The Bible is all we know and it's written mostly about God, and man's relationship to Him. You come here and claim that the covenant God and man has together is the same for angles. How can you make such an assumption, and on what scripture?
This is an evasive answer.
Evasive to what, you or scripture?
Not only did you fail to comprehend my question, you also accused me of making a statement when I was merely asking a question. So Christ only died to potentially save? I suggest you read 2 Tim. 2:11.
I failed to understand what you failed to relate. Not to nit pick because I make mistakes all the time. Hey we're not perfect.
2 Tim. 2:11
This was a statement;
Since we may all agree that there will be a definite number of believers at the last judgement with Christ,
You assume we may agree;
I must ask if this number was as definite on the cross as it will be on that Day?
This is the question.
Your coma should have been a period after the word "Christ". There are two thoughts here one questions and the other is a statement.
It should have read;
Since we may all agree, that there will be a definite number of believers at the last judgment with Christ.
A thought with in a thought is always in parentheses. Your question afterwards poses a different thought about the same subject. This was not all one thought.
Correct. You realize the error of the Arminian view of election. Why are you an Arminian? Election can only be unconditional or God respects persons.
Why do you call me Arminian?
You really shouldn't presume that you know. It'll only place you into a bad situation. I am anti- Calvinist because Calvinism is a false. Since Arminianism came out of Calvinism how can one expect good fruit to come from a rotten tree?
You said I was correct. Thankyou!!!! I also realize the error of Calvinism's view of it as well.
I see election as unconditional because election is universal and doesn't insure Salvation. Calvinist see it as unconditional and then places conditions on it by saying we are either chosen because of faith (this is one view) or we are chosen randomly to keep God from appearing as a respecter of men. The first makes Him a respecter and the second leaves Salvation up to chance, not God.
Ultimately men are in hell for their sins. While rejecting Christ is a sin to be condemned for, not all men have heard of Christ to reject him.
May not have heard but already know.
The sins of men isn't forgiven by the atonement of Christ, unless they repent and have faith in Christ. Yes they do pay for them there. We have to be covered by the righteousness of Christ in order for the atonement to take effect. However man winds up in hell because he rejects God. He rejects God because all men know there is a God it is written on there hearts. Just as the Law is written there. Romans 1:18-20.If man doesn't seek what's already in his heart it isn't God's fault.
The Bible says that 'no man seeks God.'
Romans 3 10-18 has not been proven to be the moral condition of men. Nothing there suggest that man cannot seek God, Nor that this is his morality. The entire passage is what the Salvation less think of those who have Salvation which is not so and really is a very poor support for "Total Depravity". By reading in to it what is not there we have the beginnings of Calvinism.
I fail to see how anyone can have faith on their own.
It does not take faith to seek the truth. Faith comes by hearing the word of God trust is that faith in action and it is we who must first trust Christ.
Eph 1:12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.
You have some sort of skewed polytheistic slant on the Trinity. The Bible is clear that the Holy Spirit is the one that makes intercession for us to the father.
Do you deny all three are one?
The Holy Spirit can't intercede for us if we don't have Him and we can't have Him until we have Grace and Grace comes only through faith.
Rom 5:2 By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.
May Christ Shine His Light On Us All;
Mike
