Absolutely amazing!!!

Your ideas Brother Bill... Your Billology... your Billdoctrine... your Billbelief... from your Billbible... And they have been in the past and still are UnBillievable ... Brother Glen

 

Old arguments--as old as Pelagius. New theology? No newer than Rome. Ignorance--aha, thou temptest me bro... thou must be ecstatic...

And I am not confused on my tenses. Perfect tense indicates an action in time past which has reached a culmination and its effects still continue. Present tense indicates continuity. "Historical presents" are not discernable (as the basic tenses are) by the spelling of the Greek verb, but are an interpretation. IN this case, "no one can come," "can" refers to ability, "no one is able to come," and it is in the present tense, indicating that this is a continuous state. And, I've never seen a translator interpret this passage as an historical present.

And oh, what tortured logic in John 6. Whatever tends to Calvinism is explained away, whatever doesn't is OK. Bill, Bill, what are we going to do with you?

[ July 02, 2003, 06:42 PM: Message edited by: Major B ]

 

Brother Bill... You are free to post until you fly off the handle and break the rules... You can say anything you want to as long as it is decent and in order... Now as far as the Arminian position I would like a head count of all the Arminians on here who embrace your doctrine... Maybe only you... Maybe a few... Maybe them all!... I don't know... Maybe they will tell us... All I can say is that I will monitor the posts... So say on Brother Bill... I'm watching and reading ALL posts... Not just yours!... Brother Glen

 

I was at WKU's library today and saw a book on Jacobus Arminius and thought about checking it out, but instead I checked out the two next to it on the History of Primitive Baptists in Georgia and Mississippi. I did check out a biography on Spurgeon, I figured this would satisfy ol' Arminius' ghost at least, but wait, you don't believe in MUMBO JUMBO do ya? Well, neither do I, that is why I didn't even touch the one on Mary Eddy Baker and the Christian Science Church .

I was disappointed to see there was no history of Primitives in Kentucky, looks like it is time for somebody to write one, IMHO.

Not even any books on John Taylor that are circulating, oh well, looks like my Saturdays are booked for a while.

God Bless All on the BB

Bro. Dallas Eaton

At least it is air conditioned

 

You might have better results at the Vanderbilt University library, or at Southern Seminary.

 

Yes, Arminius resurrected the teachings of Pelagius, John Cassian, Pighius, Erasmus, and other catholics.

You assume we haven't read any of this stuff, but some of us have. I have also read some Mennonite stuff, which is just as incorrect, but better argued usually.

 

Brother Dallas... Just off topic for a minute... You might want to check the PB Library in Carthage with Elder Webb he may have a history of the PB's in Old Kentucky... Worth a try!... We are all here to help!... Brother Glen

Btw... It probably will not be free but will be an addition to your vast library!... You do have a vast library don't you?

 

I THINK OF THE GARDEN, AND THE INSTRUCTION TO NOT EAT THE CERTAIN FRUIT OR SURELY DIE..... AND I THINK THAT IN ACTUALITY, SATAN'S REPLY MIGHT HAVE BEEN SOMETHING LIKE THIS.
" You will not surely die. What you need is a basic understanding of the historical context of the day in which those statements were made. Just a little hermenuetics might help you interpret those texts more accurately. Just one bite and you will see that I am right."

 

I for one basicaly agree, but I don't focus on the apostles as being the only ones chosen at the time. But the basic idea is that God/Christ was starting out with certain people first (such as the apostles), while Israel was being hardened. This is in the overall context, and it is not saying that salvation would never be offered to the rest of the people.

It is certainly true that Arminians have not addressed this part of scripture enough, and that is why Bill's doctrine seems so strange (and Calvinists assumed the passage was totally unanswered by the other side)

 

No. Pelagius denied that man was even really fallen, if I understood correctly. Calvinists may claim this is the corollary of Arminius' teaching, but to be truuthful, it is not the same, anymore than the caricatures Calvinists object to, such as fatalism.
Erasmus seemed to make a lot of good points, though I don't really know his full position (was he as Pelagian as the rest of Catholicism had become)
Augustine was the chief of Catholic authorities, so that guilt by association means nothing.

 

Well - I am not sure which of Bill's views you are referencing - but certainly I too am Arminian in that I believe that God so Loved the World - and that God draws all mankind to Himself.

I also agree that "hardening" takes place. In the case of the lost it is hardening by their choice to turn from the Holy Spirit that "Convicts the World of sin and righteousness and judgment".

I differ with Bill in that I accept the "disposition" in mankind that is in line with total depravity - but I agree with him that hardening takes place -- i.e. they enter into a WORSE condition in terms of their turning from the Spirit of God.

I am not sure what "other views" you may be referencing here.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Now now Bill ... you are playing loose with the facts again. I did give you a reason why. So whether or not you agree with my reason, it is simply untrue to say that "No Calvinist on this board" has given you a reason.

 

You thanked me for it. I don't think you gave it much thought however. The hardening could be a prevention of false acceptance of the Messiah for political reasons rather than spiritual ones. Some tried to set him up as an earthly king at that time. Had the nation not been hardened, they would have accepted him as a political leader, not a spiritual one. Because of their depravity, they would never have accepted him as a spiritual leader.