God of the Bible?

well, suggest all you want ... i may feel free then to suggest that i think you've missed something from scripture as well.

good day. enjoy yourself.

 

again- i reference you to my story. I was a 'programmed' arminian for 17 of the 18 years i've been saved. i rejected Calvinism for a few months too but ultimately my will fell to the burden of scripture. you are (to put it bluntly) wrong. one may be brainwashed of calvinism (just as anything else), but none of the Calvinist answers given in this thread are answers of the brainwashed. Of course, when I was brainwashed, I would have thought anyone that disagreed with me was brainwashed. proof that the free-will preachers of today are doing a good job at creating a 'no-questioning' attitude among Christians.

Perhaps when you become a Calvinist in heaven you won't feel so strongly about us?

 

But I presume in your analogy he wanted to be healed, and that is why it breaks down.

This is like ... well, I don't know, because it doesn't seem to make much sense. Again, a bad analogy ... at I think so. Perhaps if you explain, I will know for sure.

Flawed thinking on this. The fact that God chose some in eternity past, without reference to anything in them means he does not respect them. In your position, where God chooses those who choose him, he is a respecter of those who choose him, and a disrespecter of those who do not. That is heinous. In the biblical teaching, God chooses individuals without any reference to the individual because he is not a respecter of persons. This teaching alone is enough to prove biblical election as the Calvinists see it.

 

Funny how if truth never contradicts itself, everything DOES fit....

But with liberal theology you can put square pegs in round holes all day long and say ... good theology!! Sad.

Your quote says it all about your man made sophistry. I bet if you look hard enough into scripture you could even make it say Jesus came back before the flood !! Wouldn't surprise me, since everything doesn't have to fit!! Silly statement.

 

The analogy needs explaining since it appears to have absolutely nothing to do with teh topic at hand.

We are talking about who is saved and who is not. The way someone defines a full glass or half glass sounds like restauranteur speech.

The fact is that whosoever believes will be saved; those who don't believe will not be saved. That is neither "full" nor "half full." It is simply the truth.

 

Since I make it a habit not to twist wording, that clearly is not the reason I didn't answer. I didn't answer it becuase it appears to have no relevance.

Who was talking about a full glass? If a 12 ounce cup has 2 ounces in it, is it full? Who cares? I woulnd't say that is full, but then i don't know what it is being used for. It may be sufficient to have two ounces in it. So what?

World has a meaning in context. Sometimes it means all men without exception. Other times, it means a philosophy or culture. Other times it means the realm of the physical creation. Sometimes, it means a segment of the population.

Every calvinist believes that "whosoever believes" will be saved. Why do you continue to act like we don't? That makes no sense to me.

Your analogy still looks very irrelevant since we weren't talking about glasses.

 

How is that deceptive? You are talking about glasses being half full or full. I am talking about election. Your point, as best as I could tell from the poor analogy is that I don't believe "whosoever believes" because I believe in election. That is a wrong belief on your part.

You accused me of being deceptive, but you won't even explain your analogy so I have no idea what you are actually talking about ... I am just trying to understand where the whole glass thing came from.

 

Webdog... you would have to finish the statement to make it relavent.

If you say "Whosoever eateth, will be full" THIS is a complete factual statement.

The same with "whosoever believes.... what about them? ... They will be saved... I've never seen such laboring over a simple factual statement.