His determinate counsel

[webdog]

It'll probably take him a while to read through 11 chapters of your "bullet proof scriptural argument"

 

[npetreley]

It'll probably take him a while to read through 11 chapters of your "bullet proof scriptural argument"

As often as I think it's a futile exercise, I would rather debate with you than with someone who makes an outrageous statement, slaps some scripture references into a post with no quotes or explanation, and then runs away to hide.

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

Originally Posted by reformedbeliever
See, thats where you do not (or more likely misrepresent or being dishonest) know what Calvinism teaches. Men make choices. God does not make man choose, he chooses according to his nature and the circumstances of his environment. God's providence causes the circumstances, or allows them. Sometimes God acts directly to cause His plan to go according to His perfect will, sometimes He indirectly causes.

Actually after rethinking it I have to disagree with this all together. Men do not make choices toward God as a result of their nature. Our nature is sinnful and cannot choose God. This does not change after our promise of salvation. we must be guided by the Holy Ghost to avoid being controlled by our current sin nature. 1 cor 2:14

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

As often as I think it's a futile exercise, I would rather debate with you than with someone who makes an outrageous statement, slaps some scripture references into a post with no quotes or explanation, and then runs away to hide.

What you are doing is both intentionally misrepresenting what I have done, assigning motives you cannot back up, and acting in a hostile manner that you do not deserve. And it all started because I asked you for some scrpture reference.

I do not know what you hostility is about. But this is the second time you have used this tactic with me. I have neither been hostile nor have I ever conducted my self with you in this same manner.

None of my statements have been outrageous. That is quite the exageration. and it certainly was not made toward anything you said. Your behavior is inapprorpiate.

 

[npetreley]

What you are doing is both intentionally misrepresenting what I have done

How so? You continue to refuse to explain or back up your statement about how a description of man's choice is in direct contradiction to irresistible grace. You listed a bunch of verses with no quotes or explanation. That is exactly what I said, and it's all true.

None of my statements have been outrageous.

I beg to differ. RB said this.

Originally Posted by reformedbeliever
See, thats where you do not (or more likely misrepresent or being dishonest) know what Calvinism teaches. Men make choices. God does not make man choose, he chooses according to his nature and the circumstances of his environment. God's providence causes the circumstances, or allows them. Sometimes God acts directly to cause His plan to go according to His perfect will, sometimes He indirectly causes.

To which you replied...

If there is truly a misperception of what folks of the reformed theology believe it most likely is due to the way it is communicated by them. While I agree with your position on mens choices as you have articluated it here it is in direct conflict with iresistable grace.

I find the statement, "it here it is in direct conflict with irresistible grace" to be outrageous. I even explained that "irresistible" can be interpreted more than one way (which needs no scripture to understand or defend). But you stand by the statement without any support for it other than a handful of scripture references with no quotes or explanation.

Back it up. Explain why it must be in direct conflict with irresistible grace. Use scripture to support your statement WITH explanation as to WHY the scripture supports your statement. Or just cry "you're hostile" and run away. Whatever.

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

What the board can see is that your hostilities began not with my disagreement with reformed but with asking you for scripture reference. it was only after that that you found my conversation with reformed. You were already outraged. Heaven forbid someone ask for that. Since then it has been nothing but redirection by way of childish tactics and unfounded outrage about something that wasn't directed to you.

So we can see the real problem doesn't lie in my discussion with reformed but it actually lies with my asking you for scripture. Heaven forbid. And I avoid attacks form folks like you because It is equvilent to playing with rabid dogs. Alot of emotion and rhetoric.

 

[npetreley]

What the board can see is that your hostilities began not with my disagreement with reformed but with asking you for scripture reference. it was only after that that you found my conversation with reformed. You were already outraged. Heaven forbid someone ask for that. Since then it has been nothing but redirection by way of childish tactics and unfounded outrage about something that wasn't directed to you.

So we can see the real problem doesn't lie in my discussion with reformed but it actually lies with my asking you for scripture. Heaven forbid. And I avoid attacks form folks like you because It is equvilent to playing with rabid dogs. Alot of emotion and rhetoric.

Okay. You chose to cry, "you're hostile!" and run away. Whatever.

 

[Jarthur001]

Gods decree is based on what? Not based on mans heart.

"The king’s heart is in the hand of the LORD, as the rivers of water: He turneth it whithersoever He will" (Prov. 21:1)

 

[Jarthur001]

again...it is not mans heart that controls....

"There are many devices in a man’s heart; nevertheless the counsel of the LORD, that shall stand" (Prov. 19:21)

Therefore God does not elect based on mans foreseen heart, but base on His pleasure.

no?

 

[Jarthur001]

Foreknow - proginosko
1) to have knowledge before hand

2) to foreknow
....a) of those whom God elected to salvation

3) to predestinate

As in Rom 8:29, 2 Peter 3:17

From the two words:
1. pro:
1) before

2. ginōskō:
1) to learn to know, come to know, get a knowledge of, perceive, feel
....a) to become known

2) to know, understand, perceive, have knowledge of
....a) to understand
....b) to know

3) Jewish idiom for sexual intercourse between a man and a woman

4) to become acquainted with, to know

Now if it can be Foreloved....and it is clear it can be...

Then based on the passage in Romans all are saved....or it means Foreloved.

29For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

 

[Jarthur001]

It did.

I know.

First James, I have not denied saying it, but have been against the way you present what I was saying and not that I said it. But what I HAVE denied saying is that my usage of 'determined' is being the same as God's. My usage was more in line with being the action of man believing, granted the wording could have been different and in fact I have continued to insist it is more accurately portrayed as choosing.

hang in there...we should get to it tonight...if you are around

Land, Seas, and Plants

That was the 3rd day. So when was matter made that made up the Heavens and earth?

 

[Jarthur001]

Are you Supra Jarthur? I'm not Supra, but I definately lean in that direction. It probably wouldn't take much convincing...

I am not supra, but like you think it should be considered.

I in no way am "sub" which I think is based on mans feelings.

 

[npetreley]

Now if it can be Foreloved....and it is clear it can be...

Then based on the passage in Romans all are saved....or it means Foreloved.

If "know" is intellectual knowledge of, then when Jesus says, "I never knew [ginosko] you", does that mean Jesus was ignorant of their existence?

 

[Jarthur001]

If "know" is intellectual knowledge of, then when Jesus says, "I never knew [ginosko] you", does that mean Jesus was ignorant of their existence?

I agree. And I asked this very thing on the now closed "who did Christ die for" thread.
NEVER is the key word.


BTW...no answer then...my guess is no answer again

 

[Jarthur001]

I said a few pages back something about Gods "Arena of Play".

This is where it is clearly seen that man makes a choice, but God setup the arena for that choice, and so you can see also God in full control.

Just like the passage below. Read and watch how Joseph jumb from you guys did this...to God did this. So who did it?

Mans choice, but God controlled the choice...so in the end it was God in control all along.

3And Joseph said unto his brethren, I am Joseph; doth my father yet live? And his brethren could not answer him; for they were troubled at his presence.

4And Joseph said unto his brethren, Come near to me, I pray you. And they came near. And he said, I am Joseph your brother, whom ye sold into Egypt.

5Now therefore be not grieved, nor angry with yourselves, that ye sold me hither: for God did send me before you to preserve life.

6For these two years hath the famine been in the land: and yet there are five years, in the which there shall neither be earing nor harvest.

7And God sent me before you to preserve you a posterity in the earth, and to save your lives by a great deliverance.

8So now it was not you that sent me hither, but God: and he hath made me a father to Pharaoh, and lord of all his house, and a ruler throughout all the land of Egypt.

 

[Jarthur001]

For who hath resisted His will?" (Rom. 9:19)

The verse sounds simple. We have heard it many times. but think about it....

Who can resist His will?

 

[reformedbeliever]

For who hath resisted His will?" (Rom. 9:19)

The verse sounds simple. We have heard it many times. but think about it....

Who can resist His will?

Why, you should know this by now James, free willers can. :thumbsup:

 

[npetreley]

Why, you should know this by now James, free willers can. :thumbsup:

And they're dang proud of it, too.

Wait...

 

[Allan]

Now if it can be Foreloved....and it is clear it can be...

Unfortunately James it can not be because it is not proagape, proeros, nor is it prophileo. The love you keep insisting upon (which is really only an aspect of knowledge) is not the love found between two people but actually is an IDIOM used to refer to sexual relations, or what is known as carnal knowledge. Remember:

3) Jewish idiom for sexual intercourse between a man and a woman

But if you will note there is not one thing about 'love' specifically in those distinctives of the definition of knowledge.

Then based on the passage in Romans all are saved....or it means Foreloved.

Again, only if you FORCE the text. Your version of interchanging it with 'love' which is actaully a sexual carnal knowledge is not really a good idea. So I doubt you want to go there in your pursuit to force your preconcieved meaning upon the word.

It refers to the fact that those who He did foreknow He determined in that certain things. To go beyond that is to reach into the unsearchable councel of God.

Please remember, I do not dispute that Love CAN BE implied via the content but it not the primary rendering.

 

[Allan]

For who hath resisted His will?" (Rom. 9:19)

The verse sounds simple. We have heard it many times. but think about it....

Who can resist His will?

No one can, Nor can anyone resist Gods decision to will that man must choose