-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The Definition Of “Foreknowledge”
- Thread starter Baptizo
- Start date
We would link this to what John stated when he said to us that we are saved not by our will, but elect and saved by very will of God, so God is directly involved in election process, just just a mere observer
Ben,
We can see you want to oppose truth here. You back up a few verses and now try to suggest that Adoption is the full context?
Ben, how about 8:1 :
There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. Looks like Paul gives the context of this chapter right here.
1] No condemnation
2] to those who are In Christ
3] Who have the Spirit indwelling them
9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
All of Chapter 8 is about this.... It looks as if you want to fragment it. You do not accept what the teaching indicates, so you try and explain it away . Do you think it is possible, that on an emotional level you do not like the idea of what this teaches so you will look for any "possible loophole to explain it away? It seems as if you heard a voice from Heaven saying Ben this is the truth, you might look to explain it away.
[/QUOTE]
Yes it is about adoption. You can’t just skip over the expectation of the creature in verse 19 and say you are following context. I will lay back against you the charge of emotional bias. I hadn’t thought of emotions as being part of the discussion. I reread the chapter every time we go over this. The more I study, the more I see that the Calvinist must warp the definitions of certain words to fit their ideology. Not alter, just bend. It’s close. You can argue the point and feel logical but you are still departing from every NT use of the word.
We can see you want to oppose truth here. You back up a few verses and now try to suggest that Adoption is the full context?
Ben, how about 8:1 :
There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. Looks like Paul gives the context of this chapter right here.
1] No condemnation
2] to those who are In Christ
3] Who have the Spirit indwelling them
9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
All of Chapter 8 is about this.... It looks as if you want to fragment it. You do not accept what the teaching indicates, so you try and explain it away . Do you think it is possible, that on an emotional level you do not like the idea of what this teaches so you will look for any "possible loophole to explain it away? It seems as if you heard a voice from Heaven saying Ben this is the truth, you might look to explain it away.
[/QUOTE]
Yes it is about adoption. You can’t just skip over the expectation of the creature in verse 19 and say you are following context. I will lay back against you the charge of emotional bias. I hadn’t thought of emotions as being part of the discussion. I reread the chapter every time we go over this. The more I study, the more I see that the Calvinist must warp the definitions of certain words to fit their ideology. Not alter, just bend. It’s close. You can argue the point and feel logical but you are still departing from every NT use of the word.
Ben,
We can see you want to oppose truth here. You back up a few verses and now try to suggest that Adoption is the full context?
Ben, how about 8:1 :
There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. Looks like Paul gives the context of this chapter right here.
1] No condemnation
2] to those who are In Christ
3] Who have the Spirit indwelling them
9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
All of Chapter 8 is about this.... It looks as if you want to fragment it. You do not accept what the teaching indicates, so you try and explain it away . Do you think it is possible, that on an emotional level you do not like the idea of what this teaches so you will look for any "possible loophole to explain it away? It seems as if you heard a voice from Heaven saying Ben this is the truth, you might look to explain it away.
[/QUOTE]
Let’s talk about the subject matter and let the subject matter speak for itself. When you are running out of answers for a doctrine that is not supported by Scripture, is not the time to tell me that I oppose your “truth.”
We can see you want to oppose truth here. You back up a few verses and now try to suggest that Adoption is the full context?
Ben, how about 8:1 :
There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. Looks like Paul gives the context of this chapter right here.
1] No condemnation
2] to those who are In Christ
3] Who have the Spirit indwelling them
9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
All of Chapter 8 is about this.... It looks as if you want to fragment it. You do not accept what the teaching indicates, so you try and explain it away . Do you think it is possible, that on an emotional level you do not like the idea of what this teaches so you will look for any "possible loophole to explain it away? It seems as if you heard a voice from Heaven saying Ben this is the truth, you might look to explain it away.
[/QUOTE]
Let’s talk about the subject matter and let the subject matter speak for itself. When you are running out of answers for a doctrine that is not supported by Scripture, is not the time to tell me that I oppose your “truth.”
He would have to be involved. He offered Himself to do a job we can’t do. We can’t save ourselves without Him. That doesn’t equal Reformed doctrine exclusively.
It all depends if one holds to us being in Adam spiritually dead, or if merely wounded and still able to partially function
To determine is to make it happen.
Yes it is about adoption. You can’t just skip over the expectation of the creature in verse 19 and say you are following context. I will lay back against you the charge of emotional bias. I hadn’t thought of emotions as being part of the discussion. I reread the chapter every time we go over this. The more I study, the more I see that the Calvinist must warp the definitions of certain words to fit their ideology. Not alter, just bend. It’s close. You can argue the point and feel logical but you are still departing from every NT use of the word.
[/QUOTE]
Adoption is a part of Romans 8 for sure. No one said it was not part of it. You are looking to avoid the truth however, so you can continue if you want. No one is warping anything. You are just trying to avoid the issue/ You are consistently missing the discussion points
That is a distraction.
You assume that I believe the exact opposite of you. We are not diametrically opposed. We disagree on some points. We have the ability to respond to God.
Adoption is a part of Romans 8 for sure. No one said it was not part of it. You are looking to avoid the truth however, so you can continue if you want. No one is warping anything. You are just trying to avoid the issue/ You are consistently missing the discussion points
[/QUOTE]
You have only avoided the issues that I have with your position.
Instead of answering, you said I’m not listening to you.
I am searching the Scripture and I don’t find what you say to be correct. The equivalent of “I’m right. You’re wrong,” is not a legitimate answer.
I’m waiting for you to stop saying that I am avoiding the issue, and actually get to the issue.
Brightfame52
Well-Known Member
And ?
You would apply force to make something happen. F=ma, it means work is accomplished. Something was made to happen.
Follow along.
Brightfame52
Well-Known Member
Thats you bringing up force, dont put words into peoples mouth, thats evil and dishonest. Gods Power can make someone willing to do His will Ps 110:3
3 Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, in the beauties of holiness from the womb of the morning: thou hast the dew of thy youth.
God can make/cause someone to do something, and yet they do it as willingly as they wanted to.
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
BF you call this the philosophy of man "God knows who will accept the offer of salvation."
You do realize that God is omniscient?
Or do you think God can only do what your false religion says He can do?
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
Agree, your religion is the doctrine of man, TULIP/DoG.
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
Perhaps you need to look at your TULIP/DoG if you want to see where your religion says God forces people to believe.
Brightfame52
Well-Known Member
Mans philosophy
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
Correct me but are you not the one that follows the WCF/LBCF, the TULIP/DoG, divine determinism or to make it easier for you, are you not a calvinist?
The philosophy is what you try too peddle as truth.