Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
Because the word is foreknew, not foresaw.
I didn't put words in your mouth. Note the question mark at the end of my sentence.
-
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!
Where Is Free Will?
- Thread starter Reformed1689
- Start date
- Status
And what is your definition of "foreknew"?
Because in SovereignGrace's example there is no difference in meaning between foreknew and foresaw.
God speaks through himSo Isaiah is equivalent to God?
Now that is an interesting. While the mode of divine knowledge has been argued to be the same (between Arminianism and Open Theism, not "non-Calvinism" and Open Theism), I've never seen anyone go so far as to even suggest that the default position to non-Calvinism is open theism.
Are you able to defend the claim?
I suspect the fact that Hezekiah did not say "wait, God - You said..." at least proves he wasn't a Calvinist.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
He knew that person beforehand. It is talking about the knowledge of the person. Being intimately acquainted with that person.
Context means things. It doesn't say this: For those whom he foreknew the choice they would make.
Know it says those (the people) whom He foreknew. He predestined those. Those that he predestined, he also called. Those he called he justified.
In this one section of Scripture alone we see sovereign election as well as irresistible grace.
This is not a knowledge of future but a previous relationship then HE places that person in a human body as Jesus is, then places that person in a place and time TO CALL TO SALVATION
Heb 2:14
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
Nope, God knows all and his scripture does not need to point that out. This is not predestination to Salvation but to being a Human, Then being CALLED,
Calling to Salvation is not election
Sorry for jumping in , but this might above your level of training.
I've already answered this in part in another thread but saw then your have your mind set. I figured then you've apparently said it enough times that it would be hard to go back and examine facts openly. I'll just say for one to reason that Arminius was a Calvinist he must ignore a heck of a lot of reasoning why he wasn't. It also takes a lot of twisting the Calvinist position to come up with such a conclusion but I can see how high your confidence level is that you may not be disputed in this "fact". That said, it's not all bad that you would feel the need, as perhaps apparently you believe so did Edwards, to mesh Arminianism with Calvinist but really Jonc wouldn't it be easier just if you gave up on the Calvinist position.
Limited atonement comes from scripture.
You remind me of the kids right out of seminary on their Calvin crusades. (I don't mean that bad)
I am surprised "semi-pelagian" has not been said 400 times in this thread. I am sure it's coming.
G
He is not willing that any should perish. Unfortunately many refuse
God is not limited.
He is not willing that any should perish. Unfortunately many refuse
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
Gonna need to see some exegetical work on that one. That makes no sense.
Then what is election? Scriptural support please.
You really need to stop with the ad hominem attacks.
The problem is you are applying the Synod of Dort, which occured after Arminius died, to the man. At the time of his death he was a Calvinistic professor at a Calvinistic institution holding doctrine that fell into Calvinistic theology. Therefore he was a Calvinist when he died.I've already answered this in part in another thread but saw then your have your mind set. I figured then you've apparently said it enough times that it would be hard to go back and examine facts openly. I'll just say for one to reason that Arminius was a Calvinist he must ignore a heck of a lot of reasoning why he wasn't. It also takes a lot of twisting the Calvinist position to come up with such a conclusion but I can see how high your confidence level is that you may not be disputed in this "fact". That said, it's not all bad that you would feel the need, as perhaps apparently you believe so did Edwards, to mesh Arminianism with Calvinist but really Jonc wouldn't it be easier just if you gave up on the Calvinist position.
Your history seems a bit skewed. (Calvin was not alive when the Synod took place either).
Your argument is like arguing Luke could not have been a physician because he could not pass the medical board today.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
We've said it just without using the term. A lot of people probably don't even know what that means.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
Context...
Nah. We believe God knows the future.
Oh...the more fun part is Calvin did not affirm all 5 points either.....as they were post Calvin and the argument over the "scope of the Atonement" was not an issue of his time. Calvinism is just much dependent on Beza as it is Calvin.I've already answered this in part in another thread but saw then your have your mind set. I figured then you've apparently said it enough times that it would be hard to go back and examine facts openly. I'll just say for one to reason that Arminius was a Calvinist he must ignore a heck of a lot of reasoning why he wasn't. It also takes a lot of twisting the Calvinist position to come up with such a conclusion but I can see how high your confidence level is that you may not be disputed in this "fact". That said, it's not all bad that you would feel the need, as perhaps apparently you believe so did Edwards, to mesh Arminianism with Calvinist but really Jonc wouldn't it be easier just if you gave up on the Calvinist position.
I don't hold the Calvinist position.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
If you don't mean that bad, how exactly do you mean it? You are basically calling me a cage calvinist.
- Status