Why is it such a big deal?

[Winman]

It surprises me that the KJV missed the mark on this one, it should read 'sons of God', in lieu of 'children of God':

for ye are all sons of God through the faith in Christ Jesus, Gal 3:26 YLT

....with 'sons of God' denoting maturity in contrast to 'children of God'. But you know that already, as I said this has become circular, it's the same ol' same ol', we've been here before:

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=2087003#post2087003

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=2087010#post2087010

....and this is the order we're given from the example:

Jehovah redeems with a strong hand from the House of Bondage.

His redeemed are baptized into Christ through the Red Sea.

The glad tidings that Jehovah has given His redeemed the Promised Land for their taking is preached to them while they're in the Wilderness.

Most disobey and spend their lives as lost sheep wandering in the wilderness because of their unbelief.

And folks here call my views unorthodox? You got me beat by miles.

The scriptures clearly show that no one is "in Christ" until they believe in time.

Rom 16:7 Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.

No one is in Christ until they believe in time, therefore God could only choose us "in him" according or dependent on his foreknowledge as 1 Pet 1:2 says. God could foresee our future faith and chose us through "belief in the truth" as 2 The 2:13 says.

 

[kyredneck]

And folks here call my views unorthodox?...

No, your views are quite natural.

 

[Winman]

No, your views are quite natural.

Well, what is natural for one person may not be for another.

 

[Iconoclast]

Winman

.

Dude, you are agreeing with my view and refuting yours. God in his foreknowledge saw before the foundation of the world that Jeremiah would believe in time. We are not known of God until we believe.

You are unable to comprehend...sorry

But very important, notice that God also "now" knows them. This is what you do not realize, no one enters into an intimate and personal relationship with God until they believe in time.

But God in his foreknowledge can foresee this personal relationship that begins in time when a person believes. He can foresee that person "in Christ".

So, you are proving the foreknowledge view and refuting yours. Nobody was in Christ before the foundation of the world, that only happens in time when a person believes. And God can only "foreknow" that person in a personal relationship when he sees their future faith and when that person is placed in Christ.

I can no longer read your unbiblical posting as it can only defile and destroy brain cells. maybe at another time you will be allowed to welcome truth.

You think foreknowledge is about having sex?

You just cannot be taken seriously I cannot walk you by the hand through every verse as you really have no desire for truth.

 

[Iconoclast]

No, your views are quite natural.

Yes indeed:wavey::wavey::wavey:

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

You just cannot be taken seriously I cannot walk you by the hand through every verse as you really have no desire for truth.[
/QUOTE]

Just so I am clear, since you know this & since you have continuously been spurned, why are you still trying to press on with this guy????

 

[Sapper Woody]

I'd honestly like to start a thread to DISCUSS the viewpoint of Calvinism. But I know that's impossible on here. It would derail by the third post into an argument of why one side or the other is wrong.

 

[Iconoclast]

You just cannot be taken seriously I cannot walk you by the hand through every verse as you really have no desire for truth.[
/QUOTE]

Just so I am clear, since you know this & since you have continuously been spurned, why are you still trying to press on with this guy????

I am waiting on my next return load here in Bakersfield so I had the time.
I do not like to give up on a soul. He just does not want to be serious or he cannot help himself.

4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.

5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit

 

[Iconoclast]

I'd honestly like to start a thread to DISCUSS the viewpoint of Calvinism. But I know that's impossible on here. It would derail by the third post into an argument of why one side or the other is wrong.

SW......just jump in and ask specific questions....we will respond.

or start a thread for cals only...or non cals only then ask the same question in each thread

 

[Sapper Woody]

SW......just jump in and ask specific questions....we will respond.

or start a thread for cals only...or non cals only then ask the same question in each thread

I'm going to try to start a thread. We'll see if it can stay as a give and take of information, rather than a continuous and pointless debate.

 

[Sapper Woody]

I made a new thread. http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=93612

 

[Yeshua1]

Winman

.

You are unable to comprehend...sorry





I can no longer read your unbiblical posting as it can only defile and destroy brain cells. maybe at another time you will be allowed to welcome truth.



You just cannot be taken seriously I cannot walk you by the hand through every verse as you really have no desire for truth.

Guess that he sees God has having jesus die for sinners, and that at best He provides a possible salvation, and that God waits and hopes that some sinners make the right choice to accept jesus, so that his death was not in vain on their behalf!

 

[Revmitchell]

Guess that he sees God has having jesus die for sinners, and that at best He provides a possible salvation, and that God waits and hopes that some sinners make the right choice to accept jesus, so that his death was not in vain on their behalf!

Intellectually dishonest characterizations like this are not helpful.

 

[Yeshua1]

Intellectually dishonest characterizations like this are not helpful.

No disrespect intended here, but how isn't the non Cal view simply that God provided the means to have all saved, but that he cannot save any sinner until/unless they allow Him to do that thru their free will?

 

[kyredneck]

Intellectually dishonest characterizations like this are not helpful.

'Intellectually dishonest'. What number is that on your list of knee jerk quips?

Better yet, what exactly does 'intellectually dishonest' mean?

 

[Revmitchell]

No disrespect intended here, but how isn't the non Cal view simply that God provided the means to have all saved, but that he cannot save any sinner until/unless they allow Him to do that thru their free will?

More intellectual dishonesty. No one has said God cannot. Since God chose to do things that we the phrase "He cannot save any sinner until/unless they allow Him to do that thru their free will?" is pure fiction and completely dishonest intellectually.

It is a childish characterization meant only to demonize an opposing view.

 

[kyredneck]

More intellectual dishonesty......

I'm thinking this is you insidiously calling someone a liar.

 

[Yeshua1]

More intellectual dishonesty. No one has said God cannot. Since God chose to do things that we the phrase "He cannot save any sinner until/unless they allow Him to do that thru their free will?" is pure fiction and completely dishonest intellectually.

It is a childish characterization meant only to demonize an opposing view.

The Lord, in your view, will not save a sinner unless they desire him to save them, by free will choosing jesus, correct?

 

[Revmitchell]

The Lord, in your view, will not save a sinner unless they desire him to save them, by free will choosing jesus, correct?

There is a vast difference between will not and can not and I assume you smart enough to know that.

 

[Rippon]

There is a vast difference between will not and can not and I assume you [sic]smart enough to know that.

Your inability to see the doctrine of man's inability is something you cannot spiritually understand.