Author	Thread: Free-will doctrine
dljrn04 View Profile History	Free-will doctrine Posted : 23 Jul, 2012 04:33 PM Free-will doctrine�what does it do? It magnifies man into God; it declares God's purposes a nullity, since they cannot be carried out unless men are willing. It makes God's will a waiting servant to the will of man, and the whole covenant of grace dependent upon human action. Denying election on the ground of injustice, it holds God to be a debtor to sinners, so that if he gives grace to one he is bound to do so to all. It teaches that the blood of Christ was shed equally for all men and since some are lost, this doctrine ascribes the difference to man's own will, thus making the atonement itself a powerless thing until the will of man gives it efficacy...http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/0502.htm Post Reply
dljrn04 View Profile History	Free-will doctrine Posted : 25 Jul, 2012 04:59 PM well jude it didn't start that way yesterday, but the calvinism bashers started and i crumbled to temptation. yep you got it the devil made me do it !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :ROFL: Post Reply
dljrn04 View Profile History	Free-will doctrine Posted : 25 Jul, 2012 05:07 PM ok reigns 11 pages and you have proved nothing except you have a pride problem. May God free you from your bondage of pride. Post Reply
View Profile History	Free-will doctrine Posted : 25 Jul, 2012 05:15 PM Haha spoken like a true Calvinist-cant debate anything of substance so u resort to name calling me-i think the devil made u do that too-some perserverance! U people have shown yrselves to be elitist evasive scripture twisters-thank goodness I dont live in Calvins Geneva with u lot-i would be on the rack by now and the fire would be being prepared for my execution. Post Reply
View Profile History	Free-will doctrine Posted : 25 Jul, 2012 05:21 PM This division isn't between "Calvinist" and "Arminian". It's between the wheat (Christianity) and the tares (humanism). You are either one or the other. The parable makes that clear. A tare can not suddenly use it's "free will" and decide to become wheat. Threads like this merely expose the wheat from the tare. Glory to God. As the world matures Christianity and humanism become more and more antithetical as the parable illustrates. As well, those who hold each view become increasingly epistemological self-conscious. God sovereignly and purposely designs debates like this as a mirror so that each individual may see their own reflection and know whether or not they are wheat or tare. Matt 13 24 Another cparable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field: 25 But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way. 26 But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also. 27 So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares? 28 He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? 29 But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. 30 Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but dgather the wheat into my barn. Post Reply
View Profile History	Free-will doctrine Posted : 25 Jul, 2012 05:30 PM I see that I left the "ly" off the end of epistemological. Therefore it should read: "As well, those who hold each view become increasingly epistemologicalLY self-conscious. Post Reply
dljrn04 View Profile History	Free-will doctrine Posted : 25 Jul, 2012 05:39 PM Amen Bob. :applause: Post Reply
View Profile History	Free-will doctrine Posted : 25 Jul, 2012 05:52 PM " Why does it fail? You ignore the word "might" in 17. My understanding therefore makes perfect sense." You conveniently skipped over the first occurrence of "world"....17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world...Yes your interpretation fails here. You would have us believe that v17 should be read in this way...."For God did not send his Son into every single person to condemn every single person". Your interpretation fails because God didn't send his Son "into every single person". Jude...the above goes for you as well. I didn't say that the word is any different. However you cannot reconcile your interpretation of it, in light of v17. Posting the rest of the paragraph to say you are giving it context is great. I've done the same thing. However it doesn't replace the fact that your interpretation simply doesn't fit in v17 Post Reply
View Profile History	Free-will doctrine Posted : 25 Jul, 2012 05:55 PM " Why hasnt Holding or anyone else responded to the John passage?" Because you haven't responded to what I asked over and over again...Why must John 3:16 mean what you say it means?....Your answer...."Because the experts agree with me." " Actually busy with my son." Make any excuse you like but you are online. You see how silly and childish that is? Post Reply
teach_ib View Profile History	Free-will doctrine Posted : 25 Jul, 2012 07:42 PM World...so many definitions and explanations been given on this thread. �If we are so off base with our understanding of this single word, please provide your definition of the word, enlighten us. Also, what is your definition of ALL? �For instance explain ALL in this verse: 2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us- ward, not willing that any should perish, but that ALL should come to repentance. Or what about ALL in these verses: 2 Corinthians 5:14 For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for ALL, then were ALL dead:� 15 And that he died for ALL, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again. And what about the word WHOLE in this verse? �And there's that troubling word WORLD right beside it...what does it mean here? 1 John 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD. And what about the word WHOSOEVER in this passage? �If it was only some, it wouldn't be so broad... Romans 10:13 For WHOSOEVER shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. If the literal sense makes sense, any other interpretation is NONSENSE. Post Reply
teach_ib View Profile History	Free-will doctrine Posted : 25 Jul, 2012 07:48 PM Joshua 24:15�And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord. ***** here it was a clear CHOICE for Israelites to make...serve God or serve the gods... Numbers 21:8�And the Lord said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live.� 9 And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived. ***** an example of Christ in the OT which Jesus referred to in the NT. �the Israelites disobeyed God, God sent poisonous serpents to punish them. �The only way for them to live was to CHOOSE to look at the fiery serpent lifted up on the pole. �The serpent was there for ALL of them, but if they did not have the faith that God would save them when they looked upon it and CHOSE not to look, they DIED. John 3:14�And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: Post Reply

First

<< Previous  10

Page : 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Next  10 >>

Last