1John 5:1 regeneration before faith

Yes I aleady got a first ad hominem reply not sure that particular poster even wants to have the discussion. The guy yesterday was very responsive and interactive with my posts and I with his. The funny thing is he is a drummer and we talked about my boys. Also we both have our favorite drummers Neil Pert and John Bonham in common. So we had some nice common ground to work from.
We should know beforehand that they will Hate us. We have to decide if Adhoms are worth it or not...
 
You are agreeing that God controls us, as that is what I said and you say "certainly"
But without force?
How does that work? Control without force? Can you explain from scripture what you mean?
Force implies overcoming resistance by using greater power. That is not how God operates in his children. He works in us to will and to do of his good pleasure, causing us to be willing to do his will, so that force is not required.

Of course, the above is not an exhaustive description of how God works, in the lives of his children, but it is a useful broad brush stroke.
 
I see you feel frustrated, but the point of the discussion is whether or not force is involved in control and your example demonstrated force being used to control water flow
You are conflating physical force (used in opening a literal sluice gate) with God reducing his restraining grace (no force involved). Do you honestly not see this?
 
Because of God's controlling force the earth stays just the right distance from the sun to keep it inhabitable.
Yes as per Colossians 1:17-He is before all things, and in him all things hold together

And

Hebrews 1:3
The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of His nature, upholding all things by His powerful word
 
Because of God's controlling force the earth stays just the right distance from the sun to keep it inhabitable.
This is a bait and switch, although I don't think it was deliberate.

You should not conflate physical force (needed to control physical objects) with the way God operates in his chidren.
 
Yes as per Colossians 1:17-He is before all things, and in him all things hold together

And

Hebrews 1:3
The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of His nature, upholding all things by His powerful word
Colossians 1:16-17
For Or in.by Him all things were created in heaven and on earth, [things] visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities; all things were created and exist through Him [that is, by His activity] and for Him. 17And He Himself existed and is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. [His is the controlling, cohesive force of the universe.]

Thanks
 
But how can there be control without force, you have to change the meaning of the word "control" in order to come up with control without force, whether the force is mental, physical or spiritual

As I pointed out in my "Know" thread, words have many different connotations, and Merriam-Webster lists 15 main connotations for "force", and many more minor connotations. So it depends on what you mean by "force". It's helpful to define our terms.

We get the feeling that Arminians are either intending, or what readers to have the connotation, that you mean:

1: to do violence to
5
: to achieve or win by strength in struggle or violence:

We don't believe God "forces" us that way.

However, if you mean:

2: to compel by physical, moral, or intellectual means
3: to make or cause especially through natural or logical necessity

... we don't think there's any Biblical problem with that.

Having said that, I don't think it helps move discussion forward to talk about God "forcing" (nor is it stated Biblically), it only seems to have negative effect on discussion (mud-slinging) by encouraging readers to jump to the wrong conclusion. And I suspect that is precisely why many people use it.
 
As I pointed out in my "Know" thread, words have many different connotations, and Merriam-Webster lists 15 main connotations for "force", and many more minor connotations. So it depends on what you mean by "force". It's helpful to define our terms.

We get the feeling that Arminians are either intending, or what readers to have the connotation, that you mean:

1: to do violence to
5
: to achieve or win by strength in struggle or violence:

We don't believe God "forces" us that way.

However, if you mean:

2: to compel by physical, moral, or intellectual means
3: to make or cause especially through natural or logical necessity

... we don't think there's any Biblical problem with that.

Having said that, I don't think it helps move discussion forward to talk about God "forcing" (nor is it stated Biblically), it only seems to have negative effect on discussion (mud-slinging) by encouraging readers to jump to the wrong conclusion. And I suspect that is precisely why many people use it.
Good one!:)
 
Okay, I get it...
So as long as you simply CLAIM your doctrines are "completely biblical", then the absolves you from having to DEMONSTRATE that they are Biblical.

Good to know.
I'll have to remember that the next time you ask us if we "Got Scripture?".
Double standards much?
Got scripture Theo?
 
Sir i would rather chat with people who are willing to answer questions, but you have tols me to go read books instead of ask you to explain wht you believe.

Do you disagree that getting information about Calvinism piecemeal, and randomly from one topic to another, with our opponents trying to self-servingly over-emphasize parts to poison the well, is a FAR inferior method of understanding than going to a source that presents it in an organized way?
 
You are the one saying that God uses force, although you have not told us which definition of force you are using.
Nobody asked me to define force.
force has to relevant meanings that I think are related here.
1. compel/make happen - if you compel a person to do something you are using force
2. exercise of energy - like in the force of his will, or a force of nature, or brute force
 
Do you disagree that getting information about Calvinism piecemeal, and randomly from one topic to another, with our opponents trying to self-servingly over-emphasize parts to poison the well, is a FAR inferior method of understanding than going to a source that presents it in an organized way?
I think that I have a decently logical mind and am capable of asking a person what they believe and hearing and responding to their answer
 
Back
Top