Another parable that prove Calvinism false

Sethproton

Well-known member
If your nature were changed, your free will choices would be different
From your view, your choices are from your free will
What scripture are you referring to teaching that if your nature were changed your choice would differe?
Can you tell me where you are getting that idea from scripture?
 

Sethproton

Well-known member
If you are dependent on God drawing you, then that is NOT "coming to Christ on your own".

For instance, according to you, those who are not drawn CANNOT "come on their own".
I agree that if you are not drawn, you will not come. But it is not about ability. It is about revelation.
 

Sethproton

Well-known member
So you now admit that men cannot come "on their own".
They have to be DRAWN.

And no, revelation does not "draw" anyone.
GOD draws people.
I just explained that "cannot come" refers to the lack of revelation, but you pretend I am saying it is a lack of ability.
This has been explained to you many times.
For other posters who are interested in what is actually being said:
If you do not know where the store is, you cannot go there.
Yes, you have a car and gas and the ability to understand directions and drive there, but until you get revelation about the location you "cannot" go there. That is not physical inability as Theo would promote. It is about lack of revelation.
The same with God, until He reveals Himself, you cannot come, because you do not know where to go.
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
I just explained that "cannot come" refers to the lack of revelation,

No, seth... You have "explained" nothing.
You merely asserted it.
You seem to be under the misconception that anyone here trusts anything you claim.

but you pretend I am saying it is a lack of ability.

This constant claim of people "pretending" is insulting.
We are not "pretending" anything.

You falsely claimed that "men can come on their own" (which contrary to your claim, IS about "ability".

Then you finally learned that men CANNOT come on their own, but need to be "drawn" by God.

But since that doesn't fit with your false theology, then you have to REDEFINE "draw" to mean "revelation". There are no less than THREE problems with your bogus claim:

1) That's NOT what "draw" means;
2) There are those who have heard revelation but DO NOT come;
3) Not all have heard the revelation, so they ARE "unable to come".

This has been explained to you many times.

And you are WROG "many times".
And you have REFUSED TO ACCEPT CORRECTION "many times".
So kindly lose the attitude.

If you do not know where the store is, you cannot go there.
Yes, you have a car and gas and the ability to understand directions and drive there, but until you get revelation about the location you "cannot" go there. That is not physical inability as Theo would promote. It is about lack of revelation.

So now you're making up irrelevant comparisons to justify usurping Scripture.

The same with God, until He reveals Himself, you cannot come, because you do not know where to go.

Except that is NOT what the Bible teaches.
 

Sethproton

Well-known member
No, seth... You have "explained" nothing.
You merely asserted it.
You seem to be under the misconception that anyone here trusts anything you claim.



This constant claim of people "pretending" is insulting.
We are not "pretending" anything.

You falsely claimed that "men can come on their own" (which contrary to your claim, IS about "ability".

Then you finally learned that men CANNOT come on their own, but need to be "drawn" by God.

But since that doesn't fit with your false theology, then you have to REDEFINE "draw" to mean "revelation". There are no less than THREE problems with your bogus claim:

1) That's NOT what "draw" means;
2) There are those who have heard revelation but DO NOT come;
3) Not all have heard the revelation, so they ARE "unable to come".



And you are WROG "many times".
And you have REFUSED TO ACCEPT CORRECTION "many times".
So kindly lose the attitude.



So now you're making up irrelevant comparisons to justify usurping Scripture.



Except that is NOT what the Bible teaches.
I am making up comparisons to explain the use of words.
You remember how the old testament describes your inability to understand truth? It says like a drunk man who cannot feel a thorn in his hand.
 

Sethproton

Well-known member
No, seth... You have "explained" nothing.
You merely asserted it.
You seem to be under the misconception that anyone here trusts anything you claim.



This constant claim of people "pretending" is insulting.
We are not "pretending" anything.

You falsely claimed that "men can come on their own" (which contrary to your claim, IS about "ability".

Then you finally learned that men CANNOT come on their own, but need to be "drawn" by God.

But since that doesn't fit with your false theology, then you have to REDEFINE "draw" to mean "revelation". There are no less than THREE problems with your bogus claim:

1) That's NOT what "draw" means;
2) There are those who have heard revelation but DO NOT come;
3) Not all have heard the revelation, so they ARE "unable to come".



And you are WROG "many times".
And you have REFUSED TO ACCEPT CORRECTION "many times".
So kindly lose the attitude.



So now you're making up irrelevant comparisons to justify usurping Scripture.



Except that is NOT what the Bible teaches.
It is what the Bible teaches me.
Strange that you think I should accept correction from YOU.
 

Sethproton

Well-known member
The reason to reject what you say is because it is anti-Biblical.



So when you say you shouldn't accept correction from me, that's okay.
But when I say I shouldn't accept correction from you, suddenly that's "avoid[ing] content to discuss style"?
Gotta love your double standards, seth!
I never said I should not accept correction from you. Will you ever stop twisting what people post?
Would it ever be possible for you to have a Biblical discussion without all the personal attacks?
 

Sethproton

Well-known member
I hear Ginkgo is good for helping your memory.
Just sayin'.



<sigh>
Thank you for yet another personal attack.



Are you now claiming that you never wrote the above?
I feel bad for any English student who has an instructor unable to distinguish the difference in meaning bewteen these two:
1. Starnge that you think I should accept correction from you
2. I should not accept correction from you
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
I feel bad for any English student who has an instructor unable to distinguish the difference in meaning bewteen these two:
1. Starnge that you think I should accept correction from you
2. I should not accept correction from you

If want to complain about "English students", maybe you should explain to us (since it's 100% relevant to "English") what "Starnge" means.

And then you can try to explain to us what YOU think the difference is, which is basically you trying to deny your own words.
 

Sethproton

Well-known member
If want to complain about "English students", maybe you should explain to us (since it's 100% relevant to "English") what "Starnge" means.

And then you can try to explain to us what YOU think the difference is, which is basically you trying to deny your own words.
Per usual, you avoid content and major on typos.
 

civic

Well-known member
I feel bad for any English student who has an instructor unable to distinguish the difference in meaning bewteen these two:
1. Starnge that you think I should accept correction from you
2. I should not accept correction from you
More irony regarding English when you fail o spell correctly and change the definitions of words all of the time.
 
T

TomFL

Guest
So you now admit that men cannot come "on their own".
They have to be DRAWN.

And no, revelation does not "draw" anyone.
GOD draws people.
according to scripture

John 6:45 (ESV)
45 It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me—

God does so by providing revelation
 
Top