Announcement

Collapse

Message to all users:

https://carm.org/forum-rules

Super Member Subscription
https://carm.org/carm-super-members-banner-ad-signup

As most of you are aware, we had a crash to forums and were down for over two days a while back. We did have to do an upgrade to the vbulletin software to fix the forums and that has created changes, VB no longer provide the hybrid or threaded forums. There are some issues/changes to the forums we are not able to fix or change. Also note the link address change, please let friends and posters know of the changed link to the forums. For now this is the only link available, https://forums.carm.org/vb5/ but if clicking on forum on carm.org homepage it will now send you to this link. (edited to add https: now working.

Again, we are working through some of the posting and viewing issues to learn how to post with the changes, you will have to check and test the different features, icons that have changed. You may also want to go to profile settings,since many of the notifications, information in profile, also to update/edit your avatar by clicking on avatar space, pull down arrow next to login for user settings.

Edit to add "How to read forums, to make it easier."
Pull down arrow next to login name upper right select profile, or user settings when page opens to profile,select link in tab that says Account. Then select/choose options, go down to Conversation Detail Options, Select Display mode Posts, NOT Activity, that selection of Posts will make the pages of discussions go to last post on last page rather than out of order that happens if you choose activity threads. Then be sure to go to bottom and select SAVE Changes in your profile options. You can then follow discussions by going through the pages, to the last page having latest responses. Then click on the other links Privacy, Notifications, to select viewing options,the forums get easier if you open all the tabs or links in your profile, user settings and select options. To join Super Member, pull down arrow next to login name, select User Settings and then click on tab/link at top that says Subscriptions.

Thank you for your patience and God Bless.

Diane S
https://carm.org/forum-rules
See more
See less

Anti- Calvinism

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Josheb View Post
    Off-topic rubbish nowhere in evidence in these posts.

    That is not what either text states. Romans 1: explicitly states they knew God but did not see fit to acknowledge God. This places them outside the category of those who believe in God salvifically. Furthermore, their "knowing" God occurs in the context of creation's testimony about the power of God, their own suppression of truth, and stands in stark contrast to the knowing God in manner in which the knower is also known (see Matthew 7:5 and Gal. 4:9, and Cor. 4:8).
    "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.... [whole bunch of bad stuff happens to them] ...And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are... haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, ...without understanding...." (Rom. 1:18-31, excerpted)
    "Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?' And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.’" (Mt. 7:22-23)
    "Because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, “Abba! Father!' Therefore you are no longer a slave, but a son; and if a son, then an heir through God. However at that time, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those which by nature are no gods. But now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God..." (Gal. 4:6-9)
    "Now concerning things sacrificed to idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge makes arrogant, but love edifies. If anyone supposes that he knows anything, he has not yet known as he ought to know; but if anyone loves God, he is known by Him." (1 Cor. 8:1-3)
    That kind of "belief" has absolutely no salvific validity, veracity, or efficacy. This can be understood in post postmodern times as the materialist who thoroughly exploring creation (which s/he calls the "universe" to remove it from its necessary divine origins) sees the truth of intelligence and inherent moral construct but refuses to acknowledge any of it because.... his thinking is futile, his heart is darkened, his flesh is hostile to God, and he has been given over to idolatrous lusts and depravity so that he is wicked and without understanding. That's what the text states, not what I made it say eisegetically.

    And it took me all of forty seconds to copy and paste those passages so every reader here can see the scriptures and the scriptural support for my commentary. There's no excuse for vague references to this chapter or that with some sembalnce of detail what it is we'd be looking for should we bother to get out our Bible to check the veracity of claims made.

    Nice dodge. You were asked for precedent and given three opportunities. Obfuscation about looking for names as errant and principle over specifics Fail. If you don't have a precedent then just say so. If you know there are none then just say so. As ironic as it may sound, "I have no explicit examples to cite" would be a place where we can find agreement. Then ad only then can we discuss what that means and what it means to assert a position for which there is no specific precedent.

    Two down, one to go. Make it good (or concede the effort).
    I've already shown you everything you need to understand my point.
    But for those reading and wanting to know I will repeat.
    Hebrews 11 tells us it is by faith that we understand that God exists and has created the world. We know that kind of faith does not save us. But it can be understood that God has given that faith to each person so they "know" He exists. Based on having that faith at work, when we then hear the truth, we are prepared to entrust ourselves to God if we so choose and be saved; but knowing by faith that God exists, does not save. You can see that in Romans 1 where there are people who know God exists (Hebrews says this is only by faith) but they suppress that truth and do not submit/entrust themselves to God and so are not saved. They become reprobate.
    This is clear and simple, despite this poster trying to convolute it.
    by faith we understand...
    Didn't I tell you that if you believe, you will see the glory of God?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Theo1689 View Post

      Wow.
      Not even CLOSE to my position.

      And that's why you can't QUOTE anything close to that in anything I've said.

      smh...
      And this post is a great example why nobody knows what YOU, Theo believe. All you do is deny everything, and in this case when a simple statement could be made to say what you DO believe, you refuse to say. Your posts are all negatives, no positives. You tell us what you don't believe, but never state clearly what you do believe.
      by faith we understand...
      Didn't I tell you that if you believe, you will see the glory of God?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by civic View Post

        all BELIEVERS(each one of YOU) a measure of faith.
        That measure of faith is one of those talents,
        which were buried in the parable.

        Calvinist buried that measure of faith by choice.


        The 2 end-time prophets will preach a return to the FOUNDATIONAL apostles and prophets to those, who are intoxicated on the Roman harlotry of adding tares to the word of God
        Get rid of the dross in the Roman Canon - Raise My Word to the HIGHEST place

        Comment


        • Originally posted by SethProton View Post

          And this post is a great example why nobody knows what YOU, Theo believe. All you do is deny everything, and in this case when a simple statement could be made to say what you DO believe, you refuse to say. Your posts are all negatives, no positives. You tell us what you don't believe, but never state clearly what you do believe.
          That's because that's not why I'm here.
          Every time I clarify one thing about my beliefs, you (or others) turn it into FIVE different misrepresentations.
          And I refuse to participate in enabling you to play your "game" of MISREPRESENTATION.

          Case in point was your last false claim that I allegedly said that I believe man's will is not a "participant".
          You don't care what I (or other Calvinists) believe.
          You're only interested in MISREPRESENTING us and trying to make Calvinism sound as ridiculous as possible.

          My main purpose here is to CORRECT MISREPRESENTATIONS of Calvinism constantly posted here.
          And your MISREPRESENTATIVE posts alone are enough to keep me busy for decades, sadly.
          "We are not to understand the other side; we are to discuss to expound the truth." -- A misguided apologist
          --------------------------------------------------------------------------
          "The Law is a storm which wrecks your hopes of self-salvation,
          but washes you upon the Rock of Ages."
          -- Charles Haddon Spurgeon

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Theo1689 View Post

            My main purpose here is to CORRECT MISREPRESENTATIONS of Calvinism constantly posted here.
            I preach the gospel
            and therefore don't have to defend a RELIGION
            The 2 end-time prophets will preach a return to the FOUNDATIONAL apostles and prophets to those, who are intoxicated on the Roman harlotry of adding tares to the word of God
            Get rid of the dross in the Roman Canon - Raise My Word to the HIGHEST place

            Comment


            • Originally posted by SethProton View Post
              You are right that I don't cite the verse when I think it is so well known that I don't need to. But for people who know the Bible, it is evident in what I write that i constantly quote scripture, I just don't always write down the reference. So instead of claiming "You don't reference scripture" If you think I am presenting an idea outside of scripture, just ask and I'll tell you where the idea comes from.
              No, Seth, that's simply not true at all.
              We have a TREMENDOUS understanding of the Bible, but since we don't understand the irrational way you think, we have no idea what "verse" you might be thinking of, since we KNOW that your beliefs don't have ANY Biblical support (which we've proved here countless times).

              The REAL reason you refuse to provide citations most of the time is because you know that if people actually SEE your "proof-texts", they will see VERY CLEARLY that they don't support your false teachings. Romans 1 is a case in point, since it is NOT about "faith" at all, but about KNOWLEDGE of God.

              We are well aware of the games you play... At least I am, since I have had to deal with you for year and years.

              Here is how your usual "dodging" game scenarios play out:

              Seth: My beliefs are Biblical!
              Critic: Then show us where SCRIPTURE supports your claim.
              Seth: Well, if you actually KNEW the Bible, you would know what I was referring to, so obviously you don't know the Bible at all.
              Critic: That's not true. Show us a verse.
              Seth: Okay, if you want me to provide you with a verse, just ask me, and I will gladly provide one.
              Critic: I just DID. I'm asking again. Provide us with a verse.
              Seth: Okay, if anyone who is SERIOUSLY interested in discussing this needs me to provide a verse, I will provide it gladly.
              Critic: Well, since you refuse to provide a verse, you're forcing me to guess. Is it this one?
              Seth: No, it's not. You obviously don't understand the Bible at all.
              Critic: I understand the Bible just fine. You simply don't have a verse that supports your claim.
              Seth: This verse is this....
              Critic: That doesn't say what you falsely claim it does.
              Seth: Of course it does. If you don't believe me, just go ask an English teacher you trust.
              Critic: That's not my job. Why don't YOU provide an English teacher who allegedly agrees with you?
              Seth: The only reason you don't see it is because you're under a stronghold!

              And so how many iterations of time do we waste before Seth FINALLY provides the verse (eg. Rom. 1), in which case we can IMMEDIATELY see that it doesn't speak of "faith" at all, but of "knowledge"? And of course, that's Seth's tactic, he hopes people will give up before he is forced to show his out-of-context "proof-texts".


              You should know by now that people DISAGREE with your views, and therefore they DISAGREE with your misinterpretations of Scripture. And the only way we can discuss the true meaning of a passage is if you are brave enough to actually QUOTE it and bring it up for discussion. So this should be the immediate expectation.

              And the fact that you refuse to do so (constantly) speaks VOLUMES.
              Last edited by Theo1689; 04-24-18, 08:34 PM.
              "We are not to understand the other side; we are to discuss to expound the truth." -- A misguided apologist
              --------------------------------------------------------------------------
              "The Law is a storm which wrecks your hopes of self-salvation,
              but washes you upon the Rock of Ages."
              -- Charles Haddon Spurgeon

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Theo1689 View Post

                We have a TREMENDOUS understanding of the Bible.
                By attempting to correct a poster
                doesn't prove that Calvinism is the truth.
                The 2 end-time prophets will preach a return to the FOUNDATIONAL apostles and prophets to those, who are intoxicated on the Roman harlotry of adding tares to the word of God
                Get rid of the dross in the Roman Canon - Raise My Word to the HIGHEST place

                Comment


                • Originally posted by SethProton View Post
                  Hebrews 11 tells us it is by faith that we understand that God exists and has created the world.
                  Aside from the fact that salvific faith is a gift from God, not a cognitive or volitional manifestation of the flesh, especially not the flesh of an unbeliever that point is irrelevant. IN addition, Hebrews 11 says much more about faith than "by faith we understand God exists and has created the world. You've grossly misrepresented Hebrews 11.

                  Furthermore, all of the people cited in the chapter were believers in God. They are not examples of futilely thinking, heart-darkened, mind-of-flesh, hostile-to-God dead slave unbelievers. You've just commited a false cause fallacy.
                  Originally posted by SethProton View Post
                  We know that kind of faith does not save us. But it can be understood that God has given that faith to each person so they "know" He exists.
                  Hmmm... think about what you've just written: non-salvific faith is somehow relevant to this discussion?

                  Furthermore, this point has already been addressed: the potential to know God exists is what exists. That knowledge is considered by the non-believer something to be considered.
                  Furthermore, it's not a function of faith, but of eeryday observation of creation's testimony. Faith is "the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen." Non-believers do not hope for an assurance of salvific things not seen. When you provide an explicit example of them doing so then we'll talk, but until then this is just another failed example of you eisegetically asserting things for which you have no explicit precedent.
                  Originally posted by SethProton View Post
                  Based on having that faith at work, when we then hear the truth, we are prepared to entrust ourselves to God...
                  No such precedent or principle is explicitly reported in scripture, and if you had such a scripture you should have posted it. The debate would be resolved in a fraction of a nanomicrosecond. No precedent = no evidence.
                  Originally posted by SethProton View Post
                  if we so choose and be saved...
                  Unbelievers do not choose that in which they do not believe. It is axiomatic. Believers choose, not unbelievers. Believers in God choose God. Believers in salvation choose salvation. Believers in the need for salvation choose salvation. Unbelievers don't ask the God they don't believe exists for anything.

                  When you provide an example of a futilely thinking, heart-darkened, given over to evil lusts and depravity, unknowing, non-understanding, mind of flesh dead-in-sin, hostile to God unbeliever choosing to be saved then we'll talk. Until then yours is a position without a single precedent in scripture.
                  Originally posted by SethProton View Post
                  ...but knowing by faith that God exists, does not save.
                  Agreed.
                  Originally posted by SethProton View Post
                  (Hebrews says this is only by faith)
                  Where? The word "only" is nowhere found in chapter 11.
                  Originally posted by SethProton View Post
                  You can see that in Romans 1 where there are people who know God exists but they suppress that truth and do not submit/entrust themselves to God and so are not saved.
                  And not a word of it is attributed to human volition. It is all either a consequence of sin's tyranny or God's sovereignty.
                  Originally posted by SethProton View Post
                  They become reprobate.
                  No, they did not "become" reprobate. They were given over to it. There's no mention of their choosing it, no mention of them being given a choice. No mention human will is involved in reprobation at all.

                  The volitional position is entirely eisegetic, entirely inferential.

                  And there isn't a single explicit example in the entirety of the Bible of anyone reported to "I choose depravity." They choose to disobey and the instantaneous unasked-for response is death and slavery. Sin does not ask permission.
                  Originally posted by SethProton View Post
                  This is clear and simple, despite this poster trying to convolute it.
                  Except that it is neither. Its all a product of eisegetic inference at best, fantastical imagination at worst (or delusion).
                  Originally posted by SethProton View Post
                  I've already shown you everything you need to understand my point.
                  The evidence says otherwise.

                  What was shown is wanton liberty in speculative interpretation of scripture based on a pre-existing bias and a refusal to consider all of scripture as written and let scripture interpret scripture.


                  I asked for one thing: a single explicit example of an unbeliever doing any of the claims made salvifically. I gave you three opportunities to accomplish that one single request and now three attempts later there is no explicitly reported example.

                  Every single Calvinist can point to many examples of believers having salvific faith, many examples of believers choosing God, several examples of scripture assigning causality to God and His will, not human will.

                  So when it all comes down to it the debate evidences:

                  God did it: lots of explicit mentions.
                  Believer's did it: lots of mentions.
                  Unbeliever's will did it: not a single explicit mention.


                  Volitionalism is a position absent a single explicit example in the entirety of the Bible. God saved you because He wanted to do so and He did not ask you, "Would you like Me to save you?" with an option of not saving you. Such an impotent act defies the very premise of an Almighty God.


                  Three strikes: you're out.
                  All verses cited or quoted or in the NAS unless otherwise noted.

                  “if anyone competes as an athlete, he does not win the prize unless he competes according to the rules.” (2 Tim. 2:5)

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Josheb View Post



                    Volitionalism is a position absent a single explicit example in the entirety of the Bible. God saved you because He wanted to do so and He did not ask you, "Would you like Me to save you?" with an option of not saving you. Such an impotent act defies the very premise of an Almighty God.

                    .
                    I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance (Mt 9:13).

                    That is problematic for Calvinists,
                    as those enslaved to sin
                    don't have a choice to respond to the call of Jesus.
                    The 2 end-time prophets will preach a return to the FOUNDATIONAL apostles and prophets to those, who are intoxicated on the Roman harlotry of adding tares to the word of God
                    Get rid of the dross in the Roman Canon - Raise My Word to the HIGHEST place

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Josheb View Post

                      Volitionalism is a position absent a single explicit example in the entirety of the Bible. God saved you because He wanted to do so and He did not ask you, "Would you like Me to save you?" with an option of not saving you. Such an impotent act defies the very premise of an Almighty God.


                      .
                      Originally posted by Josheb View Post
                      God did decide to shed his grace on someone before they chose to accept Him as LORD.
                      Is it grace to force people to accept the sufficient sacrifice of Christ?
                      The 2 end-time prophets will preach a return to the FOUNDATIONAL apostles and prophets to those, who are intoxicated on the Roman harlotry of adding tares to the word of God
                      Get rid of the dross in the Roman Canon - Raise My Word to the HIGHEST place

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Josheb View Post
                        Aside from the fact that salvific faith is a gift from God, not a cognitive or volitional manifestation of the flesh, especially not the flesh of an unbeliever that point is irrelevant. IN addition, Hebrews 11 says much more about faith than "by faith we understand God exists and has created the world. You've grossly misrepresented Hebrews 11.

                        Furthermore, all of the people cited in the chapter were believers in God. They are not examples of futilely thinking, heart-darkened, mind-of-flesh, hostile-to-God dead slave unbelievers. You've just commited a false cause fallacy.

                        Hmmm... think about what you've just written: non-salvific faith is somehow relevant to this discussion?

                        Furthermore, this point has already been addressed: the potential to know God exists is what exists. That knowledge is considered by the non-believer something to be considered.
                        Furthermore, it's not a function of faith, but of eeryday observation of creation's testimony. Faith is "the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen." Non-believers do not hope for an assurance of salvific things not seen. When you provide an explicit example of them doing so then we'll talk, but until then this is just another failed example of you eisegetically asserting things for which you have no explicit precedent.

                        No such precedent or principle is explicitly reported in scripture, and if you had such a scripture you should have posted it. The debate would be resolved in a fraction of a nanomicrosecond. No precedent = no evidence.

                        Unbelievers do not choose that in which they do not believe. It is axiomatic. Believers choose, not unbelievers. Believers in God choose God. Believers in salvation choose salvation. Believers in the need for salvation choose salvation. Unbelievers don't ask the God they don't believe exists for anything.

                        When you provide an example of a futilely thinking, heart-darkened, given over to evil lusts and depravity, unknowing, non-understanding, mind of flesh dead-in-sin, hostile to God unbeliever choosing to be saved then we'll talk. Until then yours is a position without a single precedent in scripture.

                        Agreed.

                        Where? The word "only" is nowhere found in chapter 11.

                        And not a word of it is attributed to human volition. It is all either a consequence of sin's tyranny or God's sovereignty.

                        No, they did not "become" reprobate. They were given over to it. There's no mention of their choosing it, no mention of them being given a choice. No mention human will is involved in reprobation at all.

                        The volitional position is entirely eisegetic, entirely inferential.

                        And there isn't a single explicit example in the entirety of the Bible of anyone reported to "I choose depravity." They choose to disobey and the instantaneous unasked-for response is death and slavery. Sin does not ask permission.

                        Except that it is neither. Its all a product of eisegetic inference at best, fantastical imagination at worst (or delusion).

                        The evidence says otherwise.

                        What was shown is wanton liberty in speculative interpretation of scripture based on a pre-existing bias and a refusal to consider all of scripture as written and let scripture interpret scripture.


                        I asked for one thing: a single explicit example of an unbeliever doing any of the claims made salvifically. I gave you three opportunities to accomplish that one single request and now three attempts later there is no explicitly reported example.

                        Every single Calvinist can point to many examples of believers having salvific faith, many examples of believers choosing God, several examples of scripture assigning causality to God and His will, not human will.

                        So when it all comes down to it the debate evidences:

                        God did it: lots of explicit mentions.
                        Believer's did it: lots of mentions.
                        Unbeliever's will did it: not a single explicit mention.


                        Volitionalism is a position absent a single explicit example in the entirety of the Bible. God saved you because He wanted to do so and He did not ask you, "Would you like Me to save you?" with an option of not saving you. Such an impotent act defies the very premise of an Almighty God.


                        Three strikes: you're out.
                        Indeed game , set and match !
                        His true identity as both Lord (κύριος used by the LXX to translate Yahweh) and God (θεός used by the LXX to translate Elohim)netbible John 20:28[In John's writings] Of the approximately 70 instances in which ουτος has a personal referent, as many as 44 of them (almost 2/3) refer to the Son. Of the remainder most imply some sort of positive connection with the Son.What is most significant is that NEVER is the Father the referent. 1 John 5:20, Wallace

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by civic View Post

                          Indeed game , set and match !
                          hurray! Your side won your game.
                          Last edited by SethProton; 04-25-18, 04:12 AM.
                          by faith we understand...
                          Didn't I tell you that if you believe, you will see the glory of God?

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Josheb View Post
                            Aside from the fact that salvific faith is a gift from God, not a cognitive or volitional manifestation of the flesh, especially not the flesh of an unbeliever that point is irrelevant. IN addition, Hebrews 11 says much more about faith than "by faith we understand God exists and has created the world. You've grossly misrepresented Hebrews 11.

                            Furthermore, all of the people cited in the chapter were believers in God. They are not examples of futilely thinking, heart-darkened, mind-of-flesh, hostile-to-God dead slave unbelievers. You've just commited a false cause fallacy.

                            Hmmm... think about what you've just written: non-salvific faith is somehow relevant to this discussion?

                            Furthermore, this point has already been addressed: the potential to know God exists is what exists. That knowledge is considered by the non-believer something to be considered.
                            Furthermore, it's not a function of faith, but of eeryday observation of creation's testimony. Faith is "the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen." Non-believers do not hope for an assurance of salvific things not seen. When you provide an explicit example of them doing so then we'll talk, but until then this is just another failed example of you eisegetically asserting things for which you have no explicit precedent.

                            No such precedent or principle is explicitly reported in scripture, and if you had such a scripture you should have posted it. The debate would be resolved in a fraction of a nanomicrosecond. No precedent = no evidence.

                            Unbelievers do not choose that in which they do not believe. It is axiomatic. Believers choose, not unbelievers. Believers in God choose God. Believers in salvation choose salvation. Believers in the need for salvation choose salvation. Unbelievers don't ask the God they don't believe exists for anything.

                            When you provide an example of a futilely thinking, heart-darkened, given over to evil lusts and depravity, unknowing, non-understanding, mind of flesh dead-in-sin, hostile to God unbeliever choosing to be saved then we'll talk. Until then yours is a position without a single precedent in scripture.

                            Agreed.

                            Where? The word "only" is nowhere found in chapter 11.

                            And not a word of it is attributed to human volition. It is all either a consequence of sin's tyranny or God's sovereignty.

                            No, they did not "become" reprobate. They were given over to it. There's no mention of their choosing it, no mention of them being given a choice. No mention human will is involved in reprobation at all.

                            The volitional position is entirely eisegetic, entirely inferential.

                            And there isn't a single explicit example in the entirety of the Bible of anyone reported to "I choose depravity." They choose to disobey and the instantaneous unasked-for response is death and slavery. Sin does not ask permission.

                            Except that it is neither. Its all a product of eisegetic inference at best, fantastical imagination at worst (or delusion).

                            The evidence says otherwise.

                            What was shown is wanton liberty in speculative interpretation of scripture based on a pre-existing bias and a refusal to consider all of scripture as written and let scripture interpret scripture.


                            I asked for one thing: a single explicit example of an unbeliever doing any of the claims made salvifically. I gave you three opportunities to accomplish that one single request and now three attempts later there is no explicitly reported example.

                            Every single Calvinist can point to many examples of believers having salvific faith, many examples of believers choosing God, several examples of scripture assigning causality to God and His will, not human will.

                            So when it all comes down to it the debate evidences:

                            God did it: lots of explicit mentions.
                            Believer's did it: lots of mentions.
                            Unbeliever's will did it: not a single explicit mention.


                            Volitionalism is a position absent a single explicit example in the entirety of the Bible. God saved you because He wanted to do so and He did not ask you, "Would you like Me to save you?" with an option of not saving you. Such an impotent act defies the very premise of an Almighty God.


                            Three strikes: you're out.
                            For the readers, let me repeat again, so they might be clear on this concept. It is by faith that we know God exists. Just knowing God exists does not save us. We have to entrust ourselves to Him, or said another way in the Bible, we have to mix faith with the truth and trust God to save us.
                            God gives us that measure of faith so that we can know He exists, but simply knowing by faith that God exists does not by itself save us.
                            Last edited by SethProton; 04-25-18, 03:58 AM.
                            by faith we understand...
                            Didn't I tell you that if you believe, you will see the glory of God?

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Theo1689 View Post

                              No, Seth, that's simply not true at all.
                              We have a TREMENDOUS understanding of the Bible, but since we don't understand the irrational way you think, we have no idea what "verse" you might be thinking of, since we KNOW that your beliefs don't have ANY Biblical support (which we've proved here countless times).

                              The REAL reason you refuse to provide citations most of the time is because you know that if people actually SEE your "proof-texts", they will see VERY CLEARLY that they don't support your false teachings. Romans 1 is a case in point, since it is NOT about "faith" at all, but about KNOWLEDGE of God.

                              We are well aware of the games you play... At least I am, since I have had to deal with you for year and years.

                              Here is how your usual "dodging" game scenarios play out:

                              Seth: My beliefs are Biblical!
                              Critic: Then show us where SCRIPTURE supports your claim.
                              Seth: Well, if you actually KNEW the Bible, you would know what I was referring to, so obviously you don't know the Bible at all.
                              Critic: That's not true. Show us a verse.
                              Seth: Okay, if you want me to provide you with a verse, just ask me, and I will gladly provide one.
                              Critic: I just DID. I'm asking again. Provide us with a verse.
                              Seth: Okay, if anyone who is SERIOUSLY interested in discussing this needs me to provide a verse, I will provide it gladly.
                              Critic: Well, since you refuse to provide a verse, you're forcing me to guess. Is it this one?
                              Seth: No, it's not. You obviously don't understand the Bible at all.
                              Critic: I understand the Bible just fine. You simply don't have a verse that supports your claim.
                              Seth: This verse is this....
                              Critic: That doesn't say what you falsely claim it does.
                              Seth: Of course it does. If you don't believe me, just go ask an English teacher you trust.
                              Critic: That's not my job. Why don't YOU provide an English teacher who allegedly agrees with you?
                              Seth: The only reason you don't see it is because you're under a stronghold!

                              And so how many iterations of time do we waste before Seth FINALLY provides the verse (eg. Rom. 1), in which case we can IMMEDIATELY see that it doesn't speak of "faith" at all, but of "knowledge"? And of course, that's Seth's tactic, he hopes people will give up before he is forced to show his out-of-context "proof-texts".


                              You should know by now that people DISAGREE with your views, and therefore they DISAGREE with your misinterpretations of Scripture. And the only way we can discuss the true meaning of a passage is if you are brave enough to actually QUOTE it and bring it up for discussion. So this should be the immediate expectation.

                              And the fact that you refuse to do so (constantly) speaks VOLUMES.
                              I never refuse to cite scripture. Never.
                              Last edited by SethProton; 04-25-18, 04:11 AM.
                              by faith we understand...
                              Didn't I tell you that if you believe, you will see the glory of God?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by refromedguy
                                Common sense in this situation is simply a dodge.
                                Actually, common sense is common to us all b/c God put it in everyone's heart. It is, for instance, instinctive for everyone who knows about God to believe that He is fair and equitable.

                                skypair

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X