Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Pelagian Captivity of the Church
Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals ^ | R. C. Sproul

Posted on 02/07/2004 12:26:51 PM PST by Gamecock

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 381-391 next last
To: P-Marlowe; Corin Stormhands; Alex Murphy; CCWoody; Dr. Eckleburg
Now for a news break:

John Kerry and Jane Fonda at a rally of some sort in Viet era. (Kerry behind Fonda ... over the middle of her head.)

Do you think it's Kerry? I do.

161 posted on 02/09/2004 12:25:17 PM PST by xzins (Retired Army and Proud of It!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: Wrigley
Man you guys have been spinning for so long its really getting funny.

The Independent Fundamental Baptist churches speak for themselves. They know what they believe even if you don't.


BigMack
162 posted on 02/09/2004 12:25:32 PM PST by PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: xzins; P-Marlowe; Dr. Eckleburg
I read it and didn't think it addressed the issues being discussed. Only tried to skirt them.

What I hear being asked is "how man a man be held accountable, if he has no choice in what he does?" Do I have the question right? And why is it that when I respond to questions asked by P-Marlowe, you're telling me I have his questions wrong? Are you sure you two are using the same script?

163 posted on 02/09/2004 12:26:23 PM PST by Alex Murphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain
You really can't speak for what each and every one of the church's believe then can you? So you can't say that each and every IFBC dismisses Calvinism.
164 posted on 02/09/2004 12:27:11 PM PST by Wrigley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
Yep. I just looked again at Marlowe's questions, and I don't think you answered them.
165 posted on 02/09/2004 12:30:00 PM PST by xzins (Retired Army and Proud of It!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: Wrigley
I never said that, come on my 12 neighbor can spin better than that.

I said it ain't a true IFBC if it accepts Calvinism.

BigMack
166 posted on 02/09/2004 12:30:50 PM PST by PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Do you think it's Kerry? I do.

Only if you'll agree that's Diane Keaton to the immediate right (our right) of your Kerry. ============

TWEEEEEEEEET

Flag on the field.

Attempted diversion, or change of the subject.

Penalty refused. Ball is back in court, subject being Pelagian doctrine.

167 posted on 02/09/2004 12:32:00 PM PST by Alex Murphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: xzins
I just looked again at Marlowe's questions, and I don't think you answered them.

Thanks for your opinion. What matters is if The Apostle Paul answered Marlowe's questions. You and I are just spectators, and I'm not sharing any of my Milk Duds.

168 posted on 02/09/2004 12:34:11 PM PST by Alex Murphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain
Is there a corporate, unified statement from these IFBC that proves your claim?

You're sounding Roman Catholic with all your "true" church talk.

169 posted on 02/09/2004 12:39:37 PM PST by Wrigley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: CCWoody
whatever
170 posted on 02/09/2004 12:49:24 PM PST by Corin Stormhands (www.wardsmythe.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7; P-Marlowe
You would have to go a long way to surprise God Marlowe

Please point me to where in anything Marlowe has said he indicated God was "surprised."

171 posted on 02/09/2004 12:50:52 PM PST by Corin Stormhands (www.wardsmythe.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands
Exactly what I've been thinking about the antics today of some of you Arminians.
172 posted on 02/09/2004 12:57:31 PM PST by CCWoody (Recognize that all true Christians will be Calvinists in glory,...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain
***#130 Sorry I missed it.***

Evidently some thin skinned person thought it worthy of extermination. You should be able to view it from your comments page, though.

Woody.
173 posted on 02/09/2004 12:59:40 PM PST by CCWoody (Recognize that all true Christians will be Calvinists in glory,...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Vernon
God is not the butler in His own house.

We thank God for His unmerited mercy because it is all of Him. Otherwise, salvation is only partially due to God's mercy and partially due to our clever choice.

174 posted on 02/09/2004 1:00:39 PM PST by Dr. Eckleburg (There are very few shades of gray.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy; P-Marlowe
Not only since he was a little child, P-Marlowe, but if you'd open your Bible and start reading Romans 9:11, you'd see that He hated Esau before Esau was even born.

(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) [Rom. 9:11].

God rejected the first born, and chose the younger son. At that time Jacob had done no good, and Esau had done no evil. It does not rest upon birth that was identical and it does not rest upon their character or their works. Paul makes the entire choice rest upon "the purpose of God according to election." He further qualifies his statement that it is not of works, but rests upon God who calls. However, the calling in this verse is not to salvation.

It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger [Rom. 9:12].

This is from Genesis 25:23, which was given before the two boys were born. "And the Lord said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger."

As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated [Rom. 9:13].

This is from the last book in the Old Testament, see Mal. 1:2–3. This statement was not made until the two boys had lived their lives and two nations had come from them, which was about two thousand years later, and much history had been made.

I believe its called context. :)

BigMack

175 posted on 02/09/2004 1:02:19 PM PST by PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: Wrigley
Correct. That's the fundamental difference between Calvinist Baptist and Presbyterian -- the form of church governing.

Presbys hold to a horizontal accountability of churches within the faith, per Calvin, and Baptists don't. Each church is free to decide.

176 posted on 02/09/2004 1:04:53 PM PST by Dr. Eckleburg (There are very few shades of gray.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: Vernon; Dr. Eckleburg; P-Marlowe; Corin Stormhands; CCWoody
Otherwise, salvation is only partially due to God's mercy and partially due to our clever choice.

it fascinates me that this argument is a backhanded way of saying that free will ---> works righteousness. How often does it need to be repeated that the Bible itself does not consider believing to be a work.

But there are squawks when someone says: total decree = "God willed Hitler to be the murderer of 6 million Jews."

177 posted on 02/09/2004 1:07:58 PM PST by xzins (Retired Army and Proud of It!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: CCWoody
Bless your heart.
178 posted on 02/09/2004 1:08:22 PM PST by Corin Stormhands (www.wardsmythe.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain; P-Marlowe
However, the calling in this verse is not to salvation.

Again, funny how I address posts to Marlowe, and only get direct responses from others. Check your playbooks again. Which one of you is the ventrioquist, and which one the puppet?

You missed Paul making a direct connection between the two OT quotes, in verses 12 and 13, tying both together into verse 15, and wrapping up by summarizing the principle in verse 16. God wills whom He wills, and the "willed" cannot refuse Him. The overall context is found a few verses back, in verse 8:

"it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendents".

Everything that follows in the chapter, from Esau to pottery, ties back into this. Are you really going to tell me that a discussion about who constitutes the children of God is not a discussion which includes salvation?

But then again, Marlowe's question didn't deal with salvation, either.

I believe its called context. :)

179 posted on 02/09/2004 1:20:35 PM PST by Alex Murphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
Now tell me its false and I will retract it. Tell me that God did not approve of what Hitler and Dahmer did.

There is a well-known Freeper who was a H.S. classmate of Dahmer. But then, I graduated from H.S. with Robert Yates, the Spokane serial killer.

180 posted on 02/09/2004 1:25:21 PM PST by connectthedots (Recognize that not all Calvinists will be Christians in glory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 381-391 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson