Replies

Man , this is starting to get confusing. First OP states that Palmer is wrong about Total Depravity and Absolute Predestination being interdependent, the_doc claiming that Palmer would agree with the_doc without you knowing if the_doc ever read Palmer, and then you implying that the_doc doesn't even need to read Palmer, a Calvinist with impeccable credentials, to know what Palmer would agree with.

If Palmer, a Calvinist amongst Calvinists, asserts that all five points of Calvinism are interdependent, and OP claims that they are not; who is correct? They can't both be right, can they? Then on top of that, the_doc agrees with OP while at the same time asserting that Palmer would agree with the_doc (even though the_doc may not have read Palmer), yet Palmer and OP have differing opinions on the interdependency of the five points of Calvinism. I'd really like to see someone try to reconcile this mess.

It is only confusing and irreconcilable to one who doesn't understand the point that "doc" was making. Words do have meaning, and he was very precise with his usage.

At the same time, you need to recognize (having the charity to understand our position, again) that just because someone, John Calvin included, says something as a "Calvinist" doesn't mean that we have to toe the line. I don't mean to confuse you over this anymore than you already are, but we normally don't give a fig for other men's opinions.

Man , this is starting to get confusing. First OP states that Palmer is wrong about Total Depravity and Absolute Predestination being interdependent, the_doc claiming that Palmer would agree with the_doc without you knowing if the_doc ever read Palmer, and then you implying that the_doc doesn't even need to read Palmer, a Calvinist with impeccable credentials, to know what Palmer would agree with. If Palmer, a Calvinist amongst Calvinists, asserts that all five points of Calvinism are interdependent, and OP claims that they are not; who is correct? They can't both be right, can they? Then on top of that, the_doc agrees with OP while at the same time asserting that Palmer would agree with the_doc (even though the_doc may not have read Palmer), yet Palmer and OP have differing opinions on the interdependency of the five points of Calvinism. I'd really like to see someone try to reconcile this mess.

Okay.

If your characterization of Palmer is accurate, and Palmer maintains that absolute predestination is dependent upon the doctrine of Total Depravity, he's wrong.

It is impossible to "get around" Absolute Predestination as long as God is Omniscient, whether or not Man is totally depraved in the equation, as I have demonstrated. See, if you thought that there were any way "around" Absolute Predestination, you would attempt to answer my #593:

Matthew 11: 20 - 27 -- Then Jesus began to denounce the cities in which most of his miracles had been performed, because they did not repent. "Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you. And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted up to the skies? No, you will go down to the depths. If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day. But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you." At that time Jesus said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure." All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.

God foreknew Tyre and Sidon's free choice NOT TO REPENT in the case of His non-performance of such Miracles; AND
God foreknew Tyre and Sidon's free choice TO REPENT in the case of His performance of such Miracles; AND
God CHOSE not to perform these Miracles in Tyre and Sidon, a choice which had as its perfectly foreknown result the NON-Repentance of Tyre and Sidon, just as He foreknew.
True, or False?

But you are unwilling to answer this point, because you know that there is no answer you can bring which will not acknowledge God's absolute pre-determination of Man's individual choices. You know that the Bible is showing you this, and you do not want to believe the Bible. That's a bad spiritual condition in which to be.