Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: xzins, Jerry_M, CCWoody, RnMomof7
Come on, bud, you know that it isn't a lie if it's what I believe. You could call it wrong, misguided, silly, etc., but it isn't a lie.

Yes, it is a lie. It is a lie about the words of Jesus.

This is what you said: "Jesus declared infants innocent."
Now, cite the specific scripture where Jesus expressly states, "Infants are innocent of Sin".

If you can't, you are lying. You are putting words into Jesus' mouth, unless you can cite a scripture where Jesus expressly and specifically states, "infants are innocent".

And to place your words in Jesus' mouth, is Blasphemy against the Son.

You are willing to tell lies about the Son Himself for the sake of protecting your religious "beliefs". Hmmmmmmmm.....

BTW, you owe me some editing on the definitions.

Only when you offer an OBJECTION to the Calvinist Doctrine of Total Depravity.

As you have worded it, your statement of the matter only reinforces Calvinism:

I'm sorry, but that's a very Calvinist statement. Did you have an objection to the Calvinist Doctrine of Total Depravity, perchance? Any?

893 posted on 03/01/2002 8:40:53 AM PST by OrthodoxPresbyterian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 884 | View Replies ]


To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
Now, cite the specific scripture where Jesus expressly states, "Infants are innocent of Sin".

I will as soon as you cite the specific scripture where Jesus expressly states, "All infants are part of the elect and go to heaven when they die."

And I asked you this last night and I'm still waiting. My question precedes yours. WHERE IS MY SCRIPTURE?

You "LIE" ABOUT THE WORDS OF JESUS according to your definition of lie. (In my definition, you simply have a faulty interpretation, but then again, Arminians believe in exercising grace not just talking about it.)

895 posted on 03/01/2002 8:45:25 AM PST by xzins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 893 | View Replies ]

To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
Your 893 falsely portrays my 765 from last night in bold letters:

Have the Arminians a one-sentence objection to the Doctrine of Total Depravity?

Yes. We would rewrite it as follows:

Total Depravity means that Natural Man is totally sinful AND HE CAN ONLY ever WANT in his own spirit to know Christ DUE TO GOD'S foreplanned divine intervention and preceding divine grace.

We object because calvinists leave out prevenient grace and the remaining vestiges of God's image. We've discussed this before. My saying this isn't a surprise to you is it?

AGAIN, YOU HAVE MY RESPONSE. That was the condition you set forward as to your assistance in editing the calvinistic tulip definitions. Will you or won't you honor your word?

901 posted on 03/01/2002 8:57:38 AM PST by xzins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 893 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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