| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 04/19/2004 7:52:52 PM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
This thread has 183 abuse reports. It’s now locked. Maybe you can all get along better on the next thread. |
Posted on 03/10/2004 9:37:27 PM PST by malakhi
| Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams |
Then there is the punishment part. How can we be held accountable for what we do or don't do if we were given no choice? It just doen't make sense to me.
Isaiah 25
6 And in this mountain will YHWH of hosts make unto all peoples a feast of fat things, a feast of wines on the lees, of fat things full of marrow, of wines on the lees well refined.
7 And He will destroy in this mountain the face of the covering that is cast over all peoples, and the veil that is spread over all nations.
8 He will swallow up death for ever; and the Lord YHWH will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the reproach of His people will He take away from off all the earth; for YHWH hath spoken it.
9 And it shall be said in that day: 'Lo, this is our God, for whom we waited, that He might save us; this is YHWH, for whom we waited, we will be glad and rejoice in His salvation.'
From the JPS - Divine Name Restored
Perhaps because you catch more flies with honey. And I would wager an even $10 that not one word that the Calvinists have uttered in response to Steven's announcement has had one iota of effect upon him other than "yup, that's about what I expected." And that's not something to take pride in.
I will still debate doctrinal, historical and cultural points with vigor with Steven. But, I would further wager that conversions in 80% of the cases are not accomplished by study, but by relationship. And it's mighty hard to have a relationship with someone you hold at arm's length.
When you ridicule a spiritual journey as illogical and conversions as proof of wrongness before which therefore invalidates the present conversion, you should only expect that your own conversions would and should be examined. Otherwise, you're a naive debater. Or perhaps thick-headed.
The feisty old school marm schtick is tired. Let it die.
That is not what the gospel says ...but for some reason Arminians never give up hope that their personalities or their walk will save .
Perhaps you could show me in Scripture where one's "walk" is not a valid witnessing tool. I may have missed that....I am prepared to be deluged with a veritable avalanche of totally irrelevant Scripture on how loving people is really screaming in their face that they're going to Hell. I know you must post those, so carry on. But humor me and throw in at least one or two that are relevant. I wait with bated breath.
Must've missed this post. Perhaps you'd like to repost it? Perhaps we can add taglines which are more evangelically oriented. Or we could post little graphic images in each post which pointed to our absolute and total devotion to the spreading of the Gospel. I'm sure you have a lot of good ideas for us here.
Did Jesus come for the sick or for the well? And how did the religious leaders respond to Jesus "fellowshipping with darkness?" I'm sure you have wiggle room here, so commence to wiggling.
1 Corinthians 11:1 Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ.
First of all, you have created a false dichotomy, in which the only two options are an ecumenical feel-goodism where we all just sit in a circle and sing Kum-ba-yah and avoid any points of disagreement and a Calvinist theocracy. Yes, I'm overstating the case, just as you overstated yours. Tis the nature of false dichotomies. As my grandpa says "Them ain't the only two choices."
Secondly, I think if you are honest you will admit that you have overstated Cindy's case that it is simply "being nice and happy" that wins people to the Lord (though this is an approach that is not often tried by Christians contrary to your opinion).
Finally, you have separated the preaching of the Gospel from the "walk." They cannot be separated. They are inextricably linked. If one's walk is off-kilter then their preaching is going to be like a gong in the world's ears. And if the presentation of the Gospel is lacking, then there is no real walk to begin with. It is the Protestant Reformation mind which has exalted the collegiate lecture to the ultimate pinnacle of presentation of the Gospel. In the New Testament instead, we see house churches, we see discipling, we see one-on-one contact, we see the "follow me as I follow Christ" concept. And that is one of the fundamental means of presentation of the Gospel in the New Testament.
Um....I know it will pain you so, but Arminians don't believe we save ourselves or others. No soup for you. Next.
Other than occasional pillow fights over doctrine that has been debated over and over, there is no serious attempt to counter the false doctrines taught here by non Christians .
I sincerely hope you devote as much vim and vigor in your prayer life to this situation as you devote to chastising people who disagree with you doctrinally. I know this is frustrating to see someone leave the fold of Christianity, but bashing a different thread of Christian beliefs will not bring Steven back.
You do a remarkable impression of a donkey. I wonder if it ever sinks in that there is an actual person on the other end of the post you are addressing? And, perhaps, just perhaps, Mack is frustrated by his friend's renunciation of his faith. But no, that's not important. What's important is that you get your Calvinist dig in and insult him, his abilities and his doctrine in one fell swoop. Take a bow, big guy. You've earned it.
Um...again, for the record, Arminians do not believe that grace is not the means of salvation. But prattle on....and on....and on.
Then why don't you leave this thread? I don't mean that as an inane retort. I mean it as a sincere disinvitation to be true to your own beliefs and leave. If light truly has no fellowship with darkness and we've got darkness here, then by your argument you shouldn't be here. I await your next post to prove me wrong.
That's cuz you're not God....or a Calvinist. The difference between the two referents is slight, but noticeable. Mainly by the ability to move mountains and save humanity in the first case. Though the second group manages to move mountains of paper and rail against humanity.
Well, either God decides or man decides.
And I doubt anything God does is "random." The God of Exodus who explained Himself to Moses as "I AM that I AM," sounds pretty definite to me.
"My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand." - John 10:27-29.
How can we be held accountable?
Each man is responsible for his own actions. And everyone will end up where their nature's take them.
"Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why has thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor?" - Romans 9:20-21
We are all fallen and none is deserving of heaven. Yet through His mercy some are brought to repentance and faith, their sins paid for by the gracious gift of Christ's sacrifice.
But none of this is a surprise to God. He wrote the script.
But it's good you seem to find fault with this "I got grace 'cause I'm so good" theology of the Arminians.
That was your point, wasn't it?
Difficult to tell with all the dripping sarcasm cluttering up your posts.
Or thinking you contributed to the salvation of someone else? (as has been claimed here by your side a number of times).
And even trying to argue who is "more humble" really makes my point for me, don't you think??? Hmmm?
More insightful, obedient, righteous or simply luckier than others?
Boy... now THAT is an interesting one from a Calvinist. God choses to elect some people and not others.... If there is any "side" to this debate whose salvation relies on "luck" I would think it would be yours. I certainly haven't seen a Catholic or Baptist/Bible Christian here thinking they were "luckier" than the rest.
"More obedient" or "More righteous"? Again, I would think you would actually read the posts here before spouting off. Only one side here has been acting as if they are more righteous...
Or does it seem prudent and faithful to Scripture to say I had nothing to do with my salvation ( But of course you had LOTS to do with the salvation of others?)
Yeah, we can see that humility and lack of self-righteousness just oooozing out of every pore.
"Faith alone" was the standard of the Reformation.
True. But not the standard of Scripture. Interesting that you would base your salvation on a word that is not even there? (even underlining it to show how important it is). But of course your faith is in your own faith.
Faith in Christ and Christ alone is the standard or your redeemer. If you want to add words to Scripture, the "alone" should at least modify "Christ".. not "faith".
Really? No kidding?
When I use a shovel to dig a hole does the shovel say "I dug a hole"? And then talk to the other shovels about how he did it and they didn't?
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.