MARK BSNR: Since the accuracy of your posts is very well known and understand, I shall. Aruanan, is that what you posted?
Aruanan posted the following post, for which I thanked him...
Let's ask a lutheran -- xzins, did Luther believe in double-predestination? Well, how does this sound? It is from Luther's Bondage of the Will, Section X.
"Hence it irresistibly follows, that all which we do, and all which happens, although it seem to happen mutably and contingently, does in reality happen necessarily and unalterably, insofar as respects the will of God. For the will of God is efficacious, and such as cannot be thwarted; since the power of God is itself a part of his nature: it is also wise, so that it cannot be misled. And since his will is not thwarted, the work which he wills cannot be prevented ; but must be produced in the very place, time, and measure which he himself both foresees and wills." "If God does not foreknow all events absolutely, there must be defect either in his will, or in his knowledge ; what happens must either be against his will, or beside his knowledge. Either he meant otherwise than the event, or had no meaning at all about the event, or foresaw another event, or did not foresee any event at all. But the truth is, what he willed in past eternity, he wills now; the thing now executed is what he has intended to execute from everlasting; for his will is eternal: just as the thing which has now happened is what he saw in past eternity; because his knowledge is eternal." Wednesday, February 02, 2011 2:57:00 PM · 2,929 of 3,126 aruanan to Cronos
"God foreknows nothing contingently, but foresees, and purposes, and accomplishes every thing, by an unchangeable, eternal, and infallible will. But, by this thunderbolt, Freewill is struck to the earth and completely ground to powder. Those who would assert Freewill, therefore, must either deny, or disguise, or, by some other means, repel this thunderbolt from them."
This was followed by aruanan wondering who questioned the established fact of Luther's belief in double predestination here...
DR.E: That excerpt from Luther certainly does support double predestination. ARUANAN: Who disagreed and claimed it did not? 2,946 posted on Wednesday, February 02, 2011 4:43:10 PM by aruanan To: Dr. Eckleburg
And I responded to aruanan with this. (Note, you were included even here)...
DR.E: That excerpt from Luther certainly does support double predestination. ARUANAN: Who disagreed and claimed it did not? Cronos and Markbsnr have denied that Luther taught double predestination. Therefore I was surprised by your agreement with my posts stating Luther did indeed believe in a double predestination, as evidenced by your quote. I'm delighted. May this be the first of many theological agreements between us. (wink wink nudge nudge) 2,947 posted on Wednesday, February 02, 2011 4:56:59 PM by Dr. Eckleburg To: aruanan; Cronos; MarkBsnr; xzins
So as anyone (you, too, God willing) can see, you were notified TWICE of aruanan's agreement that Luther believed in double predestination, as outlined in POST 2,945
Three little posts
All in a row
Hopefully teach
What Mark doesn't know.
MARK BSNR: Since the accuracy of your posts is very well known and understand, I shall. Aruanan, is that what you posted?
Aruanan posted the following post, for which I thanked him...
I don't recall asking you. I asked aruanan. I'm sure that (s)he can speak reasonably well and does not need the equivalent of Robert Gibbs to be a mouthpiece.
I asked if aruanan posted this and was hoping to start an exchange which would lead to the posting of reasons for these statements, since I could not arrive at those conclusions from the posted words.
Three little posts
All in a row
Hopefully teach
What Mark doesn't know.
All three are not in a row. However, I will appreciate aruanan telling us where these passages tell us that men are predestined to hell, if you can possibly stop skipping around in a little circle and singing nursery rhymes.