Replies

The reason that is is because God chose to have it that way! He wanted creatures to freely choose for Him, which meant that the choice had to be a real one, not directed by Him. God could have made us all loving Him and there would have been no Fall. God was willing to endure the rejection of some, to have the free love of others. That is the very nature of love, a desire for a true response. Calvinism tends to think that God is some sought of inpersonal force, indifferent to the response of man, but on the contrary, God is always striving with man, until man's own rejection is so stubborn that man must now face God's wrath and not His love. (Acts.7:51)

There you go again, projecting your false understanding of Calvinism onto a faulty position. God is by no means seen as impersonal or indifferent. On the contrary, He is extremely engaged and involved. By the very presence of your doctrine of prevenient grace you are in a sense invalidating your statement that "He wanted creatures to freely choose for Him, which meant that the choice had to be a real one, not directed by Him." If that were true, He never would have interfered and we'd all be lost.

There you go again, projecting your false understanding of Calvinism onto a faulty position. ~ Frumanchu

The problem is that he has a false understanding of the Bible. Such things happen when you don't have a Truth receptor. Woody.

The reason that is is because God chose to have it that way! He wanted creatures to freely choose for Him, which meant that the choice had to be a real one, not directed by Him. God could have made us all loving Him and there would have been no Fall. God was willing to endure the rejection of some, to have the free love of others. That is the very nature of love, a desire for a true response. Calvinism tends to think that God is some sought of inpersonal force, indifferent to the response of man, but on the contrary, God is always striving with man, until man's own rejection is so stubborn that man must now face God's wrath and not His love. (Acts.7:51) There you go again, projecting your false understanding of Calvinism onto a faulty position. God is by no means seen as impersonal or indifferent. On the contrary, He is extremely engaged and involved.

According to Calvinism everything has been fixed in eternity according to God's own directive will, thus, there is no dynamic to the relationship between God and man.

By the very presence of your doctrine of prevenient grace you are in a sense invalidating your statement that "He wanted creatures to freely choose for Him, which meant that the choice had to be a real one, not directed by Him." If that were true, He never would have interfered and we'd all be lost.

It is clear that you have no intention of even trying to understand the nature of 'pervenient' grace.

Prevenient grace is not irresistable as is the 'sovereign grace' of Calvinism.

It can be rejected, just as you resist grace when you sin, or does God want you to sin?

God was willing to endure the rejection of some, to have the free love of others

Here is the heart of the fault of your position. In your world, God is passively waiting, hoping, that some will choose Him. He is pining away for responsive love, wringing His Hands, hoping that some will freely choose to love Him. Your God is a wimpy girly-man who hasn't got an ounce of integrity or backbone, because He gave away the only power He had over man, the will. And yet you try to also say that God exercises control over history and events, but cannot breach man's free will. You make man's will actually more powerful than God Himself.

You neglect and refuse to understand that unregenerate man cannot EVER, in any way, by any means, choose God. He won't do it, not because he wills not to do it, but because he is INCAPABLE of doing so. It requires an act of Grace on God's part to give man the ability to even make that choice. You cannot discount the scriptures that state it is totally within God's power as to who is saved and who is not. You make the unsaved an active choice on God's part, and the saved a passive choice on God's part, reversing clear scriptural evidence that it is the exact opposite. You make God an impotent, love-sick, wimpy Diety who will do nearly anything to get man to love Him and choose Him (all your talk about moving Heaven and Earth to get the Gospel to him), and is heartbroken over those who reject Him (which doesn't happen in an active sense, as man's nature is rejection of God by birth, not by choice).

You have not answered that which I have posted yet. I have posted it twice, and you refuse to address it. I can only assume that you refuse to for one of two reasons: you don't know how to address it, or you don't want to, because it makes swiss cheese of your precious free will.