Can We Really Exercise Free Will?

[HeIsHere]

No. Not really.

We are merely responding to faulty arguments, various fallacies, non-sequiturs, misapprehensions, and outright exegetical failures of TULIP.

And we are doing a darn good job at it. And winning quite decisively to boot.

Well we can certainly understand why they want to cloak what they believe, it really ain't pretty.

 

[Cameron143]

Well we can certainly understand why they want to cloak what they believe, it really ain't pretty.

View attachment 277993

Glad you showed this, because it demonstrates ignorance of scripture. Jesus did always what He saw the Father doing. Since there are none who seek after God, when someone does seek after God, Jesus would know that the Father was at work in the individual. He would never turn such a one away.

 

[studier]

Well we can certainly understand why they want to cloak what they believe, it really ain't pretty.

View attachment 277993

It's difficult to respond to this with an emoji. It makes me smile for the rhetoric and disappointed for the perspective at the same time.

 

[HeIsHere]

What do you do with all the men and women in history who did and are still doing the work to make certain we have the most precise translations we can? Or with God's people who are still to this day scouring the globe to search for more ancient manuscripts to make sure we have all there are and to try to resolve still existing issues that God has some working on? Or with other things you don't know of in the scholarly ranks who are constantly working on translations and lexical tools in an effort to resolve the multitude of interpretive conflicts?

Do you know that some of our current understandings of the Greek language of Biblical times was unearthed not long ago in Archeological work? Are you willing to say that those who say they are called by God to do this work are mistaken.

IOW, you're speaking from your own perspective, but God has many continually working at levels you can't see or don't yet know about.

There must be a reason for His doing so, no?

Agree, along with the fact that the original languages and culture are so very different than the English language and our culture.

 

[HeIsHere]

Since there are none who seek after God,

Once again building a theology on one verse and making it apply to every person ever born.

 

[studier]

Since there are none who seek after God,

Though this is drawn from Scripture, I don't think it's properly understood, and it's certainly not harmonized or balanced with other Scriptures that speak of men seeking God.

When we read that section of Rom3 we should be focusing in on the perspective of the Perfect One ultimately saying it.

 

[HeIsHere]

It's difficult to respond to this with an emoji. It makes me smile for the rhetoric and disappointed for the perspective at the same time.

Inability and limited atonement are horrible doctrines so yes, I get it.
Sadly they are created by cherry picking verses.

Has anyone given a rebuttal to your post on John 1:13?

 

[Cameron143]

Once again building a theology on one verse and making it apply to every person ever born.

As usual, you miss the point. Those that come to Jesus, He will in no wise cast out.

 

[HeIsHere]

Glad you showed this, because it demonstrates ignorance of scripture. Jesus did always what He saw the Father doing. Since there are none who seek after God, when someone does seek after God, Jesus would know that the Father was at work in the individual. He would never turn such a one away.

He was at work on that individual, but, the chap down the street does not receive that special work.

So in essence the image has some truth.

 

[BillyBob]

Well we can certainly understand why they want to cloak what they believe, it really ain't pretty.

You seem to have reached a new low as a poster! Congratulations, you have reached a new level of ignorance that I would never have imagined possible.

 

[cv5]

I see it this way. I read English I speak it and I understand it.

I use an example. Me and you are by a river I say "I just saw a fish jump " those words dont enter your brain as some scrambled electronic message that then has to be re organized though an anchient Greek codex back into a coherent thought. You just know what I ment. So when I read John 3-16 I dont need to know about the 14 differnt meanings of the word world. I read English I know what it means. God though his infinite wisdom translated the Bible into English in the simplest ways so even the most simple can understand. That way the largest possible target audience is reached. The people who speak and read that language. God didnt translate the Bible into English then make it only understandable to people who passed it through some de coding machine.

When I see people using these various de coding methods like the Strongs thing it just screams I am inventing ways to make scripture mean what I want it to mean. To fit my naritive.

Good grief man one MUST refer back to the original tongues of the Bible.
That is how the translations were made to begin with.

Consider that today we are continually wrestling with the right comprehension of the text itself.
Native hearers in Paul's day doubtless had little of the troubles that we commonly encounter.

 

[studier]

Inability and limited atonement are horrible doctrines so yes, I get it.
Sadly they are created by cherry picking verses.

Has anyone given a rebuttal to your post on John 1:13?

Maybe here.

And here which I could have made clearer, but I work through these on the fly. I really think the use of James was a very poor argument.

 

[HeIsHere]

You seem to have reached a new low as a poster! Congratulations, you have reached a new level of ignorance that I would never have imagined possible.

Limited atonement is pretty low, I agree.

 

[Cameron143]

He was at work on that individual, but, the chap down the street does not receive that special work.

So in essence the image has some truth.

So you admit your meme was a misrepresentation of truth?
I employed a second verse in showing your meme to be false. Evidently I have more than 1 verse theology.

 

[HeIsHere]

So you admit your meme was a misrepresentation of truth?
I employed a second verse in showing your meme to be false. Evidently I have more than 1 verse theology.

For some that is what they think scripture teaches.
It is called limited atonement.

 

[Cameron143]

For some that is what they think scripture teaches.
It is called limited atonement.

Still can't admit the meme misrepresents truth.

 

[cv5]

there are none who seek after God

The subtleties of Hebrew and Greek rhetorical devices escape you. Often.
As in this case.

And truly, there are plenty of people who heed His call. Always have been.
Without which there would be no hope.

Like these fine and faithful people for example. Right choices were a habit for them it would seem.

[Luk 1:6 NKJV]
And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.

[Luk 1:6 NKJV]
And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.

 

[Cameron143]

For some that is what they think scripture teaches.
It is called limited atonement.

I understand what the meme is about. But to make his or her point, they employed a misrepresentation of truth. And you repeated it, and are still defending it.

 

[Cameron143]

The subtleties of Hebrew and Greek rhetorical devices escape you. Often.
As in this case.

And truly, there are plenty of people who heed His call. Always have been.
Without which there would be no hope.

Like these fine and faithful people for example. Right choices were a habit for them it would seem.

[Luk 1:6 NKJV]
And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.

[Luk 1:6 NKJV]
And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.

Those who heed the call are exercising faith. They are already saved.

 

[HeIsHere]

Maybe here.

And here which I could have made clearer, but I work through these on the fly. I really think the use of James was a very poor argument.

Yes agree, your post was very well argued. I have it bookmarked!

James is written to believers for a different purpose for sure.

Saving faith is not part of the gift in Ephesians 2:8, many experts in Koine Greek have proven this to be this case, along with overall message of scripture that personal faith is the condition to receive the gift of salvation.

It just seems preachers with a megaphone blast "saving faith is a gift" and people just accept it, and it really serves the whole TULIP doctrine well.

The entire system falls apart when "saving faith" is correctly understood.