Can We Really Exercise Free Will?

[Magenta]

It is true that it is God Who saves. Scripture explicitly says it is not by the will of the flesh nor of the will of man.

The flesh serves the law of sin and brings forth fruit unto death according to Scripture.

The unregenerated person is opposed to the spiritual things of God.

Hostile in his mind toward God.

A God hater.

 

[Rufus]

I agree.The calvies think God is "fair" by leaving 20%, 30%, 40%,50%? in their sins to FRY. And obviously , nothing can bring them off of their special perch.

Pray tell: What JUDICIAL reason(s) do you have for believing God would be unfair? (The operative term here is "judicial", btw.) If you're going to blaspheme God and attempt to wax more righteous than He is by accusing him of injustice, then you must have such a reason.

 

[Cameron143]

There is a difference between slamming the gate to salvation and ushering people into it.

Some are obsessed with the former and will find out what they have done eventually. To their dismay.

This simply reflects your false assumptions of other's understanding and practices. Rather than dealing with ideas, you choose defamation.

 

[Magenta]

Pray tell: What JUDICIAL reason(s) do you have for believing God would be unfair? (The operative term here is "judicial", btw.) If you're going to blaspheme God and attempt to wax more righteous than He is by accusing him of injustice, then you must have such a reason.

I don't think they have a leg to stand on.

 

[Magenta]

First negative claim has the burden of proof.

That would still be you.

Typical shift and deflection of original burden.

Mirrors

 

[Rufus]

First negative claim has the burden of proof.

I wonder if you can find it.

Typical shift and deflection of original burden.

All done.

Can't prove a negative and the fact that you insist I do proves your lack of mental acuity. But POSITIVES can be proved easily enough. So, go for it! Whatever you posted about my Exodus Typology series was minimal and most likely dismissive.

 

[Magenta]

This simply reflects your false assumptions of other's understanding and practices. Rather than dealing with ideas, you choose defamation.

Proverbs 29 verse 27, Luke 16 verse 15b ~ The righteous detest the dishonest; the wicked detest the upright. What is highly esteemed among men is an abomination in the sight of God.

 

[Rufus]

I don't think they have a leg to stand on.

To this very day, no one has given me as much as one judicial reason. They simplistically think that appealing to "God is love" is the catch-all answer. They evidently don't understand that all of God's attributes demand that He be just.

 

[Magenta]

To this very day, no one has given me as much as one judicial reason. They simplistically think that appealing to "God is love" is the catch-all answer. They evidently don't understand that all of God's attributes demand that He be just.

What is bizarre to me is how one person has said so many times that it would be unfair
of God if He were to do the very thing He is shown to do from the beginning of Scriptures
to the very end. This is one of the reasons why I exhort them to read the Bible. Of course
mocking and scoffing to their wicked heart's content appeals to them but it also shows
off their ignorance to a degree that they really ought not be proud of.

 

[cv5]

This simply reflects your false assumptions of other's understanding and practices. Rather than dealing with ideas, you choose defamation.

I prefer to deal with sound biblically accurate doctrinal truth. With you anything goes.

Your OWN (you own them you yourself and not anyone else)"understanding", "practices" and "ideas" had better align with accurate doctrine BTW. There is no alternative.

 

[reneweddaybyday]

I never said you did it intentionally.

I guess the words

It is done so often by so many it looks like deliberate distortion to suit their presups.

​

mean something other than "deliberate distortion" in your vernacular???

Anyways, there WAS a reason why you left it off.

As I indicated to Cameron143 ... it was inadvertent on my part. whether you believe that is anyone's guess.
.

 

[Kroogz]

Pray tell: What JUDICIAL reason(s) do you have for believing God would be unfair? (The operative term here is "judicial", btw.) If you're going to blaspheme God and attempt to wax more righteous than He is by accusing him of injustice, then you must have such a reason.

Like @cv5 mentioned, right out of the gate you fall flat on your face.

John 3:16
“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life.

1 John 2:2
and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

2 Cor 5:19
that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation.

John 1:29
The next day he saw Jesus coming to him, and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!

Rom 5:15
But the gracious gift is not like the offense. For if by the offense of the one the many died, much more( a fortiori ) did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many.

a fortiori
adverb
a for·ti·o·ri ˌā-ˌfȯr-shē-ˈȯr-ˌī ˌä-ˌfȯr-shē-ˈȯr-ē
-ˌfȯr-tē-

: with greater reason or more convincing force

—used in drawing a conclusion that is inferred to be even more certain than another

 

[HeIsHere]

It's the cruel hoaxing of the hopeful trusting souls that gets me.

These souls, who, in child-like trust and faith, (also aware that they are being obedient to His command to do so) literally"come" to Jesus (a response to His call by an act of their will), only then to be devastated, discovering later that they have been abandoned to the lake of fire, as they were not a random winner in the pre-birth lottery.

And that God's much advertised goodness and graciousness and forgiveness and fairness is actually cruelty and fickleness and condemnation.

Reformed doctrine is the ultimate gaslight.
Your last line captures the essence of this false system.

 

[Magenta]

I guess the words

mean something other than "deliberate distortion" in your vernacular???

As I indicated to Cameron143 ... it was inadvertent on my part. whether you believe that is anyone's guess.
.

As much as you want to stick your erroneous assumptions on me I still never said you did it intentionally.

You do seem determined to misunderstand so you can condemn me, though.

It is a pattern with you.

 

[HeIsHere]

She actually doesn't, but can't reconcile the actions of God in history with her beliefs.

LOL, you mean your interpretation of God's actions in history which are retro fitted to support the false doctrine of unconditional election.

 

[Rufus]

same answer I gave you before ... they were believers in John's gospel ... does John's gospel bring believers in John's gospel from natural man to born again? Romans 1:16 tells us it is the gospel of Christ which is the power of God unto salvation ... I do not believe they were born again ... you need to allow God to sort this out in your heart .
.

So, what in "John's gospel" is inconsistent with or contradictory to the "gospel of Christ"?

 

[HeIsHere]

same to you as well ... and, as has been pointed out to me here ... I did omit the words "to everyone who believes" ... that was not intentional on my part ... as @Magenta would have you believe.
.

Oh if you miss a word, or phrase things which may not be completely clear to the reader .... watch out.

 

[cv5]

they try their best to make us believe that the power of Sovereignty saves. The Gospel and believing comes after He Sovereignly saves us.

Is there any evidence whatsoever that Paul preached the "pre-birth sovereign lottery" message of salvation? Ever? To anybody?

How about Peter? How about John?

Yet this is the core doctrine of salvation that the super-determinists CHOOSE to adhere to (but not necessarily proclaim.....it's just too awful to advertise openly even by them).

If this "pre-birth sovereign lottery" were actually biblical, it would be manifestly obvious in the text CONSTANTLY and CONSISTENTLY. And would be accepted without hesitation by all, myself included.

Which of course is why I am not a super-determinist.

 

[reneweddaybyday]

I think "marred" not lost.

Is it totally lost at the GWT final judgement? Maybe who knows.

well, whatever occurred, God had to set in motion all that it took to get the point where He could create a new heart within.
.

 

[HeIsHere]

same to you as well ... and, as has been pointed out to me here ... I did omit the words "to everyone who believes" ... that was not intentional on my part ... as @Magenta would have you believe.
.

Typical, because the doctrine is not scriptural, it is superimposed (eisegesis) and the use of singular verses out of context that require the context, so how else can it be defended.