Ok... one last reply then I have to GET TO WORK!

Originally Posted by Pilgrim
God's sovereignty and man's responsibility and involvement is seen in the crucifixion of the Lord Christ, Acts 2:22-24; 3:18; 4:26-28. Are you familiar with these inspired words of Peter?


Yes, of course. Such great verses. They are pertaining to God's grand design of reconciling mankind to Himself through the shed blood of Jesus Christ. This relates to whether God has any plans for the future at all and whether Jesus just happened to fulfill all 109 prophesies by luck.
Since we are not arguing Open Theism, we'll both agree with what these verses are saying.

Originally Posted by Pilgrim
To put it in a polemic fashion, God didn't "look down the corridors of time" or "peer into the future" to see who would believe on Christ and thus predestinate and elect them. Likewise, God did not consider any individual's character, alleged good deeds, desires, etc., etc., which somehow influenced God to choose them because of what He allegedly saw. I have thoroughly shown any such notions as being a denial of the biblical God elsewhere and myriad times on this board.

I don't know of any theology that adheres to that concept of God's sovereignty, unless it is some form of pseudo-Calvinism that you have come across. I would be interested in your other posts, if you would please link them here.

Regarding A and B, we are going back and forth on this. I'm going to break down the logic a little simpler for you, then I think I'm going to solve the problem for you. I'll expect a gift card or something for it. smile

My argument is

(A) No action by any man will have any bearing on the salvation of any man.

(B) The minister sharing the gospel is an action.

(C) The minister sharing the gospel will have no bearing on the salvation of the dying man.

By this logic, you might be tempted to accept A. B is basic and undeniable. C is thus irrefutably concluded.

The only way out of this is to deny A, which I think you actually don't believe anyway. I think your defense to this line of argument is to restate premise A.

(A) No choice by any man will have any bearing on the salvation of any man.

(B) If the minister's witness is the divinely ordained means for the sinner's salvation, his action of witnessing will not be a choice, but will be mandated by God.

(C) The minister sharing the gospel will have bearing on the salvation of the dying man.


Last edited by KentDMc; Fri Apr 29, 2011 12:54 PM.