In reply to:Fatalism has nothing at all to do with Calvinism. Fatalism is a false doctrine and not a biblical doctrine. Fatalism is not Calvinism—you need to look up your definitions before making sweeping “general” comments, that you “still” fail to back up with Scripture.
Let me show you were I am coming from. I take this definition. Total Inability or Total Depravity Because of the fall, man is unable of himself to savingly believe the gospel. The sinner is dead, blind, and deaf to the things of God; his heart is deceitful and desperately corrupt. His will is not free, it is in bondage to his evil nature, therefore, he will not - indeed he cannot - choose good over evil in the spiritual realm. Consequently, it takes much more than the Spirit's assistance to bring a sinner to Christ - it takes regeneration by which the Spirit makes the sinner alive and gives him a new nature. Faith is not something man contributes to salvation but is itself a part of God's gift of salvation - it is God's gift to the sinner, not the sinner's gift to God.
"Man is unable to himself to savingly believe in the gospel". To me this is fatalism defined "The doctrine that all events are predetermined by fate and are therefore unalterable"
That has given my the conclusion I draw which is puffiness because I don't think this is the Bible.
And from everything you have said you have not indicated otherwise, so what am I to think. If you can't explain yourself or you read the Bible differently and back it up with verses that I think you are misreading then what am I to think? All the words of calvanisms 5 points lead to fatalism. Perhaps you don't believe in fatalism but why do you use such uncomfortable words to describe fatalism in calvins 5 points of fatalism. You should be using armenianism points that are clear against fatalism and also respect God's will to give man a free will depraved or not.
In reply to:If I did not think that the articles on this website properly interpreted the Word of God, I would not direct you to them. But, you are right the articles will not assist you in your present condition because you cannot understand them. But since, there are over a 1000 articles here and you have not read them “all” (if any) how can you condemn them? You cited:
I have more spiritual writings to read right now but I don't condemn your website. The only thing I do disaprove of is your inability to explain reformed calvanism and I disaprove of calvanism because it uses fatalistic language on all 5 points. Its really simple why I believe what I believe when I compare Steele's simple definition of each of the 5 points of armenianism and calvanism
In reply to:But, where is your readiness of mind and searching of the Scriptures to disprove Calvinism. You have violated the very thing you claim to adhere too.
How so? My words find peace in comparing steele's definition of armenian vs calvanism. armenian preserves God given man's free will. calvanism is fatalistic in its choice of words leading to reformed calvanism whatever that is. I don't know what that is yet because you can't put it into words to describe it.
In reply to:Calvinism is very simple for the regenerate to understand. Though I could have saved an immense amount of time by just you reading, The Five Points of Calvinism, by W.J. Seaton please simply read this:
The Bible says we are NATURALLY SINFUL: by birth [Ps 51.5] and practice [Gen 6.5]. The Scripture informs us that we are BOUND: [2 Tim 2.25]. It demonstrates to us that we are BLIND, DEAF, and DUMB [Luke 6:39, 7:22]. The Bible instructs us that we, by nature are DEAD [Rom 5.12]. It illustrates to us that we are UN-INSTRUCTABLE [1 Cor 2.14]. Thus, man is depraved. When was the last time you saw a dead man heal himself?
Some have trouble believing that God could pass by some and elect others (unconditional election). Yet, like you, they have no difficulty in trusting that God called Abraham out of the Ur of the Chaldees and left the others (unconditional election). Why should God choose the nation of Israel as His "peculiar people"? Why did God choose the younger son Jacob (disregarding the customary family laws of Israel), over the elder Esau? (Rom 9.11-13). Thus, one who does not believe in unconditional election clearly does not believe the Word of God.
Now we are getting somewhere. Each of these points are not unconditional. They are conditional. Abraham, Jacob were conditional. Why because they were receivable. It may not say that in no uncertain terms but the fact of the matter that is why they were chosen because of their receivableness. Think of it this way. Scan the globe in those days. OF all to be chosen It was Abraham and Jacob. Why? Because they were receivable. God did not choose the native indians of north america or the incas of peru or the chinese or the mongolians. God chose the most righteous men or should I say the least unrighteous to begin revealing his redemptive design to. Yes it was God's grace but man first played a part in reception. Otherwise it is all fatalism. So becaus the man fulfilled a condition however small or great, God moved because he found the right person to move in. Otherwise you get fantasy island and God moving like roulette player laying down chips on a roulette wheel randomly. My loving God does not do that. My loving God is purposeful and meaningful and that is what is being shown in these various deeper life Christian authors I am guiding you to. Yes man is depraved but still God won't touch man's free will.
In reply to:1. Christ died to save all men without distinction.
If, Christ died to save all men, then, all men will be saved. If, Christ paid the debt of sin, for all men, then all men will be saved. Is unbelief a sin? Yes! If, Christ died for all the sins (including unbelief) of all men then none could ever be lost for their unbelief is atoned for!
2. Christ died to save no one in particular.
Some say, Christ obtained only a potential salvation for all men, although He paid the debt of our sin. Even though Christ said, “it is finished,” His work on the Cross does not become effectual until man makes a decision for Christ and is thereby saved. Thus, man becomes the author (initiator) of his own salvation. But, this is in violation of Scripture—Eph 2:8-10, et. al.
3. Christ died to save a certain number.
Christ died certainly and effectually to save a specific number of hell-deserving sinners. Christ paid the debt for the elect and only them. Christ died to save a particular number of sinners; those for whom He Himself said He shed His blood: This is my blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many, for the remission of sins [Matt 26.28], that is, those chosen in him before the foundation of the world [Eph 1.4]; those whom the Father had given him out of the world [John 17.9].
If Christ died to save all men, not all men will be saved necesarily but Jesus laid the groundwork for all to be saved. ALl men that believe will be saved. Do you see the difference? It is not righteous and holy to say Christ died for all men to saved so all men should be saved for again it is killing man's free will and makes man an automaton and is fatalism. If you don't agree with fatalism then why do you speak fatalistically? Ephesians 2:8-10 says "not of ourselves" yes not of ourselves, salvation is from GOd but just because we choose God does not mean we saved ourselves for God still does the saving all from Himself. Do you see? "not of works" means I can go do things to be saved. This does not mean choice for God is a work for it is a choice. Can you see the difference? Free will is not a work. It is stationary unworking. In its purest form it is yea or neah workless. Matt 26.28 Eph 1.4 John 17.9 are on the basis of God knowing who would come to Him so it is not save a certain number because God picked a certain number but because God knew a certain number only would come to Him. Do you see the difference? Otherwise it is puffy fatalism.
In reply to:If men are unable to save themselves on account of their fallen depraved nature (as proven Scripturally above), and if God has purposed to save them, and Christ has accomplished their salvation, then it logically follows that God must also provide the means for calling them into the benefits of that salvation which He has procured for them. Irresistible grace is proven from Scripture:
The overcoming, that is letting God apply the redemptive design to your life takes place after initial salvation and is substitory death and codeath ongoing of deliverance from sin, self and supernatural. Again men do not save themselves. God does the saving, men make the choice to come. Like Billy Graham says, come, come now. Like the movie matrix, Neo said to the oracle "why ask me what choice I am going to make if you already know I made it?" Oracle says to Neo "because you have already made the choice, now you are hear to understand why you made the choice". Same in Christ, we have made the choice, now we are here to know why we made the choice. YOu have said you made the choice because God picked you fatalistically. God told me He saved me because I chose Him. We are worshipping two different God's. Can you see that? Whomever your God is not the God of the Bible to tell you that you had no choice in the matter. My God of the Bible says I chose and He chose me. One way is the machine world, the orther is God's great reality. We are led by God because we first chose Him.
In reply to:Exodus 19:12-13 And thou shalt set bounds unto the people round about, saying, Take heed to yourselves, that ye go not up into the mount, or touch the border of it: whosoever toucheth the mount shall be surely put to death: There shall not an hand touch it, but he shall surely be stoned, or shot through; whether it be beast or man, it shall not live: when the trumpet soundeth long, they shall come up to the mount.
Leviticus 20:2 Again, thou shalt say to the children of Israel, Whosoever he be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn in Israel, that giveth any of his seed unto Molech; he shall surely be put to death: the people of the land shall stone him with stones.
Numbers 15:36 And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the LORD commanded Moses.
These are not gifts but judgments.
In reply to:I do not see any of your examples in Scripture and since you have been given ample opportunity to interact with the Scripture and failed to do so, they must not be there.
Don't assume this. All verse are cited that have sin in them. There are thousands. Choose any at your leisure. Examine the varying degrees of possession in each, from slight obsesison all the way to full blown demon possession in the Christian.
In reply to:The will when given to Adam and Eve was perfect, but had the capacity to fall. Once fallen it was no longer perfect, but dead and unable to communicate with God, unless God choose to communicate first—simply look at Adam and Eve. Unregenerate man’s reaction to a holy God is to hide and cloth himself with his own works to hide his own sin—they make good Arminians. Only regenerate man has been given the capacity again to choose as Adam and Eve could. Thus, regeneration comes before conversion
How do we know man's will had the capacity to fall? Because it fell. Does God have the capacity to fall? Yes. But he chooses not to and that happens to be why He is God for to this day he has never sinned because it is unrighteous of Him to do so and God is limited by His righteousness. It is a wild circulur thought but it is true. Can God sin by free will? Yes. Will he? no. Why? Its unrighteous. The same access to sin is given to us and do we adhere to unrighteousness? No. Why? Obviously because we are not God. Regeneration is conversion. Man has been given the capacity to turn to God. How? Not by calvinism. but by the redemptive design being shown in the Word. From the law, to the Christ to the cross to to the resurrection to the ascension and descension of HS, to the rapture and the kingdom and the new jerusalem. This is how God redeems buy supply all of this in Christ. He does not falalize us. He never touches our free will.
Unfortunately, you aren't even in the "game" to win a set, never mind a match! [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/rofl.gif" alt="rofl" title="rofl[/img] It is incredible that you vastly ignorant of so many things, but especially concerning the teaching of Scripture. For nowhere in all of God's inspired Word, is it said that God could sin but chooses not to. Like so many other statements you have made, they are all based upon the fallible teachings of a man and/or your own imaginative conclusions and which have nothing even remotely to do with biblical doctrine. For example, you are constantly equating the doctrine of God with "Fatalism". But again, you appear to have no idea what Fatalism actually is. Let me help you out here, if I may, although I seriously doubt you will even bother to click the link below:
Take advantage of such recommendations while it is yet day, for the night cometh. [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/evilgrin.gif" alt="evilgrin" title="evilgrin[/img]
In reply to:[color:"blue"]I must say that you have spent more time deifying Watchman Nee than Christ. You have offered many disjuncted statements yet extremely few passages from God's inspired, infallible and inerrant Word to show that what you say and believe actually is what God has taught in His Word. You refuse to read any article offered to you yet you want everyone to read Watchman Nee. Those who have read Watchman Nee, and I am one, you say don't understand what he has written, and only YOU are able to correctly understand him. (we have another individual here who makes the same claim about his erroneous doctrines too!) If it is true that none here are able to correctly understand Nee, then he has failed miserably with his "genius" to communicate what he believed.You also claim that the reason you reject the biblical doctrine of "Total Depravity" because, in your own words, "It doesn't seem right to me". Thus your preference is to reject the clear teaching of God's inspired, infallible and inerrant Word for the doctrines of men, which Christ warned about would happen as did Paul and Peter.
Don't think that about Nee. He is just a man. Where is the deifying? He is someone that can help you, writes very well very spiritually far better than I could. I provide all verses of the bible to make my case and all those you have supplied. What articles did you want me to read. Why can't we just stick to the Bible? Again you say you understand Nee but I don't see it in your words? So that is that. I understand Nee, that is that. Why you choose not to understand and read his words incorreclty is obviously the flesh. I do not reject Total Depravity because it merely emotionally is wrong but scripturally it is wrong. For the verse in scripture says "God foreknew" and "Whosoever comes to the Father must believe unto the Son" This is free will not fatalism of calvanism. Even man's sin nature however depraved does not say God induces man's will. No. Man's will is free. God pushes and prods provides the redemptive design but he does not impinge. Your god is playing a board game with himself wth pieces he controls. My God does not control His pieces. He leaves them free. The reason you can't understand Watchman Nee and the calvanists here is because it is possible that calvanism is a sign of unsalvation and Nee being the most spiritual Christian that I have ever known leads me to believe that indeed it is true, that man can't save man. You have your own free will. To think you are not an automoton or believe you are. You are an automaton to a god, but it is not my God of the Bible. So I use scripture to show total depravity is wrong and I receive the Holy Spirits testimony to my spirit and my spirit concurs agreeing in spirit. Do you see? Plus my brothers gather 2 or 3 or more together agree. Are you my brothers in Christ? I am not to sure about that. Either you are saved or you are a possessed Christian under the demon of Calvanism.
In reply to:[color:"blue"]And, for your information, Calvinism has never taught that man's will is not "free". In fact Calvinism has stressed the biblical truth that man is indeed a "free agent". No man is forced to do anything against his will. God never violates the will of man in any situation. However, what you have failed to learn from the Spirit of the Word of God is that when Adam sinned in the Garden of Eden, he DIED!. The image of God with which man was first created did not die...... but it was grossly distorted. Sin permeated all of man's being because his spiritual nature died. No longer did man have any interest or love for God. No longer did man have a desire to do that which was right in the eyes of God. But mankind was controlled by his sin nature, which was God's punishment upon him for Adam's disobedience, which He had promised would happen should Adam eat of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.Man freely chooses that and ONLY that which he desires, as is the case with every creature of God. No unregenerate man will ever seek after God because he innately hates God. Isn't this what Paul clearly says:
Yes Adam's spirit was deadened. I realize this. Yet this does not change the fact that his free will was not responsible still. And this is where we differ. You do not distinguish between man's sin nature and the man himself, and that is why you need to learn the dividing of spirit, soul and body. A bipartate view of man is a fallen man. God's way tripartate. Read this. www3.telus.net/trbrooks
man has a soul and in his soul it has the function of mind, will and emotion. the sin nature is in the flesh. the flesh is sin of the body and self of the soul. man's free will is not renewed, yet if given the right redemptive design it is capable of choosing God. that redemptive design is shown in Christ coming in the flesh, the law, the resurrection. Given these things man could see the choice for Christ, for God, for His coming, by the law showing man's sin and sin showing Christ and Christ showing the eternal kiingdom, millennial kingdom, things of the heavenlies and rapture and Great Trib and all of it. God didn't touch man's free will and just because man fell does not mean God will infringe on it. God did everything it was all of GOd yet in all of it God never touched man's free will before the fall and after the fall. As depraved as man was after the fall with his sin nature and his spirit deadened insensitive to things of God and a damaged will, damaged emotion and damaged mind, he still retained his free which God never touches. just like the movie Jim Carrie and Morgan Friedman in Burce Almighty, the most basic concept of all is one rule "God is not allowed to play with man's free will" That is why it is free because once he gave it he doesnt come back and reenergize it or give it a boost or add to it. Uh uh. Don't believe the god that teaches you this. Then men that won't come to this redemptive desire will remain animals. The one's that do come to God's redemptive design are His children. I Feel so special that I am His. I would not feel anything if I knew it was a board game and I am a machine. You in my humble eyes are committing an actual sin saying God plays with man's free will after the fall. I believe you have read Romans 3.10 legalistically always a danger in scripture. Pentecostals like to read tongues legalistically out of context. How is it different for you? This verse is saying man is utterly deplorable by his way of doing things. That is all. This again is not to say that man can't by his free will come to God by God's leading. Do you see the difference? One way is so pure and righteous and fills me up and the other is dead nothingness really when you think about it. Free will is alive even in the man "who does not understand" yet he chooses God. So again this verse is saying of man of himself. Not the man who says NO to himself and YES to God for that door has been made available now in God's cross.
In reply to:[color:"blue"]Can you from the Scriptures.... God's inspired, infallible and inerrant Word show me where Paul erred in his understanding and thus believe what Arminianism teaches?These things the Spirit of God has taught me and ingrained in my mind and heart. The Spirit also has shown me that Watchman Nee did not teach what He once delivered unto the Saints. He has impressed this upon my soul and taken me to the Bible, of which He Himself was the Author, and shown me the truth of God. Can you SHOW ME where in God's holy Word that what you believe is taught? Please don't direct me to your website or another website to read something of Watchman Nee. The Bible is the final and sole authority in all matters of faith and practice. Thus, as Christ did, so you also should do and open the Scriptures and show me/us where these things are taught. If you care at all about us as those created in the image of God, you will fulfill this request, as it is God's will that you do so.
I can not show where Paul erred for he did not err and thus he does believe in armeniast view. What is it about Nee that you disagree with that I have not dealt with already? May I suggest that you and I believe in two different Gods and only one of is right if you feel the Holy Spirit is speaking to you. I site all verses you have displayed, and all verses of scripture. Each verse you have shown I have used to show you how you read it legalistically and thus unprofitably for your life and your spirit fatalistically. As per your request each and every verse you used I used. Your spirit reads each verse differently. I admit I am not skilled at pulling verses on a moments notice. But nor do I have to be. There is enough me who taken the argument to its fullest length pulling every verse from this side of kingdom to make their points but is this really necessary. Is it not so simple to realize that God does not touch our free will not then, not today, and not tomorrow. Calvanism says we are fatalized. NO! Why do you need a scripture beyond the garden to prove it is not fatal. WE know man's sin nature is deplorable but to assume that we are so utterly hopeless to receive God if He gives us a way is wrong of you to say and is antibiblical. Why? Simple reason that the discples chose Jesus and yet even at that point they still had not been given the indwelling Holy Spirit until resurrection. Jesus picked them out because He knew whom to pick. He did not play roulette. I can never believe that. Doesn't it prove that one of the disciples betrayed Jesus and was not saved and did not receive the Holy Spirit while the rest of the disciples did receive the Holy Spirit. So even though one of the disciples was called he had free will to refuse and that is exactly what he did - Judas. Did you know citing scripture can be works of the flesh? Be careful.
All these words are from the scriptures. Hath you an ear to hear?
I am ignorant of what? can you be more specific. What other statements did I make that are false? Of course God can't sin, but the choice is there to sin just like it exists for us like it did for Satan like it did for all that had a choice to do so. But God never did and never will, which is why He is God. How am I equating the doctrine of God with fatalism? I defined fatalism from the dictionary - what was wrong with that definition?
Neat article, neat read. It is one grand rationalization process where at the end of the day that little boy is saved because he is a child but if he is a man lets say God examines heart to see if He accepts God. Did his heart accept Christ or not unto salvation again not because of Gods boardgame predistation but God's freewill in that man (boy)'s heart to accept God's way or not.
As Watchman Nee states this is a fine article of "mental gymnastics" and that is all calvanism and everytime I read a calvanist article it is always the same. This one is trying to make fatalisim different from Predestination and yet the same.
"natural force" is not man's free will. man's free will is God's force. Why? Because who gave man that free will to begin with? Do you see?
Pentecostals are just the opposite though strikingly the same. That is why I call Pentecostals calvanists.
So you guys are all calvanist pentecostals (loss of free will gibbeshers) or pentecostal calvnists (loss of free will non-gibberishers).
You guys are both the same and have the same thing in common. Destruction of free will and an open door to passivity.
With free will that refuses mombo jumbo gibberish and a free will that says they believe God when He says "those who believe unto the Son can come to the Father" refusing predestination fatalism (boardgame) then man can be active and not passive in Christ, and truly saved and reap the full benefits of the redemptive design.
I had an idea. This might help. Lets change the word from fatalism to God's destiny and call it
predestination God's destiny
vs.
predestination foreknowledge
Do you see the difference.
We have taken out the mental gymnastic of natural fatalism to God's superanatural destinty
Now do you see how God's free will in man is killed by calvanism?
Every thing Satan does is to kill man's God given free will that no matter how currupted is untouched by God and yet can choose Him if given the right redemptive design. Not to say all would choose Him but those that do are those He chose foreknown they would choose Him.
Satan aims to passify the will into him. God never touches it.
I became aware of something else. That Calvanists are looking for a reason why man choose and take it back to God's boardgame. Here I believe they leaped one step too many and missing God's purpose. That is a false reason jumping to the boardgame as the cause, if it is not a boardgame at all. If in fact instead out of the glory of God making the first adam to choose just like God then it is not a boardgame at all but taking the first adam and asking him to choose no matter how difficult the task. He was bound to fail but he did not have to. That is why he is lesser for he did fail, but God said ok. So be it. I knew it was going to happen anyway so I have a plan to deal with - REDEMPTIVE DESIGN. And all it is about now is men choosing him and men rejecting him.
Its all about gettting back to Him so He gets someone to walk with -its all for him. He did it for himself not for us.
But under calvanism it is for us because we are destined and that is not what God wants. He wants to walk with someone like Him not someone he mechanically decided anyway. Its like God is psychotic if you do it that way or believe sucha thing. Not holy pure and righteous.
When scripture is quoted out of context - the practise of arminianism- the quote becomes a pretext thus the arminian becomes one who is wresting scripture unto their own destruction.<br><br>Regards<br><br>howard
When God said we are chosen we are chosen. When God says we are chosen because he foreknew, it is because he foreknew.<br><br>Where is the pretext?<br><br>Why is there no calvin to be found in the garden or creation? <br><br>Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image <br><br>Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth <br><br>Did God create without a choice to create? Is Gen. 1.1 an armenian pretext?<br><br>Are you saying free will is just a figment of our imagination? and so is our free will and has nothing to do with it all?<br><br>I am not a pawn in your gods boardgame against himself, though you may be<br><br><br><br>
So many errors, so little time. Here are but a few:
In reply to:[color:"blue"]OF all to be chosen It was Abraham and Jacob. Why? Because they were receivable. God did not choose the native indians of north america or the incas of peru or the chinese or the mongolians. God chose the most righteous men or should I say the least unrighteous to begin revealing his redemptive design to.
So, Abram, from heathen Ur, was righteous, or more righteous? And your proof is where? So, Jacob, the deceiver, was righteous, or more righteous? And your proof is where? What made them [color:red]receivable or [color:red]more receivable so they could boast later?
[color:blue]Rom 9:15-16 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. [color:red]So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
If they were righteous, or at least more righteous (by your assertion) why did they need God? After all, before their calling, they were doing just fine according to you. They had [color:red]earned a place of recognition with God by being more righteous. They could now [color:red]boast, saying, "God choose me BECAUSE I was righteous, or more righteous, than those Indians," et. al. But isn't it odd that what you assert once again does not fit with Scripture?
[color:blue]Ephesians 2:8-10 For by grace are ye saved through faith; [color:red]and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: [color:red]Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
Both of these men had they not been changed by the Holy Spirit would be in Hell at this very moment. They choose to follow God, BECAUSE God first choose them and enabled them to see and desire Him (John 15:16). P.S. Regeneration precedes conversion.
In reply to:[color:"blue"]If Christ died to save all men, not all men will be saved necesarily but Jesus laid the groundwork for all to be saved. ALl men that believe will be saved. Do you see the difference? It is not righteous and holy to say Christ died for all men to saved so all men should be saved for again it is killing man's free will and makes man an automaton and is fatalism. If you don't agree with fatalism then why do you speak fatalistically? Ephesians 2:8-10 says "not of ourselves" yes not of ourselves, salvation is from GOd but just because we choose God does not mean we saved ourselves for God still does the saving all from Himself. Do you see? "not of works" means I can go do things to be saved. This does not mean choice for God is a work for it is a choice. Can you see the difference?
Once again, you do NOT understand the principle of fatalism. Once again, you see life when the Scripture says we are DEAD. Once again, you have the DEAD being active. Once again, your argument fails in light of Scripture.
In reply to:[color:"blue"]Free will is not a work. It is stationary unworking. In its purest form it is yea or neah workless. Matt 26.28 Eph 1.4 John 17.9 are on the basis of God knowing who would come to Him so it is not save a certain number because God picked a certain number but because God knew a certain number only would come to Him. Do you see the difference? Otherwise it is puffy fatalism.
Uh mm, if free will (which does not even exist, even God is not totally free, He cannot change, cannot sin, cannot be unholy, et. al.) is not a work, then Adam and Eve did not sin by their own work (choice). Thus, according to you, God is guilty of sin, for He ascribed unto them "guilt" and "punishment" for something they did not work (will). If I lay aside the whole doctrine of Original Sin, then according to you, the whole human race is free of sin and will continue to be, because what happens is not a work of their own will. If they did not work (will) it then they are not responsible for it. Funny thing about your theology--you have no need of a Saviour. Now I understand why you have not told us about your salvation.
In reply to:[color:"blue"]Like the movie matrix, Neo said to the oracle "why ask me what choice I am going to make if you already know I made it?" Oracle says to Neo "because you have already made the choice, now you are hear to understand why you made the choice".
So, you are willing to quote a movie that embraces Kantanism and yet not tell us about your own salvation. The Bible + Nee + Matrix = Your Gospel, or should I say, Nee + Matrix + The Bible, out of context = Your Gospel [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/drop.gif" alt="drop" title="drop[/img]
In reply to:[color:"blue"] Does God have the capacity to fall? Yes.
You serve a lesser God than I, and the host of others here.
In reply to:[color:"blue"] Regeneration [color:red]is conversion.
This proves that you do not know Scripture or even enough about Arminianism to be arguing for it. You had better look up the definition of the terms once again. Regeneration & Conversion
Wow Troy.<br><br>I've read every reply you have made and have yet to see you uphold much from scripture. Please show us where free-will is in the Bible? I asked a question earlier and you never overcame the dilemma so I'll ask again<br><br>How does universal atonement for all sins of all mankind become limited in application?<br><br><br>God bless,<br><br>william
Can you debate for real? It doesn't seem so. You keep interjecting things that aren't relevant. None of that post makes sense.<br><br><br>God bless,<br><br>william
In reply to:[color:"blue"] I site all verses you have displayed, and all verses of scripture. Each verse you have shown I have used to show you how you read it legalistically and thus unprofitably for your life and your spirit fatalistically.
Pray tell, I believe you are utterly self-deceived and a ...... for there is not ONE verse, not even a reference to a verse of God's holy Word in your reply above. You have used not one single passage of Scripture to show me anything. All you have done is spew out more gibberish and Platonic philosophy.
In reply to:[color:"blue"]May I suggest that you and I believe in two different Gods . . .
Yes, you may suggest this. And in this one thing we can agree. We do, without question, believe in two different Gods. Your "god" is the god of this world:
2 Corinthians 4:3-5 (ASV) "And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled in them that perish: in whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not dawn [upon them]. For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus as Lord, and ourselves as your servants for Jesus' sake."
And the God of the Bible is no spectator but a participant in your blindness as well, as the inspired Apostle John says:
John 12:39-40 (ASV) "For this cause they could not believe, for that Isaiah said again, He hath blinded their eyes, and he hardened their heart; Lest they should see with their eyes, and perceive with their heart, And should turn, And I should heal them."
You cannot see God nor His only-begotten Son because it has not been revealed to you, which is God's choice to dispense His grace to those whom He chooses:
Matthew 11:25-27 (ASV) "At that season Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou didst hide these things from the wise and understanding, and didst reveal them unto babes: yea, Father, for so it was well-pleasing in thy sight. All things have been delivered unto me of my Father: and no one knoweth the Son, save the Father; neither doth any know the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son willeth to reveal [him.]"
As even a babe can see, it is GOD'S (Christ's) will that determines who will see, know and come to Him.
May it be God's "free-will" to show you mercy, to open your blind eyes, to soften your hard heart and to give you the ability to know your most desperate and helpless condition so that you may receive salvation. Troy, whoever you are, you are most pitiable, as was the case with us all before the Spirit gave us life and revealed our need of Him.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/pilgrim/pil_sig2.gif)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/Smileys/pencil.gif)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/Smileys/liar.gif)
...... for there is not ONE verse, not even a reference to a verse of God's holy Word in your reply above. You have used not one single passage of Scripture to show me anything. All you have done is spew out more gibberish and Platonic philosophy.