Originally posted by Dave L
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Theology 201 Guidelines
This is the forum to discuss the spectrum of views within Christianity on God's foreknowledge and election such as Calvinism, Arminianism, Molinism, Open Theism, Process Theism, Restrictivism, and Inclusivism, Christian Universalism and what these all are about anyway. Who is saved and when is/was their salvation certain? How does God exercise His sovereignty and how powerful is He? Is God timeless and immutable? Does a triune God help better understand God's love for mankind?
While this area is for the discussion of these doctrines within historic Christianity, all theists interested in discussing these areas within the presuppositions of and respect for the Christian framework are welcome to participate here. This is not the area for debate between nontheists and theists, additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream evangelical doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101 Nontheists seeking only theistic participation only in a manner that does not seek to undermine the faith of others are also welcome - but we ask that Moderator approval be obtained beforehand.
Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 or General Theistics 101 forum without such restrictions. Theists who wish to discuss these issues outside the parameters of orthodox Christian doctrine are invited to Unorthodox Theology 201.
Remember, our forum rules apply here as well. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
While this area is for the discussion of these doctrines within historic Christianity, all theists interested in discussing these areas within the presuppositions of and respect for the Christian framework are welcome to participate here. This is not the area for debate between nontheists and theists, additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream evangelical doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101 Nontheists seeking only theistic participation only in a manner that does not seek to undermine the faith of others are also welcome - but we ask that Moderator approval be obtained beforehand.
Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 or General Theistics 101 forum without such restrictions. Theists who wish to discuss these issues outside the parameters of orthodox Christian doctrine are invited to Unorthodox Theology 201.
Remember, our forum rules apply here as well. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Decisional Regeneration?
Collapse
X
-
That's what
- She
Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
- Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)
I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
- Stephen R. Donaldson
-
Total Depravity at Wikipedia.
I am inclined not to accept the "Total Inability" understanding, rather like I don't accept the "inherited guilt" version of Original Sin.Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.
Beige Federalist.
Nationalist Christian.
"Everybody is somebody's heretic."
Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.
Proud member of the this space left blank community.
Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.
Justice for Ashli Babbitt!
Justice for Matthew Perna!
Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!
Comment
-
Originally posted by NorrinRadd View PostTotal Depravity at Wikipedia.
I am inclined not to accept the "Total Inability" understanding, rather like I don't accept the "inherited guilt" version of Original Sin.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
False. You have no clue what works in the Bible are. No surprise though.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dave L View Post
Works place God in a position of owing you something as the law did. You have a false gospel twisted into Law that does the same. “Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.” Romans 4:4 (KJV 1900)That's what
- She
Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
- Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)
I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
- Stephen R. Donaldson
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dave L View Post
It's the same as OT Law.That's what
- She
Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
- Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)
I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
- Stephen R. Donaldson
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
Which has nothing to do with a free will confession. So you know what the Bible calls works. Now, I challenge you to find confessing Christ among the Torah laws.
You turn God into a bully that threatens eternal torture if you don't "say uncle" or whatever your cult tells you to do. And then bribes you with pleasure (heaven) if you do.... Hint; This is not Christianity.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dave L View Post
Free will = salvation by works and worse. You must perform a work of obedience. God then owes you salvation. But what's worse?
You turn God into a bully that threatens eternal torture if you don't "say uncle" or whatever your cult tells you to do. And then bribes you with pleasure (heaven) if you do.... Hint; This is not Christianity.That's what
- She
Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
- Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)
I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
- Stephen R. Donaldson
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
Ignorant claptrap. Not a lick of truth here. Free will is none of that.
Your stench of faux-Christianity turns God into a spiritual rapist. You have NO moral high ground.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dave L View Post
You cannot disprove me on anything I say. I make sure of that before I post. But you destroy God's image pushing free will, as I pointed out.That's what
- She
Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
- Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)
I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
- Stephen R. Donaldson
- 2 likes
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dave L View PostFree will = salvation by works and worse.
The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
- 1 like
Comment
-
Everybody in the Bible worked, did something, to be saved.
Before Jesus's work, people obeyed the law. They did not receive what was promised because the Land, Rest, was not ready yet. But they were set up, appointed, ordained, lined up, to enter what was promised.
After Jesus finished His work, went to the Father, people who were saved received what was promised, together with the OT believers, and what was received was better than the latter expected: it wasn't a Garden, it wasn't Land, it was a room in a Mansion, a Kingdom. All this for the people who believed Jesus.
People think belief is not a work, but it is. First believers said they wanted to switch loyalty from the world to Jesus, then they showed that loyalty. What people call using lip service loyalty, followed by demonstration loyalty. After that demonstrating, proving, they could enter Rest, the desired destination, result.
The problem with those who were officialy promised Rest was that they believed God had promised it only to Abraham's children, identified by circumcision. But Paul proved that Abraham was saved (or was started in the process of being saved) before he was circumcised.
That's how he convinced the Jews that new believers didn't have to be circumcised, but could start the process of salvation by just believing, lip service loyalty.
Scholars make the mistake today of thinking Paul was against work, doing. He wasn't. He was against the old way of officially starting the process.
Which, by the way didn't work. Jews who were circumcised as babies, but didn't obey the law (who didn't believe God wanted them to obey the law, just possess it, like the Pharisee in the Temple, who tithed, but neglected the weightier requirements of the law, justice, mercy, loving God) were not justified.
But the Publican, who believed the weightier requirements of the law were necessary, shown by his sorrow at failing (which one of us hasn't failed, when we tried?) was justified.
In fact, when Gentiles who through conscience believe it is God speaking, and, by trying to live by it, are actually trying to obey the weightier requirements of the law, their un-circumcision becomes circumcision. They are also justified like the Publican. They are also ordained to be saved.
Acts 13
48And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.
...
As mentioned before in other posts, each idea presented is like thread in a ball of wool. You can trace it and pull it out to reveal a fuller teaching. Knock yourself out.
Last edited by footwasher; 01-24-2022, 07:25 PM.
Comment
widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
Comment