What do Calvinists mean by "inability" (to believe)

[FreeGrace2]

Calvinism teaches "Total Depravity" which contains the idea that fallen man is "unable" to believe the gospel.

Objectors often argue that if man is unable to do something, then God is unjust for holding him accountable for not doing it.

So what is going on, exactly?

To know what Calvinists mean, you have to know what they believe about man's nature.

Calvinists believe that beings always act in accordance with their nature. For example, God is holy, thus everything God does is consistent with that nature. It is impossible for him to act un-holy. He cannot sin, for example. He cannot cease being God. To do any of things is inconsistent with His nature.

We are made in God's image.

Here's the problem. Angels were created blameless. Note what the Bible said about Lucifer: “You were blameless in your ways From the day you were created Until unrighteousness was found in you.

As well, Adam was created in the same way; blameless until unrighteousness was found in him. Adam did NOT have a sin nature. he acquired one WHEN he sinned, not before. So the idea of one's nature is irrelevant.

We follow the same rules as God. We act consistent with our natures.

This does not follow. We cannot be compared to God. Who is Divine and eternal, unlike angels and mankind who are neither.

The bible describes fallen, unregenerate man as follows: they are haters of God, hostile to Christ, they find the gospel foolishness, and they can't understand spiritual things, and they can't do anything pleasing to God, they live to serve the desires of their flesh, they are spiritually dead, they don't have ears to hear or eyes to see, they can't do good any more than a leopard can change its own spots or the Ethiopian change the color of his skin.

These are general descriptions of unbelievers. But Scripture NO WHERE says that unbelievers cannot believe until God "does something" to them. That is the fallacy behind total depravity.

The proper understanding of total depravity is that man is unable to save himself by himself. There's nothing he can do to earn or deserve God's savlation. Period.

So, when such a person encounters the gospel message, what does he do? Does he act in a way consistent with his nature? Or does he suddenly break free from the bonds of his own nature/self and do something inconsistent with his nature?

Mere speculation.

Calvinists say that he acts consistently with his nature. He rejects the gospel freely and willingly, because he wants to reject it. Because its his nature to do so.

His nature has nothing to do with it. Just as the for the first angel and human sinners.

Notice, Calvinists aren't saying that the man wants to believe, but some unknown force is preventing him from doing so. Instead, they are saying he doesn't want to believe the gospel in the first place.

Thus, he is unable to believe the gospel.

This is the truth: those who don't want to do something won't do something. Obviously. They are self limited by their choice of not wanting to do something. This in no way concludes that man can't believe; it's just that he doesn't want to. But where does Scripture teach that all unbelievers are unwilling to believe until God "does something" first to change the man? No where is where.

Why do we call this an "inability", and not simply use the word "unwillingness"? Wouldn't that make it easier on ourselves (Calvinists) and stop many debates before they even start, and stop at least some of the strawmen and criticisms and objections from anti-Calvinists?

Porabaly because the word "unwillingness" directly supports the concept of free will.

But we think "inability" is an important distinction. Because it gets to the heart of the issue, and that is "nature". Man's "nature" is an important topic in Calvinism. Why? Because the doctrine of Regeneration deals with this very issue.

Since neither Lucifer nor Adam were created with a "sin nature", all this talk of "inability" is irrelevant.

We say that man gets a new nature! God changes our hearts and makes us alive in Christ. We are new creatures.

OK, here is the real deal: regeneration. So, who are "new creatures"? Those who are IN CHRIST, per 2 Cor 5:17. So, who are IN CHRIST? Believers only, per Eph 1:13. Believers are placed "in Him" by the Holy Spiirit, proving that believing precedes being a new creature.

When God regenerates us, we are now willing to do what previously we were unwilling to do. When we are born again (regenerated), we still act consistent with our (new) nature. What is consistent with the nature of a person who is spirituality alive and has a heart of flesh (rather than stone), whose eyes are open and ears are able to hear? Why, to believe the gospel of course! To repent of sins. To put faith in Jesus.

These are all the activities of a person who is spiritually alive.

The Bible teaches none of this. Regeneration does not precede believing in Christ. There are no verses that teach this. In fact, just the opposite.

Consider Eph 2:5 - even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved)

Here, Paul equates being "made alive with Christ" with "by grace you have been saved", as the parenthetical phrase explains what Paul meant by being made alive.

Now consider Eph 2:8 - For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God

Here, Paul further clarifies what he meant by v.5 and the parenthetical phrase "by grace you have been saved". In v.8 he says that wwe are saved "through faith", which obviously shows that faith precedes our salvation, and as well, our being make alive together with Christ.

 

[zippy2006]

Objectors often argue that if man is unable to do something, then God is unjust for holding him accountable for not doing it.

The bible describes fallen, unregenerate man as follows: they are haters of God, hostile to Christ, they find the gospel foolishness, and they can't understand spiritual things, and they can't do anything pleasing to God, they live to serve the desires of their flesh, they are spiritually dead, they don't have ears to hear or eyes to see, they can't do good any more than a leopard can change its own spots or the Ethiopian change the color of his skin.

Calvinists say that he acts consistently with his nature. He rejects the gospel freely and willingly, because he wants to reject it. Because its his nature to do so.

Notice, Calvinists aren't saying that the man wants to believe, but some unknown force is preventing him from doing so. Instead, they are saying he doesn't want to believe the gospel in the first place.

Thus, he is unable to believe the gospel.

So in Calvinism, a man's inability is precisely because of and predicated on his unwillingness.

And yet, by your own admission, the unwillingness follows with necessity from the nature of man, a nature which man has no control over. So it's not at all clear how you've solved the difficulty of God unjustly demanding the impossible. Holding fallen man accountable for failing to do what is impossible for him to do is like holding a man accountable for failing to fly (and punishing him for his lack of altitude).

I don't see how you've answered the objection at all.

 

[TheSeabass]

God has commanded men to believe (MK 1:15; Acts 16:31) with the verb 'believe' being in the imperative mood.
It would be pointless, senseless for God to command men to believe if men were inable to do so...God would be demanding/commanding man to do the impossible, which is not in the nature of God. The command to believe implies with it that man has the ability, responsibility, accountability to obey that command. God has given to man the onus to believe. Calvinism is man trying to throw that onus back upon God as if God has the onus, the obligation to see to it that men believe when God has no such onus, obligation at all. SInce God gave man the onus the the fault, short coming is upon those men that do not believe. If the onus were upon God, then GZod bears the fault. blame, shortcoming for the unbelief of men.

 

[TheSeabass]

It may be a little difficult to pin down theologically how the doctrine of regeneration and such things play into the problem.

But the thing that is clear is that natural fallen man cannot comprehend and respond to the things of God - also that no one can come to the Christ unless it has been granted and taught to him by God.

There is nowhere in the scriptures where it says that these problems are overcome by God for all of fallen mankind.

It is said in various ways and in various places that these things have been overcome by God for His elect in particular.

Word it any way you want to - but fallen man is unable in himself to be saved considering that God requires personal faith and trust in Christ's work. God makes some able to accept Christ as their personal savior and not others.

Fairness, what ifs, and all other arguments be hanged. The scriptures are clear on these points concerning the inability of fallen man to be saved even with Christ's work at Calvary - and the sovereign grace of God being extended to some to overcome the inherent problems on behalf of His elect.

We don't have to understand it. We don't even have to agree that it is fair. But, if you want to please God, you must have faith that it is true.

People can squirm and what ifs all they want to. But the bottom line is that if you will not subscribe to these very obvious truths from scripture - God will give you no other insight into the matter. Accept them - and God has a person of faith that He can and will work with.

But Calvinism does not get to determine/define what "fairness" is for God or the rest of us. God causing/forcing men to be lost against his own will is unfair in every sense of the word and is not in the nature of God. Parents causing/forcing their children to disobey just so they can punish the children is not only unfair, it's not a sensible, sane way to act.

 

[Marvin Knox]

But Calvinism does not get to determine/define what "fairness" is for God or the rest of us. God causing/forcing men to be lost against his own will is unfair in every sense of the word and is not in the nature of God. Parents causing/forcing their children to disobey just so they can punish the children is not only unfair, it's not a sensible, sane way to act.

I'm not sure what you mean by "Calvinism" determining and defining what fairness is for God or anyone else.

God is the one who decides.

Fairness, what ifs, and all other arguments be hanged. The scriptures are clear on these points concerning the inability of fallen man to be saved even with Christ's work at Calvary - and the sovereign grace of God being extended to some to overcome the inherent problems on behalf of His elect.

We don't have to understand it. We don't even have to agree that it is fair. But, if you want to please God, you must have faith that it is true.

People can squirm and what ifs all they want to. But the bottom line is that if you will not subscribe to these very obvious truths from scripture - God will give you no other insight into the matter. Accept them - and God has a person of faith that He can and will work with.

If people insist on determining fairness before believing (and obeying) they may find themselves at odds with God.

Adam probably didn't think it fair or within God's nature that God would place him in a garden, place a tree in the center of that garden that would kill him if he ate of it, and then allow the strongest most persuasive creature ever created to tempt him with it.

But it was true, fair, and within God's nature to do so none the less.

Best to believe the Word of God first and then go to Him for insights into how it all fits together.

And, by the way, in case anyone didn't get the memo, we are all guilty before God until made righteous in His sight through the gift of faith.

God has the right to make whatever He want to make out of the lump of clay that is fallen mankind.

And, if there's one thing clear in scripture, it is that that lump was altogether corrupted, sinful and deserving of Hell the instant they became that way.

Romans is crystal clear that we are under judgment even now in this life. A couple of those judgments being administered against most sinful men in this age are the judgments of abandonment to falsehood and hardening of their hearts according to Romans.

If a person has a problem with God having mercy on some and not others it will be just one more jealous sin on their account in the day of judgment.

 

[TheSeabass]

I'm not sure what you mean by "Calvinism" determining and defining what fairness is for God or anyone else.

God is the one who decides.



If people insist on determining fairness before believing (and obeying) they may find themselves at odds with God.

Adam probably didn't think it fair or within God's nature that God would place him in a garden, place a tree in the center of that garden that would kill him if he ate of it, and then allow the strongest most persuasive creature ever created to tempt him with it.

But it was true, fair, and within God's nature to do so none the less.

Best to believe the Word of God first and then go to Him for insights into how it all fits together.

And, by the way, in case anyone didn't get the memo, we are all guilty before God until made righteous in His sight through the gift of faith.

God has the right to make whatever He want to make out of the lump of clay that is fallen mankind.

And, if there's one thing clear in scripture, it is that that lump was altogether corrupted, sinful and deserving of Hell the instant they became that way.

Romans is crystal clear that we are under judgment even now in this life. A couple of those judgments being administered against most sinful men in this age are the judgments of abandonment to falsehood and hardening of their hearts according to Romans.

If a person has a problem with God having mercy on some and not others it will be just one more jealous sin on their account in the day of judgment.

You posted "Fairness, what ifs, and all other arguments be hanged."

Numerous verses tell me God is "just" and God does "right" (Gen 18:25). Fairness cannot be "hanged" if God is just and will do what is right......God will do what is fair, just, right not what is unfair, unjust and wrong.

God was fair, just and did right with Adam regardless of what you think Adam may have thought. Yet God forcing Adam to sin against his own will would have been unfair, unjust, and just wrong.

As far as the lump of clay analogy:
1) the clay marred itself, Jer 18:4, the potter did NOT cause/force the clay to mar just so he could fashion the clay into a vessel of dishonor.

2) Jeremiah tells me Israel is as that lump of clay in the potter's hand. Jer 18:6

3) it depended on how the clay (Israel) behaved in the hands of the Potter (God) as to how God formed them;
a) If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them. Verse 8
b) If it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them. Verse 10

If the clay/nation obey God turning from their evil God will form them into a vessel of honor.
If that clay/nation obey NOT God then God will form them into a vessel of dishonor.

Note that the basis God uses is NOT some random, unconditional or unknown reason but is based upon if one obeys God or not. Calvinism will deny that man's obedience is the basis God uses in determining how to form the lump. The problem Calvinism has it is cannot tell me the basis God uses to determine how to form the lump, Calvinism has a large gaping hole in its theology it cannot explain when the bible does give explanation.


In Romans, men harden their own hearts, God allows them to do so.

 

[EmSw]

Note that the basis God uses is NOT some random, unconditional or unknown reason but is based upon if one obeys God or not. Calvinism will deny that man's obedience is the basis God uses in determining how to form the lump. The problem Calvinism has it is cannot tell me the basis God uses to determine how to form the lump, Calvinism has a large gaping hole in its theology it cannot explain when the bible does give explanation.

Here is the basis God uses in determining how to form the lump.

Zechariah 1 -
2 “The Lord has been very angry with your fathers.
3 Therefore say to them, ‘Thus says the Lord of hosts: “Return to Me,” says the Lord of hosts, “and I will return to you,” says the Lord of hosts.
4 “Do not be like your fathers, to whom the former prophets preached, saying, ‘thus says the Lord of hosts: “Turn now from your evil ways and your evil deeds.”’ But they did not hear nor heed Me,” says the Lord.
5 “Your fathers, where are they? And the prophets, do they live forever?
6 Yet surely My words and My statutes, which I commanded My servants the prophets, did they not overtake your fathers?
“So they returned and said:
Just as the Lord of hosts determined to do to us, according to our ways and according to our deeds, so He has dealt with us.

He determines how to form the lump according to our ways and deeds; this is how He deals with us. Too many do not hear, nor heed the Lord when He says to turn now from their evil ways and deeds.

 

[EmSw]

If a person has a problem with God having mercy on some and not others it will be just one more jealous sin on their account in the day of judgment.

Here again, we can look to the truth Jesus taught.

Matthew 5:7 -
Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.

This is how a person obtains mercy from God. It has nothing to do with God Himself deciding who He has mercy on.

And no one will receive any judgment because this is a 'jealous' sin. Do not follow nor heed man's ways and thoughts!

 

[James Is Back]

Mod Hat On

Thread has undergone a cleanup due to flaming/goading so if your post is gone that is the reason or you quoted someone that did. I will remind everyone that if you disagree with someone address the post don't flame/goad them.

Mod Hat Off​

 

[Marvin Knox]

The “opposition” to Calvinism can list dozens of scriptures that talk about their beliefs. I agree with almost every one of them and I have incorporated those scriptures into my theology.

I can list dozens of scriptures that talk about my beliefs. The problem is that the other side will not acknowledge mine and incorporate them into their theology.

Reformed theology is the more thorough and systematic system of theology. That is why the majority of major systematic theology works over the centuries have been of a generally Reformed slant and not the opposition.

Most of the things that we can discuss here have been discussed before. You know where to find it all. Calvinists and Arminians have been going at it here for years. I’ll just leave off this now.

Just be sure that you have incorporated every concept from scripture into you theology and you will find the truth.

It’s not that difficult to do. Just believe ALL of the scriptures and don’t pick the ones that support only one side. The truth must include all of scripture.

One word of warning from the Word of God – don’t teach here if you have not thoroughly considered every possibility. There will be a more strict judgment awaiting you if you argue theology here then if you just read along.

My time here in the "Christian" forum has been very enlightening to say the least.

I hope to see most of you on the other side of this life.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Just be sure that you have incorporated every concept from scripture into you theology and you will find the truth.

It’s not that difficult to do. Just believe ALL of the scriptures and don’t pick the ones that support only one side. The truth must include all of scripture.

This sounds as if Scripture presents at least 2 sides to each issue. Arminianism and Calvinism contradict each other. As well, free grace theology is different than the other 2.

 

[Marvin Knox]

This sounds as if Scripture presents at least 2 sides to each issue. Arminianism and Calvinism contradict each other. As well, free grace theology is different than the other 2.

Just a quick note because I think that your observation is exactly right in one respect and wrong in another.

There are no contradictions in scripture. There are, however, paradoxes or apparent contradictions.

There are two sides to many issues (or doctrines) in scripture for sure. That is what leads some people to sometimes see contradictions in scripture and give up on systematic theology entirely. The thing that most Christians do, however, is to pick a side and entrench themselves there, ignoring or discounting the points of the other side.

I don't intend to debate the facts. But I will give an example or two.

If I asked you who wrote the book of Acts, you could give me one of 3 answers - every one of which is correct - with the third answer being more completely correct than the other 2. The answers are, of course - Luke,God, or both.

If I asked you who made the statement that said ".....it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people....." - there would be 3 answers - Chaiaphas, God, or both. Only the third would be comprehensively correct.

If I asked you who spoke words out of the mouth of the donkey - who sent Joseph ahead to Egypt - who killed Jesus - who hardened Pharaoh's heart - what caused the drought in Elijah's day - well you get the point.

Everything in history has two components to it. Those two components are the acts of the creation and the acts of the creator.

The Word of God is sent forth to accomplish whatever is the ultimate will of God. He not only brings the components of creation into being - God inhabit that creation as that creation inhabits God. "In Him we live and move and have our being."

God fills the heavens and the earth. He fills every synapse of your brain and every hair on your head.

God is fully present in every bullet that strikes a child in a driveby shooting.

God is present in every atom that has been split in atomic explosions and in every atom that will be split.

He is as present in Satan as He is in Me.

He accomplishes whatever He desires - nothing less or more. His Word will not return to Him without accomplishing everything for which He sent Him forth.

In the display of God's innate knowledge of good and evil that is this present age - God has only decreed what is good. But He has chosen that those decrees be carried out involving the free choices of men and angel. Often they are evil choices.

Some find this impossible to reconcile with His goodness. I do not. I find it, instead, amazingly wise. The idea of summing all things up in His Son is amazing to me. It strikes me as altogether wise and totally reconcilable.

The idea that men or angels use God to do anything that He doesn't approve of is ridiculous.

God has not left us with the option of seeing Him as a God who merely observes and reacts to His creation. He is a God who is minutely involved in every facet of His creation from Satan's tail to the spikes that pierced His Son.

Men and angels make choices and are held accountable for them. He predestines everything that He allows and yet He is not to be held as evil when the choices of men or angels are evil.

Although His creation has it's being in Him - He is interactive with that creation on a very personal level. There is no contradiction in that according to the Word of God.

Similarly there is no contradiction between predestination and the free choices of creation. Simply put - we have identity and we make our own choices - but we are not God nor are we independent of Him nor can we ever be.

Nor do I want or need to be. That's Satan's desire not mine. It is apparently and sadly the fondest desire of many here in the forum as well.

God loves me. He bends low over me and rejoices in my acts even though I have no real being outside of God Himself. Some times it causes me to tremble and fall to my knees in wonder.

I could continue forever I suppose. I suppose that if I listed everything the Son of God does all the books in all the world could not contain my words. God is totally sovereign in all that occurs.

I didn't write the book. I'm just the messenger of it's contents. I tell both sides of the story and make no apologies for doing so.

Whether I can adequately explain or justify the providential activities of God is not the measure of whether the various paradoxes in scripture are reconcilable. Ours is but to believe them and act and preach accordingly.

Over the years, I have found the words of Jesus to be true. To the one who has more will be given. To the one who has not even what he thinks He has will be taken away from him.

Believe the entire Word of God with it's apparent contradictions and you will find the answers to be adequate as you ponder them under the direction of the Holy Spirit.

Choose a side in a discussion concerning theology and you may well end up correct. But just as surely you may end up fighting against God and His Word.

That is what I have found to be true concerning people in this section of the forum in particular. It is true for Calvinists and non-Calvinists alike.

Some folks believe that they have everything figured out. Some teach and write books and papers on the subjects discussed here. Sadly - their theology is in truth shallow and inadequate.

Many people make comments and ask questions ranging from the death camps of Hitler to the free choices of men - in light of what Reformed theologians hold to be true about the absolutely sovereignty of God. They make charges concerning "double speak" and other such. They likely think that their challenges are brilliant when in fact they are - as I said - shallow and inadequate.

It would be good IMO if some here in this forum would ask questions and simply read and contemplate the answers given. But it seems that they just can't do that without arguing about something that they haven't given adequate thought to.

Some here have given it a great deal of thought of course. But many just are not studied enough to give their opinions. They would be wiser not to do so IMO.

People shouldn't teach here unless they have worked through both sides of the doctrines with an open mind. There will be a more strict judgment for us for participating here. I am keenly aware of that fact. I only hope that everyone else is as well.

Both Calvinist and non can be wrong if they do not rightly divide the word of truth. The correct division of the Word of God often includes some of both sides of a doctrine - apparently contradictory at first glance or not.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Just a quick note because I think that your observation is exactly right in one respect and wrong in another.

I enjoyed your response.

There are no contradictions in scripture. There are, however, paradoxes or apparent contradictions.

I'm aware of that position, but I don't see any paradox or apparent contradictions. As of yet, no one has actually been able to show that my view of theology is in any contradiction, apparent or literal. Not that I think that I have it all figured out. There are many verses and passages that I have no idea what the writer meant or had in mind. But none of them affect my theology.

There are two sides to many issues (or doctrines) in scripture for sure. That is what leads some people to sometimes see contradictions in scripture and give up on systematic theology entirely. The thing that most Christians do, however, is to pick a side and entrench themselves there, ignoring or discounting the points of the other side.

However, there is only 1 truth to every issue or doctrine in Scripture.

I don't intend to debate the facts. But I will give an example or two.

If I asked you who wrote the book of Acts, you could give me one of 3 answers - every one of which is correct - with the third answer being more completely correct than the other 2. The answers are, of course - Luke,God, or both.

If I asked you who made the statement that said ".....it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people....." - there would be 3 answers - Chaiaphas, God, or both. Only the third would be comprehensively correct.

If I asked you who spoke words out of the mouth of the donkey - who sent Joseph ahead to Egypt - who killed Jesus - who hardened Pharaoh's heart - what caused the drought in Elijah's day - well you get the point.

These examples don't contain any apparent contradictions.

God fills the heavens and the earth. He fills every synapse of your brain and every hair on your head.

But I don't believe that God controls every synapse of our brains. Yes, God can bring thoughts into one's mind, but He's not into mind control.

God is fully present in every bullet that strikes a child in a driveby shooting.

Nah, God is not present "in bullets". God is omnipresent and dwells within believers, but He doesn't exist in bullets. He's fully aware of all bullets that have or will ever be fired. He may stop some and allow others to reach their target.

God is present in every atom that has been split in atomic explosions and in every atom that will be split.

I don't see omnipresence that way.

He is as present in Satan as He is in Me.

There is no evidence that God indwells any angel. Yes, the Holy Spirit indwells believers.

He accomplishes whatever He desires - nothing less or more. His Word will not return to Him without accomplishing everything for which He sent Him forth.

And part of His desire or will is that His creation have freedom in their choices.

In the display of God's innate knowledge of good and evil that is this present age - God has only decreed what is good. But He has chose that those decrees be carried out involving the free choices of men and angel. Often they are evil choices.

Some find this impossible to reconcile with His goodness. I do not. I find it, instead, amazingly wise. The idea of summing all things up in His Son is amazing to me. It strikes me as altogether wise and totally reconcilable.

I have no problem with the fact that God allows evil in His creation. And His plan conquered evil.

The idea that men or angels use God to do anything that He doesn't approve of is ridiculous.

Absolutely!!

God has not left us with the option of seeing Him as a God who merely observes and reacts to His creation. He is a God who is minutely involved in every facet of His creation from Satan's tail to the spikes that pierced His Son.

Per Scripture, the devil has neither a red epidermis, a tail, or horns. If he manifested himself today, he would appear as THE most handsome, dashing male in the universe, in a perfectly tailored 3 piece suit, etc. He would make women swoon, and men feel totally inadequate and jealous of him.

I could continue forever I suppose. I suppose that if I listed everything the Son of God does all the books in all the world could not contain my words. God is totally sovereign in all that occurs.

I don't know what that means. For some Calvinists, it seems to mean that God controls everything, to which I disagree. God is sovereign, but allows freedom of choice, which in no way affects His sovereignty.

I didn't write the book. I'm just the messenger of it's contents. I tell both sides of the story and make no apologies for doing so.

I see only 1 truth in His story. Not 2 sides.

Believe the entire Word of God with it's apparent contradictions and you will find the answers to be adequate as you ponder them under the direction of the Holy Spirit.

I do not see any apparent contradictions in Scripture. I really don't.

Some folks believe that they have everything figured out.

They are kidding themselves.

 

[Marvin Knox]

FreeGrace2

It is my intention to quit the forum altogether now or very soon. I've said that before and always been drawn back into it. Hopefully I can leave this time for good. Although I find it stimulating - this takes too much of my time.

You have been a worthy "adversary" in debate. We've had our differences. I have found you exasperating - but stimulating.

You and I have a very different world view vis a vis God's omnipresence and providential control. (Which is likely the main root of our differences.)

Having said that - with all of our differences - I consider you to be orthodox for the most part in things that really matter. I'm quite sure I'll see you in Heaven someday. It will be interesting to compare notes.

For the record - I don't believe for one minute that Satan has a tail either - but I think you knew that.

 

[FreeGrace2]

FreeGrace2

It is my intention to quit the forum altogether now or very soon. I've said that before and always been drawn back into it. Hopefully I can leave this time for good. Although I find it stimulating - this takes too much of my time.

You have been a worthy "adversary" in debate. We've had our differences. I have found you exasperating - but stimulating.

You and I have a very different world view vis a vis God's omnipresence and providential control. (Which is likely the main root of our differences.)

Having said that - with all of our differences - I consider you to be orthodox for the most part in things that really matter. I'm quite sure I'll see you in Heaven someday. It will be interesting to compare notes.

For the record - I don't believe for one minute that Satan has a tail either - but I think you knew that.

Thank you for the compliments. And I have thoroughly enjoyed our discussions.

May God bless you and yours.

ps: looking forward to comparing notes!