In my Post #80 on Page 4, with reference to the Calvinism versus “Arminianism” debate, I floated a thought:
But could it be that someone, reading the Scriptures afresh, has found a third perspective after all – one that renders this whole Calvinist-Arminian debate in its current form meaningless?
If so, what could it be?
In reply, in Post #84 on Page 5, nonaeroterraqueous stated:
There is an infinite number of ways to be wrong. Start a contest and throw in some prize money and you'll get more third perspectives than you can shake a pitchfork at.
However, I did mention a Scriptural basis, did I not?
Some years ago I was jokingly presented with a promotional $US1,000,000 note of obviously non-legal tender as part of a Christmas bonus from the company where I was then working. I still have it.
And while I have no intention of parting with it, why don't we play pretends? Just for fun.
Why don't we ask nonaeroterraqueous to pretend that there
is a contest of the type he suggested, and ask him to forget everything he has ever learned or been taught, and to come at the Scriptures afresh, in an unrushed fashion, looking at each verse, phrase, word and passage carefully, and noting any differences in meaning from what he had thought they meant (including, had been taught they meant), and any apparent inconsistencies between different verses, passages, etc.
After a while, maybe he could even start a thread in one of the forums here to report what he has found, and to request clarification with regard to things he might find puzzling. (And let us know where that thread is.)
You never know. He might indeed find a different, a third, perspective. Based on pure Scripture.
And he might even qualify for a copy of my promotional note.