Episcopalians of the United States: Democrat, Republican, or what?

[Fotis Greece]

I'm sorry, that's not Arminianism; that's Semipelagianism, and it is a heresy condemned by Arminians themselves.

I'm afraid that you are not paying attention to my posts. I repeat then ''God offers His grace and atonement... (that is His part) We on the other side use our free will and we choose either follow him and make our part or reject Him''

I would be a Semipelagian or even Pelagian if I was rejecting Prevenient Grace but I dont. And now... Where exactly do you disaggre with me...?

 

[thecolorsblend]

 

[PaladinValer]

I'm afraid that you are not paying attention to my posts. I repeat then ''God offers His grace and atonement... (that is His part) We on the other side use our free will and we choose either follow him and make our part or reject Him''

First off, address my posts, not me. I am not my posts.

Next, I repeat what was said in one of your posts: "Synergism comes from the greek wοrd συνεργώ that means act along with someone else. Now... God offers His grace and atonement... (that is His part) We on the other side use our free will and we choose either follow him and make our part or reject Him."

We have no free will in and of ourselves, so the two question are these: 1) How is this will suddenly free? 2) What is the timeline of God and individual action?

I would be a Semipelagian or even Pelagian if I was rejecting Prevenient Grace but I dont. And now... Where exactly do you disaggre with me...?

It seems however that your position does, or otherwise why debate my position when I bring it up in so many words, quote, "We don't have a 'free will' in terms of salvation. We don't have a will that is capable of saving ourselves" and replying with, quote, "As an arminian, I am a synergist". It logically implies that your belief in synergism is a doctrine that teaches we are capable of saving ourselves. If that was agreed to, then a reply of "I agree" or something to that effect would have been the logical reply. Instead, it was debated. No need to debate if it is agreed to.

 

[freezerman2000]

I won't vote in the poll because I an an Independent

 

[Albion]

I won't vote in the poll because I an an Independent

I could be wrong, but I suspect that that's why "Something else" was included as an option. Of course, there are minor parties, but if you are not committed to either the Dems or GOP, that's "something else."

 

[freezerman2000]

Well,I have been told that I am "Something else" many times..

 

[Albion]

Well,I have been told that I am "Something else" many times..

As a compliment, I assume.

 

[freezerman2000]

Sometimes I wonder...

 

[Fotis Greece]

First off, address my posts, not me. I am not my posts.

Next, I repeat what was said in one of your posts: "Synergism comes from the greek wοrd συνεργώ that means act along with someone else. Now... God offers His grace and atonement... (that is His part) We on the other side use our free will and we choose either follow him and make our part or reject Him."

We have no free will in and of ourselves, so the two question are these: 1) How is this will suddenly free? 2) What is the timeline of God and individual action?



It seems however that your position does, or otherwise why debate my position when I bring it up in so many words, quote, "We don't have a 'free will' in terms of salvation. We don't have a will that is capable of saving ourselves" and replying with, quote, "As an arminian, I am a synergist". It logically implies that your belief in synergism is a doctrine that teaches we are capable of saving ourselves. If that was agreed to, then a reply of "I agree" or something to that effect would have been the logical reply. Instead, it was debated. No need to debate if it is agreed to.

Nevermind...