In that case, the doctrine is obviously mistaken. Not only is the idea that sinners have no free will obviously, plainly, unmistakeably apparent to anyone who knows a sinner, it contradicts Christian doctrine itself.Ignorance of the fact that our lack of free will here on earth is a Christian doctrine of many theologians and whole sects of the Church does you no good. No free will for sinners is doctrine, your quibbles aside. And the necessity to reconcile that doctrine with the absolute necessity of all sin / evil and all righteousness / faith MUST be by a free will decison is explainable to those who are not blinkered by a previous commitment to a mindset...Christian or atheist.
To show you your mistakes, of course.If you don't understand Christian theology and cannot follow ordinary Christian words in a theological context....why are you here?
(Shrug)Again you act as if Christian doctrine is new to you, so curious.
Wrong.
It's a metaphor. That's all. You give the game away here when you have to choose your own word to show what you think he meant. Please try not to extrapolate a whole theology out of one short, out-of-context sentence.The letters of the NT are full of the doctrine of our enslavement to sin over, and over, Even Jesus purportedly supported this pov at John 8:34 Jesus replied, "Very truly I tell you, everyone who sins is a slave to sin. The use of the more modern and available word 'addiction' for its metaphor 'enslavement' is not out of bounds for the meaning of the words.
Then you've just lost. This is a debating forum. Its purpose, as stated on the top of the front page, is for non-Christians to challenge the faith, and Christians to defend it.Debating forum or not - I have no vested interest in winning or beating your or you changing your mind.
I don't debate, I prefer a dialectic.
You're quite right. I apologise. Checking the dictionary, I find that sophistry includes the intention to deceive. I am sure you have no such intention.You asked, I answered and it is your job to understand the basic concepts enough to follow the answer. If election, sanctification and the concept of the necessity of free will but it not being available to sinners is gobbledygook to you then I am at a loss... The pejorative gaslighting words sophistry, playing word games and claiming my paragraph doesn't actually mean anything are NOT acceptable debating techniques so we must guess as to why you use them...
"Playing word games" also carries a pejorative overtone, and I withdraw it and apologise for that too.
Claiming that your paragraph doesn't actually mean anything, though - no, I think that is fair comment. You ideas are mistaken, your logic is flawed, and your arguments are self-contradictory. I hope that my answers have helped you to understand this.
It's what I'm here for.
Upvote
0