First you said they were concerning atheists.
I never said all 6 quotes were about atheists. Just the first quote. But ALL 6 quotes are examples of the various ways people sin.
Are you guilty of ALL of the quotes?
I agreed that they are atheists, the natural man that claims "no God". Are you updating your claim?
No, but I am clarifying, since you obviously didn't understand what I wrote.
It isn't the "natural man" who claims no God, but atheists. Didn't you read Psa 14:1-3 or 53:1-3?
And you need to address Cornelius in Acts 10, who, as an unsaved person (Acts 11:14) prayed to God and gave alms.
I didn't miss it at all. What is the problem here. Are you saying it should have said in the immediate context, as part of the narrative, that God enabled him to seek God? Why must it?[/QUOTE]
iow, you are simply ASSUMING that God enabled him to seek God. It doesn't say so, so you have to speculate, to keep your theology intact.
I'm sorry for being dense, but how does the fact that God must change a man to enable him to believe, contradict the will, and choice?
You fail to understand "will". If man's will is free, then God doesn't "change his will". If God has to change his will, so he will believe, then man ISN'T free and merely a robot or puppet.
It is only a statement that man's will is contrary to God until God changes the will. We always choose as we will.
Your talking point fails to explain Cornelius. So you have to assume, presume, and speculate to get to your theology.
I said:
The "not submitting to God's law" is a choice. The rest are results of the first.
Agreed. So how does such, of his own virtue and integrity, choose God?
If you really did agree, then you should understand that man is also able to choose to submit to God.
And your question is simply a false issue. This isn't about virtue/integrity. It's about "taking God at His word". That's what faith is.
It appears you don't really understand heb 11:6.
"And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him."
First, it is faith that pleases God. So if God MUST change a person so that they will have faith, or He MUST give the faith to a person, they are merely a passive programmed robot or puppet with strings that are being pulled.
Second, note the words: "anyone who COMES TO GOD". So, how do that do that?
Third, they
1. MUST BELIEVE THAT HE EXISTS
2. THAT HE REWARDS THOSE WHO SEEK HIM
So, iow, believing that God exists and that He rewards those who seek Him is FAITH. Which pleases God.
How does the example you show deny Election of believers to salvation?
Can you show any verse that speaks of saved angels? Of course not. That's not even on the table. That example with Heb 1:14 proves that election is for service.
These are indeed elected to serve, and they do precisely as God chose for them to do. Likewise, with the saved and the reprobate. We always choose according to God's plan for us. Precisely. What is the problem?
First, the claim that God elects to salvation, when there are NO such verses that indicate that. None whatsoever.
Second, that God MUST change the person so they will believe. Again, NO such verses that indicate that.
I have shown by Scripture and I have shown by reason, that God chooses, and man always chooses accordingly, either by rebellion or obedience.
Huh? Are you suggesting that God chooses people to be rebellious???
You have no support in Scripture for your view of election.
Said the man who has NO verses that teach one is elected to salvation.
I've given you 7 examples of people described as elect, and NONE of them mentioned anything about salvation. All were obviously for service.