What's the difference between Calvinism and Arminianism?

[guuila]

Jesus certainly did and I agree with Jesus. Luke 13:3 unless you repent, you shall all likewise perish.

Ok so we should believe Luke 13? Good to know.

 

[elman]

Ok, so when God determines who the elect are, he figures this out by seeing what we will do. Thus he learns information about us (what we will do). Feel free to deny this - you're just being inconsistent. But hey, why should we expect anything different?

When did I say there was a point in time that God had to learn something? I did not.

 

[guuila]

When did I say there was a point in time that God had to learn something? I did not.

Right. Because you're inconsistent.

 

[elman]

Ok so we should believe Luke 13? Good to know.

He that has ears to hear, let him hear.

 

[guuila]

Only if you pick and choose and reject parts of the Bible.

Do you accept all 66 books of the Bible?

 

[elman]

Right. Because you're inconsistent.

Not until you point out where I said God did not know something. Until then you are simply creating things to assign to me I did not say.

 

[elman]

Do you accept all 66 books of the Bible?

Do you?

 

[guuila]

Do you?

Answer the question.

 

[elman]

Answer the question.

The answer is the same for you and me. The difference is you are rejecting parts of the 66 books and denying it. I reject parts of the 66 books and admit it.

 

[Charis kai Dunamis]

Jesus certainly did and I agree with Jesus. Luke 13:3 unless you repent, you shall all likewise perish.

As a counter-question, what do you think about the no-less-than 150 uses of faith/believe in the NT apart from any mention of repentance?

I don't agree with Jonathon Edwards if I understand him to say that if evil exists God caused it to exist.

Well then I guess you agree with him.

 

[elman]

=Jesusfreak5000;61968807]As a counter-question, what do you think about the no-less-than 150 uses of faith/believe in the NT apart from any mention of repentance?

I don't think anyone can believe in Jesus as they should without repentance. If there is no turn from wickedness to righteousness, there is not true believing in Jesus. In Acts 10 Peter refers to it as doing the right thing.

Well then I guess you agree with him.

I don't think so. I don't believe God is evil. I think God is good all the time.

 

[Skala]

I don't think so. I don't believe God is evil. I think God is good all the time.

When God sent Christ to die for our sins to save us, did He guarantee that Christ would be murdered to accomplish this plan?

Or did God (and by extension, us) just get lucky that some people happened to decide to murder Jesus?

 

[guuila]

The answer is the same for you and me. The difference is you are rejecting parts of the 66 books and denying it. I reject parts of the 66 books and admit it.

Ok, well I said your signature was unbiblical, and you said "Only if you pick and choose and reject parts of the Bible." so per your own admission, since you pick and choose and reject parts of the Bible, you must believe your signature was unbiblical. Logic.

 

[Charis kai Dunamis]

I don't think anyone can believe in Jesus as they should without repentance. If there is no turn from wickedness to righteousness, there is not true believing in Jesus. In Acts 10 Peter refers to it as doing the right thing.

That's fine, but you have now removed the graciousness of the Gospel and added a requirement to it. It is a gracious gift, there is no merit or demerit, working or non-working in the reception.

I don't think so. I don't believe God is evil. I think God is good all the time.

You said you don't agree with Edwards if he is saying God is the cause of the sin. And I responded "then you must agree with him" - meaning he is not saying God is the cause of sin. I think you missed that.

However the ordination of God certainly does make all existence actual; nothing happens that was not ordained or decreed. This does not make God the direct cause of sin, however, it does mean He decided it would certainly happen.

You must recognize the logic of Edward's quote. Otherwise you deny omniscience.

 

[crimsonleaf]

When did I say there was a point in time that God had to learn something? I did not.

Now you're just being deliberately contrary.

If God searches to discover (note, elman) who believes, and those people are then elect, then God has learned something.

In English and Texan english (small "e") "discover" is understood to mean "learn". To discover something is to move from a position of little or no knowledge to one of increased knowledge. God is omniscient and therefore cannot increase His knowledge. But if one believes as Arminians and elman does, then one accepts that God at some point has had His knowledge increased.

Could this be any clearer?

 

[Arcoe]

Jesus is responding to the selfrighteousness of some, that because of their piety looked at Zaccheus as if he was lost, thought of themselves as safe. Context is everything my friend.

In context, did He come to seek and save you?

 

[guuila]

Now you're just being deliberately contrary.

If God searches to discover (note, elman) who believes, and those people are then elect, then God has learned something.

In English and Texan english (small "e") "discover" is understood to mean "learn". To discover something is to move from a position of little or no knowledge to one of increased knowledge. God is omniscient and therefore cannot increase His knowledge. But if one believes as Arminians and elman does, then one accepts that God at some point has had His knowledge increased.

Could this be any clearer?

I don't think so. Like you said, it's deliberate.

 

[guuila]

In context, did He come to seek and save you?

What's up with your font?

 

[Charis kai Dunamis]

What's up with your font?

He wants to make sure you are focusing on what he is saying.

 

[Arcoe]

He wants to make sure you are focusing on what he is saying.

It is wise to leave the intentions of the heart to God.