Why do Arminians...

FreeGrace2 · May 16, 2014

Marvin Knox said:
So you object to the term "elect" being used for believers because there are some people who are elect for other reasons other than to believe on Christ. Fair enough. I get it.

No, I do't think you do get it. Yes, NT believers are also called "elect". I have no problem calling believers elect, but my point, which continues to be ignored or dodged, is that no believer was elected to believe OR to be saved. That's what should be "got".

We won't call the doctrine that speaks of the predestination of some to believe as the doctrine of election as has been Christian tradition.

Please direct me to the verse that says that some are predestined to believe. I'm not aware of any. Thanks.

But we do agree that those who believe were predestined to do so before the foundation of the world - right?

Wrong. No one was predestined to believe, as in God causes anyone to believe.

That is the logical conclusion of Calvinist doctrine of election, and it is unbiblical.

God obviously knows who will believe. But He does not elect who will. And your alluding to Eph 1:4 does not say what you think it means.

FreeGrace2 · May 16, 2014

Hammster said:
So Titus had copies of 1 Peter and James lying around? How do you know this?

Not necessary, since all three were inspired by the Holy Spirit when they wrote. So they had the same ideas.

Hammster · May 16, 2014

FreeGrace2 said:
I explained why it was such a poor parallel.

Your issue is with Paul, then. He made the parallel.

Hammster · May 16, 2014

FreeGrace2 said:
Wow. Really? Not aware of any verses that call the Father, Son, and the Spirit as God?? There's not "one" verse, as you well know. But there are many verses that speak of each member of the Trinity as God.

And most Christians are aware that in Genesis 1 Elohim is plural, which is why the Scripture says "Let US".

That's funny. Really. You've admitted that you can't provide any verses for some of the things of your view, and yet request one from me.

You can't give a verse that explains the Trinity because it's an idea that must be gleaned from examining various passages of scripture and drawing a conclusion. That's the same thing with the various aspects of Calvinism.

Hammster · May 16, 2014

FreeGrace2 said:
And, actually it does, when the gift (Rom 6:23) is received (Jn 1:12, 1 Tim 1:16).

Paul gave a complete thought in Titus 2, yet you must use other verses from other books out of context and interject them into the text to support your view.

Hammster · May 16, 2014

FreeGrace2 said:
For some inexplicable reason, Calvinist seem unaware that gifts are possessed only when accepted or received. Jn 1:12, 1 Tim 1:16.

I'm looking at Titus 2 in it's entirety. It's very clear. No need to go elsewhere. And more than a single verse. The only way to support your view is to use a single verse.

Hammster · May 16, 2014

FreeGrace2 said:
Not necessary, since all three were inspired by the Holy Spirit when they wrote. So they had the same ideas.

So then Titus 2 can be understood without injecting other ideas from other places. Thanks.

FreeGrace2 · May 16, 2014

Hammster said:
Your issue is with Paul, then. He made the parallel.

I have no issue with Paul. I do have an issue with claims without support or evidence, though.

FreeGrace2 · May 16, 2014

Hammster said:
You can't give a verse that explains the Trinity because it's an idea that must be gleaned from examining various passages of scripture and drawing a conclusion. That's the same thing with the various aspects of Calvinism.

Absolutely wrong. Gen 1:26,27 refutes your claim.

And when Scripture is gleaned, we don't find any hint of Calvinism. Instead, we find clear verses that state that Christ died for everyone, that God is pleased to (chooses) save those who believe. All of which refutes Calvinism. Hm.

FreeGrace2 · May 16, 2014

Hammster said:
Paul gave a complete thought in Titus 2, yet you must use other verses from other books out of context and interject them into the text to support your view.

All of Paul's thoughts and writings were complete. Your claim is empty without clerly defining your point and use of Scripture. Which hasn't been done yet.

btw, when any verse can be used to refute or contradict any view, the verse wins out over the view that it contradicts.

Hammster · May 16, 2014

FreeGrace2 said:
Absolutely wrong. Gen 1:26,27 refutes your claim.

And when Scripture is gleaned, we don't find any hint of Calvinism. Instead, we find clear verses that state that Christ died for everyone, that God is pleased to (chooses) save those who believe. All of which refutes Calvinism. Hm.

Genesis one does not prove the Trinity. A plurality, maybe. But not the Trinity. And Oneness folks have clear verses that state what they believe.

Hammster · May 16, 2014

FreeGrace2 said:
All of Paul's thoughts and writings were complete. Your claim is empty without clerly defining your point and use of Scripture. Which hasn't been done yet.

btw, when any verse can be used to refute or contradict any view, the verse wins out over the view that it contradicts.

What? So you think you found a VERSE that contradicts all of Titus 2, and so it wins out? Is that how you do theology?

FreeGrace2 · May 16, 2014

I said this:
For some inexplicable reason, Calvinist seem unaware that gifts are possessed only when accepted or received. Jn 1:12, 1 Tim 1:16.

Hammster said:
I'm looking at Titus 2 in it's entirety. It's very clear. No need to go elsewhere. And more than a single verse. The only way to support your view is to use a single verse.

It's very easy to hold up an entire chapter to hide behind, but unless you can point to specific verses that support your claims or view, why believe it?

And please keep in mind that even singles verses that SAY opposite of what your claim IS a problem for you.

There are NO single verses in Scripture that contradict ANY passage of Scripture. None.

So, when single verses do refute one's view, one should take notice.

FreeGrace2 · May 16, 2014

Hammster said:
So then Titus 2 can be understood without injecting other ideas from other places. Thanks.

Meaning, that whatever view you thought was in Titus 2, isn't supported by Scripture. Unless Titus 2 contradicts any other "single verse" in Scripture.

FreeGrace2 · May 16, 2014

Hammster said:
Genesis one does not prove the Trinity. A plurality, maybe. But not the Trinity. And Oneness folks have clear verses that state what they believe.

That's why there are so many verses that identify the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as God. Bingo.

FreeGrace2 · May 16, 2014

Hammster said:
What? So you think you found a VERSE that contradicts all of Titus 2, and so it wins out? Is that how you do theology?

Seriously? I don't think that at all. In fact, just the opposite. There are verses that seriously refute your view of Titus 2.

Scripture is never contradictory.

Hammster · May 16, 2014

FreeGrace2 said:
I said this:
For some inexplicable reason, Calvinist seem unaware that gifts are possessed only when accepted or received. Jn 1:12, 1 Tim 1:16.

It's very easy to hold up an entire chapter to hide behind, but unless you can point to specific verses that support your claims or view, why believe it?

And please keep in mind that even singles verses that SAY opposite of what your claim IS a problem for you.

There are NO single verses in Scripture that contradict ANY passage of Scripture. None.

So, when single verses do refute one's view, one should take notice.

I'm hiding behind a WHOLE CHAPTER????

Wow. I think the problem has really been exposed now. You think single verses out of context trump whole passages. I can't even imagine doing theology that way.

Hammster · May 16, 2014

FreeGrace2 said:
Meaning, that whatever view you thought was in Titus 2, isn't supported by Scripture. Unless Titus 2 contradicts any other "single verse" in Scripture.

Speechless. smh

Hammster · May 16, 2014

FreeGrace2 said:
Seriously? I don't think that at all. In fact, just the opposite. There are verses that seriously refute your view of Titus 2.

Scripture is never contradictory.

What is Paul's point in Titus 2?

Charis kai Dunamis · May 16, 2014

Hammster said:
I'm hiding behind a WHOLE CHAPTER????

Wow. I think the problem has really been exposed now. You think single verses out of context trump whole passages. I can't even imagine doing theology that way.

Can I come out of hiding to laugh at something?

Why do Arminians...

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Carpe Chaos

Carpe Chaos

Carpe Chaos

Carpe Chaos

Carpe Chaos

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Carpe Chaos

Carpe Chaos

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Carpe Chaos

Carpe Chaos

Carpe Chaos

χάρις καὶ δύναμις

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency