Why misrepresent what those who hold to free will believe???? Jackass!
Is God angry with sin , and was sin the Sovereign plan of God ?
- Thread starter Leatherneck0311
- Start date
What is that I misrepresented? If you don't think God will go against one's free will in salvation, there's no "zapping" as scoffed your resident thesaurus thumper.
Therefore the only reason one could choose Christ is because he already possesses the will and the power to do so, and the only reason would would choose Christ where another wouldn't, is because one is more virtuous than the other.
Nobody has claimed they "saved themselves" you Calvinist corruptor. Jackass.
But don't you assert that the drawing is based on His foreknowledge of the merits of that individual?
Elect according to the foreknowledge of God as you say.
Not in so many words, but it is in essence what is being claimed.
No saved, born again, blood bought, forgiven , redeemed child of God believes that God would make men sin and violate His own commands to His creation not to sin, and then have His Son crucified to pay for the sins that He preordained men to commit. That evilness does Not come from God it comes from the god of this world,
Would you like to answer the question that was posed? What is "election according to foreknowledge" if it isn't that God elects someone based on the merits of one's good choices?
Since God knows everything before it happens you are adding a qualifier into the verse ( merit)that the verse doesn’t. I don’t add to scripture to arrive at what I believe. The verse says elect according to the foreknowledge of God anything after that YOU added.
I'm not talking about the Scripture. I'm talking about your assertions and premises.
But if one wants to appeal to the Scripture, it might behoove him to quote it faithfully. The Scripture doesn't say election is based on what God foreknew, but upon whom He foreknew, Romans 8:29. He will say to the workers of iniquity, "I never knew you," Matthew 7:23.
And so Isaac was loved, not because there was anything at all to set him apart from Esau (Esau may have been profane, but Jacob was a worm and liar) but because of God's purposes in election.
But your assertion is, as many put it, that God could look down the "corridors of time" (Whatever that means) and see who and who would not freely choose Him, and so they are elect upon that basis, not upon the basis of God's purposes.
Do you see “whom” in this verse ?
Absolutely. Peter was foreknown, as are all the elect.Do you see “whom” in this verse ?1Pe 1:2 - Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father,
Who said anything about a lottery? God will have mercy upon whom He will have mercy.
"Persons" actually, meaning regardless of status and genealogy, God will have mercy upon whom He will have mercy.
No it doesn't, but still the Scriptures say whom He did foreknow, He also did predestinate...
But let's take your premises back to the antedeluvian world. You're saying that of all the families of the earth, only some of the descendants of Noah would have enough virtue to freely choose Christ? That God looked down the corridors of time and saw only those descending from Noah worthy of election?
You do understand that the book of Romans is not the totality of scripture right ? Again you act like Peter never addressed the “elect” , which he did, but he of course since it exposes the errors of Calvinism it is ignored.—>
Do you see “whom” in this verse ?
1Pe 1:2 - Elect according to theforeknowledge of God the Father,
That's a Calvinist lie straight from the pit of hell.
Okay, you win.You do understand that the book of Romans is not the totality of scripture right ? Again you act like Peter never addressed the “elect” , which he did, but he of course since it exposes the errors of Calvinism it is ignored.—>
Do you see “whom” in this verse ?
1Pe 1:2 - Elect according to theforeknowledge of God the Father,
Nope, if you learned you win.
Cain't learn a leatherneck to argue, so I just quit.
D
Dr. Huk-N-Duck
Guest
Getting soft in your old age?
