more indept study of Armenian and Calvinist

[Guest Teditis]

I tend to think that both views can be true... they certainly aren't mutually exclusive

and contradictory.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Teditis said:

I tend to think that both views can be true... they certainly aren't mutually exclusive

and contradictory.

So, is it a matter of limited free will? That is what I understood Omega to say.

[Guest Teditis]

5 minutes ago, Joline said:

So, is it a mater of limited free will? That is what I understood Omega to say.

Well I leave that for him to answer... but as I understand it, it does.

Irresistible Grace would mean that we cannot choose against it.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Teditis said:

Well I leave that for him to answer... but as I understand it, it does.

Irresistible Grace would mean that we cannot choose against it.

Hmm. That is why I need to just sit back and listen to you all discuss this.

[enoob57]

1 hour ago, Omegaman 3.0 said:

I am not sure I am understanding this, but I will try, taking it a little bit at a time.

"For the simple fact it must be resolved with this Scripture

2 Pe 3:9

9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering
to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
KJV"

Not sure how Calvinism is not compatible with that. Are you saying that since God is not willing that any should perish but would have all come to repentance, is at odds with the fact, that he only selects some? (I do wish you would learn to spell things out more clearly, explain things instead of just dropping things out there that just pop into your head, but are clear as a bell in your mind!) Help the obtuse out a bit!
When I referenced the obtuse part it was under the grammatical construct of purposefully being obtuse not that you are obtuse!
I will never purposefully malign you but when the truth is threatened I will speak it, no matter the consequence of feelings...

I think I will just start out with that, otherwise my reply will become too long and confusing for others to follow.

The immediate context
2 Pe 3:1
 beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance:
KJV
this defines the us-ward in 3:9
 

the immediate context
2 Pe 3:3-5
3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,

4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.

5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
KJV
this defines the 'any' should perish and the 'all' should come to repentance

...thus on this foundation of Scripture, God through Peter, is saying God does not want any of the scoffers
to perish and this is simply denied by Calvinist doctrine.

Love, Steven

 

[enoob57]

41 minutes ago, Omegaman 3.0 said:

 

ahhhh, it dawns on me maybe . . . .

your first question is exploring the possibility, that a moderator deleted by post!

yes

[Guest Teditis]

12 minutes ago, Joline said:

Hmm. That is why I need to just sit back and listen to you all discuss this.

There is a certain logic to it all and Scripture that seems to suggest irresistible Grace...

There are none that seek after God... We are all dead in trespasses, etc., etc. which would

seem to suggest that if there's any movement towards God, it must be Him that initiates it.

And then it's a short jump to the notion that God completes everything He starts. So He calls

us from the get-go because of our spiritual "deadness" and directs our paths from that point

forward until one becomes "saved". Without His initial action of softening our hearts to Him

we would never be inclined to even seek Him... so He wakens us, softens our hearts and leads

us into truth... all done by His will and nothing to do with our own. His "will" is imparted into

us, thereby negating our own. I hope that makes sense...

But like I say, I think that He may do that with some, but not all. Others come to God after He

awakens our spiritual self and then gives us the free will to follow after Him... thus allowing the

verses that speak to "all", "any", "the world" etc. to remain true as well. It also therefore makes more

sense to evangelize and spread the Gospel to all peoples... there would be a chance that someone

could choose to turn to God and seek understanding and repentance.

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Teditis said:

There is a certain logic to it all and Scripture that seems to suggest irresistible Grace...

There are none that seek after God... We are all dead in trespasses, etc., etc. which would

seem to suggest that if there's any movement towards God, it must be Him that initiates it.

And then it's a short jump to the notion that God completes everything He starts. So He calls

us from the get-go because of our spiritual "deadness" and directs our paths from that point

forward until one becomes "saved". Without His initial action of softening our hearts to Him

we would never be inclined to even seek Him... so He wakens us, softens our hearts and leads

us into truth... all done by His will and nothing to do with our own. His "will" is imparted into

us, thereby negating our own. I hope that makes sense...

But like I say, I think that He may do that with some, but not all. Others come to God after He

awakens our spiritual self and then gives us the free will to follow after Him... thus allowing the

verses that speak to "all", "any", "the world" etc. to remain true as well. It also therefore makes more

sense to evangelize and spread the Gospel to all peoples... there would be a chance that someone

could choose to turn to God and seek understanding and repentance.

Ok, what I see you saying here is....We all receive salvation the same....by his will.

The differences are in our walk? Or sanctification, calling, office. ?  Or are those options off the mark to what you are saying?

[Ezra]

43 minutes ago, CATerri said:

Am I foolish to think both views can be true at the same time?

Both views cannot be true at the same time since they are contradictory. Either all can be saved (biblical) or only some can be saved (Calvinist). Either Christ died for all (biblical) or Christ died only for the elect (Calvinist). Either God does not predestine anyone for salvation or damnation (biblical) or God predestines some for Heaven and others for Hell (Calvinist).

[enoob57]

The whole of this issue is in knowing The Person of God through His Word...
God Who has expressed His satisfaction in defining Himself here

1 Jn 4:8
8 He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.
KJV

1 Jn 4:16
16 And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love;
and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.
KJV

and this Love being fully defined in 1Cor 13 all

it is in this area the debate rages to an eternal importance ... for God's salvation of the soul is dependent upon His knowing you

Mt 7:22-23
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name?
and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
KJV

If the respondents of Calvinism were true then this would not be found to be false in their theology:
Clearly they (Calvinist) say that God takes pleasure in the death of some yet God says
Eze 33:11
11 Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of
the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from
your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?
KJV
Love, Steven