Are The Unsaved REALLY Free to NOT Sin?

Well said brother!:thumbsup::thumbsup:......it does not lead to learning...just contention and strife...with an evil questioning of God's purpose:wavey:

 

The Lord is not willing that any should perish, but come to repentence. I do not know how many times I have to post this. First of all, where do you find in the Bible the word, unelect?

Secondly, again, the Bible is clear where faith comes from, by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God. How does that square with your idea that people who believe in a sovereign God think He withholds faith.

I have no idea why you keep using the name Calvin to describe those who believe in sovereignty. As much as you detest the doctrine, why do you use his name? I told you in another post that I consider Calvin to be basically a power hungry thug. He had at least one person executed because they did not agree with him theologically. He preached for the seperation of church and state, yet created his own little theocracy, and had lots of flawed beliefs, like infant baptism. That is why I refer to the doctrines as doctrines of sovereignty and grace. So enough about Calvin, he is best forgotten.

In fairness to you, there are those on the other side of the question who are just as radical as you are. As I said before, neither you, or that person on the other side (cannot recall his name at the moment, as I have not posted in nearly a year), have any idea how the Lord mixes His sovereignty with man's choice in some fashion to carry out His will. This is evidenced by the fact that verse after verse is used to support both sides, and in the end, nothing is settled. Why? Because all of the arguments are opinion and not Biblical truth. Those who cannot tell the difference between opinion and Biblical truth have no business being a leader in a Christian vocation.

My personal opinion is that those who think they understand the mind of God on EITHER SIDE of this doctrine have no idea what they are talking about. Again, it is merely spreading their opinion, which is what an editorial page does every day.

What gets me about your side is the idea that we have something within ourselves to gain eternity. What irritates me about the other side is the the claim that the Lord delights in waving his magic regeneration wand and sending people to hell. Neither is correct, and the whole picture is understood by no one.

 

If there are elect (and there are) then there must be the unelect. If few are chosen, then most are not. (Mat 22:14)

The difference between the two sides is whether God elects only a few and regenerates these few so they are able to believe, or whether all men are able to believe and God chooses or elects those who do.

I believe all men can believe, and God has elected those he knew in his foreknowledge would.

The parable of the marriage in Matthew 22 shows which view is correct. Only those who obeyed the call and came with a wedding garment were chosen.

 

.
This post is just my opinion, as is all other posts on this subject. It seems you have limited your thinking to two positions, either yours, or the radicals on the other side, A or B. That is like chosing between a democrat and republican, or a D and F, neither is acceptable.

For example, why do you limit a belief about regeneration, as you call it? Your choice is either A. God elects some or He leaves them unelected or B. man has it within himself to come to the Lord in repentence. That is basically the limits of what you are saying on this subject. Why not a choice C, like the Lord regenerates all or most? Then of course you are getting into one of your five points, irrestible grace. Why do people put God into a box and require Him to think like our man made models?

That is why I tend to stay out of the threads of free will vs. sovereignty. It is post after post of someone's opinion, and everyone of them are right.