Those in hell for Arminianism and Calvinism

I'll tell you what I've learned here.

When they go to calling you arrogant- you've won.

They must resort to that because they cannot beat you.

 

Man, we must be winning all the time then!!!!!

I feel like Peter in Acts defending himself for preaching the Word. "We must obey God rather than men."

 

Ok, I understand your difficulty, and it is difficult to explain. And I freely admit I am trying to reconcile free will with what God has determined. I agree with DoG that God is sovereign and determines all that will happen, but I allow for a degree of true freedom to operate within it. And I do not claim to be correct, I could be wrong.
To understand my theory you have to allow for God to react, for if man has true freedom, then God must be able to react to bring the man back into his will of what he has determined to accomplish.
Now, this is incredible and waaay beyond our comprehension, but if freedom exists then God must be able to see and react to all possibilities. This will blow your mind if you think seriously on it.
In chess, you are truly free to move wherever you want. Can your opponent control where you move? Yes and no. Your queen might be in danger of being taken. You could move her to safety, or in your grand strategy you may allow her to be taken. You may not see she is in danger and lose her. And if you do move her you have numerous possibilities of where you move her.
It doesn't matter, God looking back knows where you actually will move and can counter it. No matter what, he is going to bring about his will and get you in checkmate. It is not only that he knows what you will do, but he is the Master of Masters and knows how to play much better than you. You are going to lose.
But see, all your moves are free, you can make good moves, bad moves, whatever. No matter what you freely do, he is in complete control.

 

Kind of like when you resort to saying someone is just "antagonizing?"

 

Yea, I actually think the only possible purpose for this post is to antagonize. :laugh:

 

That is certainly what I would expect someone like you to think. Rather than recognize your own hypocrisy.

 

More antagonizing.

Calling me a hypocrite is a personal attack and forbidden by BB rules.


It also is motivated by hate, I think because you cannot debate me and it frustrates you.

You certainly are on the attack mode and not addressing the subject at hand by this post.

I have not attacked you on this thread but you come after me.

You don't accomplish anything by this.

You just waste posts.

 

When you actually start to debate let me know. All I've seen you do is abandon threads when you have no answer to arguments made towards you. All I've seen you do is to try to piggy back onto the arguments of others who you agree with. All I've seen is you question the intelligence of anyone who doesn't hold a similar view to you. So like I said, when you start to debate, please let me know.

 

Still not addressing the subject at hand. Still attacking personally.

This is what many people do who cannot form good arguments and answer arguments put to them.

Personal attacks are a waste of time and unchristian.

Attack the arguments not the arguers.

Say something about the statements they make- not about them personally.

Your last three posts have been hateful, antagonizing and insulting- and untrue.

If you cannot get back on topic I ask that you not post.

If you must continue to insult me I will contact a moderator.

 

Just calling it like I see it.

 

Thank you for a serious question, and this is where I have difficulty in my theory, or at least explaining it. But I will try.

Both perspective are one, for if you can look forward from the beginning and see everything that will occur, then you must necessarily be able to look back from the end and know everything that has happened.

Here is the difficulty, when God looks forward he cannot see something until it actually occurs. But at the same time he can look back from the end and know it.

I admit this is a paradox.

But what did God say? He said he was declaring the END from the beginning.

This suggests to me that he is declaring the back looking perspective from the end.

This is where I am stumped. That's ok, it is not for a foolish man like me to understand God.

 

I believe God knows all and knows it all at the same time.

Not forward, not backward, but sees everything that ever was and ever will be at the same time.

God's name says it all, "I AM".

 

That'll preach!

:godisgood:

 

Seriously Winman.......this god you describe is a weak, effeminate, victim.

here is what you describe;
No, I am saying God can look back from the future and see everything that will happen......he is a spectator,with good eyesight?
I believe God can react.......He does not ever have to "react"
God reacted to Jonah's move and made a great storm arise. God knew Jonah would be cast into the sea ......?????
I do believe God can exercise influence over us, just as a master chess player can do.....

read your own post....then read the verses offered by those you speak against

 

Unbelievable aint it?

And you're correct.


That is not the God I walk with. One that can't know things until they happen? Uh, no.

 

Please.... it is offensive to be lectured by someone who is brainwashed and cannot think for themselves. The DoG theories have far more difficulties than mine.

 

Your problem is hate. You hate Calvinism so much you will try anything to prove it wrong, even if its error. You will trash talk God and make him a little helpless God, if you can prove Calvinism wrong.

Look at all you post...HATE.

get rid of the hate, and maybe you can see your error.

 

You're correct. His false theory and doctrine minimizes God. I heard Erwin Lutzer talking of this thing today, concerning "which Jesus," and he described all the Jesus' that have been formed out of ideologies, and of course reminded us there is only One. And this One I claim as my Savior: The omnscient, Holy God who died for me on the Cross. He is my Savior.

I will say this about Winman: His hate isn't directed at the theology only, it's directed at the proponents thereof, i.e. Christians.

This theory that he has come up with (because he certainly hasn't derived it from Scripture) is total error and fallacy.

 

Is this a joke? You DoGs have been attacking me for several pages now, and you accuse me of hate?

 

I don't believe the church was ever helped with your brand of Hyper-Calvinism. In fact, I feel this has been one problem the church has had to endure. I will fight against this error in every church I attend!