COMMON-ground?

you say Dave you esteem Amy.....If Im correct her understanding (From Scripture) is that very few will get into heaven. May want to touch base with her & confirm that but then she is in your camp so maybe she is in a better position than I to elaborate.

 

EWF, I am not exactly sure what you mean. I was not intending to try to count those who will spend eternity in the presence of God. Not sure what you mean. I am reminded of the words of Jesus, Matthew 7:13-14.

 

You must understand that in Abram, God chose His seed, representing all of "Israel" all of the children of promise, i.e. each and every one chosen.

Romans 4 elaborates upon this.

 

Openly questioning the testimony of my brother in Christ on a public forum is my business. If you don't like it address him via pm or start living with the open rebuke. Remember all of that Christian charity stuff you allegedly espouse?

 

,

He's a lot closer than that to me. You cannot be "in Christ" or have an intimate relationship from across a mountain.,,,,

 

One....your rude & everyone knows it
two....I didnt see him getting upset
three... then if you dont like report me....you do that well
four..... Any lakes around you.... LOL

 

One...re-read your last couple of replies to me
two...being upset is not a requirement to being called out on questioning anothers salvation
three...how would you know?
Four...go back to one... And I live by a great one, would be happy to show you ;)

 

:thumbsup:

...and I saw no questioning of testimony/salvation whatsoever.

:wavey:

 

:laugh::laugh::laugh:

 

God chose a man (Abram) who was to become a people (Israel) to be a "peculiar treasure" and for a missional purpose. To display and demonstrate the One True God, YHWH to "the nations" and to supply the genealogy for the ultimate expression and revelation of God in the person of Christ. This is still a fundamental function of the elect today. (Just how I see it.)

 

Once again your statement is blatantly false, verifiably untrue, clearly in error and I'm pretty sure you know it.

Find ONE poster who would ever say that fallen humanity are "pretty good fellers" or anything remotely close.

Find ONE poster who would ever say that we seek God on our own, or that we initiate the process by which we are saved.

Find ONE poster who would ever say that on our own we "do good things." Or base anything regarding salvation on our "goodness and ability?"

Your strawmen attacks are inflammatory and unnecessary P4T. You know that we don't believe this yet you say things like this just to anger and falsely accuse the brethren. That is very unfortunate. :tear:

 

It's been expressed on here that man does seek God, and man does do good works prior to salvation. This has been expressed against those of us who provide the Romans 3 indictment upon mankind, thus it has been argued that it is untrue that man, (in context of lost man in Romans 3) doesn't seek God.

As a matter of fact, and entire thread was started presenting this argument against what we say.

No need for me to go FIND a thing when it's been apparently expressed. People have boldly expressed these concepts, and for you to attempt to turn this into "false accusations" is what I believe to be unfortunate.

Thus, nothing is "blatantly false" here. And apologetically defending against the well known things I address is not inflammatory. :)

No strawman at all, and no intentions to "anger" anyone.

I express all of this in love, and speaking the truth in love.

And no need to add to my words as if I said man gets saved on good works. No need to turn it that way, as that was never my intentions, nor did I say that. No need to turn "initiate" to our "salvation" by man himself by seeking. I never said that either. None of what I stated made man his own salvation. I simply stated that some believe man not so bad, not as bad off as Scriptures state, that they also in fact say man does seek God, and that they fight against there are none that doeth good. YOU added the "salvation" part of it. Not me. No need to misrepresent me Skandelon.

In fact, I stated that in somes concept of freewill, they believe they had the ability to choose God on their own. That it was done by their faith, to which I disagree. And you know I don't believe man has the ability on his own to choose. You also know I don't believe mans will is free.

Go FIND where I said it is salvific, and that they say they are thus saving themselves by their attempts. I didn't.

 

I agree. Over and again the word here on the board by many is that God acts when He sees a person choosing. That is blatantly evidential against Skandelon's accusations that no one is saying such things. Perhaps not parsed in exactly the terms he used, but saying similar things, yes, constantly!

I have pointed this out myself time and again, but the answer is always for a mod to shut down the thread when the heat gets turned up against the pet position of the ones who hold the keys to this forum.

 

This is a round about way of saying, "I'm obviously closer to Jesus than you are because of my soteriological views." Yet, I find it difficult to believe Jesus would treat other well intentioned children of God in the manner you have. "We will know them by their fruits."

And having been one who has "viewed Christ" from both theological perspectives...and one who has many close friends and even family members who are Calvinistic; I can honestly say that both camps can and do know Christ.

FOR ME, I see him less as a mere theological construct who has been so over systemized that he is difficult to relate to, and now see him as a real person who loves and relates to us. Whether the shift has to do with my change in soteriology, I'm not sure, but I've noticed a huge difference in our intimacy over the years. The relationship has gone from one of master/servant to friend and father/son. Whereas fear once motivated me, now love and relationship do. Where study was my only mode of connection, now real conversations abound. Again, that isn't just about ones theological system, that is just my journey.

 

Thank you. This belief has been expressed on here to ad nauseum.

Well know fact.

The point is that one is attempting to turn what I've said into saying that I accused them of saving themselves through this. Not true.

That was never said by me.

I smell straw. :thumbsup:

 

1. Romans 3 passage is speaking of man's condition under the law, prior to the "righteousness apart from the law being revealed." (vs. 21).

2. Proof that we don't seek God on our own, is not proof that we can't respond to a God actively seeking us. He seeks us by coming to earth, inspiring the apostles, breathing the scriptures and founding His Bride, the church. That is hardly "on our own."

Find them. If these concepts have been "boldly expressed" and "apparent" then it should be easy for you to produce JUST ONE. I think it might be interesting because then we could look at the actual context of their post to see what they mean versus what you apparently think they mean, because I can assure you that no scholarly Arminian worth his salt would EVER make the claims you suggest that "boldly expressed" here.

When you find them let me know and I'll join you in scolding them for their false views! :type:

 

Seek God

I think we should be ashamed of ourselves, that no one seeks God. Most people are sheep not shephards few are them. The sheep need someone to lead them, not tell them they can't come.

I pray every day that the Lord of the Harvast send out more workers.

 

Look above and see I'm not the only one who sees this. :wavey:

And I'll pass on the we'll study the context invitation, we both know we won't agree, as I think the lens you look through is not the same as mine. Heavens sakes, I don't even agree with how you context Scriptures, how then would we ever agree upon boldy expressed views when the intentions and context are plain?

And who limited this to "scholarly Arminians?" yes, you must now force what I said into a narrow context of your doing, not mine.

This is another reason why I will pass on the invite.

I never stated anyone who said these things to be salvific as you've accused me of saying.

An apology for misrepresenting me would be appreciated.

Also, you know I disagree with your theology and application of Romans 3.

 

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

I would add to this personally, myself, and I think MANY others experience great deal of "spritirual anxiety" over "performance based" issues of theology. I hope no one interprets my statement as supporting a license to sin though. :)

 

You could choose to see it that way, but I believe that Aaron's illustration is closer to the truth than most are willing to admit.