Given the 5 points: TULIP (in Calvinism)
Which ones are different in Arminianism, if any?
Why Do Arminians Pray for the Salvation of the Lost?
Discussion in 'Calvinism & Arminianism Debate' started by thatbrian, Dec 26, 2017.
Page 9 of 9
-
-
I will conduct a civil and pleasurable discourse.
But I will not discourse with one who wants to attempt to gain ground by disparage and demeaning.
Therefore, attend to the matter and leave off the grade school yard bully tactics.
Surly your parentage taught you better manners. -
HeirofSalvation Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Two things in your post:
1.) you made use of the word "called" in reference to particular verbiage used, and
2.) you placed that verbiage about which you contend in quotes:
I will show the readers of this post again how "Agedman" did this very thing:
There is no such faith in the Scriptures called "prevenient / preceding grace."Click to expand...Click to expand...
Just so no one is confused, this is "Agedman" (whom I don't mind placing in quotes)
Suggesting an intractable standard by which things are judged, and I quote him:
There is no such faith in the Scriptures called "prevenient / preceding grace."Click to expand...Click to expand...
:) :) -
HeirofSalvation Well-Known MemberSite Supporteragedman said: ↑One more item that I put as separate.
I will conduct a civil and pleasurable discourse.Click to expand...
But I will not discourse with one who wants to attempt to gain ground by disparage and demeaning.Click to expand...
You will not discourse with one who insists on quoting your own words back to you and insisting that you explain your own words...which I've quoted ad-nauseum to you.
You simply want everyone to bow down to you and accept every word of yours as gospel...
Not gonna do it.
Therefore, attend to the matterClick to expand...
There is no such faith in the Scriptures called "prevenient / preceding grace."Click to expand...
and leave off the grade school yard bully tactics.Click to expand...
If that is so, I have no appreciation for your "school-yard" ethics inasmuch as they don't imply taking a man at his word....
Apparently, in your "school-yard" no one can take a man at his word since you insisted on a standard you now deny...
And in case anyone forgets that standard it was this:
There is no such faith in the Scriptures called "prevenient / preceding grace."Click to expand...
Surly your parentage taught you better manners.Click to expand...
Apparently, your parentage taught you no such thing.
How sad, and morally impoverished, and pathetic your up-bringing was...
I feel for you. :( :( -
HeirofSalvation said: ↑That's exactly what you did, I will again quote you in your own words explaining the standard to which you adhere"
This is you insisting on particular verbiage and the quotes are YOURS (not mine) meaning you were (an hour ago) insisting on particular verbiage.:Click to expand...
Again, from the quote from the post in question:
"There is NOT as single instance or Scripture for the support of such grace."
Perhaps you missed such the first two times I posted, so this is the third.
There is no Scripture called prevenient / preceding grace.
There is no example demonstrating support for prevenient / preceding grace.
HeirofSalvation said: ↑Two things in your post:
1.) you made use of the word "called" in reference to particular verbiage used, and
2.) you placed that verbiage about which you contend in quotes:Click to expand...
HeirofSalvation said: ↑That was your standard.
Just so no one is confused, this is "Agedman" (whom I don't mind placing in quotes)
Suggesting an intractable standard by which things are judged, and I quote him:
That is "Agedman's" standard and I quote him word for word
:) :)Click to expand...
You quoted only a part of the post. A part that seems to suit your undetermined goal.
That which was an opening remark which was clarified and restated at the end of that same post.
Perhaps, you would like to demonstrate the standard being met, as I presented was certainly done for irresistible grace, in this matter of your own support for prevenient / preceding grace.
Show either by Scripture statement or Scripture example that such grace is valid.
For, even the Wesleys' knew that it was without support of either when they concocted the scheme.
Should you be able to do so, then perhaps I would be amendable to such a scheme.
However, it is evident by your response to my posts that you probably would not be so amendable toward acceptance of irresistible grace, though I have shown you by Scripture example that such is indeed true. -
HeirofSalvation said: ↑It's only "pleasurable" if we don't take your word seriously though, since you object to my insistence on quoting your own words to you.
Translation:
You will not discourse with one who insists on quoting your own words back to you and insisting that you explain your own words...which I've quoted ad-nauseum to you.
You simply want everyone to bow down to you and accept every word of yours as gospel...
Not gonna do it.
Will do, here's the "matter"....your standard was specific verbiage used and whether it was quoted in the Bible. Here's you insisting on it:
..
I suppose taking you at your word is "school yard bully tactics" to you...(per your own words).
If that is so, I have no appreciation for your "school-yard" ethics inasmuch as they don't imply taking a man at his word....
Apparently, in your "school-yard" no one can take a man at his word since you insisted on a standard you now deny...
And in case anyone forgets that standard it was this:
..
My parentage taught me to take a man at his word....
Apparently, your parentage taught you no such thing.
How sad, and morally impoverished, and pathetic your up-bringing was...
I feel for you. :( :(Click to expand...
You have no honor, and you are deceitful in presenting. -
HeirofSalvation said: ↑You're just "moving the goalposts"...
You cried that the Scriptures don't use any such phrase as "prevenient Grace", and I explained they also similarly don't use terms like "efficacious" or "irresistible grace" either.Click to expand...
I have posted this before, but Baptist Arminian Roger Olson has addressed the topic of this thread. It's worth a read.
More about prayer for unsaved loved ones and friends -
HeirofSalvation said: ↑Did you soldier through Downton Abbey?Click to expand...
HeirofSalvation said: ↑Maybe you could short-cut through "Upstairs-Downstairs" instead???Click to expand...
HeirofSalvation said: ↑That isn't fair.Click to expand...
HeirofSalvation said: ↑"Poldark" is a good compromise, guys could get into it too.Click to expand... -
rsr said: ↑As had been said before somewhere on this thread, Arminians and Calvinists both believe that God must act first through His grace. (As opposed to semiPelagians and Pelagians.) They disagree on whether it is irresistable.
I have posted this before, but Baptist Arminian Roger Olson has addressed the topic of this thread. It's worth a read.
More about prayer for unsaved loved ones and friendsClick to expand... -
InTheLight Well-Known MemberSite Supporterthatbrian said: ↑Apples and oranges. Yes, we agree that God must first act in the salvation of men, but the Arminian view is that God elects only those who first elect Him; therefore, His action is in response to man's action.Click to expand...
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL -
Yeshua1 said: ↑God does the very same towards both persons, and so the one gets saved due to his own free will , correct?Click to expand...
-
thatbrian said: ↑First;y, you could have used a few more exclamation points, and I like the red. Nice touch.
When I clicked on the thread I wasn't taken back to the last comments since I last looked for some reason, so I missed your answer. My apologies.
I will reply soon, but my love for my dear wife has caused me to do something no man should have to endure, I have to watch, The Crown.Click to expand... -
Mr. Davis said: ↑Given the 5 points: TULIP (in Calvinism)
Which ones are different in Arminianism, if any?Click to expand...
Wesleyan (modern) arminianism tends to lean towards believers can lose their salvation. I disagree. -
thatbrian said: ↑Apples and oranges. Yes, we agree that God must first act in the salvation of men, but the Arminian view is that God elects only those who first elect Him; therefore, His action is in response to man's action.Click to expand...
-
Squire Robertsson AdministratorAdministrator
Six Hour Warning
This thread will be closed sometime after 4 AM Pacific. -
Yeshua1 said: ↑I would think that the difference is that calvinists know that whenever the Gospel is preached to a crowd, some will indeed get saved, while non cals have just "hope" that any will choose Christ!Click to expand...
Romans 8
24For in hope we have been saved, but hope that is seen is not hope; for who hopes for what he already sees? 25But if we hope for what we do not see, with perseverance we wait eagerly for it.
Leave the hoping to Christians.
1 corinthians 13
13But now faith, hope, love, abide these three; but the greatest of these is love.
What do you know about that? -
Squire Robertsson AdministratorAdministrator
This thread is closed.
Squire Robertsson said: ↑Six Hour Warning
This thread will be closed sometime after 4 AM Pacific.Click to expand...
Page 9 of 9