An Article on free will

Johann said:
My brother, you seem unfamiliar with the true art of debate. You are merely repeating the same old one-liners, neglecting to consider the full counsel of Scripture. You use Bible verses that you think support your position, but in reality, they do not.

J.
Click to expand...
Sometimes debate brings conclusive answers, I have been debating these matters over two decades, so

You have it wrong, Jn 1:12 is clarified by Jn 1:13

13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

All the jews were rejecting Him but them which had been born of God.
 
brightfame52 said:
lol, I will put my boy James White on him
Click to expand...
You can "Lol" as much as you want-sure sign your cage is a bit rattled.

The analogy of being “dead” is seen throughout the scriptures, but can it be demonstrated to mean that mankind is born morally unable to willingly respond to God Himself, as the Calvinists presume? Are we born dead like Lazarus, a corpse rotting in the tomb (a link scripture never draws), or are we dead like the Prodigal, a loved one living in rebellion? Scripture supports the latter rather than the former:

“For this son of mine was dead and has come to life again; he was lost and has been found.’ And they began to celebrate” (Luke 15:24).

Spiritual deadness seems to be equated with “separateness,” “lostness,” or “in rebellion,” not as “total moral inability to respond.” Likewise, in Romans 6:11, Paul also teaches the believers to count themselves “dead to sin.” A consistent Calvinist would have to interpret this to mean that believers are morally unable to sin when tempted. Of course, that is not the case. Paul is teaching that we are to separate ourselves from sin, in much the same way we were once separated by our sin from God. “Deadness” here connotes the idea of being separated, like the son was from his father, not the incapacitation of the will to respond to God’s appeal to be reconciled from our separation.

Plus, if we examine the story of Lazarus more closely it reveals a truth that flies in the face of the Calvinistic conclusion.

“So Jesus then said to them plainly, ‘Lazarus is dead, and I am glad for your sakes that I was not there, so that you may believe…’ (John 11:14-15).

The lesson the Lord wishes to teach his followers is not the conclusion that Calvinists draw from this text (i.e. God effectually makes the spiritually dead alive in the same way He raises Lazarus); but instead, the Lord’s expressed desire is so that the witnesses “may believe.”

Clearly, an outward sign is said to have the ability to help individuals believe, something that seems completely superfluous given the effectuality of regeneration on the Calvinistic system. The text goes on to say:

“Jesus said to her, ‘I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in Me will live even if he dies, and everyone who lives and believes in Me will never die. Do you believe this?’ She said to Him, ‘Yes, Lord; I have believed that You are the Christ, the Son of God, even He who comes into the world’ … Jesus said to her, ‘Did I not say to you that if you believe, you will see the glory of God?’’ (John 11:25-27; 40).

Once again, it is the faith of the eye witnesses, not Lazarus, that Jesus seems to be focused upon in this discourse.

Furthermore, the responsibility is put onto the individual to believe so as to live, not the other way around. The focus of this text is on the believing response of the witnesses to Christ’s miracle and the believers eventual resurrection from the dead. Remember, Lazarus was a believer, not Totally Depraved, so this miracle more likely represents the believer’s resurrection from the dead than a irresistible soteriological drawing of the lost to faith.

“So they removed the stone. Then Jesus raised His eyes, and said, ‘Father, I thank You that You have heard Me. I knew that You always hear Me; but because of the people standing around I said it, so that they may believe that You sent Me’… Therefore many of the Jews who came to Mary, and saw what He had done, believed in Him” (John 11:41-42; 45).

Jesus expresses a desire for the witnesses to believe based upon what they have seen, something on Calvinism that is a certainty for the Elect ones and absolutely impossible for the Reprobates, regardless of what miracle either of them witness.

Notice that Jesus describes the faith of the eye witnesses as being a direct response to what they saw, not a supernatural inward work of regeneration, or an unconditional choice before time began.

No where in this passage, or any other, do we find the concept of spiritual deadness as being in reference to total inability, yet the story of Lazarus is one of the most referenced proof texts cited by Calvinists in defense of this doctrine.

Let’s consider other passages which use the analogy of “deadness.” For instance, take a look at Jesus’ own words to the church in Sardis:

“To the angel of the church in Sardis write: These are the words of him who holds the seven spirits of God and the seven stars. I know your deeds; you have a reputation of being alive, but you are dead. Wake up! Strengthen what remains and is about to die, for I have found your deeds unfinished in the sight of my God. Remember, therefore, what you have received and heard; hold it fast, and repent. But if you do not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what time I will come to you.” (Rev. 3:1-6)

Clearly, Jesus fully expects this church to heed his warning and respond in repentance despite the fact that he called them “dead.” The Calvinist may object saying, “But, Jesus is speaking to the church, not to the lost, so that does not apply to our point of contention.” I disagree, and here is why:

The point is simply to show how the analogy of being “dead” doesn’t necessarily imply “corpse-like inability.”

This use of the word illustrates that point because clearly those in the church are expected to “wake up” and “repent.” The burden is on the Calvinist to produce examples where the analogy explicitly demonstrates the concept of “total inability” to respond to God’s life-giving Word.

The Calvinistic teachings on “Compatibilism” equally applies to the choices of the Saints (the elect) and the Reprobates (the non-elect).
According to the Compatibilist, a person will always choose in accordance with his or her greatest desire, which is determined by the God given nature and Divinely controlled circumstances in which that individual makes the choice.[1]Therefore, the choice of a Christian is as much under the “sovereign meticulous providence” of God as are the choices of the Reprobates. So, according to a consistent Calvinist, the “dead” believers in Sardis were as incapable of response to Christ’s appeals to repent, as were the “dead reprobates” being called by the gospel to repentance for the very first time. In other words, if Compatibilism is true, then both the “dead” believer in Sardis and the “dead” reprobate is equally incapable of repentance apart from God’s gracious work to effectuate that willing response. Thus, the burden of proof is still on the Calvinist to demonstrate that the analogy of being “dead,” in both instances, equals “corpse-like inability.”

Paul is known to use the analogy of being “dead” along side the concept of being included “in Him,” as we see here:

“In Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ; having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead. When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions” (Col. 2:11-13).

Here Paul seems to relate circumcision to being made alive. Deut. 10:16 says, “Circumcise your hearts, therefore, and do not be stiff-necked any longer,” which strongly seems to indicate it is man’s responsibility to humbly repent, as seen repeated in Jer. 4:4:

“Circumcise yourselves to the LORD and remove the foreskins of your heart, Men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem, Or else My wrath will go forth like fire And burn with none to quench it, Because of the evil of your deeds.’”

This parallels Paul’s teaching in Ephesians 1 and 2, which likewise references the saints as having once been dead but being made alive by God.

Both Calvinists and non-Calvinists affirm that we were all once dead in our sins and have been made alive together with Him. The point of contention is over whether the dead sinner has any responsibility in his being raised up. Is the concept of “deadness” meant to suggest that mankind has no responsibility (ability to respond) to God’s appeal to “repent and live” (Num. 21:8-9; Ezk. 18:32; 33:11; John 6:40; John 20:31).

The text indicates that we are “made alive together with Him,” and it is mankind’s responsibility to be included “in Him,” through faith:

“And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory” (Eph. 1:13-14).

When were you “mark in Him?”

“When you believed,” according to the text.

Clearly, one must believe in order to be marked “in Him” and receive the Holy Spirit, not the other way around. It is “in Him” that we are “made alive” or “raised,” according to the texts quoted above.

No where in the Bible is the concept of being “dead” connoted to mean that mankind has no responsibility to humble themselves and repent in faith so as to be “made alive together with Him.” As Paul teaches in Romans 8:10, “If Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, yet the spirit is alive because of righteousness.”

The theme of being “raised up,” “made alive,” “exalted,” or “lifted up” is carried throughout the scriptures, and it is not difficult to see the expectation God has for those who He will graciously raise up:

1 Peter 5:5-6: “God opposes the proud but shows favor to the humble.” Humble yourselves, therefore, under God’s mighty hand, that he may lift you up in due time.

James 4:10: “Humble yourselves before the Lord, and he will lift you up.”

Matthew 23:12: For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.

Psalm 18:27: You save the humble but bring low those whose eyes are haughty.

Psalm 147:6: The Lord sustains the humble but casts the wicked to the ground.

Matthew 18:4: Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

Luke 18:14: “I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.”

Not once in scripture does it teach that God is the one responsible for humbling us so that we would be “lifted up,” “raised up,” “exalted” or “make alive together with Him.”

In James 1:14-15, it states, “But each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.”

Likewise, Paul says in Romans 7:9-10, “I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive and I died; and this commandment, which was to result in life, proved to result in death for me.” Yet, Calvinists teach that we are born dead already. So, which is it?

Clearly, the analogy of “death” can carry with it different connotations, none of which can be shown by the text to mean “total inability” from birth.

Your rebuttal?

J.
 
brightfame52 said:
@Johann



Yeah he got his hands full with James White
Click to expand...
Still waiting for your response. If you have no further argument, then please don't waste my time. Time is precious, and I must use it wisely, as Scripture reminds us in Ephesians 5:15-16: 'Look carefully then how you walk, not as unwise but as wise, making the best use of the time, because the days are evil.'

So, if you have nothing more to present, kindly let me know.

J.
 
brightfame52 said:
@Johann



Yeah he got his hands full with James White
Click to expand...
It's rather unfortunate that you listen to your heroes instead of those that explain scripture as it is written.
You're so childish BF,,,that I rarely am willing to even post to you.

James White is a heretic and blasphemer and you choose to listen to HIM
instead of scripture.

"My boy James White"....

Let's see how GOD feels about James White when he gets to heaven.
God won't be very happy about James attributing to GOD
what SATAN does.
 
Johann said:
Still waiting for your response. If you have no further argument, then please don't waste my time. Time is precious, and I must use it wisely, as Scripture reminds us in Ephesians 5:15-16: 'Look carefully then how you walk, not as unwise but as wise, making the best use of the time, because the days are evil.'

So, if you have nothing more to present, kindly let me know.

J.
Click to expand...
He will NEVER have more to say Johann.
He copies and pastes stuff others say but has nothing to say on his own.

A total waste of time,,,
except that some are reading along and it's good to post for them too.
 
Johann said:
You're saying that 1 Corinthians 2:14 proves a person has to be regenerated before they can understand or receive spiritual truth. But that’s not actually what Paul is saying in this passage. Let’s break it down.

First, when Paul talks about the “natural man” (ψυχικὸς ἄνθρωπος), he’s talking about someone who is operating purely on worldly thinking, someone who doesn’t accept the wisdom of God because, to them, it seems foolish. But notice the wording—it’s not that the natural man cannot ever understand; it’s that he does not receive it. That’s a key difference. This is about rejection, not an inherent inability.

If we look at the surrounding context in 1 Corinthians 2:9-16, Paul is explaining that divine wisdom is revealed by the Spirit, and those who are spiritual recognize it. But that doesn’t mean an unregenerate person is incapable of grasping anything about God. Instead, the issue is their disposition—they choose to see it as foolishness because they’re leaning on human wisdom.

And if we compare this with other scriptures, the idea that people have to be regenerated before they can even grasp spiritual truth doesn’t hold up.

Take John 7:17, where Jesus says, If anyone wants to do His will, he will know about the teaching.

That shows that a willingness to seek God precedes understanding, not the other way around. Or look at Acts 17:11—when Paul preached, the Bereans examined the Scriptures daily to see if what he said was true. They were unregenerate at that point, yet they were capable of reasoning through spiritual truth.

Now, about the phrase “spiritually discerned” (πνευματικῶς ἀνακρίνεται) in 1 Corinthians 2:14—it means divine wisdom is understood through the Spirit’s guidance. But nowhere does it say this can’t happen before regeneration. The Spirit convicts the world of sin (John 16:8), meaning He’s working on people before they’re saved. Look at Acts 26:18—Paul was sent to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light. That means people in darkness can recognize the truth when it’s presented to them.

The bigger problem with saying that regeneration comes before faith is that it contradicts what Scripture actually teaches about salvation. Over and over again, the Bible presents faith as the prerequisite to being born again, not the result of it.

John 1:12 – Those who received Him were given the right to become children of God.
John 3:16 – Whoever believes has eternal life.
Ephesians 1:13 – After believing, you are sealed with the Holy Spirit.
Acts 10:43-44 – Cornelius and his household believed, and then the Holy Spirit came upon them.

If regeneration had to happen first, these passages would read the other way around. But they don’t.

And then there’s the issue of free will. All throughout the Bible, God calls people to make a choice:

Deuteronomy 30:19 – Choose life.
Isaiah 55:6-7 – Seek the Lord while He may be found.
Matthew 23:37 – Jesus says, You were not willing. That means they could have but refused.

If people had to be regenerated before they could even understand or receive spiritual truth, none of these calls to seek God and believe would make sense. The Bible constantly presents belief as something people are called to do, not something that happens after they’re regenerated.

So, no, 1 Corinthians 2:14 doesn’t prove that regeneration precedes faith. What it does show is that the natural man, left to his own way of thinking, rejects divine truth. But the Holy Spirit convicts and draws people so they can respond in faith. Faith comes first—then regeneration follows.

Contextual Analysis of 1 Corinthians 2:14
Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, p. 340-345 – Wallace explains that ψυχικός (psychikos, "natural man") refers to one governed by human reasoning rather than divine wisdom and that the rejection of divine truth is due to a moral disposition, not an ontological inability.

A.T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, p. 532-536 – Robertson discusses how πνευματικῶς ἀνακρίνεται (spiritually discerned) emphasizes perception through the Spirit’s guidance but does not require prior regeneration.
C.F.D. Moule, An Idiom Book of New Testament Greek, p. 108-112 – Moule notes that Paul's contrast in 1 Corinthians 2:14-16 is between worldly reasoning and divine wisdom, not between the regenerate and unregenerate in an absolute sense.

2. The Work of the Holy Spirit Before Regeneration
John 16:8-9 – Jesus states that the Holy Spirit convicts the world (not just the elect) of sin before salvation, indicating that the unregenerate can recognize divine truth before regeneration.

Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses, p. 241-245 – Bauckham argues that divine revelation is made available to all, though only those who respond in faith receive its full understanding.

3. Biblical Evidence That Faith Precedes Regeneration
John 1:12-13 – Receiving Christ (faith) is the basis for becoming a child of God, showing that faith precedes regeneration.
Ephesians 1:13 – Paul states that believers are sealed with the Holy Spirit after believing, which contradicts the claim that regeneration (which involves receiving the Spirit) must happen first.

David L. Allen, The Extent of the Atonement, p. 271-276 – Allen emphasizes that faith is the means by which people receive salvation, not the result of prior regeneration.

Michael L. Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, Vol. 2, p. 138-142 – Brown argues that the biblical pattern consistently shows people responding to the gospel before receiving new life in the Spirit.

4. The Role of Human Responsibility and Free Will
Deuteronomy 30:19 – The command to “choose life” implies real human responsibility.
Matthew 23:37 – Jesus’ lament that people were “not willing” supports the idea that people resist divine truth, not that they are incapable of responding before regeneration.

David L. Allen, Calvinism: A Biblical and Theological Critique, p. 84-92 – Allen critiques the claim that people must be regenerated before faith, showing that many biblical passages call for an act of belief before new birth.

The interpretation that 1 Corinthians 2:14 proves regeneration must precede faith is inconsistent with both Greek grammar and the broader biblical witness. The passage describes the rejection of divine truth, not an inherent inability to understand it. Numerous passages (John 1:12, John 3:16, Ephesians 1:13) demonstrate that faith precedes regeneration, and the Spirit convicts and draws sinners before they are born again (John 16:8, Acts 26:18). Thus, the claim that the unregenerate cannot understand spiritual truth at all apart from regeneration is not supported by the text.

But the natural man -- The NIV inserts "the man without the Spirit" for the Greek "the natural man" or "physical man". In 1Co_2:12-13 the word "know" becomes "understand", and erroneously teaching that we cannot understand the Scripture without the direct operation of the Spirit.

Johann.
Click to expand...
Kudos to you Johann.
I'm so tired of addressing 1 Cor 2:14

and pretty much every other verse that Calvinists THINK agrees with their absurd beliefs.
 
Johann said:
Still waiting for your response. If you have no further argument, then please don't waste my time. Time is precious, and I must use it wisely, as Scripture reminds us in Ephesians 5:15-16: 'Look carefully then how you walk, not as unwise but as wise, making the best use of the time, because the days are evil.'

So, if you have nothing more to present, kindly let me know.

J.
Click to expand...
You know what it is
 
brightfame52 said:
Sometimes debate brings conclusive answers, I have been debating these matters over two decades, so

You have it wrong, Jn 1:12 is clarified by Jn 1:13

13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

All the jews were rejecting Him but them which had been born of God.
Click to expand...
That’s all I have 2 more decades than you.
So you have it wrong

Next fallacy
 
GodsGrace said:
Persons give likes because they fully agree with something that is said and, if you ever want to take notice of this,
ONLY CALVINISTS agree that God is the God that YOU THINK He is.
Click to expand...

You, and your cohort, have made a concerted effort to belittle and degrade me who proclaims the awesome and majestic Sovereignty of God, but I'll focus on just your efforts, here.

First, you lied by writing "You like to concentrate on one word" about a post which contained a short paragraph about the word "for" in John 3:16 but 3 longer paragraphs about the Love of God as recorded in post #6,508.

Second, you tried to isolate me as a non-christian heretic by conveying no one believed in the Sovereignty of God for about 1,500 years starting from the time of Christ, and you quoted Ignatius as your proof, but your quote is a much longer modern forgery of the shorter ancient manuscript as recorded in this proof post #6,695.

Third, you try to marginalize me by way of you brazenly lie with your "ONLY CALVINISTS agree that God is the God that YOU THINK He is" which contrasts with the testimony of @Red Baker wrote "You and others can slander this truth by calling it Calvinism, but I call it the truth of the gospel of Christ, supported by God's very own testimony. Calvin and others from the Reformation period did not hold to this in the exact way that we just wrote it".

Here's another quote which contradicts your lie, this time from @The Rogue Tomato who excludes himself from your "CALVINISTS" camp when he wrote "I stopped using the term 'Calvinism'. It's intellectually honest to do that because I never read Calvin, nor did I get my ideas about election from Calvin. I didn't get any of my views from TULIP, either. If my views overlap with Calvinism or TULIP at all, I'm unaware of it. I couldn't care less, since I'm not a follower of Calvin, nor a student of TULIP" in post #747.

Your post demonstrates your public deception of you not knowing God's Grace. Grace is "unearned love", but you believe that you earn God's Grace by your free-willian conveyance "in my sovereignty, I choose to permit your resistibly non-sovereign heart's love to enter my sovereign heart" - the fidelity your conveyance about this is assured by your "God's grace can be resisted" further down in your post, yet Holy Spirit inspired Paul wrote “For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 8:38-39).

Self-will or image of Christ will​

These 16 parts integrally contribute to one full composition. A response to post #6,699.
Part 1 of 16: Illegitimate Isolation
Part 2 of 16: Self-exaltation
Part 3 of 16: Unity Prayer (Acts 4:24)
Part 4 of 16: CHOOSE, ABLE, list
Part 5 of 16: God creates all
Part 6 of 16: Matthew 11 examined
Part 7 of 16: Free-willian NT Conflict
Part 8 of 16: John 3 16/Matthew 11:25
Part 9 of 16: Free-willian Self-savior
Part 10 of 16: Faith, the gift of God
Part 11 of 16: Free-willian are self-willed
Part 12 of 16: The Potter and the clay
Part 13 of 16: the problem here
Part 14 of 16: you confuse Calvin for Christ
Part 15 of 16: Christ controls Christians
Part 16 of 16: Christians hear Christ
 
Kermos said:
You, and your cohort, have made a concerted effort to belittle and degrade me who proclaims the awesome and majestic Sovereignty of God, but I'll focus on just your efforts, here.

First, you lied by writing "You like to concentrate on one word" about a post which contained a short paragraph about the word "for" in John 3:16 but 3 longer paragraphs about the Love of God as recorded in post #6,508.

Second, you tried to isolate me as a non-christian heretic by conveying no one believed in the Sovereignty of God for about 1,500 years starting from the time of Christ, and you quoted Ignatius as your proof, but your quote is a much longer modern forgery of the shorter ancient manuscript as recorded in this proof post #6,695.

Third, you try to marginalize me by way of you brazenly lie with your "ONLY CALVINISTS agree that God is the God that YOU THINK He is" which contrasts with the testimony of @Red Baker wrote "You and others can slander this truth by calling it Calvinism, but I call it the truth of the gospel of Christ, supported by God's very own testimony. Calvin and others from the Reformation period did not hold to this in the exact way that we just wrote it".

Here's another quote which contradicts your lie, this time from @The Rogue Tomato who excludes himself from your "CALVINISTS" camp when he wrote "I stopped using the term 'Calvinism'. It's intellectually honest to do that because I never read Calvin, nor did I get my ideas about election from Calvin. I didn't get any of my views from TULIP, either. If my views overlap with Calvinism or TULIP at all, I'm unaware of it. I couldn't care less, since I'm not a follower of Calvin, nor a student of TULIP" in post #747.

Your post demonstrates your public deception of you not knowing God's Grace. Grace is "unearned love", but you believe that you earn God's Grace by your free-willian conveyance "in my sovereignty, I choose to permit your resistibly non-sovereign heart's love to enter my sovereign heart" - the fidelity your conveyance about this is assured by your "God's grace can be resisted" further down in your post, yet Holy Spirit inspired Paul wrote “For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 8:38-39).

Self-will or image of Christ will​

These 16 parts integrally contribute to one full composition. A response to post #6,699.
Part 1 of 16: Illegitimate Isolation
Part 2 of 16: Self-exaltation
Part 3 of 16: Unity Prayer (Acts 4:24)
Part 4 of 16: CHOOSE, ABLE, list
Part 5 of 16: God creates all
Part 6 of 16: Matthew 11 examined
Part 7 of 16: Free-willian NT Conflict
Part 8 of 16: John 3 16/Matthew 11:25
Part 9 of 16: Free-willian Self-savior
Part 10 of 16: Faith, the gift of God
Part 11 of 16: Free-willian are self-willed
Part 12 of 16: The Potter and the clay
Part 13 of 16: the problem here
Part 14 of 16: you confuse Calvin for Christ
Part 15 of 16: Christ controls Christians
Part 16 of 16: Christians hear Christ
Click to expand...
You have conflated your fatalism with biblical Sovereignty. You are very confused at to what Sovereignty means.

Hope this helps !!!
 
GodsGrace said:
Every other denomination DISAGREES with reformed theology because it CANNOT possibly be right.
This would give me pause and lead me to reconsider my belief system.
Click to expand...

You wrote "This would give me pause and lead me to reconsider my belief system", and your statement demonstrates that your faith is rooted in your faulty flesh instead of rooted in the unshakable God. God tells me that my faith is the belief deposited in me by God with “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent” (John 6:29).

I am not going to discuss about your "reformed theology" because I am talking about Christ's teaching of “you did not choose Me, but I chose you” (John 15:16) and “I chose you out of the world” (John 15:19).

You exalted yourself with an attribute of God when you wrote "Every other denomination", so your self-ascribed attribute is that you convey to know every denomination that has ever existed in all places in all time - you claimed to be all knowing which is God’s exclusive domain! Your words are reminiscent of "I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High" (Isaiah 14:14).

Self-will or image of Christ will​

These 16 parts integrally contribute to one full composition. A response to post #6,699.
Part 1 of 16: Illegitimate Isolation
Part 2 of 16: Self-exaltation
Part 3 of 16: Unity Prayer (Acts 4:24)
Part 4 of 16: CHOOSE, ABLE, list
Part 5 of 16: God creates all
Part 6 of 16: Matthew 11 examined
Part 7 of 16: Free-willian NT Conflict
Part 8 of 16: John 3 16/Matthew 11:25
Part 9 of 16: Free-willian Self-savior
Part 10 of 16: Faith, the gift of God
Part 11 of 16: Free-willian are self-willed
Part 12 of 16: The Potter and the clay
Part 13 of 16: the problem here
Part 14 of 16: you confuse Calvin for Christ
Part 15 of 16: Christ controls Christians
Part 16 of 16: Christians hear Christ
 

Similar threads

brightfame52
Salvation is according to the will of God
9 10 11
Replies
212
Views
2K
Red Baker
R
MTMattie
Ephesians 2:8 “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:” with a dollop of "free will".
Replies
1
Views
40
Jim
J
Tranquil
What is Albigenses?
Replies
0
Views
57
Tranquil
Tranquil
M
Bible Eschatology is Jewish Eschatology
Replies
12
Views
66
mikesw
M
civic
God requires man to HUMBLE THEMSELVES
63 64 65
Replies
1K
Views
16K
TomL
T
Back
Top Bottom