Maybe, possibly be judged. Who knows what the open future will bring.The subjective mood concerns the saving
all who do not believe will be finally judged on the last day
Maybe, possibly be judged. Who knows what the open future will bring.The subjective mood concerns the saving
all who do not believe will be finally judged on the last day
If God promises judgment on the last day for unbelievers then that is settledMaybe, possibly be judged. Who knows what the open future will bring.
There are unforeseen events in the future God cannot possibly know. He could change His mind. No one knows for certain.If God promises judgment on the last day for unbelievers then that is settled
God says that is not so. And that of course is what is wrong with the open theology.There are unforeseen events in the future God cannot possibly know.
I agree with you.God says that is not so. And that of course is what is wrong with the open theology.
There is no word "might" in John 12:47 by the way. You know, the text originally in question until you ran away.The subjective mood concerns the saving
all who do not believe will be finally judged on the last day
Yes the context reveals the futility of your argument and Jesus explains in from the context you left out.Ripping out of context? LOL John 12:47.
I did not originally post it. Your fellow Open Theist did.
God’s Sovereignty and Man’s Free Will
Sometimes Calvinists will say that Arminians have a small God. I have been told by Calvinists that the Calvinist God is “bigger” and therefore superior to my “little” Arminian God.
I find this explanation far more satisfying then the “compatibilistic” approach of Calvinism.
It seems to me that when it comes to the scope and nature of God’s sovereignty, the Arminian God is far wiser than the God of Calvinism. A God who controls His universe like a puppet master is not that impressive to me. A God who can control His universe and accomplish His will without having to override or meticulously control the will of His creatures seems far more impressive and worthy of worship. I believe that Calvinism does not exalt God’s sovereignty but rather limits it by not properly incorporating God’s infinite wisdom into the equation.
The Calvinist view differs in that it can only comprehend God’s sovereignty within the context of cause and effect. If His creatures are free in a libertarian sense, then He is not sovereign. The only *freedom* in Calvinism is a freedom to do what God causes us to do. The Calvinist will say that we choose according to our desires, but our desires are ultimately determined by God, so in the end we are only free to do what God causes us to do.
Does the "Arminian perspective on Gods Sovereignty and mans free will" exists except as a foil to the beliefs of Calvinism?The freedom of Calvinism is more like the freedom of a falling rock to keep falling, or the freedom of a man hooked up to a respirator to keep breathing.
Good points well taken. I’ll work on a thread that does just that my friend.Does the "Arminian perspective on Gods Sovereignty and mans free will" exists except as a foil to the beliefs of Calvinism?
Why create a topic to explain the "Arminian perspective" but then merely define it in relationship to another perspective. ("Arminianism" is "not Calvinism"). What about starting from the position of explaining what the Arminian Perspective is to someone that is indifferent to Church History and arguments of the 1600's (or 400's)?
Start with the Text from the First Century and explain "what's what". Answer the unanswered questions about WHO and HOW God Saves to someone living in the 21st Century reading a modern translation of a 2000 year old manuscript and asking LOTS of basic questions that every new believer has.
[I know more about what you DO NOT believe than what you DO believe.]
Shalom.
He comes I will hide behind a imaginary fallacy. Which you never explain exactly what it is.Yes the context reveals the futility of your argument and Jesus explains in from the context you left out.
John 12
Even after Jesus had performed so many signs in their presence, they still would not believe in him. 38 This was to fulfill the word of Isaiah the prophet:
“Lord, who has believed our message
and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?”[h]
39 For this reason they could not believe, because, as Isaiah says elsewhere:
40 “He has blinded their eyes
and hardened their hearts,
so they can neither see with their eyes,
nor understand with their hearts,
nor turn—and I would heal them.”[i]
41 Isaiah said this because he saw Jesus’ gloryand spoke about him.
42 Yet at the same time many even among the leaders believed in him. But because of the Pharisees they would not openly acknowledge their faith for fear they would be put out of the synagogue; 43 for they loved human praisemore than praise from God.
44 Then Jesus cried out, “Whoever believes in me does not believe in me only, but in the one who sent me. 45 The one who looks at me is seeing the one who sent me. 46 I have come into the world as a light, so that no one who believes in me should stay in darkness.
47 “If anyone hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge that person. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world. 48 There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; the very words I have spoken will condemn themat the last day. 49 For I did not speak on my own, but the Father who sent me commanded me to say all that I have spoken. 50 I know that his command leads to eternal life. So whatever I say is just what the Father has told me to say.”
Next fallacious question
hope this helps !!!
I quoted where and why Jesus judges those who do not believe in Him. His own words which explain the verse you ripped from the context that you do not understand.He comes I will hide behind a imaginary fallacy. Which you never explain exactly what it is.
Let's try again.
"I did not come to judge the world BUT TO SAVE THE WORLD".
Does our Lord accomplish His stated purpose yes or no?
So does Christ save the world yes or no? His stated purpose.I quoted where and why Jesus judges those who do not believe in Him. His own words which explain the verse you ripped from the context that you do not understand.
You can lead a horse to water but cannot make it drink. I gave you Jesus teaching from the context of John 12 but you will not receive His teaching.
hope this helps !!!
yes all those who believe.So does Christ save the world yes or no? His stated purpose.
That's not your definition of world is it? World in John 12:47 refers to believers and those who will believe?yes all those who believe.
nope since no one is born a believer.That's not your definition of world is it? World in John 12:47 refers to believers and those who will believe?
No one said they were.nope since no one is born a believer.
next fallacy
no I did not. all are under sin and therefor condemned.No one said they were.
I guess this debate is over. You already conceded world refers to those who believe.
Good talk
Since you say faith is required you confirmed that " His Part wasn't enough to save the whole world He came to save", correct ?Faith is required in the one to be saved.
Saved by grace through faith -- Grace is Jesus' (God's) part; faith is our part. His part is complete and perfect and necessary to save the whole world. It is not sufficient, however, because faith is needed in the one to be saved.
The human will is controlled either by the Holy Spirit or the sinful nature, but it makes its own decisions accordingly.The human will is controlled by your greatest desire when you actually choose.
I agree for the most part. This does not preclude determinism. Choices are determined yet free from coercion or force. The Bibles has many examples. The Bible itself is the best example. "God's word". Yet written by fallible human authors. FREELY
Who requires faith?Since you say faith is required you confirmed that " His Part wasn't enough to save the whole world He came to save", correct ?