When Grace is not Grace
- Thread starter The Rogue Tomato
- Start date
civic
Well-known member
Factual I quote Calvinist theologians all the time to correct you
Bragging about committing the appeal to authority fallacy. Very bizarre
civic
Well-known member
Even Tom understands tulip better than you and corrects you with Calvinist theologians on a daily basis
Of course. I think I will stick around just the same. Nic your drift towards Pelagianism in the bud.
Slide slide slippty slide.....
Last edited:
civic
Well-known member
Fatalism/ determinism is the heretical slope that comes directly from paganism, Gnosticism and Greek philosophy.
Compatibilism is the idea that determination and free will are compatible. Compatibilists believe as long as you are doing what you want you are exercising free will. So according to compatibilism your circumstances and desires are determined by God so you do only what you are determined to desire in the circumstance
Now from a Calvinist source
Compatibilism
Compatibilism (also known as soft determinism), is the belief that God's predetermination and meticulous providence is "compatible" with voluntary choice. In light of Scripture, human choices are believed to be exercised voluntarily but the desires and circumstances that bring about these choices about occur through divine determinism (see Acts 2:23 & 4:27-28). It should be noted that this position is no less deterministic than hard determinism - be clear that neither soft nor hard determinism believes man has a free will. Our choices are only our choices because they are voluntary, not coerced. We do not make choices contrary to our desires or natures. Compatibilism is directly contrary to libertarian free will. Therefore voluntary choice is not the freedom to choose otherwise, that is, without any influence, prior prejudice, inclination, or disposition. Voluntary does mean, however, the ability to choose what we want or desire most. The former view is known as contrary choice, the latter free agency. (Note: compatibilism denies that the will is free to choose otherwise, that is, free from the bondage of the corruption nature,for the unregenerate, and denies that the will is free from God's eternal decreee.) Directory of theology at monergism.com
No I do not believe in a form of compatibilism
I did not say compatibilism. I said you believe in a form of determinism. Nice try
Perfect definition. I asked for yours and obviously you could not answer on your own.
Slide slide slippty slide
civic
Well-known member
You are in a mud slide
Good one.
civic
Well-known member
Yes neither of us do it’s just another caricature like they paint God with and they are doing that with us too.
It is clearly error
It's clearly truth. The very Bible you read is a product of compatibilism.
assumption as inspiration is not determination
Again, compatibilism is the topic.
To restate my point, which apparently you cannot dispute, the very Bible your proof text ad nauseum is a product of compatibilism along with the crucifixion by which you are saved.
Did Paul freely write God's word as he was moved along by the Holy Spirit? Did God determine what He would write? It is His word no?
You cannot prove your point by asking questions
if you want to prove compatibilsm you have to show
1 God determined in Paul a desire to write
2 and then Paul wrote of his own free will
and then you have to show this involves everything ever done
Can you do all that?
Are you denying he wrote of his own free will? LOL Was he forced or coerced?
Again, desire is not the issue. Why do you have a problem staying on point?
So, did Paul freely write what He wrote?
Did God determine what He wrote? It is His word.
Similar threads
