Free Will

[quote]pat wrote:<<< No it’s not contradictory. >>>[/quote]Unlike us, God does not, indeed as an infinitely perfect being CANNOT change. (Malachi 3:6 for instance)
Jesus said: “God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.”
He once did not not have a body and for 2 of His persons still doesn’t.
However He didn’t just take a body He took it PERMANENTLY and is now inhabiting it at the right hand of the Father without in any way diminishing any of His incommunicable attributes of deity such as His omnipresence.
You see no logical problem here huh?

Also, unless you believe in the preexistence of the human soul like the Mormons do we do not participate in any such thing and even if we did we are not unchanging nor unchangable. Ya know not being God n stuff like that =]

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:<<< No it’s not contradictory. >>>[/quote]Unlike us, God does not, indeed as an infinitely perfect being CANNOT change. (Malachi 3:6 for instance)
Jesus said: “God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.”
He once did not not have a body and for 2 of His persons still doesn’t.
However He didn’t just take a body He took it PERMANENTLY and is now inhabiting it at the right hand of the Father without in any way diminishing any of His incommunicable attributes of deity such as His omnipresence.
You see no logical problem here huh?

Also, unless you believe in the preexistence of the human soul like the Mormons do we do not participate in any such thing and even if we did we are not unchanging nor unchangable. Ya know not being God n stuff like that =][/quote]

Who said God changed? No, it’s not contradictory no matter how badly you want it to be…Saying something is and then isn’t is contradictory. A miracle, strange event, anomalies do not fit the definition of contradiction.

[quote]pat wrote:<<< Who said God changed? >>>[/quote]Didn’t have body, now does.

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:<<< are you suggesting that it, Romans 9, informs the rest of the Bible? >>>[/quote]No. I’m proclaiming that the 9th of Romans is but one of numerous descriptions of the one true and living God who informs absolutely EVERYTHING including the entirety of Holy Scripture. I will say if Romans 9 was all we had the principle would stand. It is not possible to portray anything clearer in human language. To paraphrase in a nuthshell: I, God will choose who I will love, who I will hate, who I will save, who I will condemn, who I bless and who I will curse CUZ I"M GOD AND YOU AIN’T. Paul even goes so far as to anticipate the universal objection: “you will say to me then, why does He still find fault for who resists His will?” Paul answers with “who are you oh man who answers back to God? Does not the potter have the right over the clay to make from the SAME LUMP one vessel for this and another for that?”.

Don’t ya see? You are saying that very thing: “Hey now wait a minute here, how on earth can God hold men accountable when they’re only doing what He planned for them?”. Paul (wisely) doesn’t even venture a guess at how that works. He simply says “shaddup, He’s God and you ain’t” again to paraphrase. That only even requires interpretation at all by those attempting to escape it’s unavoidable message.

[quote]Cortes wrote:You are going to have to explain to me why Romans 9 appears to negate a whole slough of other passages that pretty unambiguously assume human self-determination and ultimate accountability for one’s actions. I’m not seeing it. [/quote]There are NUMEROUS other passages, even simple declarations in proverbs, that clearly state that God almighty is in ultimate control of all that transpires in time in history. 16:33 for instance (short on time here) “The lot is cast into the lap, But its every decision is from the LORD” Casting lots in the ancient world was the rough equivalent of rolling dice. Even when men go out of their way to DESIGN a chance occurrence “it’s every decision is from the Lord”. Tons more. I’ll address this more fully later tonight I hope, but it is actually syllogistic in a way. "Here’s what God says about Himself. Here’s what God says about man. What God says about man is informed and governed by what what God says about Himself. What God says about Himself in His relations with finite man are also informed and governed by His infinite nature. The only alternative is to make man the governor of God which has been and is routinely done throughout history because man is sinful, self centered and prideful.

The Westminster Assembly (1642-46) which consisted of dozens and dozens of God fearing reverent men took 4 years to agree on language for their confession and catechisms though that won’t impress Catholics. But anyway they REALLY got it right, simply stating what the whole of scripture reports though it is clearly beyond human comprehension.

Of God’s eternal Decree: Section 1
“1. God from all eternity did by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby neither is God the author of sin; nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.”

The Westminster standards also actually has a section titled “Free Will” which begins with:
“1. God hath endued the will of man with that natural liberty, that is neither forced, nor by any absolute necessity of nature determined to good or evil.”

God is utterly sovereign and man is for his sin and evil utterly responsible. I have no idea how that works and am quite certain that if I did we wouldn’t be talking about God because any God who can fit between my ears is no God at all. [/quote]

Clearly, if dozens of god fearing men spent a whole 4 years figuring out the answers to the most elusive questions of the universe, we are justified in concluding their answers MUST be true.

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:<<< Who said God changed? >>>[/quote]Didn’t have body, now does.
[/quote]

How is that more contradictory than insisting that god entirely determines who to save and who to damn, yet allows men free will and holds them accountable for how they choose to exercise it?

Contradictions clearly don’t bother you, so why are you ragging on Pat for his beliefs?

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:<<< Who said God changed? >>>[/quote]Didn’t have body, now does.
[/quote]

How is that more contradictory than insisting that god entirely determines who to save and who to damn, yet allows men free will and holds them accountable for how they choose to exercise it?

Contradictions clearly don’t bother you, so why are you ragging on Pat for his beliefs?[/quote]It’s not contradictory at all except to finite man who is enslaved to his own FALLEN logic. My point to Pat is that all the while he is trading barrages with you on YOUR terms he is himself claiming to accept other propositions that are clearly contradictory to BOTH of you. It’s not contradictory to me because it’s not contradictory to God and I take His Word for it.

If man is ultimately free to accept or reject the universal call to repentance and faith apart from the infallible electing grace of God? Then God is simply another participant in uncertainty and finitude. He is in essence no longer God at all and indistinguishable from His creation in any foundationally meaningful way. The perfect divine system of thought that He has so graciously authored (and is) fails on the altar of human autonomy. God forbid. Only the God of Paul, Augustine and Calvin, the God who omipotently decrees and thereby KNOWS ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING with infinite eternal certainty (right on Pat) makes any sense of anything whatsoever.

I count it the most awesome of all conceivable privileges to raise my hands to Him and sing praises to all that He is. I worship Him as my loving Father and use whatever meager gifts with which He has blessed me for His glory. I long for the day I will finally look into that beautiful face and hear Him say “well done thou good and faithful servant”. Repent elder forlife. Repent, believe Him and live. You will see that you have most assuredly NEVER known Him yet. There is no sin more powerful than His blood and resurrection. NONE.

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:<<< Who said God changed? >>>[/quote]Didn’t have body, now does.
[/quote]

How is that more contradictory than insisting that god entirely determines who to save and who to damn, yet allows men free will and holds them accountable for how they choose to exercise it?

Contradictions clearly don’t bother you, so why are you ragging on Pat for his beliefs?[/quote]It’s not contradictory at all except to finite man who is enslaved to his own FALLEN logic. My point to Pat is that all the while he is trading barrages with you on YOUR terms he is himself claiming to accept other propositions that are clearly contradictory to BOTH of you. It’s not contradictory to me because it’s not contradictory to God and I take His Word for it.

If man is ultimately free to accept or reject the universal call to repentance and faith apart from the infallible electing grace of God? Then God is simply another participant in uncertainty and finitude. He is in essence no longer God at all and indistinguishable from His creation in any foundationally meaningful way. The perfect divine system of thought that He has so graciously authored (and is) fails on the altar of human autonomy. God forbid. Only the God of Paul, Augustine and Calvin, the God who omipotently decrees and thereby KNOWS ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING with infinite eternal certainty (right on Pat) makes any sense of anything whatsoever.

I count it the most awesome of all conceivable privileges to raise my hands to Him and sing praises to all that He is. I worship Him as my loving Father and use whatever meager gifts with which He has blessed me for His glory. I long for the day I will finally look into that beautiful face and hear Him say “well done thou good and faithful servant”. Repent elder forlife. Repent, believe Him and live. You will see that you have most assuredly NEVER known Him yet. There is no sin more powerful than His blood and resurrection. NONE.
[/quote]

You’re selectively using logic to invalidate logic you don’t like.

For all you know, the idea that men are free to accept or reject God’s call to repentance does NOT limit god’s power or infinite grace. Maybe your sinful fallen man logic tells you that is so, but it doesn’t mean it actually is.

I’m using logic in self conscious intentional subordination to the system of thought revealed in the bible. Left to myself I like the same logic you do elder forlife. If you had known me B.C. you absolutely would not believe that the person I am today was once him. This has nothing to do with me.

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I’m using logic in self conscious intentional subordination to the system of thought revealed in the bible. Left to myself I like the same logic you do elder forlife. If you had known me B.C. you absolutely would not believe that the person I am today was once him. This has nothing to do with me.[/quote]

It has everything to do with you, because that selective logic is your rationalization for why you believe what you do. You’ve said repeatedly that the reason you believe people can’t choose to accept or reject the grace of god is because doing so, according to your selective logic, would limit the power and grace of god. Therefore, you refuse to admit that people may in fact choose to accept or reject the grace of god.

Your interpretation of scripture is inextricably tied to your selective logic. Others have different interpretations, using their own logic.

You have no way of proving that your interpretation is any more correct than anyone else. Just because dozens of really smart Calvanists spent 4 years debating it doesn’t mean they are right and everyone else is wrong.

Fair enough. I’m tired tonight

[quote]forlife wrote:<<< Others have different interpretations, using their own logic. >>>[/quote]Indeed they do and using their own logic, which is ultimately the same as your logic, they wind up philosophically right where you are, which has been my point to them for many months here now. They have by using the same autonomous logic as unbelievers left themselves vulnerable to the same fatal logical downfall. It need not be brethren, but only by replacing the somehow, “just the way it is”, laws of logic (total uncertainty) in your mind with the firm foundation of the omniscient God can true… anything be had. It’s either uncertain nothing or the comprehensive certainty of almighty God. BLAH BLAH BLAH all ya want. That’s the way it is. [quote]forlife wrote:<<< You have no way of proving that your interpretation is any more correct than anyone else. >>>[/quote]I have said a hundred times (knocks on forehead to make sure elder forlife is in there) that on your own self acknowledged basis of universal uncertainty NOTHING can be proven. Think now. Think with me. If YOU YOURSELF tell me that YOU CANNOT KNOW ANYTHING FOR CERTAIN then why… pray tell… would I try to PROVE anything to you. Now did ya get that!!! When a man tells me that he cannot KNOW anything it would be idiotic for me to then step over into his own uncertainty to set about provin stuff. That’s the best I got buddy. I don’t know how to make this clearer. [quote]forlife wrote:Just because dozens of really smart Calvanists spent 4 years debating it doesn’t mean they are right and everyone else is wrong.[/quote]Uh, yer missin it dude. Back then they WERE just about everybody else. What I believe was the most prevalent non Catholic conviction on earth including the United States until the 20th century.

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:<<< Others have different interpretations, using their own logic. >>>[/quote]Indeed they do and using their own logic, which is ultimately the same as your logic, they wind up philosophically right where you are, which has been my point to them for many months here now. They have by using the same autonomous logic as unbelievers left themselves vulnerable to the same fatal logical downfall. It need not be brethren, but only by replacing the somehow, “just the way it is”, laws of logic (total uncertainty) in your mind with the firm foundation of the omniscient God can true… anything be had. It’s either uncertain nothing or the comprehensive certainty of almighty God. BLAH BLAH BLAH all ya want. That’s the way it is. [quote]forlife wrote:<<< You have no way of proving that your interpretation is any more correct than anyone else. >>>[/quote]I have said a hundred times (knocks on forehead to make sure elder forlife is in there) that on your own self acknowledged basis of universal uncertainty NOTHING can be proven. Think now. Think with me. If YOU YOURSELF tell me that YOU CANNOT KNOW ANYTHING FOR CERTAIN then why… pray tell… would I try to PROVE anything to you. Now did ya get that!!! When a man tells me that he cannot KNOW anything it would be idiotic for me to then step over into his own uncertainty to set about provin stuff. That’s the best I got buddy. I don’t know how to make this clearer. [quote]forlife wrote:Just because dozens of really smart Calvanists spent 4 years debating it doesn’t mean they are right and everyone else is wrong.[/quote]Uh, yer missin it dude. Back then they WERE just about everybody else. What I believe was the most prevalent non Catholic conviction on earth including the United States until the 20th century.
[/quote]

You’re smarter than this, and I think you know exactly what I’m saying.

I’m pointing out that YOUR beliefs, derived from YOUR interpretation of scripture, is based on the same flawed logic you accuse everyone else of using. The same goes for the Calvanist Clique you’ve chosen to follow. They spent 4 years reading the bible, and deciding what it really meant.

When you make statements like, “Men can’t possibly choose to accept or reject the will of god, BECAUSE that would limit the omniscience and omnipotence of god,” you are using LOGIC to support your claim.

Why not let go of logic entirely, and just admit your conviction is based on a “spiritual witness”? You can consider your witness to be genuine, and I can consider it to be a deeply emotional subconscious need for answers and structure in your life, supported by confirmatory bias.

But please at least put your money where your mouth is, and stop denigrating logic in others while trying to use logic to support your own beliefs.

[quote]forlife wrote:<<< When you make statements like, “Men can’t possibly choose to accept or reject the will of god, BECAUSE that would limit the omniscience and omnipotence of god,” >>>[/quote] Actually here is the statement I made “If man is ultimately free to accept or reject the universal call to repentance and faith apart from the infallible electing grace of God? Then God is simply another participant in uncertainty and finitude. He is in essence no longer God at all and indistinguishable from His creation in any foundationally meaningful way. >>>[quote]forlife wrote:” you are using LOGIC to support your claim. >>>[/quote]I use logic all the time. Logic belongs to God. God’s logic. God’s logic which BTW is responsible for every last particle of formal truth that YOU or anybody else will ever know. It’s His. You stole it. Give it back to Him and watch His glory move in your life. [quote]forlife wrote:<<< Why not let go of logic entirely, >>>[/quote]That would be sin for the reasons I’ve already mentioned. Logic and reason are a major component of the created image of God in man. [quote]forlife wrote:<<< and just admit your conviction is based on a “spiritual witness”? >>>[/quote]Of course it is. I’ve freely proclaimed (not admitted) that faith frees logic for righteous, legitimate use. You live by faith too only yours is in you and we’re seeing the futile result. [quote]forlife wrote:<<< You can consider your witness to be genuine, and I can consider it to be a deeply emotional subconscious need for answers and structure in your life, supported by confirmatory bias. >>>[/quote]You can do whatever you want. All I can do is tell you and live a life consistent with the gospel I preach. [quote]forlife wrote:<<< But please at least put your money where your mouth is, and stop denigrating logic in others while trying to use logic to support your own beliefs.[/quote]I’ll try this again (God help me). I do not denigrate logic at all. Logic is beautiful and godly if used for the glory of the Lord which is the point. What I disapprove of is using logic in independence of the God who is it’s author. Logic, like all of God’s gifts, many of which believers and unbelievers share, are good as created, but evil in the hands of fallen sinful man. 2+2=4 to you and 2+2=4 to me. You have told me yourself that cannot know that for sure. I can and do because I embrace the God who makes it so.

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:<<< When you make statements like, “Men can’t possibly choose to accept or reject the will of god, BECAUSE that would limit the omniscience and omnipotence of god,” >>>[/quote] Actually here is the statement I made “If man is ultimately free to accept or reject the universal call to repentance and faith apart from the infallible electing grace of God? Then God is simply another participant in uncertainty and finitude. He is in essence no longer God at all and indistinguishable from His creation in any foundationally meaningful way. >>>[quote]forlife wrote:” you are using LOGIC to support your claim. >>>[/quote]I use logic all the time. Logic belongs to God. God’s logic. God’s logic which BTW is responsible for every last particle of formal truth that YOU or anybody else will ever know. It’s His. You stole it. Give it back to Him and watch His glory move in your life. [quote]forlife wrote:<<< Why not let go of logic entirely, >>>[/quote]That would be sin for the reasons I’ve already mentioned. Logic and reason are a major component of the created image of God in man. [quote]forlife wrote:<<< and just admit your conviction is based on a “spiritual witness”? >>>[/quote]Of course it is. I’ve freely proclaimed (not admitted) that faith frees logic for righteous, legitimate use. You live by faith too only yours is in you and we’re seeing the futile result. [quote]forlife wrote:<<< You can consider your witness to be genuine, and I can consider it to be a deeply emotional subconscious need for answers and structure in your life, supported by confirmatory bias. >>>[/quote]You can do whatever you want. All I can do is tell you and live a life consistent with the gospel I preach. [quote]forlife wrote:<<< But please at least put your money where your mouth is, and stop denigrating logic in others while trying to use logic to support your own beliefs.[/quote]I’ll try this again (God help me). I do not denigrate logic at all. Logic is beautiful and godly if used for the glory of the Lord which is the point. What I disapprove of is using logic in independence of the God who is it’s author. Logic, like all of God’s gifts, many of which believers and unbelievers share, are good as created, but evil in the hands of fallen sinful man. 2+2=4 to you and 2+2=4 to me. You have told me yourself that cannot know that for sure. I can and do because I embrace the God who makes it so.
[/quote]

You can and do because you embrace the cherry picked logic that makes it so.

You only accept logic that confirms your beliefs. You attribute it to god because it comes from god because it confirms god.

Circular reasoning at its finest.

Hey, do what you want.

Yes my reasoning is also circular in the realm of human autonomy. Yet once again, about a month ago now I wrote:

[quote]2+2 does not equal 4 without God because two, plus, equals and four all have no meaning without Him. The statement I just made has no meaning without Him. Every upcoming protestation to the contrary has no meaning without Him. As my man Van Til was fond of saying. God is Himself the emplacement upon which men mount the very weapons they attempt to use to destroy Him. They can’t help it.

Pagans jump and down, stamp their feet with red face glowing while they demand there be no circular reasoning. That is humorous at best. When forced to face the foundation of their alleged beliefs, every time it comes down to the laws of logic. Laws which are invisible, immaterial, absolute and universal. Sound familiar? When I demand proof of the validity of the laws of logic they are trapped either re-appealing to those same laws which is circular or hypothetically looking somewhere else which destroys their authority.

Of course I also engage in circular reasoning and make no pretense otherwise because ALL finite reason is by definition and in the nature of the case eventually circular. It never reaches the termination point of ultimate resolution because it’s like finite see? The dead logic of unbelievers circles around THEM and hence never ultimately explains anything whatsoever. Mine circles around an infinite intellect and ultimately explains everything. They by utterly preeminent unconditional faith in themselves loudly proclaim the brilliance of their own unavoidably content-less existence. I by utterly preeminent unconditional faith in the triune God of Christianity loudly proclaim HIS brilliance and rest assured that He is the explanation for everything.

It’s not that unbelievers do not advance true knowledge and hence contribute much good to the world. Of course they do, but they do it in spite of and not because of their own foundational beliefs. It’s only because my foundational beliefs are true that anything they do bears fruit. They hate that. They hate God. They are His enemies. Same as I was. That’s why Paul told us in Romans 1 that they “suppress” or as the Greek has it, they “hold under” the truth in their unrighteousness. Picture a beach ball in the water. They keep holding it down, while it keeps popping up. That’s how they attempt to hide from their true selves and the God who created them. Paul says they are without excuse. God has reveled Himself unavoidably everywhere and especially IN themselves as created in His very image fractured though it is.

THAT is the discussion that has to happen or any quibbling about this or that particular proof or evidence has no genuine framework to even legitimately take place.[/quote]

My mistake Elder Forlife. I stand corrected. I am in a terrible hurry all the time lately. Didn’t see that. Thank you Cortes. Neither one of those demonstrates doubt though.

[quote]Cortes wrote:<<< Given that we have no free will whatsoever, how is this even remotely possible?
[/quote]Once freed from autonomous Aristotelian logic this question takes care of itself in it’s resolution in the mind of God.

Please, it’ll only take a few minutes read CHAPTER V, “Of Providence” here: 301 redirect and CHAPTER IX “Of Free Will” here: 301 redirect I cannot improve upon what those giants of the Gospel and biblical scholarship set forth 365 years ago from the Westminster assembly. EVERYBODY in the world in general and in this forum in particualr is at this very moment taking their every breath based on contradictions of their own sinful contrivance far more grievous than this appears to be. It really isn’t though at all because that IS what God says about me, you and most importantly Himself. To Him it simply is. To me as well because by faith I trust Him and not my own pathetic finite 3 pound brain and corrupted nature.

WHAT!!! God is in control of everything AND man is free and responsible you ask?

YES YES YES!!!

HOW CAN THIS POSSIBLY BE??!?!?!?

I dunno LOL!!! He’s God and I ain’t. This is called faith which according the to 11th of Hebrews is the “substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things NOT SEEN.” You have no problem believing (I hope) that God created absolutely everything save for Himself alone OUT OF NOTHING. An utter absolute no questions asked impossibility under the same logic that declares absurd the notion that that God is also comprehensively sovereign over it while His highest creatures are alone morally responsible for their sin. Both are clearly taught in the bible which is why the Westminster divines also concluded both.

You believe God brought forth the vast cosmos from nothing by some version of fiat command and defend it vigorously, I’ve seen you do it, but you will not defend His absolute kingship and governance over that same creation even though it is spelled out in kindergarten terms all over the bible. Why not? I’ll tell you why not. Because you do not like the idea of ANYTHING, EVEN GOD having more control of you than you do. That my friend is the remaining stiffnecked independence inherited from father Adam. Ohhhhh yes it is. Allow me to hasten to clarify that there are multitudes of men and women I embrace as true Christian brethren who profess this same error in the form of protestant Arminianism.

I’ve never heard them pray that way though as the great Charles Haddon Spurgeon so eloquently pointed out. No one dare approach the throne of grace crowing about their free will and volition by which they have chosen well while others have not. The heart wherein dwells the Spirit of the living God would never allow such a thing. No, they to a man cry out for mercy and extol the wonders of His unsearchable grace in saving miserable criminals such as themselves. They proclaim their inability to righteousness in themselves and thank Him for making them whole. How well I know. I have prayed, nodding and sweetly smiling with many myself =] .

On top of, or actually before all this there is the command to take every thought captive to the obedience of Christ (2nd Corinthians 10:5). As I have gone into many times, a God who is contingent upon His creatures wills is subject to the same deadly philosophical criticisms as man Himself. No again. The bible makes God Himself the first thought governing all others or no God at all. I will repost some of those if you would like me to.

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:<<< Who said God changed? >>>[/quote]Didn’t have body, now does.
[/quote]

God didn’t change though.

I thought you were camping at Lake Pleasant.

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Once freed from autonomous Aristotelian logic this question takes care of itself in it’s resolution in the mind of God.
[/quote]
You are indeed free from logic, that I will give you. You are not familiar with it at all.

Why? I haven’t run out of toilet paper yet.

Before or after they started killing non-believers in this man-made heresy?

That isn’t what you lot say. You say God condemns us or God elects us and there is nothing we can do about it. Mans will does not exist in this scenario. Saying that we don’t know the mind of God or what not is both a cop-out and a strawman. It does not answer the question or resolve the issue.
You don’t know his mind either for that matter. You may think it, but you don’t know it.

No, it’s called a load of crap. Believing in things not true is still faith, but it doesn’t mean it’s correct.

Yes but they are wrong and dumb. The bible doesn’t teach this at all.

That is not what was being asserted, so your reading comprehension sucks. It’s a simple fact, if you are foreordained to condemnation or salvation there is no freewill, period. If God is the author of sin, which this theology necessarily intimates, then Christ’s sacrifice was needless. This theology is an insult to Christ’s sacrifice on the cross. If you have no choice, there is no need to save the condemned. Actually, according to this theology, the condemned cannot be saved. Christ wasted his time if that were true.

[quote]
On top of, or actually before all this there is the command to take every thought captive to the obedience of Christ (2nd Corinthians 10:5). As I have gone into many times, a God who is contingent upon His creatures wills is subject to the same deadly philosophical criticisms as man Himself. No again. The bible makes God Himself the first thought governing all others or no God at all. I will repost some of those if you would like me to. [/quote]

There is no obedience with out freewill. You do realize TULIP has no basis in scripture, I mean it’s obvious. If you have to manipulate and take out of context to make scripture say what you want it to, you’re probably wrong.

Pat, you know I respect you deeply and we get along quite well, and will always want to keep it that way, BUT…

Catholicism has no scriptural basis either. I mean the papacy, probably one of the most important doctrines of Catholicism (?We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.? (Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull Unam Sanctam, 1302.), was made up from ONE verse, which was manipulated to make one person Christ on Earth, who has power over the Church.

I do not agree with the Calvinistic TULIP doctrines, but to completely say there is NO basis for any of it is silly, especially when you believe unscriptural doctrines as well.

But none the less, please dont take this offensively.