Search results

So why would He "blame Himself" then? For giving man the free will that enables man to sin?

Help me with this, please. You've quoted from 2 Tim. 3:16 ("All Scripture Is Given By Inspiration and Is Profitable...") and followed it with "Therefore . . ." By using "therefore," are you suggesting that the links which follow -- 100% of which quote from the NT, not the OT -- are profitable...

Wow, I've never heard it put quite this way! "God blamed himself, if you will, for man's fall." If that is the case, why couldn't God have "forgiven" Himself, along with us, just by an act of His will, without the need for Calvary?

True. But why does this matter to your argument?

No, I don't believe that many Christians willfully sin. And I certainly don't believe many Christians willfully sin "per Hebrews 10:26." (Two very different propositions.) I'm just wondering what kind of "chapter and verse" you are asking for.

And I respect yours. It's heartwarming that neither of us is as strident in our positions as many who post on this site, attacking their dissenters with ad hominems and sometimes vitriol.

Are you looking for a Scripture passage, or a published study or survey?

Amen to that! Fact-checking is essential, if not always easy. (Some of us have greater access to evidence than others. Some of us have educational backgrounds and experiential talents that others don't have.)

Thanks for this. The question presented by Eternal Security, as I understand it, is whether one is irrevocably "saved" at a particular moment in time (corresponding to when one was "born again" or however you wish to characterize the salvific moment of faith), such that nothing occurring after...

Much as you do when posting on Sundays, I suppose (e.g., #282, #283 in this very thread). Or maybe, just maybe, posts on this site do not break the Sabbath at all regardless of the day of the week it falls on.

Thanks. But wouldn't you agree that two people with diametrically opposed posts on this site will sometimes each claim to be led by the Spirit? And neither will back down regardless of what the other posts? That strikes me as evidence that at least one of them has implicit bias he/she can't...

Big Boy, I notice you want to prove Scripture by Scripture. In support of your statement, all you do is quote NT passages. You do realize the circularity of this kind of bootstrapping argument, don't you? For instance, you quote from 2 Timothy 3:16 that "All scripture is given by inspiration...

A very important point! Over a century ago William James, in The Varieties of Religious Experience, distinguished between “existential judgments” and “spiritual judgments” about the Bible; the former being concerned with questions of historical fact, the latter with questions of present value...

Karen Armstrong’s book The Case for God expresses a similar sentiment. Have you read it? I heartily recommend it.

No one is above correction. I think everyone here agrees with this. Yet when it comes to our own deep-seated religious views, the acceptance of correction and the ability to step back and question our beliefs seems to be lacking. We approach Scripture, theology and even worship with implicit...

It's an interesting proposition. If you had said "We cannot by an act of our own will do what only God could do in the first place" the statement would be tautological, and nobody could disagree. But you said undo. I need to think about that one. (The analogy I am thinking of is that only God...

For ancient Jews, vowels didn't exist in their Hebrew, so writing it in full was "YHWH" anyway. But you are right about their not speaking it.

Who is being obtuse? The content of the confession, like the act of confession itself, is different from Jesus Christ, the rock and cornerstone of the epistles you cite. So I ask you again, which do you say is the "rock" of Matt. 16:18?

That's not "evidence." It's also off point. Jesus would have addressed Peter in Aramaic, not Greek, And he spoke the Aramaic word kēpā' to Peter twice -- what in English would be "You are the Rock (kēpā') and upon this rock (kēpā') I will build my church." So this "Petros" and "petra"...

I mean simply that predestination is a choice/action of God, and foreknowledge is not. Predestination is causal, foreknowledge is not. To edit your statement "all those who believes unto justification were called because they were predestined because they were foreknown," just strike the last...