Search results

One can run from anything he wants, but God will get him back. Just ask Jonah... :) Grace and peace to all.

Sorry; I like that GIF. Marlon was a great one. I'm quite familiar with the Hypostatic Union. The term sounds fancy in English, but it’s actually a simple term. Hypostatic means personal. The hypostatic union is the personal union of Jesus’s two natures. "Intrinsic qualities"... That's...

Those to statements contradict each other... :) Neither is the case. Ah, you misunderstand Isaiah, too. What Isaiah is saying here, PY ~ poetically ~ is that our election is really a matter of being chosen in Jesus. Which... you're proving the Reformed position (Jesus is not chosen by God...

LOL! The Son proceeds from the Father, and the Spirit proceeds from the Father in the Son's name. They have many attributes, but "intrinsic quality" is just... well, silly. The triune Jehovah is what He is. No Calvinist "claims" anything of the sort. That He most certainly is. Right, but...

He didn't claim" anything. But the effect of one saying his choice effects God's choice is to make himself out to be higher than God... for God to even be subservient to him. He might as well praise himself for his own salvation, which is quite silly indeed. And, God the Father did not choose...

That makes no sense at all. Divine nature is what Jesus has, because He is deity, God made flesh, one with the Father, the second Person of the triune Jehovah. His "no bearing" comment was not meant to relate lack of importance, but merely not germane, really to what was being discussed...

We all are. Nobody has claimed otherwise. Representative of the Truth, solidly based in it. Sure, God's Word is God's Word, and nothing else is. And... God can use any man (or woman), regardless of age, or level of intellect, or any other human characteristic or limitation. Grace and peace...

Three is a reason why this is point number one ~ more than one reason, actually: First, this point was Calvin's refutation of Jacobus Arminius's first point, which was Biblically incorrect. As an aside, there are really not "five points," to Calvinism at all, but rather five responses to...

Good, good... Well not ultimately speaking, no. But if these "doctrines of men" are Biblical... :) Yes, he was. A man, just like me and... maybe you (don't know if you are male or female). He got some things wrong, yes. He was not God, and therefore fallible. But... not the things we...

No, but actually saved, not by faith, but through faith: "For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God..." (Ephesians 2:8-9; emphasis mine) "...He has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ...

Right. "Foreseen faith" is based on a wrong understanding of God's foreknowing as Paul states it in Romans 8:29. It is not mere cognitive foreknowledge. In a mere cognitive sense, God is omniscient and thus foreknows every one and every thing. It cannot be that, because Paul is talking about...

Physical Israel (all ethnic Jews) and God's spiritual Israel (all true Jews, as in Romans 2:28-29) are not one and the same. As I'm sure you well know, from Romans 9:6-7, not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring...

There. That wasn't so hard, was it? :) Grace and peace to you.

No, I thought it "funny" that you think I haven't read beyond Romans 11:6, or that I gave that impression. It was helpful in answering the specific point of discussion at the time. Again, I'm sorry you think so. I would say the same the same thing to you. "Try to be objective"... another...

LOL! No, but it was sufficient to answer the specific thing that was being discussed. Agreed. No, it is not "exactly what (I'm) doing" at all. I'm sorry you think so, but no. Right, all His elect. Yes, but yet He does not. And it's most assuredly not firstly due to people "not using...

Two things: 1. In that passage, the quote that Paul is citing is that, naturally speaking, "no one seeks for God." So together, they have become worthless, and what follows that is because of that. And the fallout of that is that even the good things we may do are no good to God, because it...

Yes it is. A total shift. You just changed ~ I guess unwittingly ~ the whole thrust of the conversation. No, John Calvin's theology was certainly not that God ordained their failures (sin). He (God) did not. "Think" what you want, man. You're your own person. Grace and peace to you.

If God had begun a good work in you, if you "walk away" and are lost to Him again, He would have failed in bringing it to completion at the day of Christ (as Paul puts it). He would have failed in keeping you from stumbling (as Jude puts it). He would have failed in giving you an inheritance...

Well, I wouldn't say "that wants sin and nothing else." We can want and do good things, even things that are not sinful, or sin, in and of themselves. But... okay. :) Grace and peace to you.