Results 1 - 6 of 6
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Is God in absolut contrl over all things | Acts 4:24 | Sir Pent | 61540 | ||
Personal Note, Oops ..................................... Dear JRdoc, I apologize for calling you by the wrong name. I assumed that it was John Reformed who was responding to my last post, since he and I have been pretty much exclusively responding on this topic (not that others aren’t welcome, just that most others have given up all hope of reaching consensus on anything related to C and A). So again, I’m sorry for any confusion I might have caused. ..................................... Now on to your post. I will try to respond to you points one at a time. 1. I called you the wrong name. See above. 2. You want to discuss specific scripture verses to prove that Calvinism is correct. I’m not interested. You have already done that with other people on this forum, and I don’t seek redundancy. The purpose of this thread is solely to discuss whether it is possible for a person with an Arminian perspective to believe in a sovereign God. 3. You say that “It is not possible for God to be sovereign in the Arminian perspective” (but you don’t say why). Then you say that “Arminianism sees man as partly sovereign”. However, John Reformed pointed out previously and I agree that there is no such thing as “partly” sovereign. One either is supremely powerful or not. 4. You say that the child would never pick something in the store that belongs to God (and quote more scriptures supporting Calvinism). Once again this is irrelevant to the question of this thread; see above. ..................................... 5 and 6. Here you say that God would be less in control if He chooses to dictate some things that happen in the history of the universe than if He chose to dictate every single thing that has ever happened or ever will happen. Please explain why you think that. You quote a verse from Daniel that says that noone on Earth could “stay His (God’s) hand”. I interpret this to mean that noone can stop God from doing anything He chooses to do. That doesn’t tell us anything about whether God is less powerful if He chooses NOT to do something. In my thinking, a being is NOT any less powerful just because it chooses not to do something that it is capable of. ..................................... In summary, I am interested in your thoughts on points 5 and 6, but don’t particularly desire any further discussion on points 1, 2, 3, and 4. You may of course respond to them anyway, you have both the FREEDOM and the ABILITY :) |
||||||
2 | Is God in absolut contrl over all things | Acts 4:24 | John Reformed | 61621 | ||
Dear Sir Pent, It's me, John. :) In reading through your note to Jrdoc, I came across the following statment of yours: "You want to discuss specific scripture verses to prove that Calvinism is correct. I’m not interested". Are you certain that JR is primarily concerned with defending his theological perspective or do you assume that that is his goal. If we are to reach even the modest goal of consensus, we must pay special attention to the the words of our co-laborers. I have learned (the hard way) that assuptions are the major stumbling block to communication! I see JR's greatest concern to be what he percieves as your (apparent) prohibition of Scripture. He said "So I cannot look at Scripture to assert the truth". What he heard from your statement above (it seems to me) is "You want to discuss specific scripture verses .... I’m not interested". your thoughts? John |
||||||
3 | Is God in absolut contrl over all things | Acts 4:24 | Sir Pent | 61838 | ||
Clarification ...................................... Dear John, You took one sentance from my post out of the context that it was in and then claimed that its meaning was unclear. Let's put it back in context and look at it. ...................................... I said, "You want to discuss specific scripture verses to prove that Calvinism is correct. I’m not interested. You have already done that with other people on this forum, and I don’t seek redundancy. The purpose of this thread is solely to discuss whether it is possible for a person with an Arminian perspective to believe in a sovereign God." ...................................... I believe that when read in context it is obvious that I my "prohibition" as you call it was very specific. I was not prohibiting all scripture from being used. Instead I was trying to maintain the focus of this thread by avoiding scriptures that merely support Calvinism in general (which would have been redundant with other threads that do that very thing). ...................................... I think that in context, my meaning was clear. However, it appears that JRdoc did misunderstand what I said, becuase he referred to me in a different thread as trying to prohibit from posting anything on this forum at all. Therefore, I did reply to him (in that thread) to clear up any misunderstanding that might have been there. |
||||||
4 | Is God in absolut contrl over all things | Acts 4:24 | John Reformed | 61844 | ||
Dear Sir Pent, I did not mean to imply that your statement was actually unclear. But my desire was to show that it was percieved to say something other than your intended meaning. I am on a mission to warn people to read and reread posts that they recieve from each other and to assertain the intended meaning of the "Poster" before they proceed to reply to that particular post. It may require a sub-post asking for clarification. I believe if we practised this discipline that many of us would avoid fights and wounded feelings. Neither one edifies the church or glorifies God. For instance: You said: "Dear John, You took one sentance from my post out of the context that it was in and then claimed that its meaning was unclear". Your statement could be taken as a straightforward remark or as a rebuke insinuating a deliberate deeption on my part. I took it in the former sense because our posts have been polite and not contentious. But if on the other hand we had been engaged in a hot debate it could easily be recieved in the latter sense. John |
||||||
5 | Is God in absolut contrl over all things | Acts 4:24 | Sir Pent | 61867 | ||
Personal Note ...................................... Dear John, Sounds like a good mission. There are obviously limitations to any conversation that can only be carried out with the written word. Lacking tone of voice, body language, facial expression, etc. can often make interpretation difficult. It is therefore very important that we all dilligently try to "assertain the intended meaning" of posts before responding. You make a great point. ................................................ P.S. Having started on this forum over a year ago, I am glad that I can say, "to the best of my knowledge I have never been in a hot debate with anyone here". |
||||||
6 | Is God in absolut contrl over all things | Acts 4:24 | John Reformed | 61869 | ||
Dear Sir Pent, The Lord has indeed favored you. I must return to work for now, but I promise to go over our lonely little thread and see if I can find a place to begin in regard to your original proposition. God Bless, John |
||||||