Search results

At first, yes, way out of character but then I noticed you forgot your quotey marks so I edited. :D

Did I do fairly well explaining the Mid Acts position?

For me, it has always been: "God is good and just and therefore do what is just and right as His nature acts. John 20:30 Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the...

Explain, was this to Nick? If to me: I tried to explain the 'Mid Acts' position as I understand it (again, confusion for clearing up, I'm puzzled, potentially hurting with/for you, especially if to me). -Lon

Not what he is saying. He is saying impasse. His theology is that James and Paul are not the same. Glory has said that she used to be Mid Acts. I'd reckon the blending of James' message and Paul's is at odds. For me, it is clear that Paul and James would argue. Perhaps another...

Not all, or even most Calvinists believe infants are hellbound. Rather, Jesus is the only way. It plays on this thread insomuch as God knows all things, thus whether a child would be good or evil, but for me, there is no reason to go too far down the speculation road. John 21:22 "Jesus...

He was saying you two type/think alike. It used to be a more common question when some of the posters on TOL had two or three aliases. In any sense that one poster posts like another, it heralds back to those days.

See? You are so caught up in the physical. It saddens me. You are missing it brother! I know emotional. It is no bad thing, but don't confuse emotion of a moment with what is Spiritual. "Feeling" closer isn't closer. You practice communion incredibly more spiritually (incredibly)...

With 20 prominent translations? Are you a conspiracy theorist for your preferred doctrines, mastered because of your preference? You make mistakes that everybody drinks the same Kool aid. We all project, because we assume another thinks like us. "One of these things is not like the...

Only because of assertion? I don't believe he could. He was master of his domain, not at all 'sharing' truth. God is more powerful yet. Rationally or God-forbid irrationally, God is the maker of all things possible. Only one possesses it in full. There are two good minds at work here...

Yes, but even if one knows all 'possible' outcomes it is still omnicompetence, even for an Open Theist. "All things knowable" is still 'everything.' There is nothing that 'can' exist without Him, no 'new' songs. No unexpected grapes. It doesn't add up rationally. Only if 'forced' to...

Settled in this case being exhaustively foreknown. Such does not, by any logical cohesion, necessitate that what He knows isn't chosen, etc. The link simply cannot be made in any clad sense. It is at best, and intimation: If God knows, we have no freewill. Reading scripture constantly...

Not the issue, but rather 'what is the scope of Total Depravity? AMR believed rather in "Total Inability." Would you think him no longer Calvinist for the qualification? We generally gravitate toward doctrines that espouse how we see and understand scriptures. Take for instance if I...

I think: respect. I didn't go to a Covenant seminary, but there were quite a few Calvinists in my life that had an impact on me. Talking with many of them, they have explained this acrostic wasn't stone. I think I remember AMR in an old thread saying he didn't espouse everything Calvin...

Am I a fruit inspector? While it is true, every man and woman saved, does good works according to the new nature, that is more about the Savior and His saved. The church (you and I) are interested in works for several reasons: 1) healthy body life 2) helping a brother or a sister walk...

First, technology has made leaps and bounds. I had to work very hard to get good grades, didn't even have a computer back then 0.o This would have streamlined me (makes me want to go back to college, the easy way :X ). Second. I always was a hold-out on this particular doctrine. Here...

True, but relating Paul and Barnabas' thoughts it'd seem to me. Again, without Paul there, the issue would be Judaized gentiles. It is fitting both Peter and James agreed. On the former, it is good to ask every question Mid Acts asks. With you, I don't agree with everything I've...

Again: 'same.' Rather, because Paul emphasizes it, what was the difference? Acts does a good job of spelling out differences, especially Acts 15:1-35 Acts 15: 4 When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and the elders, and they declared all that God...

Needs more discussion. Works was always in tangent with grace and disobedience punished with the ground opening up, serpents, swords. Paul was very clear that the Law bound any Jewish believer. While Grace was involved, it was only in promise, unavailable but by future payment. When...

True but look at 'difference.' In all of these conversations, for me, it is best to keep in mind that one group emphasizes difference and the other 'same.' Because I'm analytical by nature, I'm always listening between the two. Mid Acts is right of course, there had to be difference or...