The discussion is about my response to Beeke.

Now what is your rebuttal against it?

Bible verse wrote:
Even Luciano was caught out, because he said he agreed with Beeke's assertion that faith is not the grounds of our justification and now he appears to have changed his

How about refuting my position for a change.

Somewhat confused wrote:
Why would you want God to open up their hearts?

Somewhat confused wrote:
This is surely tacit acknowledgement that it is God who makes the difference!!

Somewhat confused wrote:
And even in your scheme of understanding, since God foreknows exactly what each person will decide - how do you know that you are not praying for someone that God knows will decide against him and therefore God is actually powerless to do anything for that person.

Next thing you know he will be going further back and making anologies to the act of marriage.

When does it end with these guys?

jago wrote:
Yamil the question I asked was do you pray for God to bring the person to repentance and to justify them or do you pray for them to bring themselves to God.
Secondly do you know your prayer will be answered in that all you pray for will be saved?
I do not know any more than you do who God will draw to Himself.

Do you pray that God would draw the sinner unto himself? If so, why do are you asking God to change his predetermined will?
_______________________________________

Observer wrote:
Firstly what statement are you referring to...

Observer wrote:
Secondly, you should appreciate that there is a world of difference between the saved and the unsaved.

That's the kind of rhetoric of a theological system that basis their whole doctrine on silly analogies.

One thing is for sure. Birth did not happen before he came out of the womb.

Instead of giving me an original objection to my position, you lazily simply asked me to refute a link to someone else's opinion. That tells me that you do not feel comfortable enough in your knowledge of your perverted system to be able to stand on your own two feet.

You see I pray because I believe that God did not predetermined all things. So I can have confidence that when I pray that he will answer my prayer according to his perfect will. Since I know that it is his will that all should come to repentance, I can pray for the lost sinner with that same confidence.

You, on the other hand, believe that God has predetermined all things. Prayer to you is nothing more than a religious rite that makes you feel good inside. You cannot pray that God will answer your prayer for the lost sinner because God has already predetermined his destiny. The best you can do is cross your fingers and hope that your prayer coincidentally just happens to be part of God's predetermined plan.

I am not sure what that is, but one thing is for certain...

Unfortunately, SA has prohibited me from doing that at the request of your Calvinists friends. So if you have not seen any exegesis from me lately, then you might want to pick the bone with them.

Nevertheless, we can have an honest discussion of the point of objection you may have. I only ask that you not be so lazy about it by merely posting a link and expecting me to do all the work.

If you do not have a solid understanding of the tenets of Calvinism, which apparently you do not, then it is quite disingenious to try to lecture me of how little understanding you think I have of it.

Nevertheless, thanks for the link. I might as well refute the strongest argument and get it all over with.

Observer wrote:
Actually you do not agree with him and there is no contradiction in what he is maitaining.

Observer wrote:
What we do deny is that given man's sinful nature... the sinner has no volition towards God.

Unless you of course do not consider yourself a sinner.

Observer wrote:
...and if we take at all seriously what is predicated of sinful man in the Bible.

Observer wrote:
I do not know what you make of the term "total" but I suspect that you do not understand what the calvs mean by it.

The definition I gave is my own belief. It's the answer to your question.

Observer wrote:
Re: predestination and the non elect - yes the heart of God cannot but love, even those whom he has decided to pass by - in other words leave to their own devices!

Observer wrote:
Firstly, I was commenting on your absurd attribution to all calvs that God hates certain people!

Weapon of Mass Instruction
signing out.

Observer wrote:
So no real answers from you. What a surprise!
What precisely does "total depravity" mean to you in relation to the sinners nature?

The previous answer addressed your ridiculous notion that man is not born with volition. The ability to choose is not a miraculous act of God; but rather one of the many faculties he has indued his imago dei with.

Observer wrote:
You had previously agreed with the quote cited from Joel Beeke! So your mind's changed, where is the rebuttal?
Beeke's quote read:

He states that Scripture do not represent faith as a work, but ironically that is what the Calvinists state. When I state that the only condition God places on salvation is faith, you whip out the strawman of faith equals works.

The act of trust is never represented as a work and your insistance that in some cases it is a work is laughable and demonstrates the Calvinist desperate attempt to prove their pet theology.

The act of faith is not a work anymore than thinking is a work. Otherwise we are all guilty! Of course the Calvinist always makes an exception for themselves.

Walt wrote:
In the interest of fairness,
Shame on you for deceiving! It is one thing for people to use that method of putting in someone's name who is past away, but another to use someone else's name who is alive to make people think they are posting. Doing that with real people's names is really unfair, as you bring that person into the debate who many not have even wanted involved. It is better to quote the person, and if available give the reference to the source. Using their name as you did is wrong in my opinion.