OK here it is. Now remember... chapter and verse.
(1)If Jesus wanted to teach unconditional election, then why did he choose to state "I will draw all men" instead of "I will draw all the elect."

(2)If the unsaved are not able to resist the Holy Ghost, how is it that the children of God who are sealed with Him and have more spiritual advantages are able to resist him?

(3)Would not the Calvinist doctrine of predeterminination make God the cause of all evil?

(4) Can a sovereign God create man with free agency?

(5) If God is sovereign does he have the right to integrate human responsibility into his soteriological purposes?

(6) If prayer is asking, why do you ask for something of God if he has predetermined all things and nothing will change that?

The only comment I can state concering the FEW scriptures quoted is that NONE state what you purport. THe best you have done is make Calvinistic inferences from out of context versus. Wishful thinking at best. Now if you really want to impress me, try providing a Scripture that makes a direct declarative statement to any of the points mentioned.

Fat chance.

I, yes I, the Weapon of Mass Instruction; the Calvinistic Plague infecting theological elitism with the devastating truth; I was able to give simple declaratives statements from Scripture to support my points. Unfortunately, you want to play revisionist and insist that it should state something else.

"Did Christ come to seek and to save sinners (Luke 19:10), or to save those that seek Him?"

Both.

(1)If Jesus wanted to teach unconditional election, then why did he choose to state "I will draw all men" instead of "I will draw all the elect."

(2)If the unsaved are not able to resist the Holy Ghost, how is it that the children of God who are sealed with Him and have more spiritual advantages are able to resist him?

(3)Would not the Calvinist doctrine of predeterminination make God the cause of all evil?

(4) Can a sovereign God create man with free agency?

(5) If God is sovereign does he have the right to integrate human responsibility into his soteriological purposes?

(6) If prayer is asking, why do you ask for something of God if he has predetermined all things and nothing will change that?

(6) Now this is your most ridiculous statement. Firstly, it is quite a ridiculous assertion to assume that God will answer Jeremiah's prayer and not everyone else. Secondly, it is quite ridiculoue to state that the promise pertains to Jeremiah but the curses do not. Your hermeneutic is taking you to Lurker's league. Apparently you find it hard to differentiate between God talking TO Jeremiah and God talking THROUGH Jeremiah.

(7) Nice strawman.

Honestly, I think you are making it up as you go. You reject simple declarative statements for wild irresponsible assertions.

Well, I guess that's the way the cookie crumbles.

(1) The Scriptures state "all men." If you think this is an erroneous translation you are going to have to take it up with them. Personally I trust them and considering the context and grammatical structure of the sentence, your position does not stand a chance.

(2) The Scriptures states "ye do always resist the Holy Ghost." Are you now going to state that it Holy Ghost should be substituted for Stephen?

(3) Well this one, you are going to have to take up with God. If you do not want to accept simple declarative statements you might as well hang up Christianity and become an atheist.

(4) I have yet to find a Calvinist who sincerely cares about context but if you want to go there I am more than happy to go with you.

I personally do not. At least not as it is commonly defined. But I think that easy believism is better attributed to neoevangecalism, rather than fundamentalism. Fundamentalist are generally hard against sin, whereas the neoevangelicals stay clear away from such preaching. We just happen to believe that their is not a sin to great that God will not forgive.

"1)Very simply because in John 12:32 Jesus states the extent of his drawing: "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw ALL MEN unto me."

2)Yes. Acts 7:51 demonstrates a whole bunch of people resisting the Holy Spirit.

3) No. Because it is God's word that dictates the conditions of salvation. If the conditions originated with God, I see no reason why you should think that man is the cause simply because God allows for human responsibility. (John 3:16)

4) Yes. For it is He that sets the standard, not man. He provides the options, we simply choose. He sovereignty is seen that he wills all to come into repentance. (2 Peter 3:9)

5)He works all things after the counsel of his will. You need no verse since I agree with you on this one.

6)God cannot change but he can be moved to act on the behalf of the sinner. "Call unto me, and I will answer thee, and shew thee great and mighty things, which thou knowest not." (Jeremiah 33:3)

Actually she is exposing your theology as the big jumbled up knot of self contradiction that it is.

Viz:

That God would command you to preach to those who have been created for the sole purpose to burn in hell.

It seems to me that he does not have a solid pastor with a solid church that he attends. Maybe we should pray that the Lord will lead him to one.

Sadly, (off the subject), we have too many church leaders who act more like corporate managers then loving pastors. When I think about the people it makes me sad. When I think of the spiritual leaders, it inflames me with zealous fury.

Well, for starters God did not right a music book. He wrote a theological book. Unless you want to point me to where he wrote the meter and melody line.

Psalms is a genre of music not a a particular song. I think you are confusing the two. There were many Psalms written in and out of judaism that are not recorded in Scripture.

So to answer your question. I think its perfectly well for both be sung so long as they give glory to God. You fall in danger of Pharisiticalism when you try to prohibit what God does not.

I believe that the NT philosophy of Music is best expressed in Ephesians 5:19:

"and though you speak of context, your presupposition of dispensationalism, leads you to ignore the connection of the Old and New Testaments...."

"It is good to see Abigail giving the Calvinists a dose of their own medicine. "

His latest post though similar to his previous posts, tops them all.

"You're confusion of the words species, subspecies and kinds is misleading..."

Well, blame your fellow evolutionists, they are the ones who articulated the words. Apparently they are the ones that are misleading you since they are the ones who make the distinction.

The devastating truth is that s cat will always produce a cat; no fish, no dog, no half-way-in-betweener, nothing. Its always a cat. It has never happened in the past, it's not happening in the present, it will never happen in the future.

Get over it. Jesus is Lord. He loved you enough to die on the cruel cross for you. You can either embrace his love or be destined for hell.