User Tag List

Page 2 of 67 FirstFirst 123451252 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 993

Thread: BATTLE TALK ~ BRX (rounds 1 thru 3)

  1. #16
    Over 3000 post club Freak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    3,003
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    251
    Quote Originally Posted by The Berean
    2. I liked the Peter example. I find it highy unlikely that Jesus "guessed" that Peter would deny him simply because Jesus knew Peter well.

    3. Dr Lamerson spells out exactly what he will attempt to prove:


    I will definitely keep this in mind when I'm reading through Dr. Lamerson's posts.

    4. Dr Lamerson gives good examples of Sctipture stating God can and does know the fututre. Matthew 6:8 is a clear example of this.
    Dr. Lamerson is using some classic passages in defending his view.
    Jesus Loves You

  2. #17
    Over 3000 post club Freak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    3,003
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    251
    Quote Originally Posted by novice
    With all due respect to Dr. Lamerson can anyone say "soft ball"?

    I do not think that was a very good opening post and can only assume Dr. Lamerson is an experienced rope-a-doper. My personal opinion is that Bob is going to knock this softball out of the park.

    At this rate I predict a knockout before the fifth round.
    I was rather uninspired by Sam's first post.
    Jesus Loves You

  3. #18
    Old Timer RightIdea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    369
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    207

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by Livewire
    Ok, good. So I wasn't the only one who was thinking this. I was actually kind of surprised at his opening post in that it seemed rather weak. Not only is it unreasonable to limit his support using only the gospels but the passages that he offers as evidence for his case seem rather feeble.
    Same here, I was very disappointed. I saw multiple problems with his initial post, some of which have already been mentioned. Again, I'll post my own thoughts on them, point by point, later tonight I hope.
    1 Corinthians 13:2
    And though I have ... all knowledge... but have not love, I am nothing.

  4. #19
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    9,273
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 14 Times in 14 Posts

    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    11815
    Peter's example is considered a problem for the Open View. Boyd and others have given a plausible explanation. The issues for closed theism are greater in that they have to take clear statements in the OT and make them figurative (God changing His mind, etc.). The strength of the Open view is that it takes all relevant verses at face value (vs preconceived theology). The two motifs (open/closed) are interpreted literally, whereas the closed view must interpret the open motif as anthropomorphic (without warrant). It seems to me that one must also water down genuine free will to retain exhaustive foreknowledge.

    Is Sam a Calvinist (based on his institution)? He may use the same arguments against Arminianis/free will theism against Open Theism.
    Know God and make Him known! (YWAM)

    They said: "Where is the God of Elijah?"
    I say: "Where are the Elijahs of God?" (Ravenhill "Why Revival Tarries")

    Rev. 1:17, 18; Jer. 9:23, 24

    "No Compromise!" (Keith Green)

    The Pledge: He died for me; I'll live for Him.

  5. #20
    Over 750 post club Ecumenicist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga
    Posts
    913
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    207
    I think that "going to Jesus Christ first" is always a good choice. Its especially pertinent here,
    because from a Christian perspective, the extent to which we can know God is revealed
    uniquely through Jesus Christ, in the flesh.

    I also think that the opening salvo was wisely planned, saving the bigger Pauline and Revelation
    resources, and even OT resources "as fulfilled through Christ," until later on. Its smart to feel out the
    opposition before showing your best cards.

    I know this crowd isn't too impressed with academic [i.e. quotes from other theologians] support,
    though its the way the rest of the world plays ball, it probably won't buy him much in this
    microcosm. Sam would probably be better off trying to incorporate the arguments of his resources
    directly into his scriptural arguments and into his logical arguments, rather than trying to show
    how other theologians agree or disagree with his assertions.

    My final comment: Go Sam! Go Sam! GO SAM!

    Dave
    1 John 4:7-8 "Beloved, let us love one another, because love is from God; everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, for God is love."

  6. #21
    TOL Legend kmoney's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    A farm
    Posts
    10,550
    Thanks
    1,225
    Thanked 2,609 Times in 1,393 Posts

    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    1246788
    I have a feeling that Pastor Enyart is going to rip up Sam on his definition of free will. He asks Bob what he defines it as and then gives his own answer:
    3. Would you mind defining free-will? In fairness I will state that I believe free will indicates that an agent will always be free to do what he or she chooses.
    Free will isn't the ability to DO what he/she chooses. I can choose to do whatever I want, but I am obviously constricted by people, natural laws, etc.

  7. #22
    Old Timer RightIdea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    369
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    207
    Quote Originally Posted by kmoney
    I have a feeling that Pastor Enyart is going to rip up Sam on his definition of free will. He asks Bob what he defines it as and then gives his own answer:

    Free will isn't the ability to DO what he/she chooses. I can choose to do whatever I want, but I am obviously constricted by people, natural laws, etc.
    I know! Wasn't that hilarious?

    I choose to go to work this morning, but someone hits me with a car. I'm not free to go to work, even though I chose it.

    What a wacky definition of free will! That isn't free will.... It's free action! Two very different things!

    I have the free will to fly unaided. But I don't have the free action.

    I have the free action to speak Portuguese... but not the free will because I don't know that language.
    1 Corinthians 13:2
    And though I have ... all knowledge... but have not love, I am nothing.

  8. #23
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    9,273
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 14 Times in 14 Posts

    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    11815
    I think he was trying to say libertarian free will means one can chose or not chose in any given choice (alternatives). It is assumed that contingency may have restrictions in an absolute sense (we cannot fly to the moon with our arms).
    Know God and make Him known! (YWAM)

    They said: "Where is the God of Elijah?"
    I say: "Where are the Elijahs of God?" (Ravenhill "Why Revival Tarries")

    Rev. 1:17, 18; Jer. 9:23, 24

    "No Compromise!" (Keith Green)

    The Pledge: He died for me; I'll live for Him.

  9. #24
    Old Timer RightIdea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    369
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    207
    Nevertheless, his definition of free will is the power to DO. And that is a completely incorrect definition.
    1 Corinthians 13:2
    And though I have ... all knowledge... but have not love, I am nothing.

  10. #25
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    9,273
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 14 Times in 14 Posts

    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    11815
    Quote Originally Posted by RightIdea
    Nevertheless, his definition of free will is the power to DO. And that is a completely incorrect definition.
    Suggest another definition.
    Know God and make Him known! (YWAM)

    They said: "Where is the God of Elijah?"
    I say: "Where are the Elijahs of God?" (Ravenhill "Why Revival Tarries")

    Rev. 1:17, 18; Jer. 9:23, 24

    "No Compromise!" (Keith Green)

    The Pledge: He died for me; I'll live for Him.

  11. #26
    TOL Legend kmoney's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    A farm
    Posts
    10,550
    Thanks
    1,225
    Thanked 2,609 Times in 1,393 Posts

    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    1246788
    Quote Originally Posted by godrulz
    I think he was trying to say libertarian free will means one can chose or not chose in any given choice (alternatives). It is assumed that contingency may have restrictions in an absolute sense (we cannot fly to the moon with our arms).
    Yeah, Sam maybe meant something other than what he said, but in any case he should clarify his definition.

  12. #27
    Over 750 post club Ecumenicist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga
    Posts
    913
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    207
    Quote Originally Posted by godrulz
    Suggest another definition.
    The power to do within the constraints of the human condition?

    Hey, does God limit free will by creating the human condition in the first place?
    1 John 4:7-8 "Beloved, let us love one another, because love is from God; everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, for God is love."

  13. #28
    Old Timer RightIdea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    369
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    207
    Quote Originally Posted by godrulz
    Suggest another definition.
    You agree with his definition? That free will is the ability to do that which you choose?



    Libertarian free will is the genuine ability to choose one alternative or another. Not just free action, as so many Calvinists like to equivocate. Not a physical ability to do X or Y, but the ability to choose X or Y.

    Just because you choose something doesn't mean you actually have the power to do it.
    1 Corinthians 13:2
    And though I have ... all knowledge... but have not love, I am nothing.

  14. #29
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    9,273
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 14 Times in 14 Posts

    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    11815
    I am not familiar with 'free action' semantics. The key is the ability to chose between alternatives without coercion/causation. There are limitations. I cannot chose to be the President of the U.S. (I am Canadian).
    Know God and make Him known! (YWAM)

    They said: "Where is the God of Elijah?"
    I say: "Where are the Elijahs of God?" (Ravenhill "Why Revival Tarries")

    Rev. 1:17, 18; Jer. 9:23, 24

    "No Compromise!" (Keith Green)

    The Pledge: He died for me; I'll live for Him.

  15. #30
    Over 750 post club Christine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    985
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    207
    I was a bit surprised when I read in Dr. Lamersons post, "If the exegete can determine the view of Jesus on divine foreknowledge, she may then have strong warrant for her hermeneutical decisions about the rest of the Bible." (emphasis mine) Did Dr. Lamerson really mean to refer to God in the feminine?
    “Prevent SIDS---keep your pants on.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us