User Tag List

Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 135

Thread: One on One: Tip toe through the TULIPs with docrob57 and Knight.

  1. #31
    Over 750 post club
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    844
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    187
    I have to leave now. I will check on this later.
    God . . .even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ--by grace you have been saved. Ephesians 2:4-5 ESV


    A dog barks when his master is attacked. I would be a coward if I saw that God's truth is attacked and yet would remain silent. . . . John Calvin

  2. #32
    ...then I woke up. Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    26,925
    Thanks
    389
    Thanked 2,335 Times in 1,100 Posts

    Blog Entries
    6
    Mentioned
    128 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    1097775
    Quote Originally Posted by docrob57
    I have to leave now. I will check on this later.
    Excellent! When you get back, make a point so we can get started.
    Also be sure to.... Join TOL on Facebook | Follow TOL on Twitter
    TOL Newbies CLICK HERE or....upgrade your TOL today!

  3. #33
    Over 750 post club
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    844
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    187
    Quote Originally Posted by Knight
    Excellent! When you get back, make a point so we can get started.
    Okay, I see you refuse to answer the questions, which is your privelege, so I will speculate as to the reasons why. Since you deny original sin, you realize that there is no other reason why man would necessarily be sinful. There has to be a reason why man is by nature sinful, and absent original sin, there really isn't one.

    If man is not, by nature, sinful then it follows, that there is no inherent reason why he has to sin. Accordingly, it follows that it is at least possible that man, or even some single person, could live without sinning. If that were the case, then at least for that person, the atoning sacrifice of Jesus would not be necessary, and you would, in general, have to at least lessen the value of the atonement. This, of course, is one of the things that opponents of the OV point out as a necessary and unacceptable logical consequence of the doctrine.

    If man somehow does retain his sinful nature, then you still have a problem. You have to explain how a being whose nature is set against God can, of his own accord, realize his sinfulness and seek Christ as savior. Even with the drawing of the Holy Spirit, there is no reason for one who by nature hates God to accept the Spirit's leading.

    Accordingly, the only doctrine which is consistent with the necessity of the atonement for salvation and with a mankind which is inherently sinful is the doctrine of total depravity.

    I quite well understand why you did not want to answer. Shall we move on to the "U" now?
    God . . .even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ--by grace you have been saved. Ephesians 2:4-5 ESV


    A dog barks when his master is attacked. I would be a coward if I saw that God's truth is attacked and yet would remain silent. . . . John Calvin

  4. #34
    ...then I woke up. Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    26,925
    Thanks
    389
    Thanked 2,335 Times in 1,100 Posts

    Blog Entries
    6
    Mentioned
    128 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    1097775
    Quote Originally Posted by docrob57
    Okay, I see you refuse to answer the questions, which is your privelege, so I will speculate as to the reasons why.
    Uh Doc, everyone can read. I am guessing you are pretty much the only person reading this thread who hasn't seen that I have answered your question three times, three different ways. This isn't the first time you have pulled this type of stunt, on another thread you accused me three times of not answering your question until finally you realized I had answered you after all, remember?

    Since you deny original sin, you realize that there is no other reason why man would necessarily be sinful. There has to be a reason why man is by nature sinful, and absent original sin, there really isn't one.


    If man is not, by nature, sinful then it follows, that there is no inherent reason why he has to sin. Accordingly, it follows that it is at least possible that man, or even some single person, could live without sinning. If that were the case, then at least for that person, the atoning sacrifice of Jesus would not be necessary, and you would, in general, have to at least lessen the value of the atonement. This, of course, is one of the things that opponents of the OV point out as a necessary and unacceptable logical consequence of the doctrine.

    If man somehow does retain his sinful nature, then you still have a problem. You have to explain how a being whose nature is set against God can, of his own accord, realize his sinfulness and seek Christ as savior. Even with the drawing of the Holy Spirit, there is no reason for one who by nature hates God to accept the Spirit's leading.

    Accordingly, the only doctrine which is consistent with the necessity of the atonement for salvation and with a mankind which is inherently sinful is the doctrine of total depravity.

    I quite well understand why you did not want to answer. Shall we move on to the "U" now?
    If I answer a 4th time will it make any difference?

    Why move on to the "U"? You haven't even brought up the "T" yet.
    Also be sure to.... Join TOL on Facebook | Follow TOL on Twitter
    TOL Newbies CLICK HERE or....upgrade your TOL today!

  5. #35
    ...then I woke up. Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    26,925
    Thanks
    389
    Thanked 2,335 Times in 1,100 Posts

    Blog Entries
    6
    Mentioned
    128 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    1097775
    Well.... if Doc isn't going to address the "T" in TULIP I will....

    T - Total Inability/Depravity = No man can come to Christ unless God predestines him to come to Christ. Yet how then could men resist this calling?

    Matthew 23:37 “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing!

    Revelation 22:17 And the Spirit and the bride say, “Come!” And let him who hears say, “Come!” And let him who thirsts come. Whoever desires, let him take the water of life freely.

    John 3:16 “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

    John 5:40 “But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life.

    Doc, how is it possible that men have the ability to resist God's calling if the "T" in the Calvinist TULIP exists?

    Another aspect of Total Depravity is the notion that man can do no good without the God directing Him to do good. And to address that I will borrow from my good friend Turbo who recently wrote....
    Quote Originally Posted by turbo
    Just because all have sinned, that does not mean that unsaved men sin constantly and are only capable of sin.

    If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask Him! Matthew 7:11
    Is it a sin to give good gifts to one's children?



    Jesus pointed out that Samaritans did not know God:
    7 There came a woman of Samaria to draw water. Jesus said unto her, "Give Me to drink." 8 (For His disciples had gone away unto the city to buy meat.)
    9 Then said the woman of Samaria unto Him, "How is it that thou, being a Jew, askest a drink of me, who am a woman of Samaria?" For the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans.
    10 Jesus answered and said unto her, "If thou knewest the gift of God and who it is that saith to thee, `Give Me to drink,' thou wouldest have asked of Him, and He would have given thee living water."
    ...
    19 The woman said unto Him, "Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet. 20 Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, and ye say that Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship."
    21 Jesus said unto her, "Woman, believe Me, the hour cometh when ye shall neither on this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father. 22 Ye worship ye know not what; we know what we worship, for salvation is of the Jews.23 But the hour cometh and now is, when the true worshipers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth; for the Father seeketh such to worship Him." John 4:7-10,19-23
    Note that the pronouns in verse 22 are all plural. Jesus was not just saying that this woman does not know God, but that the Samaritans, as a people, did not know God. That is why He used a Samaritan to drive His point in this parable about loving your neighbor:

    30Then Jesus answered and said: "A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, who stripped him of his clothing, wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead. 31Now by chance* a certain priest came down that road. And when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. 32Likewise a Levite, when he arrived at the place, came and looked, and passed by on the other side. 33But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was. And when he saw him, he had compassion. 34So he went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine; and he set him on his own animal, brought him to an inn, and took care of him. 35On the next day, when he departed, he took out two denarii, gave them to the innkeeper, and said to him, 'Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, when I come again, I will repay you.' 36So which of these three do you think was neighbor to him who fell among the thieves?"
    37And he said, "He who showed mercy on him."

    Then Jesus said to him, "Go and do likewise." Luke 10:30-37

    So this Samaritan was an example of one who did not know God, yet was compassionate and loving toward his neighbor. The Samaritan was surely a sinner, but in this instance did good. The Samaritan was not sinning when he cared for his neighbor, and in fact Jesus instructed others to follow his example.


    *Attn: Calvinists
    Isn't it odd that Jesus said 'by chance' and not 'according to God's preordination'?
    You'd think He of all people would know better.
    Also be sure to.... Join TOL on Facebook | Follow TOL on Twitter
    TOL Newbies CLICK HERE or....upgrade your TOL today!

  6. #36
    Over 750 post club
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    844
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    187
    Quote Originally Posted by Knight
    Uh Doc, everyone can read. I am guessing you are pretty much the only person reading this thread who hasn't seen that I have answered your question three times, three different ways. This isn't the first time you have pulled this type of stunt, on another thread you accused me three times of not answering your question until finally you realized I had answered you after all, remember?




    If I answer a 4th time will it make any difference?

    Why move on to the "U"? You haven't even brought up the "T" yet.
    What foolishness, if you can't answer, at least admit it. I have twice defined total depravity, and I even did it correctly. I said before in a PM that one of the things that really diappoints me with you guys is your intellectual dishonesty when you argue this stuff. Sadly, it is on display for all to see here.
    God . . .even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ--by grace you have been saved. Ephesians 2:4-5 ESV


    A dog barks when his master is attacked. I would be a coward if I saw that God's truth is attacked and yet would remain silent. . . . John Calvin

  7. #37
    Over 750 post club
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    844
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    187
    T - Total Inability/Depravity = No man can come to Christ unless God predestines him to come to Christ. Yet how then could men resist this calling?
    Actually, it is more like no one can come to Christ unless the Spirit enables him too, but close enough. No one can resist, but there you are skipping ahead to the "I."

    Matthew 23:37 “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing!
    Totally irrelevant to anything I am talking about, but I'm glad it makes you happy.


    Revelation 22:17 And the Spirit and the bride say, “Come!” And let him who hears say, “Come!” And let him who thirsts come. Whoever desires, let him take the water of life freely.
    And, of course, no one has this desire unless it is given him by the Spirit.


    John 3:16 “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.
    Well, yes, that would be true.


    John 5:40 “But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life.
    Again, irrelevant.

    Doc, how is it possible that men have the ability to resist God's calling if the "T" in the Calvinist TULIP exists?
    Again, it isn't


    Another aspect of Total Depravity is the notion that man can do no good without the God directing Him to do good. And to address that I will borrow from my good friend Turbo who recently wrote....
    No offense, but if this is all you've got, perhaps we should move on.
    God . . .even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ--by grace you have been saved. Ephesians 2:4-5 ESV


    A dog barks when his master is attacked. I would be a coward if I saw that God's truth is attacked and yet would remain silent. . . . John Calvin

  8. #38
    Over 750 post club
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    844
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    187
    I should point out that I will have to depart this fascinating and enlightening discussion early tomorrow since I and my family will be going to a church Thanksgiving supper, Lord willing (not that that matters, right?). I will enjoy dining with my fellow twisted, evil and deluded 5-pointers.
    God . . .even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ--by grace you have been saved. Ephesians 2:4-5 ESV


    A dog barks when his master is attacked. I would be a coward if I saw that God's truth is attacked and yet would remain silent. . . . John Calvin

  9. #39
    ...then I woke up. Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    26,925
    Thanks
    389
    Thanked 2,335 Times in 1,100 Posts

    Blog Entries
    6
    Mentioned
    128 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    1097775
    Quote Originally Posted by docrob57
    [/I] Actually, it is more like no one can come to Christ unless the Spirit enables him too, but close enough. No one can resist, but there you are skipping ahead to the "I."

    Totally irrelevant to anything I am talking about, but I'm glad it makes you happy.

    And, of course, no one has this desire unless it is given him by the Spirit.

    Well, yes, that would be true.

    Again, irrelevant.

    Again, it isn't

    No offense, but if this is all you've got, perhaps we should move on.
    That's the best you can do?

    Doc, why are we bothering to have this discussion if you are not even going to respond to me? And to make it worse, when I answer your questions (three different times) you simply claim I didn't.

    I am sorry man but I think you are just plain rude. I would never disregard you the you disregard me. I am really not sure what your problem is but clearly you have some personality "issues". Is your goal simply to be divisive?

    Again, if men are totally depraved or have zero ability to come to God except when God calls them it would follow that men could not reject that calling (also similar to the "I" in TULIP). Yet the Bible gives us dozens of examples which I provided above of men resisting God's calling. I also provided example (Turbo's excellent post) of the lost doing good deeds which also flies in the face of the "T" in the TULIP.

    Did you want me to start this thread so that you could hear yourself talk or did you want to discuss the issue with me?
    Also be sure to.... Join TOL on Facebook | Follow TOL on Twitter
    TOL Newbies CLICK HERE or....upgrade your TOL today!

  10. #40
    ...then I woke up. Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    26,925
    Thanks
    389
    Thanked 2,335 Times in 1,100 Posts

    Blog Entries
    6
    Mentioned
    128 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    1097775
    Quote Originally Posted by docrob57
    What foolishness, if you can't answer, at least admit it. I have twice defined total depravity, and I even did it correctly. I said before in a PM that one of the things that really diappoints me with you guys is your intellectual dishonesty when you argue this stuff. Sadly, it is on display for all to see here.
    Thank you for defining total depravity. Yet I think we were all hoping you were going to make a case for it's existence or possibly defend it as a doctrine.

    Most of us already know what total depravity means and the rest could easily look up it's definition on the internet if interested.

    Were you planning on offering more than a definition?
    Also be sure to.... Join TOL on Facebook | Follow TOL on Twitter
    TOL Newbies CLICK HERE or....upgrade your TOL today!

  11. #41
    Over 750 post club
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    844
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    187
    That's the best you can do?
    I asked you first

    Doc, why are we bothering to have this discussion if you are not even going to respond to me? And to make it worse, when I answer your questions (three different times) you simply claim I didn't.
    Here is one of the questions I asked. You said that all men sin. You also said that post-crucifixion, we are no longer subject to the sin nature inherited by Adam. If this is true, why do all men still sin? And, again, can this "propensity to sin" be avoided? Is it possible, at least? Please give me the number of the post in which you answered it and I will certainly apologize for having missed yet another post. If you continue simply to maintain that you answered it without identifying the answer, then I think we can conclude that you are being deliberately nonresponsive.

    Again, if men are totally depraved or have zero ability to come to God except when God calls them it would follow that men could not reject that calling (also similar to the "I" in TULIP). Yet the Bible gives us dozens of examples which I provided above of men resisting God's calling. I also provided example (Turbo's excellent post) of the lost doing good deeds which also flies in the face of the "T" in the TULIP.
    You gave no examples of men resisting God's effectual call. That is where the doctrine comes in. Doing good deeds does not contradict the TULIP. "Good deeds" with wrong motive fall within the boundaries of total depravity.


    Did you want me to start this thread so that you could hear yourself talk or did you want to discuss the issue with me?
    Since you either can't or won't answer the questions or address my points, I am pretty much forced to talk to myself.

    We can debate Irresistible grace (effectual call) later. For now, once again and as directly as possible . . . does man still have a sin nature? If not, is it possible for a person to live a sin free life? If not, why not? I know you said that Jesus is the only sinless person, which is true. It also isn't the question. The question is . . . well there it is directly above.
    God . . .even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ--by grace you have been saved. Ephesians 2:4-5 ESV


    A dog barks when his master is attacked. I would be a coward if I saw that God's truth is attacked and yet would remain silent. . . . John Calvin

  12. #42
    ...then I woke up. Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    26,925
    Thanks
    389
    Thanked 2,335 Times in 1,100 Posts

    Blog Entries
    6
    Mentioned
    128 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    1097775
    Quote Originally Posted by docrob57
    Here is one of the questions I asked. You said that all men sin.
    Yes.

    You also said that post-crucifixion, we are no longer subject to the sin nature inherited by Adam.
    Actually I never said that.

    All men have the flesh, which is what makes us sin (it's why we have the propensity to sin). Therefore all men will sin, and and when a man (or woman) reaches the age where they are held accountable for there sin they will need a Savior.

    We also know that there was one Man who overcame sin and He is our Savior.

    If this is true, why do all men still sin? And, again, can this "propensity to sin" be avoided? Is it possible, at least?
    It doesn't seem possible, although we know that Jesus did it so can we really say it is impossible?

    Please give me the number of the post in which you answered it
    Post #10, Post #16, and Post #25.

    You gave no examples of men resisting God's effectual call. That is where the doctrine comes in. Doing good deeds does not contradict the TULIP. "Good deeds" with wrong motive fall within the boundaries of total depravity.
    Are you suggesting that the Good Samaritan had a "wrong motive"?

    Since you either can't or won't answer the questions or address my points, I am pretty much forced to talk to myself.


    We can debate Irresistible grace (effectual call) later. For now, once again and as directly as possible . . . does man still have a sin nature?
    For the 5th time, yes, all men have the propensity to sin and will sin, yet since the cross they are already justified form Adam's sin and therefore are only guilty of their own sin. Little babies that die to NOT go to hell as you have suggested on other threads.
    Also be sure to.... Join TOL on Facebook | Follow TOL on Twitter
    TOL Newbies CLICK HERE or....upgrade your TOL today!

  13. #43
    Over 750 post club
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    844
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    187
    Okay at least I can say that some progress has been made. I am still curious as to why, having been released from the inheritance of Adam's sin, we still have the propensity. You indicate that it is because we have the flesh, from which comes our propensity to sin. From what I gather, everything you say suggests that, at least now, sin is not a part of our nature, in the same manner that sin was not part of Christ's nature.

    Before going on, could you please confirm that my understanding of what you are saying is correct, as I apparently did not recognize that many of the responses that you put forth before were supposed to be in answer to questions I had asked, so understanding appears difficult. That isn't an insult, it is often the case when people whose basic paradigms differ signifcantly attempt discussion.
    God . . .even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ--by grace you have been saved. Ephesians 2:4-5 ESV


    A dog barks when his master is attacked. I would be a coward if I saw that God's truth is attacked and yet would remain silent. . . . John Calvin

  14. #44
    ...then I woke up. Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    26,925
    Thanks
    389
    Thanked 2,335 Times in 1,100 Posts

    Blog Entries
    6
    Mentioned
    128 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    1097775
    I am not going to address this a sixth time. Please start to make your case for the "T" in TULIP or I am going to spend my time on other more fruitful discussions. Thanks!
    Also be sure to.... Join TOL on Facebook | Follow TOL on Twitter
    TOL Newbies CLICK HERE or....upgrade your TOL today!

  15. #45
    Over 750 post club
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    844
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    187
    Quote Originally Posted by Knight
    I am not going to address this a sixth time. Please start to make your case for the "T" in TULIP or I am going to spend my time on other more fruitful discussions. Thanks!
    I put my defense of the "T" in post 33, and of course you have not responded to that either. I understand the tactic is to frustrate me until I just go away and then you can declare victory, but it won't work this time.


    So I will assume that my understanding of your "doctrine" is correct. Since the propensity to sin is from the flesh, and since Jesus was human, regardless of Adam you must claim that Jesus was born with the same propensity to sin as everyone else. Since He did not, it must be true that it is possible for anyone else to live free from sin. This is especially true given that, in your view, since the cross, the inheritance of a pervasive sin nature from Adam has been broken.

    And of course this is where your first heresy is discovered. Though you would claim that for some reason it doesn't actually occur in the real world, the potential for man to live sin free (the Pelagian heresy) renders the atonement a mere "nicety," useful for sinners who willingly go along with the program, but not an absolute necessity for salvation.

    You can respond to this or not, it's up to you. The above plus, again what I presented in post 33 constitute my defense of Total Depravity. If you do not respond, I will move to an explanation of why unconditional election must naturally and logically follow.
    God . . .even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ--by grace you have been saved. Ephesians 2:4-5 ESV


    A dog barks when his master is attacked. I would be a coward if I saw that God's truth is attacked and yet would remain silent. . . . John Calvin

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