Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

BATTLE TALK ~ BRX (rounds 4 thru 7)

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by elected4ever
    I posted this on another tread. I think it is appropriate to restate it here.

    I went back and reread the post. I must have just skimmed over it. I made a mistake. Mr Enyart did address the issues of my concern. I apologize for my misstatements. I'll pay better attention next time.
    Thank you, E4E, I really appreciate that. Takes a man to admit he made an error... Lord knows I make plenty of 'em.
    1 Corinthians 13:2
    And though I have ... all knowledge... but have not love, I am nothing.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by RightIdea
      Thank you, E4E, I really appreciate that. Takes a man to admit he made an error... Lord knows I make plenty of 'em.
      Galatians 5:13 ¶For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.

      The borrower is slave to the linder. What makes this country think it is rich and free?

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by elected4ever
        I posted this on another tread. I think it is appropriate to restate it here.

        I went back and reread the post. I must have just skimmed over it. I made a mistake. Mr Enyart did address the issues of my concern. I apologize for my misstatements. I'll pay better attention next time.
        sigpic
        "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

        Comment


        • #64
          Has anybody noticed that Bob Enyart, in "discarding" what he calls the "Settled View" listing of God's attributes -- omniscience, omnipresence, omnipotence, impassibility, and immutability -- has thus swept aside the "defining" traits of deity, which identify the Almighty God of Scripture and distinguish Him from all false gods and/or created beings?
          Surely you dont mean this!!!!! Was Jesus not God when he laid aside his divine attributes in order for servanthood to take place (as phillipians 2:6 tells us) because he no longer possesed "Omniscience" or "Omnipotence" but rather relied on his Father?

          Phi 2:6 Who, being in very nature[1] God,
          did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
          Phi 2:7 but made himself nothing,
          taking the very nature[2] of a servant,
          being made in human likeness.
          Phi 2:8 And being found in appearance as a man,
          he humbled himself
          and became obedient to death--
          even death on a cross!

          To further illustrate my point, Jesus clearly had to learn as a child:
          Luke 2:40 The child Jesus grew. He became strong and wise, and God blessed him.

          Surely Christ being without complete Omniscience, even today is still God:

          Mat 24:36 "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son,[6] but only the Father."

          Mark 13:32 "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father."

          If you understand God to be God because of his nature rather than his identity and being as God, then you are falsely chaining God to an immutable nature that God has already proven to have broken through in his incarnation of Christ.

          Let me give you this example: I work at a home for people with dementia related disabilites, mainly with alzhiemer related residents. Many of these residents do not know who they are, what they have done, what they liked to do, whom they were married to, how many kids they have, their age, or even the current situation, however, even though they have lost their characteristics, quirks, and even addictions that uniquely made them who they are, their being and identity still, nevertheless, remains. They dont become less of a human or even less of themselves when they discard their previous nature or further change their nature.

          What i mean is I will always be theo_victis no matter what i do unless my "eternal" nature is taken away. So God, being eternal, will always be God no matter what nature he possesses, even to the likeness of a servant (phillipians 2:6)!
          "The devil is a better theologian than any of us and is a devil still."
          - A. W. Tozer



          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by M. K. Nawojski
            Which unsupported and illogical claim of mine are you referring to, Clete? MK
            I am sorry... this just sounds to funny. I read this without reading Clete's post and i just laughed. If you read it alone without any context it sounds as though you have many unsupported and illogical claims and are confused at which one Clete is discussing... lol

            "The devil is a better theologian than any of us and is a devil still."
            - A. W. Tozer



            Comment


            • #66
              ...At any rate here is the first challenge. If Bob really believes that he has won the debate he should have no problem ending the debate here. If he continues, it is evident that he does not believe that he has won... -Samuel Lamerson
              I'd like to see how Bob Enyart is going to respond to this.

              "Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum" [I think that I think, therefore I think that I am]. - Ambrose Bierce

              "Live as if you were to die tomorrow. Learn as if you were to live forever."- Mohandas Gandhi

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by theo_victis
                Surely you dont mean this!!!!! Was Jesus not God when he laid aside his divine attributes in order for servanthood to take place (as phillipians 2:6 tells us) because he no longer possesed "Omniscience" or "Omnipotence" but rather relied on his Father?

                Phi 2:6 Who, being in very nature[1] God,
                did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
                Phi 2:7 but made himself nothing,
                taking the very nature[2] of a servant,
                being made in human likeness.
                Phi 2:8 And being found in appearance as a man,
                he humbled himself
                and became obedient to death--
                even death on a cross!

                To further illustrate my point, Jesus clearly had to learn as a child:
                Luke 2:40 The child Jesus grew. He became strong and wise, and God blessed him.

                Surely Christ being without complete Omniscience, even today is still God:

                Mat 24:36 "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son,[6] but only the Father."

                Mark 13:32 "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father."

                If you understand God to be God because of his nature rather than his identity and being as God, then you are falsely chaining God to an immutable nature that God has already proven to have broken through in his incarnation of Christ.

                Let me give you this example: I work at a home for people with dementia related disabilites, mainly with alzhiemer related residents. Many of these residents do not know who they are, what they have done, what they liked to do, whom they were married to, how many kids they have, their age, or even the current situation, however, even though they have lost their characteristics, quirks, and even addictions that uniquely made them who they are, their being and identity still, nevertheless, remains. They dont become less of a human or even less of themselves when they discard their previous nature or further change their nature.

                What i mean is I will always be theo_victis no matter what i do unless my "eternal" nature is taken away. So God, being eternal, will always be God no matter what nature he possesses, even to the likeness of a servant (phillipians 2:6)!
                According to Bob's first post the OVers does not believe God possesses theses qualities to begin with. Read his first round response.
                Galatians 5:13 ¶For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.

                The borrower is slave to the linder. What makes this country think it is rich and free?

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by elected4ever
                  Yes I noticed that too. That was done to change the direction of the debate. One thing i have noticed about Bob's debating style. He wonts to debate on his points of interest and ignore yours in an attempt to gain advantage and a win for him. It does not matter the validity of his opponents argument. It's all about controlling and winning the debate. He wonts to debate on his terms not the opponents.
                  I agree with your insightful observations. Mr. Enyart certainly is quite an aggressive debater . . . which would be a good thing in any other realm . . . but in a debate on scriptural issues, I think his win-at-any-cost-and-by-any-means tactics are out of place.

                  MK
                  http://www.twilight-tales.com
                  Always remember that you're unique, just like everybody else.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by M. K. Nawojski
                    I agree with your insightful observations. Mr. Enyart certainly is quite an aggressive debater . . . which would be a good thing in any other realm . . . but in a debate on scriptural issues, I think his win-at-any-cost-and-by-any-means tactics are out of place.

                    MK
                    http://www.twilight-tales.com
                    I still think that Bob has assigned God the character of a mythical Greek god. By restricting God to human limitation and reasoning but with far greater power is like watching a movie basted on Greek mythology. I wonder if we are discussing Zeus or God?
                    Galatians 5:13 ¶For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.

                    The borrower is slave to the linder. What makes this country think it is rich and free?

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by M. K. Nawojski
                      I agree with your insightful observations. Mr. Enyart certainly is quite an aggressive debater . . . which would be a good thing in any other realm . . . but in a debate on scriptural issues, I think his win-at-any-cost-and-by-any-means tactics are out of place.

                      MK
                      http://www.twilight-tales.com
                      Could it be that Bob believes there is more at steak than his pride?

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by Parel
                        I'd like to see how Bob Enyart is going to respond to this.
                        I'm sure he's got another book in the works and would really like to get as much material from Lamerson as he can, gratis, to fill things out...

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          From the critique thread:
                          Originally posted by Z Man
                          Does anyone else feel that Bob is paving road, apart from what Sam has laid before him to take? It seems from the very get go of this debate that Bob is running away from the direction Sam started to take this topic. Not to mention Bob has continued to 'pave his own road' until he has gotten way off subject! That letter he posted from that guy who lost his child at Columbine was unnecessary. Has Bob forgotten that Sam is not debating about Calvinism, nor is the topic anything about debating if Calvinism is wrong or not? This debate is about God knowing the future, to which Sam has presented a valid case for, from the beginning of the debate! And yet, from the get go, Bob has ignored the direction of Sam's post and has decided to create his own path apart from the topic at hand. Sam cleared the way for Bob in post one, but Bob seemed to have started his own path. So, unwillingly, Sam ventured down Bob's road and even cleared more for Bob to follow. But what does Bob do? He did what any Open Theists I've come to debate on this site always seems to do; they ignore the path set before them to debate and make up their own path. It's their only defense to steer clear of the obvious truth, which is the Bible does not support their views.
                          (Emphasis added)

                          Open Theists make up their own path? Strange words, coming from a Calvinist. How in the world are OVers able to make up their own path, according to your own worldview? Once again your own words betray what you claim to believe.

                          Ever wonder why God has predestined you to speak as though people have free will while claiming to believe they don't? I suppose someday you'll find out how that glorifies Him.
                          Last edited by Turbo; August 17th, 2005, 07:35 AM.
                          BRXI: Should Christians support the Death Penalty?

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by Turbo
                            From the critique thread:
                            (Emphasis added)

                            Open Theists make up their own paths? Strange words, coming from a Calvinist. How in the world are OVers able to make up their own path, according to your own worldview? Once again your own words betray what you claim to believe.

                            Ever wonder why God has predestined you to speak as though people have free will while claiming to believe they don't? I suppose someday you'll find out how that glorifies Him.
                            There in lies your fallacy. You think that just because a person is a CVer that man's choice is somehow over ridden. That sir is a lie to justify your own belief. Will you please stop making this false accusation. It is not true, has never been true and will never be true. You seem to have no concept of what a CVer believes except what some jug head has told you.
                            Galatians 5:13 ¶For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.

                            The borrower is slave to the linder. What makes this country think it is rich and free?

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by elected4ever
                              There in lies your fallacy. You think that just because a person is a CVer that man's choice is somehow over ridden. That sir is a lie to justify your own belief. Will you please stop making this false accusation. It is not true, has never been true and will never be true. You seem to have no concept of what a CVer believes except what some jug head has told you.
                              e4e,

                              What a Calvinist believes whether he admits it or not is that free will is an illusion. The only way to escape the conclusion is to redefine the terms "free", "will", "illusion", and "predestination". Regardless of what someone claims to believe it does not require me or any open theist to suspend our own ability to reason and determine for ourselves what the logical conclusion of their stated beliefs are. The bottom line is that if I cannot choose to do or to do otherwise, I do not have free will; the violent protestations of Calvinists to the contrary not withstanding.

                              Resting in Him,
                              Clete
                              Last edited by Clete; August 17th, 2005, 10:48 AM.
                              sigpic
                              "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by Clete
                                e4e,

                                What a Calvinist believes whether he admits it or not is that free will is an illusion. The only way to escape the conclusion is to redefine the terms "free", "will", "illusion", and "predestination". Regardless of what someone claims to believe it does not require me or any open theist to suspend our own ability to reason and determine for ourselves what the logical conclusion of their stated beliefs are. The bottom line is that I cannot choose to do or to do otherwise, I do not have free will; the violent protestations of Calvinists to the contrary not withstanding.

                                Resting in Him,
                                Clete
                                Sir the only thing greater than your blindness to the facts is your ignorants of them. What makes you think that I will support the OVers relegating God to the order of a mythical Greek God?
                                Galatians 5:13 ¶For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.

                                The borrower is slave to the linder. What makes this country think it is rich and free?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X