Search results

And therefore already determined. I'm open to your suggestions about who is doing the determining, as long as that individual exists at the time the future events become known. Not unnecessary. Perfect foreknowledge means they are already determined. Yes. Somebody must, if He knows the...

But I don't see why a warning doesn't convey a command, just like "or you will die" was a warning, where God forbade them to eat of the tree.

What is a 1% free will?? Are you saying that God makes 99 out of every 100 choices for us?

All scholars are open theists in practice. They have to be, or they would never do anything. Nobody in practice thinks, "I'm eating this meal, picking my teeth, lusting after that girl, etc., because God foreordained it for me before the foundation of the world.

Do I understando you correctly? The forbadence is only to those under the law? Yes, agreed. Why would you be interested in fulfilling the law?

So you're saying God forbids that we sin? Sounds like a commandment.

Please read more carefully. It is true what you wrote, that foreknowledge doesn't mean the person with foreknowledge determined the events. But it does mean the events are already determined, else the foreknowledge is not trustworthy. Knowing the future perfectly (without error) does indeed...

It's the open theist in @Lon that keeps making an appearance, but then gets stuffed back down.

This is true. But knowing the future without error means that the future is already determined. Your choices, if God knows the future exhaustively, are 1. God determines the future 2. Someone else determines the future. That someone else must be someone in existence at the time all future events...

What isn't explained is how they failed to conduct the proper vetting of all members of the chat group that is required for classified conversations in other venues.

You probably are correct here. If the Dems did it, it should raise suspicion that it's not a smart thing to do. https://redstate.com/bonchie/2025/04/03/exposed-biden-dni-avril-haines-used-signal-all-the-time-n2187475

Fortunately we both realize that is not much of an answer, so thanks for continuing. Part of a good argument is how well it comport with the whole of scripture. Let's see how we do. Thanks for that clarification. We will use that distinction more. "You see then," is a phrase that means, "the...

Where did the quoted post cone from?

Two groups might be clearly seen, but they aren't "the Body of Christ" and "the Circumcision". They are those who once thought works would save them and those who were assured works can't save them. As the first comes to the correct understanding, they begin to acknowledge that the second is...

:ROFLMAO:

That's just you defending the clown world from the inside.

Yes. The story is provided in 2 different passages. 2 Kings 20 first several verses. Isaiah 38:1-5 is the more detailed account. No, I don't, as I already told you. God has given some things into our hands, and we can do well or poorly with those things. Jess talked about this in the parable of...

In other words, God, seeing all the possibilities before He created the universe, prearranged everything that was going to happen? This is standard Calvinism. The problem is that it doesn't square with scripture. Go back to the Hezekiah scenario, where God gave two future possibilities of...

Yes, but I don't see how they apply. Just quoting a verse about scripture does little to help me understand you position. I apologize for a more harshly worded post than I intended, though perhaps you caught the gist better. I guess I don't get the "one accuser" comment. Anyone who writes...

I agree the we's and you's and us's are important, and context is required to know the target groups. But in that chapter and the next Paul makes it clear that he is talking about the church at Corinth and himself...if you actually read the context to glean information from it. He is including...