@Ologun007 My phone almost got ruined in the process as it fell off my hand when I began to doze. I think the discussion lasted up till the midnight. Is that how X calls are usually done? No specification/outline of the issues to be flogged, modality, amount of time that will be spent, etc?
@Ologun007@BrotherPossible Tbf, they seem to repeatedly point out that there are intradiversities within their tradition and Calvin is not the embodiment of Calvinism. I think Dr Faf talked about this issue on the space yesterday, though I didn't listen till the end since my body wanted sleep.
welled up in their heart, as in the rocky soil in the parable again. But I suppose it was no real faith, etc.
In short, I'd gladly pass on this conversation: I feel no obligation to opine on the issue, as though I even had an audience, lol.
Hi. I've largely refrained from the conversation because there is much I am yet to ascertain & I don't want to be found guilty of misrepresenting them. I've seen our Calvinist brothers say we're caricaturising their position. I caught a post by Dr Faf, if you know him, where he
Reprobate prime fit taste am? Yes.
Isn't this absurd to you? No, it makes sense
I think this is absurd...
@OA_Thinks what's your take on this evanescent grace issue. I haven't seen your two cents since. Happy Sunday.
there is no real category of evanescent grace: the SAME grace appears to all (as in the parable of the sower where there is no distinction in the seed administered), but it is only efficacious in the elect. There are however some in whom temporal - i.e. evanescent - faith is
@PulpitIntern@busyminds_@Antheologiae Okay, my concern should not be mistaken for prejudice against a patient treatment of the issues. I was only asking about an agenda, outline, or something similar, without which discussions tend to drift.
@FafysamuelDr Okay, I appreciate your engagement. But note: you've just restated the Westminster confession of faith and, note again, it may be true or not but it remains an assertion - one that has not been DEMONSTRATED or justified. It merely states that no violence is done to the will of
@FafysamuelDr I don't think so but okay, granted that the logical structure is different, the fact of determination remains, no? In whatever way it was accomplished, determinism obtains in both. Thus the question remains about how the freedom of the will can be accounted for.
@FafysamuelDr I already admitted a difference between the two.
But the difference, no matter how significant it may be, (and yes it does seem significant), is however a difference in detail but not logical structure.
God is not to be compared to brute force . . .
@FafysamuelDr Really? Care to clarify? From my understanding, it was addressing Exhaustive Divine Determinism. Do you deny that Calvinism doesn't entail that doctrine?
@FafysamuelDr The real question is pastoral please: I'm not asking how we may distinguish temporal faith from a saving one from an external POV but a subjective (self-examination) POV. Iow, can an individual know that HIS faith is not temporal?