I am wondering, sir, where your animosity comes from?
I mean, we all know you have decided to take a stance on a topic you have yet to study. That has become clear. You know nothing of the history of the topic, and show no familiarity with any primary sources. But your conclusions are clear, and, plainly, the facts are not going to get in your way! But where does this animosity come from? As was pointed out to you by another, I wrote a lengthy work on the doctrine of justification by faith about twenty years ago. It is just under 400 pages in length, and offers biblical exegesis from the Greek text of the key passages relevant to the doctrine of justification. Chapter 12 is on Romans 4:1-12. I would invite you to demonstrate the existence of any "pirouettes" or "backward somersaults" in the discussion. But, honestly, sir, you would not be able to engage the text. You lack the standing to be able to do so. Not only are you intentionally ignorant of the field, but you lack the training to do so. There is nothing wrong with being ignorant---we are all ignorant of many things. But you have chosen, for some odd reason, to publicly parade your ignorance as if it is a virtue, and attack others on that basis.
For those knowledgable about these topics, they know that the most robust defenses of justification by faith since the Reformation have always been by...Calvinists. That's just a fact. There is no contradiction between Romans 4 and Calvinism. Clearly, there is in your mind, which only again proves that you have chosen to take a stand with your feet planted firmly in mid-air. You simply don't know what you are talking about. I tried to encourage you to learn but...you have chosen another path.
BREAKING: Total Depravity Has Officially Been Defeated
After another emergency session of the Council of X, theologians have finally discovered the fatal flaw in the Reformed doctrine of total depravity:
“But people can choose.”
Apparently that settles it.
Unfortunately, a few biblical texts were submitted into evidence:
“No one understands; no one seeks for God.”
(Romans 3:11 ESV)
“The mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot.”
(Romans 8:7 ESV)
“And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked.”
(Ephesians 2:1–2 ESV)
And then Jesus complicated matters:
“No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him.”
(John 6:44 ESV)
The Council responded with its strongest exegetical argument yet:
“Yeah, but free will.”
After lengthy deliberation, the objection was accepted unanimously.
Romans 3 has been referred back to committee.
Romans 8 has been ruled unnecessarily negative.
“Dead” in Ephesians 2 has been redefined as “mostly fine, just needs to make a decision.”
And John 6:44 has been postponed indefinitely pending further clarification from the Greek word autonomy, which apparently isn't actually in the text.
Another devastating evening for Calvinism.
At this rate, we may have to cancel the Synod of Dort retroactively.
The Council will reconvene tomorrow. 😂
@CatholicJack05@JesusandWhatnot I debated him on sola fide and he agreed with me (thanks to o God!) so ya I have been given the grace understand Noah no matter how flawed in his thinking he may be.
@DGPsalm3@HwsEleutheroi@DineshDSouza God changing my will is the irresistible grace. So no it doesn’t was up to me, because when I was in that state I was a child of wrath, a hater and enemy of God. Until God graciously gave the gift of spiritual life. Just as Lazarus didn’t decide to come back from the dead
I’ve been quiet but I can’t now.
Protestants saying “Eucharistic miracles” and “apparitions” are evidence of God is tragic, these are the things he named off that led to his “conversion”…
We direct people to the word of God, not false and possibly sinister “miracles” and wonders. We direct people to the gospel, not the Roman Catholic list of fables.
Stop this! This man didn’t covert to Christianity he converted to Romanism by way of lying wonders and/or made up stories.
"For no man is damned precisely because God hath not chosen him, because he is not elected, but because he is a sinner, and doth willfully refuse the means of grace offered."
— Anthony Burgess
@DGPsalm3@HwsEleutheroi@DineshDSouza Hebrews 11:6
[6] And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him. For more context
@DGPsalm3@HwsEleutheroi@DineshDSouza Lovely dodge. No one can/ will choose Jesus while they are children of wrath. God has to change their nature for them to choose him. That’s why in Ezekiel 3626 he hast to take out our heart stone and give us a heart of flesh.
Nothing has humbled me more than the biblical doctrine of God's sovereign election. I still get tears in my eyes thinking about the unconditional grace and mercy God has shown to a wretch like me.
What's arrogant is thinking that you were righteous enough to choose a holy God.
@DGPsalm3@HwsEleutheroi@DineshDSouza Umm how do this disprove Calvinism? Yes they were presented with a choice but it stands that someone who is not set free by the son is a SLAVE to sin.
We’ve been more biblical. Furthermore, there were a few things more arrogant few things that will require as much hubris to handwave away a systematic theology that you didn’t take the time to understand and you assume that you’re right ,it’s obvious ,and we’re stupid to disagree
I’ve been watching this dispute both us calvinist and you Armenians have been slightly nasty at times. But at at least we took the time to understand your position. At least we’re not purposely misrepresenting you, like you a lot are . And at least through the grace of God -