tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post219116454659584900..comments2024-03-27T17:15:37.606-04:00Comments on Triablogue: Rice paper wallsRyanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-29831232572974900292009-09-25T16:24:46.728-04:002009-09-25T16:24:46.728-04:00Something comes to mind to ask you as I read your ...Something comes to mind to ask you as I read your explanations through these articles about the Calvinistic/Arminian conflict. I just so happen to use this particular article to give you a piece of my mind about it! :)<br /><br />Luke records the idea of our human natures this way:::><br /><br />Luk 17:25 But first he must suffer many things and be rejected by this generation. <br />Luk 17:26 Just as it was in the days of Noah, so will it be in the days of the Son of Man. <br />Luk 17:27 They were eating and drinking and marrying and being given in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all. <br />Luk 17:28 Likewise, just as it was in the days of Lot--they were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building, <br />Luk 17:29 but on the day when Lot went out from Sodom, fire and sulfur rained from heaven and destroyed them all-- <br />Luk 17:30 so will it be on the day when the Son of Man is revealed. <br /><br />It seems as though nothing has changed human nature in our day. It is as though, "because they cannot win the argument on the message", they attack the messengers of it. It has been that way from the beginning of human events; attack the messenger all the while their message is ignored.<br /><br />Nothing has changed with human nature under the direct influences of our own soulish nature these many millenium. Without God's effect affecting the outcome, no one would be saved! It seems to me that Arminians indirectly, by the influences of doctrines of demons in some cases or directly by demons, they go about debating deconstructing the messenger.<br /><br />I would ask you therefore, do you believe broadly Arminians are just deluded and gain little after death, that is, their works are burned up seeing they build with nothing more than wood, hay and stubble?<br /><br />That may be way to direct a question for you to publicly answer?<br /><br />I am of the opinion that, after some run ins with some very fierce Arminians, no holds barred attacks on me and my comments in some of the Arminian blogs I choose to make comments in, they are driven by forces and elements of hatred and bitterness. And if theirs is Salvation, wrought in Christ, their works will be burnt up and they will be saved, yet so as by fire when they pass. I have experienced other Arminians who seem to be compassionate and are really not as yet settled with Eternal Life and are objective in debate with someone such as I am.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-33036438998744716322009-09-25T10:59:06.213-04:002009-09-25T10:59:06.213-04:00Dear Steve:
You said:
How does that solve the pr...Dear Steve:<br /><br />You said:<br /><br />How does that solve the problem of evil? Doesn’t the argument from evil normally pose the question: “Why did God allow it?”<br /><br /><i>"The argument from evil is quite prepared to concede the premise that God “allowed” it. But that’s hardly a solution. Rather, that’s a statement of the problem. Is that the sort of thing he should allow that to happen? That’s the question, is it not?"</i><br /><br />Exactly right! I have tried to get Billy to see this inconsistency in his theodicy, but to no avail.<br /><br />Blessings,<br /><br />StephenStephen Garretthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10866698322854892197noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-35912710545415448802009-09-25T10:27:43.544-04:002009-09-25T10:27:43.544-04:00"Then came to him all his brothers and sister..."Then came to him all his brothers and sisters and all who had known him before, and ate bread with him in his house. And they showed him sympathy and comforted him for all the evil that the Lord had brought upon him." (Job 42:11)Saint and Sinnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14166699860672840738noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-86935410795836073942009-09-25T10:22:38.707-04:002009-09-25T10:22:38.707-04:00Steve said:
---
Is Billy saying that for God to st...Steve said:<br />---<br />Is Billy saying that for God to stop the 9/11 hijackers from crashing their planes into the twin towers, God would also have to stop you from choosing between strawberry and raspberry sherbet? Even on a libertarian scheme, how does the correlation begin to follow?<br />---<br /><br />I think this is an especially important point that should be expanded on. Supposedly, in order for a relationship to be "real" in the Arminian version, one must have free will. Yet, how free must one be to be free enough for a relationship?<br /><br />If I have a two-year-old son, I can restrict his freedom without violating our relationship. He would still love me even though I didn't let him eat candy all day long, and that would be genuine love, right? I could force him not to leave the yard, putting up boundaries and enforcing them, right? So he doesn't need absolute libertarian freedom in order for him to love me.<br /><br />The same thing would be true of God, no? I mean, it would still be possible for a loving relationship to exist if God put up little boundaries like, I dunno, not letting terrorists board planes. Why would *THAT* need to be allowed in order for there to be real love if a parent can force his child to stay in the yard instead of wandering out into the street and still have reciprocal love?Peter Pikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11792036365040378473noreply@blogger.com