Search results

Excellent post! I'm not going to respond to it all as I'm not wanting to disrupt your conversation with Idolator. I just want to focus on the two highlighted sentences in first part of your post. I'll quote them here for easy reference... I prefer to view science in the sense that it is an...

I figured someone was! This new software is awesome, by the way!

The formatting of your post was so poor that I almost decided to completely ignore it all together. I decided to respond to this single question.... I didn't accuse God of lying, I accused you of accusing God of lying. I'm the one who believes the the scripture plainly states. I'm the one who...

:cool: Thanks Sherman! I just reread the post and found a couple of minor typos! I hate that! (we need the :doh: smiley back! )

This was said to suggest that the passages I cited were figures of speech. They are not figures of speech. They cannot be. When the bible talks about the Spiritual (i.e. non-physical) God as having eyes it is a figure of speech meaning that He can see. When it talks about Him having arms, it is...

The word Logos does not convey the meaning of "person" but the words "houtos" and "autos" do! They are personal pronouns that are usually translated as "him" or "her" depending on the context.... John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same...

Believe it or not, what you said in your post puts you well outside what is considered the pale of orthodoxy by a great many Christians. Calvinism in particular would insist that there is no form or kind of knowledge that God does not possess and to suggest otherwise is blasphemy. They, of...

That is not in dispute. The argument in question doesn't deny that at all.

A big percentage of Christians who believe that "God knows the future because He decreed every thing that will ever happen at every point in time where nothing will happen that He did not decree" simply reject the notion of free will altogether. Their problem isn't in trying to resolve the...

Not in dispute and therefore irrelevant to the argument. Of course! No one has suggested otherwise. Since this also is not in dispute is too is irrelevant to the argument. None of this is relevant to the argument except perhaps one sentence that I don't understand. What did you mean to say...

The logic applies regardless of who its being applied to. It doesn't have to be God who knows. It doesn't matter who infallibly knows the future or how they know it so long as it is someone other than the person doing the action. If I infallibly know that you will answer the phone tomorrow at...

There is a forth response I've seen to this argument that I didn't think of when I wrote the post quoted above. There are those who accept the veracity of the argument but instead of rejecting foreknowledge, they reject free will. I'd say that, based strictly on this argument alone, that is a...

I assume then that you do not deny that the contradiction exist so far as our puny human brains are able to function and that there isn't any refutation of the argument not because its true but purely because we're just aren't smart enough to understand. Are you fine with any doctrine that is...

This is one of the most brilliant examples of formal logical argumentation that I've ever been exposed to. I have yet to see any refutation of it that was the least bit valid. The response by those who disagree with it takes one of three forms. 1. The person doesn't understand the argument and...

So, here's my list.... God exists and is the Creator of all things and He is perfect, holy, and just. We, having willfully done evil things and rebelled against God, who gave us life, deserve death. Because God loves us, He provided for Himself a propitiation (an atoning sacrifice) by becoming...

Umm, that's not from my list. :unsure:

I'm not so sure that they do but if they do then I'd say that in spite of the great damage that they're doing to their own spiritual lives, they'll still be delivered safely to the day of redemption. Right and as such they wouldn't agree with my list. They'd insist that it was incomplete. Do...

Clearly that is the case. Exactly! And the major goal of producing that list is to see what's left over when you take everything that is debatable, all the fuzzy areas, out of the equation. Well, I think you're giving a lot of Catholics a lot more credit than they've earned. I think that it is...

Well, I would have guessed but I think I would have guessed wrong based on what I think you're saying here. How does that work then? How do you deal with the "foolish Galatians" (Gal. 3), for example, who had clearly gotten into legalism? Were they not saved in your view? Surely not. The end of...

That's beside the point. Whether they are contradictory or not, the point is that both can be believed and often are. Oh yes, there's no doubt at all that they were confusing / mixing dispensations but very nearly the entire Christian church does that. Is it your belief that only Mid-Acts...