Arminians' Dilemma

[Samie]

Hi Clete;

Compare your last post with my post you responded to, brother. You will see that you included in your post many ad-hominem leaning stupidities which should not have been included there. Just the same I will respond instead of resorting to threat of ignoring just like what you are inclined to do knowing that you will soon run out of Scriptural haven.

When I said:

You are telling me that NOTHING means SOMETHING? Are you serious?

You responded with:

Please don't go from parroting stupidity to being stupid!

So who is actually stupid? Samie who believes Christ's NOTHING is NOTHING or Clete who believes Christ's NOTHING means SOMETHING? Think of it and stop acting like stupid.

You said:

We could potential have a substantive discussion here but I will not throw pearls before pigs. If you cannot think and respond rationally I'll simply ignore you.

Is it not rational enough to believe in Christ's words that NOTHING is NOTHING and not SOMETHING? I should be the one entitled to say I don't have to throw pearls before the swine. You can ignore me if you want. I did not even ask you to comment in the first place.

When I said:

That's precisely what the OP is pointing out. Jesus was asking the people to repent because they are capable of repenting, being NOT separate from Him.

You replied:

Even by you own convoluted interpretation of the passage in question, the logic just doesn't work!

Is that it? Just saying it won't work. How? Is that the substantive discussion you are referring to when your reply have no substance at all?

You said:

You claim that you can nothing at all whatsoever, including repent, unless you are in Jesus.

What's there to repent of if you're already in Christ?

The better question should be: how can you repent when you are dead being NOT in Christ? Since the time you were In Christ, have you not committed any single sin, Clete? You can't answer NO, or be proven a liar. That sin is what you are going to repent of. Faced with the opportunity of committing the same sin again, you change your mind and do what is good instead. That is the essence of true repentance. See Acts 26:20.

When I said:

And repenting is overcoming evil with good.

You countered with:

No, to repent, strictly speaking, means to change your mind. But in the sense we are using the term it means to be sorry or regretful.

The Hebrew word is Nacham (Strong's 5162)

See Gen 6:6; Exo. 32:12; Num.23:19; Jer. 18:8-10; etc

You want "repentance' used in the sense "we" are using that word, instead of how the Bible uses that word when people are to repent from evil. Notice that the verses you specified talk about God changing his mind (נָּחֵ֥ם nacham). What you should have given are verses that tell of how people are to repent (שׁ֤וּב shuwb). See for example Ezek 14:6; 18:30. Do you now know the difference between נָּחֵ֥ם nacham and שׁ֤וּב shuwb?

When I said:

Correct, it is STUPIDITY to tell people to do SOMETHING when they are not able to. And that's what Arminians basically do. How so?

You responded with:

Arminians say no such thing. It's only in your pseudo-universalist world of weird English interpretation where generalities aren't allowed that any such teaching is detected.

You simply resorted to denial. And who says I don't allow generalities when I simply believe NOTHING means NOTHING generally speaking? Think again.

When I quipped:

Scriptures say that Christ is our Life (Col 3:4).

Here's what you retorted:

"Our" is referring to believers, numb-skull!

See where your false belief have led your mouth to? And that's what you tell me "substantive discussion"? Are you saying all others derive their life NOT from Christ?

When I said:

Hence, separate from Christ Who is our Life, man is dead, spiritually dead.

You replied:

More Calvinism!

Actually, this is Augustinian thinking but its the same thing, applied in the same way. It's straight up stupidity. Or at least the way you are applying it is.

Here, you are insinuating that there is life separate from Christ. You know any other Source of life, Clete, other than the Father through Christ?

You said:

Spiritual death is not spiritual non-existence, its simply separation from God. That's all any sort of death is, a separation. Physical death is the separation of your soul/spirit from your physical body. Spiritual death is the separation of your soul/spirit from God. Jesus experienced both on the cross and remained dead for three days and was yet able, after having laid down His own life, to take it up again (John 10:18). If being dead means you can't do anything at all whatsoever, how do explain John 10:18?

That's Christ, the Author of life. There's NOTHING impossible with Him. The Father gave Him that power. But how about us humans, Clete? Are you telling me, even while dead, we can do things like Christ was able to? Then you, Clete, don't need Christ. But I need Him.

When I said:

Arminians know that those In Christ are spiritually alive. They consider the non-believers as being NOT in Christ, and therefore spiritually dead.

By requiring non-believers to first believe for them to be In Christ, the Arminians are in effect telling whom they know are dead to believe. And from your mouth, that's STUPIDITY.

You responded with:

You're just a box full of misconceptions and confusion. You've (actually, it wasn't you but whomever it was that taught you this silliness) constructed a whole theological paradigm designed to solve problems that don't actually exist.

That's not unlike ostrich defense, is it? Burying its head in the sand so as not to see the coming danger, does not prevent the danger from coming. And you want to blame the one that taught me? Then blame the Scriptures.

When I said:

In John 15, Jesus was speaking to His disciples. His disciples are In Him, In Christ, hence spiritually alive.

You replied:

Being identified "in Christ" was not possible prior to the Dispensation of Grace, which began with Saul's conversion in Acts 9. Jesus was talking to His disciples, yes, but they were not "in Him". They were Jews, saved under the Dispensation of Law and remained under that dispensation until their physical deaths. (I Corinthians 7:17-24).

Dispensation of Grace began with Saul's conversion? Sorry, but it seems you're still in shallow waters, my brother. God's grace was given us in Christ BEFORE time began, Clete. See 2 Tim 1:8-10. Did you know that God's grace has appeared to all men? See Titus 2:11. Salvation is all by grace, my brother. NEVER by works. And that applies both to people BEFORE or AFTER the cross.

I think I now understand why you so vehemently deny and instead attach a different meaning to Christ's "apart from Me, you can do NOTHING". You even believe people BEFORE the cross were saved DIFFERENTLY from people AFTER the cross. And I thought you told me "it's difficult to teach art to a rat". It really seems you have wandered into the wrong schoolroom. Kindergartens are way down the hallway yet.

I now know why you call Samie an idiot. But you're not an idiot, kid. You have just not grown up yet.

 

[Samie]

For the faith that cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God... Both faith and hearing are NOUNS. Faith, in this instance, is NOT a VERB for action at all, and neither is hearing. Faith is the thing believed, and it comes out of the thing heard, which comes by means of the thing thought and spoken about by God.

The issue is whether those NOT in Christ can hear in the first place. Again, Christ is our life (Col 3:4). Hence, those NOT in Christ are not In life; they are In death. So, dead. Is that rocket science it's too difficult for you to understand?

Man takes no action whatsoever. None of these are verbs. And repentance is granted.

Man takes no action? Wow! So, when He comes again, who will Christ reward according to his works when no one has done anything?

NIV Matthew 16:27 For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. NIV Revelation 22:12 "Behold, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to everyone according to what he has done.

I guess I now know why you can't believe Christ when He told His disciples that apart from Him they can do NOTHING. You want it changed to "apart from Me, you can do SOMETHING", much in the same way you want His statement "I will give to everyone according to what he has done" changed to "I will give to everyone according to what he has NOT done". And you want Samie to believe you?

You're a Synergist. An Arminian, if not a Semi-Pelagian.

Man cannot effect his own salvation. Even his cooperation in action is response to all God is and does.

And I thought you said man takes no action whatsoever. But you are now talking about man's cooperation in action. You seem to be confused, PPS. You are contradicting yourself. You are not yet settled as to what position to take.

You have a dilemna in taking issue with Arminians when you ARE ONE (or worse, a Pelagian of some degree; if there's even a difference beyond playing word games).

I understand why you are saying that. You don't understand the issue, despite your intimidating display of theological jargons and anarthrous inventions. When Christ says anything that seems to go against your theology, you want Christ's words changed to what you want Him to mean.

You even say one thing and then contradict yourself later. Settle the issue first with your ownself, brother. And when you are sure of your position, come back and try again.

 

[Epoisses]

It is doubtful you know of what you speak in the matters of Divine Ordination . . .

God is not the author of sin. James 1:13-15

The wages of sin is placed upon mankind (
Romans 6:23); not God.

Only created men die . . . because of their sinful acts.

God never dies because God has no part of sin.


Duh . . .

So how did sin happen if God is in control of everything??.....durrrrrr!!!!

Getting a straight answer out of these things is darn near impossible.

 

[Nang]

So how did sin happen if God is in control of everything?

Adam failed to live up to the holy moral standards of God, according to his God-given secondary moral agency which allowed him subjective cause & effect control over his creaturely actions, limited by the creational Covenant of Works established between God & man before the fall.

Adam broke moral contract (Law) with God. That was the original sin . . .

God created Adam in His image as a responsible moral agent, but Adam fell short of his created glory. That was the original sin . .

Lesson: Created beings; neither angels nor men, equal God Almighty.

Nothing created can live up to His holy standards & find eternal life, apart from His Sovereign grace & power.

That is the Gospel message from the very beginning of history.

God has so ordained and manifested this eternal Truth.

 

[Aletheiophile]

So how did sin happen if God is in control of everything??.....durrrrrr!!!!

Getting a straight answer out of these things is darn near impossible.

This is answered simply by understand what good and evil mean. In Hebrew, "tov" means functional. "Ra'a," evil, is dys/mal/nonfunction. And thus, in all function there is the potential for dysfunction. If God had not provided for it, it would be beyond Him and thus He would not be all-powerful.

Evil is simply the potentiality for dysfunction within function, inaugurated first by Satan and then introduced to mankind when Adam and Eve communed with the serpent. Thankfully, Christ has come to fill all dysfunction with Himself, that at the Resurrection there would no longer be any potential for evil.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

And you're a Calvinistic monergist

Ummm... Nope. You have no idea that ra'a ("evil") is a privation of tov ("good"), just as hamartia (sin, the noun) is a "something-lessness" as a void or hole; and neither is directly from or by God in creation, but by negation of the decently and orderly complete functionality that scripture concisely declares repeatedly throughout the creation account in Genesis.

who believes that God ordained sin.

No. Just because your inferred presumptions are a compounding of your ignorance, it doesn't mean I'm representing an unreconciled view of all degrees of Lapsarianism in its various forms. God did not "ordain" sin. That's absurd.

It all goes back to God so he ordained sin, suffering and death.

No. Just because He works all things together for the good of them that love Him, that are the called according to His purpose, it doesn't mean He is the cause and source of sin, suffering, and death. You have no clue of Ponerology, Hamartiology, and the incommunicable and communicable attributes of God.

He ordained murder. He ordained adultery. He ordained rape. He ordained genocide.

Blasphemy. Your presuppositional myopic understanding does not mean there isn't vast comprehension beyond the false binaries you and most others install to be superordinate to God Himself in your artificial human deductive reasoning.

I could go on and on if the human has no input

I indicated no such thing. On the contrary, I insisted there IS Synergism within the functionality of creation. You just have no clue what foreknowledge and predestination are relative to a timeless God who is both "no-when" and "every-when", and for whom there is no "before" or "after" or "during" or any other constraining created time construct that He can or is subject to in subordination.

For God, there is NO Ordo Salutis; for it would require time to be superimposed and attributed to Him. He is timeless, with no sequentiality, linearity, duration, or elapsation. He transcends time, just as He pervades time. For all anyone knows, creation has unfolded in arrears from end to beginning; but that is irrelevant to a God that is beyond the created boundaries of time and all it is applied to.

Yours is a time-based approach to a timeless God, just like all Calvinists and Arminians (Pelagians). There is no third option beyond Monergism and Synergism; only the reconicilation of them both into a cohesive whole that represents God's attributes and nature from revelation of scripture by the Spirit.

then life is just a show and theater and the judgment where we stand condemned before God I could say 'hey God you made me this way, what's your problem?'.

Utterly and completely untrue. Your false dichotomy is your folly. It's a matter of epistemological functionality being understood or misunderstood.

I'm (hypostatically )tranlsated into Christ, seated in heavenly places in Christ Jesus, living and moving and having my being IN Christ; who is seated at the right hand (which is dexios, and isNOT a geographic location reference). I'm partaking of His divine nature through the Theanthropic perichoresis I share with the ascended eternal Son and the my hypostatic union with Him. That perichoresis allows me the vicarious access of fellowship with the Father and the Holy Spirit, just as the Son has for all eternity of pre-existence. And I'm communing from time into timelessness with the God and Father of my salvation as we collectively unfold creation's scroll on my behalf, along with all other Believers of all ages.

I can at least deal with a Lutheran monergist but never a Calvinistic one.

Well... Since you're not the final arbiter of truth by ANY stretch of the imagination; I'm not concerned about what you "can deal with" versus what you "can't deal with", since you haven't a clue of the depths, breadths, and heights of the ontological Gospel and its accompanying historical doctrines within the orthodox faith.

The ancients had a more eastern-based mind and focused on the aspects of Synergism; while the more modern mind is much more in need of focusing on Monergism to combat the onset of Modernism and other revolutions by the spirit of anti-christ to exponentially corrupt the epistemology and ontology of humanity in the last half millennia or more.

Monergism and Synergism coallesce into the manifestation of God's eternal immutable mind, and all the multi-versity of contingent potentialities are according to both His sovereignty and the delegation of our functionality of will as the stretching forth of the mind in phenomenological embrace or denial of His divine will.

If you understood the valid Theodicy of God's all-powerful and all-benevolent existence along with the presence of evil, you wouldn't have to be so bewildered and limited in your understanding as devoid of the revelation of knowledge, in which loves abounds.

And Lutheran Monergism is much closer to what I'm espousing, so presuming extreme Lapsarianism is your erroneous inference from me addressing an Arminian pretending not to be.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

This is answered simply by understand what good and evil mean. In Hebrew, "tov" means functional. "Ra'a," evil, is dys/mal/nonfunction. And thus, in all function there is the potential for dysfunction. If God had not provided for it, it would be beyond Him and thus He would not be all-powerful.

Evil is simply the potentiality for dysfunction within function, inaugurated first by Satan and then introduced to mankind when Adam and Eve communed with the serpent. Thankfully, Christ has come to fill all dysfunction with Himself, that at the Resurrection there would no longer be any potential for evil.

THIS is exactly correct!! Finally... Another human who actually has a clue. If one doesn't understand Ponerology and Hamartiology in this respect of an appropriate Theodicy, then one is trapped in a false binary of man-made doctrines that deny both God's sovereignty and His transcendance, etc.

 

[Samie]

THIS is exactly correct!! Finally... Another human who actually has a clue. If one doesn't understand Ponerology and Hamartiology in this respect of an appropriate Theodicy, then one is trapped in a false binary of man-made doctrines that deny both God's sovereignty and His transcendance, etc.

High sounding theological jargons but devoid of truth when put to the test of Scriptures.

Have you stopped contradicting yourself, PPS? Do you now believe that when Christ comes again He will reward EVERY MAN according to what he has done, and that apart from Him man can do NOTHING?

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

So how did sin happen if God is in control of everything??.....durrrrrr!!!!

Getting a straight answer out of these things is darn near impossible.

Since it's one of the deepest spirit-revealed issues of scripture and the Holy Spirit, you shouldn't expect a dumbed-down answer as one who not even sought the historical recountings of Theodicy by the great theologians throughout human history.

Your false autonomy is glaring for all to see. Evil is the privation or negation of good. Tov (good) is more appropriately understood as "functionality", with ra'a (evil) being the privation of good as dysfunction, malfuction, or non-function. It's subtraction by addition.

Picture a completely functional automobile, and then imagine a 10-pound bag of sugar being added to the gas tank. That addition will subtract functionality, so the potentiality for degrees of dysfunction was in the functionality. It's indirect, and requires something added to un- or non- it.

If you don't understand this (and you don't, but you're in the vast majority who just conceptualize according to their own reasoning without accessing and understanding the authentic historical and theological history of the Christian faith they allegedly profess), then you haven't done much homework beyond exercising own Modernism-tainted epistemological imagination.

Read Isaiah 45 and tell me how and why it is that God creates evil. Exegete that from the text in the Hebrew langauge.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

The issue is whether those NOT in Christ can hear in the first place. Again, Christ is our life (Col 3:4). Hence, those NOT in Christ are not In life; they are In death. So, dead. Is that rocket science it's too difficult for you to understand?

Man takes no action? Wow! So, when He comes again, who will Christ reward according to his works when no one has done anything?

NIV Matthew 16:27 For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. NIV Revelation 22:12 "Behold, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to everyone according to what he has done.

I guess I now know why you can't believe Christ when He told His disciples that apart from Him they can do NOTHING. You want it changed to "apart from Me, you can do SOMETHING", much in the same way you want His statement "I will give to everyone according to what he has done" changed to "I will give to everyone according to what he has NOT done". And you want Samie to believe you?

And I thought you said man takes no action whatsoever. But you are now talking about man's cooperation in action. You seem to be confused, PPS. You are contradicting yourself. You are not yet settled as to what position to take.

I understand why you are saying that. You don't understand the issue, despite your intimidating display of theological jargons and anarthrous inventions. When Christ says anything that seems to go against your theology, you want Christ's words changed to what you want Him to mean.

You even say one thing and then contradict yourself later. Settle the issue first with your ownself, brother. And when you are sure of your position, come back and try again.

You're a rebellious and stubborn idolator who only relies on his own faulty and frail modern reasoning. I, on the other hand, stand on two millennia of the authentic and historical orthodox Christian faith that you know nothing of in your arrogance and ignorance.

You haven't unveiled some paradox for Arminians. You ARE an Arminian, and are self-impugning all you say by your own historical and theological ignorance in obtuse cognitive dissonance.

This will be my last response to your drivelous and impetuous nonsense. You're a novice and a child, wanting to have a position in the body that you are not equipped for nor can fulfill as a Believer of full age.

 

[Samie]

You're a rebellious and stubborn idolator who only relies on his own faulty and frail modern reasoning. I, on the other hand, stand on two millennia of the authentic and historical orthodox Christian faith that you know nothing of in your arrogance and ignorance.

I rely on the Father through Christ and His words whose existence is from eternity to eternity. How is that compared with your 2 millennia of human inventions, brother?

You haven't unveiled some paradox for Arminians. You ARE an Arminian, and are self-impugning all you say by your own historical and theological ignorance in obtuse cognitive dissonance.

I have shown in my recent response how you contradicted yourself. So whose suffering from cognitive dissonance?

You said "man takes no action whatsoever" and that tells me you are not even aware of Christ's words that He will reward every man according to what he has done. So, who's suffering from theological ignorance of Christ's words?

This will be my last response to your drivelous and impetuous nonsense. You're a novice and a child, wanting to have a position in the body that you are not equipped for nor can fulfill as a Believer of full age.

Thank you for calling me a child, PPS - the wise and learned one.

NIV Matthew 11: 25 At that time Jesus said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. 26 Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure. KJV 1 Corinthians 1: 19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. 20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: 27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; 28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: 29 That no flesh should glory in his presence.

 

[Clete]

God never dies because God has no part of sin.


Duh . . .

If you do not believe that God died, you are not even a Christian!

To reject the death of God is to either reject the death of Jesus or to reject that Jesus was/is God. Either way, you're disqualified as a Christian.

 

[Clete]

Hi Clete;

Compare your last post with my post you responded to, brother. You will see that you included in your post many ad-hominem leaning stupidities which should not have been included there. Just the same I will respond instead of resorting to threat of ignoring just like what you are inclined to do knowing that you will soon run out of Scriptural haven.

I did not use any ad-hominem arguments you stupid idiotic fool!

An ad-hominem is an argument where one attempts to say that a truth claim is false based on the fact that the person making the claim is stupid. I made no such argument. I simply called you stupid. You don't understand the difference because I'm right, you are stupid.

When I said: You replied: Is that it? Just saying it won't work. How? Is that the substantive discussion you are referring to when your reply have no substance at all?

NO! That wasn't it! I explained precisely what I meant and made a very clear and specific argument starting with THE VERY NEXT SENTENCE!!!!!!

You are too stupid to waste a single more syllable with.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

I rely on the Father through Christ and His words

No, you don't. You don't know what words mean. I've tried to help you and you just want to persist in your false concepts.

whose existence is from eternity to eternity.

No. Because you don't know the difference between eternal (aidios) and everlasting (aionis). Eternity is timeless and spaceless, so it isn't "from" "to".

How is that compared with your 2 millennia of human inventions, brother?

Horrific, since it's your own false autonomy as conceptualizations that aren't based on scripture at all.

I have shown in my recent response how you contradicted yourself. So whose suffering from cognitive dissonance?

No. You just presume that I did because you quoted my post before I edited it to clarify that man takes no INITIATIVE action for salvation. You don't, and can't, understand the vital importance of knowing the difference between Greek articular and anarthrous nouns. You have changed and added to the text, and without being able to know it.

You said "man takes no action whatsoever" and that tells me you are not even aware of Christ's words that He will reward every man according to what he has done. So, who's suffering from theological ignorance of Christ's words?

Man takes no INITIATIVE action whatsoever.

Thank you for calling me a child, PPS - the wise and learned one.

NIV Matthew 11: 25 At that time Jesus said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. 26 Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure. KJV 1 Corinthians 1: 19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. 20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: 27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; 28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: 29 That no flesh should glory in his presence.

Man takes no INITIATIVE action for salvation. You are a heretical Universal Atonement proponent and an Arminian to the point of being some degree of Pelagian.

I didn't say you were LIKE/AS a child. You are a child who is not of full age. You're a novice, and my wisdom is from God. If you had any, you'd know that.

You're just trying to blaze a new trail you think has never been trod by anyone before. Instead, you're rehashing old territory that has been well-worn; but you don't know the meanings of words.

 

[Epoisses]

Adam failed to live up to the holy moral standards of God, according to his God-given secondary moral agency which allowed him subjective cause & effect control over his creaturely actions, limited by the creational Covenant of Works established between God & man before the fall.

Adam broke moral contract (Law) with God. That was the original sin . . .

God created Adam in His image as a responsible moral agent, but Adam fell short of his created glory. That was the original sin . .

Lesson: Created beings; neither angels nor men, equal God Almighty.

Nothing created can live up to His holy standards & find eternal life, apart from His Sovereign grace & power.

That is the Gospel message from the very beginning of history.

God has so ordained and manifested this eternal Truth.

So God is not absolutely sovereign in all things! Thanks, that's all I needed to know.

 

[Epoisses]

This is answered simply by understand what good and evil mean. In Hebrew, "tov" means functional. "Ra'a," evil, is dys/mal/nonfunction. And thus, in all function there is the potential for dysfunction. If God had not provided for it, it would be beyond Him and thus He would not be all-powerful.

Evil is simply the potentiality for dysfunction within function, inaugurated first by Satan and then introduced to mankind when Adam and Eve communed with the serpent. Thankfully, Christ has come to fill all dysfunction with Himself, that at the Resurrection there would no longer be any potential for evil.

So God is not absolutely sovereign in all things! Thanks, that's all I needed to know.

 

[Epoisses]

Ummm... Nope. You have no idea that ra'a ("evil") is a privation of tov ("good"), just as hamartia (sin, the noun) is a "something-lessness" as a void or hole; and neither is directly from or by God in creation, but by negation of the decently and orderly complete functionality that scripture concisely declares repeatedly throughout the creation account in Genesis.

Evil according to the NT is unbelief which would be you and you're Christ rejecting Calvinistic mysticism.

 

[Epoisses]

THIS is exactly correct!! Finally... Another human who actually has a clue. If one doesn't understand Ponerology and Hamartiology in this respect of an appropriate Theodicy, then one is trapped in a false binary of man-made doctrines that deny both God's sovereignty and His transcendance, etc.

LOL, if one doesn't understand that Christ is the savior of the world they are a godless heretic!

 

[Aletheiophile]

So God is not absolutely sovereign in all things! Thanks, that's all I needed to know.

You're hilarious. That is the opposite of what I said. Good job.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Evil according to the NT is unbelief which would be you and you're Christ rejecting Calvinistic mysticism.

Poneros is much better understood in light of ra'a from Hebrew. And you don't know what apisteuo means, either.

You're clueless.