We've both been told this before :think: (you're not, I'm not :idunno: what are we?) I don't fear it. I would 'expect' neither do you and would respond: "I am what I am."
View attachment 25522
I yam what I yam as well, neither of us overtly concerned except that it'd be said 'well done." For that, I study and work and toil, yet.... 1 Corinthians 4:7 John 15:5 Colossians 1:17
You shotgunned it. I'd have had to have been all over the place if I didn't just stick in Romans 7. I'd certainly encourage you to bring any other particular verse, but I handle the 6 shooter better than all those pellets all over the place. You know what clean up is like. Don't blast that dad-burn double-barrel in the house (seriously, I read each and every one, but they need more context to be able to 1) Understand your points of them and 2) to be able to more effectively address them). One or two at a time with your explanation of how they apply specifically to your points, would help and thank you ahead of time.
:nono: There are few Pelagians in Christendom and no Open Theist. You have to realize 'you' are outside the camp on this one. Even Catholics, who believe in works from a semi-broken sin condition, are at the very worst: Semi-pelagian by any accusation. In a word: Heresy against the full and whole church, including Catholics who view Pelagianism as heresy as well, and they are the closest thing to it.
1) I read the verses and failed to see the connection to Romans 7 with a good many of them. 2) You don't do this either, unless there is a request to address each and every scripture. 3) The unwritten rule for such would be to 'not' expect one to respond to a list of scriptures because they are rather given as support for the initial scripture, not direct address. 4) I'd like/appreciate just one or two at a time if your expectation is that someone addresses each and every one because our posts are already unruly. To respond to each and everyone would make an incredibly long post. 5) I'd have to make about ten posts for your one and such doesn't look like a fair expectation, especially when all you did was list them (mine would require a lot of work. 6) Posts of extreme length (what your expectation would require) are against TOL rules.
:nono: Not true, I spent a LOT of time reading and expounding Romans 7. Did you even put in an hour? I don't mind any of this, but I'm asking you to step up your game if you demand the same.
Er, flimsy accusatory and I don't accept it. You may certainly disagree, but as I said, your theology is Pelagianism, not mine. Come away from it: We have no need of Savior if we are born sinless. Total Depravity or just 'depravity' with something in tact, is on the table. Born-sinless is not and cannot be on this forum, as orthodox (acceptable). Heresy would be from satan, but lets toss out flimsy accusatory. I frankly find it beneath any of us to resort to that kind of vitriol unless such is warranted. Even if you are full-blown Pelagian, I'll not stoop to that, but it would 'satanically' eliminate the need for a Savior and we'd be right back in his clutches. Such may be assumed anti-Christ, but I'd 'expect' you to step away from such doctrine as one who embraces Christ. -Lon
(this thread isn't about Free will theism or Open theism anyway, nor Total Depravity but strictly: Grace Salvation and also realize that Jerry and I 'think' Robert Pate are the only full-blown Pelagians on TOL, well beside yourself if that is true)
