tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18654361.post4089388040763775817..comments2023-07-06T15:14:57.204+01:00Comments on JOHN'S BLOG: Calvinism?Johnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02487495921222083129noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18654361.post-65587602222676731192009-10-31T12:33:10.138+00:002009-10-31T12:33:10.138+00:00So if someone has the ability or desire to choose ...So if someone has the ability or desire to choose God then it means that God chose them first? So without that action by God we are incapable of desiring to or actually choosing to believe, right? I'm not sure how anyone could say that we are culpable in that case. How can God hold us accountable for something over which we have absolutely no control? Would that not be the same as leaving theCaseyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05673005082334740023noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18654361.post-12082806534290158342009-10-31T09:44:55.121+00:002009-10-31T09:44:55.121+00:00I don't think 1 Cor. 1:27 is teaching that God...I don't think 1 Cor. 1:27 is teaching that God's reason for saving some and not others is that the first are not influential and wise. (After all, it is God himself that gave the worldly wise and influential their worldly wisdom and influence, so this cannot be a reason for God's choice before the creation of the world (Ephesians 1:4).) <br /><br />Rather, I think that the chapter is Daniel Hillhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07823511443088751096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18654361.post-80127912947359543762009-10-31T08:39:13.370+00:002009-10-31T08:39:13.370+00:00I think I disagree with that last statement, Dan.
...I think I disagree with that last statement, Dan.<br /><br />I don't see how it fits with 1 Cor 1:27, for example.Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02487495921222083129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18654361.post-91590715393985703332009-10-31T07:28:38.167+00:002009-10-31T07:28:38.167+00:00Total depravity classically includes the view that...Total depravity classically includes the view that we are naturally unable to believe, and that, thus, we can believe only if God <b>supernaturally</b> enables us. Arminius held that our accepting Christ doesn't <b>earn</b> God's favour, but that, nevertheless, it is something we can <b>naturally</b> do despite our sinfulness. This the Calvinist denies.<br /><br />Unconditional election Daniel Hillhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07823511443088751096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18654361.post-16152101656723012122009-10-30T15:43:40.988+00:002009-10-30T15:43:40.988+00:00Total depravity: "Ability" here is diffi...Total depravity: "Ability" here is difficult. If someone does really believe, it shows that God has chosen them (as per 1 Thes 1). I'm not convinced that the logic going from there to your statement is valid.<br /><br />Unconditional election: It doesn't (shouldn't) mean that at all - just that the criteria aren't to do with us deserving it.<br /><br />More reasons I Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02487495921222083129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18654361.post-27373453434017147922009-10-30T03:40:07.404+00:002009-10-30T03:40:07.404+00:00Total depravity: Does it mean that we do not have ...Total depravity: Does it mean that we do not have the ability to believe unless God has chosen us?<br /><br />Unconditional election: Does it mean that God chooses who to save arbitrarily?<br /><br />It seems to me that Calivinists try to avoid the problem by claiming that we're all totally depraved, so the fact that God chooses to save anyone is proof that he is a God of love. It does not Caseyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05673005082334740023noreply@blogger.com