Bible only wrote:
I have you PEGGED! Your Rogerant alias nearly had me fooled! You parade around SA as DJC49, pagan understanding, Rogerant, pew view, RR, FTGOG and ?
So much for your disingenous claim that you were not identifying me with C.U!

PS There are ways to get around back to back posts. So that argument doesn't prove anything.

And Mike. Isn't this your Pelagian post?

Here's the imo's:

The Heresy of Free Will wrote:
What is frustrating but revealling about the Free Will religion is that they must weaken, reduce or modify SIN to achieve their presumed salvation.
Thereby do they make manifest the error of their doctrine.

Mike wrote:
So Arminius was not an "Arminian type Free Willer" I wonder what Pew View thinks of that?

You asked: "Then since your answer to John's 2nd question is a definite no, the problem with man is that he will not come from a free choice?"
I'm a believer in "will not" as opposed to "cannot." But I'm open to better understanding of the fallen Adam and Eve responding to God's voice.

Arminius taught that mans will was corrupted by the fall. But, the Holy Spirit since the fall restores man's ability through "prevenient grace", a supernatural act of God that draws man to believe in the Gospel. Yes, he and Wesley taught that it was possible for man to resist this prevenient grace, even though there is a total lack of scriptural support for it.

Your position, and that of Pelagius is that a supernatural work of the Holy Spirit is NOT required since man has not lost is ability.

Mike wrote:
Sorry for the Delay, John. Spent yesterday day at the courthouse, along with 115 others from which were selected 12 jurors for a criminal trial. I wasn't one of those selected. Many are called, but few are chosen. (in accordance with the foreknowledge of the attorneys as to the requirements necessary)
Here's the imo's:
#1) The will is affected, not erased. marred, not destroyed. The will remains free after the Fall. Adam and Eve immediately died spiritually, yet still heard and responded to the voice of God by hiding from Him.
Genesis 3:8
"And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden."
These fallen creatures heard God's voice, (how?)responded by hiding themselves, then by showing themselves. They chose to hide of their own free will, knowing who they were hiding from and why. It was not that they could not do otherwise.
#2) Definitely no.

Bible only wrote:

"Pagan understanding" a.k.a. DJC49, you are beginning to sound like a madman. I think you'd better lay down and have someone take your temperature pretty quick
___________________________
Scum Sprog
You'd better stick with yours, as odious as it sounds. What does it mean?

I am Pagan Understanding!

Bible only wrote:
Read John Gill (Calvin agrees with him). Nothing here to do with salvation

You are to kind.

Do you remember some FOOL making this remark.

This is typical philosophical baloney!

Bible only wrote:
Hey, look what I found, using Rogerant's eisegesis: a verse that speaks of the regeneration of the beast and the young raven
“He giveth to the beast his food, and to the young ravens which cry,” (Psalm 147:9.)
Now listen Pew View, RR or whatever other moniker you choose, don't confuse me with anyone else.

Oh I see. David, then was able to trust God from the womb. By natural ability then? Wouldn't trusting God speak of salvation? "I was cast upon thee from the womb"

Your verses in regards to providing natural sustenance to the beasts and the ravens. How can you confuse TRUSTING God that brings about salvation, and the natural susenance of ravens?

Bible only wrote:
This is typical philosophical baloney!
Do you want to back this up with any Bible verses? Or are you just going to stick with the infallible Berkhof

Psalm 71:5 For thou art my hope, O Lord GOD: thou art my trust from my youth. By thee have I been holden up from the womb: thou art he that took me out of my mother's bowels: my praise shall be continually of thee.

John UK wrote:
As I've said all along, the order is found in these verses of the Bible:
2 Thessalonians 2:13-14 KJV (13) But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: (14) Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.
The gospel is preached to all. In some, the Spirit sets them apart for God and enlightens them as to the truth. They believe the gospel and appropriate the benefits of The Cross through faith. Saved!
By grace are ye saved THROUGH faith...
Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved... Acts 16:31

Now we should not make the mistake of regarding this logical order as a temporal order that will apply in all cases. The new life is often implanted in the hearts of children long before they hear the call of the gospel; yet they are endowed with this life only where the gospel is preached.

Regeneration and Effectual Calling

[AUTHOR]Certainty[/AUTHOR]
What's that supposed to mean? [/QUOTE][URL=http://calvinistflyswatter.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_archive.html]]]Divisive Flyswatter[/URL]

Good Morning CU:

Now I can understand your preoccupation with regeneration preceding faith. What is this supposed to mean?

Reading through this fellows post it looks like the only thing this fellow is for is the veneration of Spurgeon. Otherwise he is nothing but a divisive force in the body preocuppied with his narrow view of man's timeline on regeneration and faith happening simulatneously. And those who believe otherwise are heterodox hyper Calvinists.

Well here is a quote from one of my "hyper" friends.

The calling of God may be said to be one (effectual calling and regeneration), and the distinction between an external and an internal or effectual calling merely calls attention to the fact that this one calling has two aspects. This does not mean that these two aspects are always united and always go together.

Calvinist Understanding wrote:
[URL=http://calvinistflyswatter.blogspot.com/2006_03_01_archive.html]]]Bob Ross, Spurgeon and Regeneration[/URL]
You will have to scroll down to his blog entry dated Friday, March 17, 2006 entitled "Bob Ross: Regeneration -- Calvinism".

Michael Hranek wrote:
ml
No. I disagree with you DJC49 and Rogerant have indeed raked many over the reformed coals and it is quite sad they would choose to do so with a gracious humble lady such as lyn. And I believe you have been quite unkind to her to equate their continual sarcasm and the way they have in attempting to tear a person down as just their way of debating. IMHO they could care less if they edified a brother or sister but rather or not they win the "debate" etc.

Oh well, since everyone knows, I must head home from work now to restock and stoke my coal fired altar.

Have to keep it nice and hot, for the likes of Servetus and all of his ilk

lyn wrote:
I have respect for this man, he has a doctorate in theology. Tell us Rogerant, do you hold such a doctorate? Have you been faithfully preaching the word of God for over 40 years?
I grow tired of your constant attacks on everyone on this forum who disagrees with you. You seem to be unable to see the log in your own eye, yet, you do not hesitate to desperately try and remove everyone elses' 'speck'.
Your repeated attacks against J.M. concerning 'lordship salvation' were addressed on another thread, someone gave a link stating the accusation was wrong. May God be merciful.

His academic career can be found here:

[URL=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Benedict_XVI]]]HIs Worship[/URL]

2) If one traces your blogging history we can see your constant attacks on Lance, John Yurich and GG, for not having their theology quite right.

So, maybe someone could provide you with a tower crane to climb down off of your horse.

lyn wrote:
the 'reformed camp' targets MacArthur only because he does not hold to their views on eschatology.

We do not target MacArthur only because he does not hold to our view on eschatology. I never have. I could not care less whether someone is historic pre mill, amill or postmill.

Our problem is not with Jm himself. As I said before, he is a very gifted brother in the Lord.

It is the abberant soteriological teaching on the Lordship salvation of Christ that results from dispensational doctrines. The two abberations that flow from dizzy teaching are antinominsim and legalism.

So, we differ on soteriology (the doctrine of salvation) not just eschatology.

Lyn wrote:
The Lord God has used John MacArthur in a mighty way. Prayerfully Rogerant, you may be able to say the same about yourself, as soon as you climb down off your high horse. What knowledge you may have has puffed you up, and all who think outside your box are 'shipwrecked'. Praise God, He alone knows the heart of man.

Is that fair?

You can find the humility of your pastor here ridiculing reformed folk.

Lyn wrote:
The Lord God has used John MacArthur in a mighty way. Prayerfully Rogerant, you may be able to say the same about yourself, as soon as you climb down off your high horse. What knowledge you may have has puffed you up, and all who think outside your box are 'shipwrecked'. Praise God, He alone knows the heart of man.

MacArthur is a very popular and gifted preacher in the U.S.

A popular and gifted preacher. He is probably the most sound grammatical-historical dispensationalist preachers in the U.S. I consider him as being a brother in the Lord. He boasts that he is a dispensationalist and he criticizes his reformed brethren. If he dishes it out, he can expect correction back. John asked me a question about him, I answered.

John UK wrote:
John MacArthur is a dispensationalist? What, like CI Scofield? Is this true? I know nothing about this gentleman, so I would like to know where he stands on this.
p.s. I appreciated your testimony very much.

MacArthur is a very popular and gifted preacher in the U.S. but he is a dizzy. It is hard to tell what he believes on his website. He does not point to any confessions or creeds that he adheres to, so it is hard to pin him down on what he actually believes.

Mike wrote:
btw, the 5 points being of Dordt, not Calvin, whence cometh 5 point Calvinists?

From those who think they are 4 point Calvinists, who in essence are...

Arminians

Those who consider themselves as believing in particular atonement are Reformed.

ml wrote:
Hi Rogerant, thanks for your testimony.
Do you believe the Spirit was convicting you of sin, of righteousness and of judgement before you were regenerated? (Joh 16:8)

The "sign" I was talking about was the return of my children. I then, felt that I owed God a response. And that was that I would seek him out. I ended up in a Bible believing church near my home in Portland. Everyone seemed healthy (psychologically) and had a joy that I never experienced before. I enjoyed church and reading the Bible, but I really didn't want to have anything to do with this Jesus guy. That just seemed to uncool. But then came the sinking feeling tht He was who He claimed to be. I put my Bible down on stopped reading it for a while, and was very upset. But then, I knew I had to make a decision way or another. Embrace Him as master, or perish.