What? No "free will?"

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

and if we believe He created this world, knowing the end of it before He started it, then He knew all about me, and the decisions I would make before I was ever born.

Which in turn means all your decisions were CERTAIN before you were ever born, which means GOD DECREED that they should be certain (you could not make them certain because you weren't born yet)...

...which means God decreed every thing that ever happens, is happening, or ever will happen...straight up rational Calvinism.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

... and yet, as a direct contrast to that statement, Paul says "WHOSOEVER" ... that means anyone with faith in their hearts can call upon a merciful God, and receive salvation.

Actually, it literally means that whoever actually does call on the name of the Lord will be saved, not that everybody CAN call on the name of the Lord.

Just saying.

[Michael The Disciple]

Paul was addressing SAINTS when he said every man is given a measure of faith. Not everyone in the world.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

Paul was addressing SAINTS when he said every man is given a measure of faith. Not everyone in the world.

Exactly.

[acerrak]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Which in turn means all your decisions were CERTAIN before you were ever born, which means GOD DECREED that they should be certain (you could not make them certain because you weren't born yet)...

...which means God decreed every thing that ever happens, is happening, or ever will happen...straight up rational Calvinism.

calvinism and arminianism is to far left and to far right, however there is a happy medium in the middle

[samuelofisrael]

Originally Posted by acerrak

calvinism and arminianism is to far left and to far right, however there is a happy medium in the middle

Would you kind enough to explain the "happy medium" in the middle of the road?

Usually one hits a bump in the road if all that is Written is consulted. Then too, it's a matter of exegesis of certain passages. Both sides have their explanation of "problem passages" and therein usually lies the greater discussion.

Even so, come quickly Lord Jesus

[acerrak]

Originally Posted by samuelofisrael

Would you kind enough to explain the "happy medium" in the middle of the road?

Usually one hits a bump in the road if all that is Written is consulted. Then too, it's a matter of exegesis of certain passages. Both sides have their explanation of "problem passages" and therein usually lies the greater discussion.

Even so, come quickly Lord Jesus

we have bashed this same topic out numerous amounts of times. Im not sure what search will do for you but i would rather you try that before i set down and list my belief or way of thinking with scriptures and full exegesis of my Soteriology

though i will point out some of my basic concepts.
I do not believe a depraved mine will freely choose christ
I do believe God draws People to him
I Do believe God opens the eyes of the Person He draws, That person is given faith. That person can choose to accept or reject Christ.

the freedom only comes after the veil is removed and not before.

[Esaias]

calvinism and arminianism is to far left and to far right, however there is a happy medium in the middle

I do not think we should search for a 'happy medium in the middle' but rather should search for a Biblical, apostolic understanding of the subject.

Both Calvin and Arminius accepted certain assumptions a priori, as true, upon which their doctrines were built. If those assumptions are false, then BOTH systems are false. I would say both systems are based upon the same faulty premises, and thus are two similar (but distinct) solutions to a problem that doesn't exist.

[acerrak]

Originally Posted by Esaias

I do not think we should search for a 'happy medium in the middle' but rather should search for a Biblical, apostolic understanding of the subject.

Both Calvin and Arminius accepted certain assumptions a priori, as true, upon which their doctrines were built. If those assumptions are false, then BOTH systems are false. I would say both systems are based upon the same faulty premises, and thus are two similar (but distinct) solutions to a problem that doesn't exist.

my happy medium is what i consider a biblical understanding as to the way i see scriptures presented to my level of understanding.

what i see is both present a case that are to drastic in some areas while spot on in others. There is places in scriptures that support such things on both sides, thus why they believe the way they do.

trying to determine scriptures under a presupposed position is what limits a person, caue one must try to interpret scriptures in view of this predetermined belief.

I have just allowed scriptures to speak for themselves, and the way i understand this is what i call the happy medium. (not that im trying to just find a spot in the middle to make both happy)

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by acerrak

my happy medium is what i consider a biblical understanding as to the way i see scriptures presented to my level of understanding.

what i see is both present a case that are to drastic in some areas while spot on in others. There is places in scriptures that support such things on both sides, thus why they believe the way they do.

trying to determine scriptures under a presupposed position is what limits a person, caue one must try to interpret scriptures in view of this predetermined belief.

I have just allowed scriptures to speak for themselves, and the way i understand this is what i call the happy medium. (not that im trying to just find a spot in the middle to make both happy)

Okay, thanks for the clarification. I see what you meant, now.

But I would say that we ALL operate with certain presuppositions. Also, certain presuppositions are required to be in place before a meaningful interpretation of Scripture is possible - for example, we must presuppose the Scriptures are inspired and suitable for doctrine, otherwise the whole search for meaning falls apart as irrelevant.

Also, when looking at verses, we have to have an understanding of the biblical usage of terms (such as foreknowledge), and further we must have some kind of a priori assumptions about HOW to determine the Biblical usage of a term before we apply that understanding to a verse.

As an example, both Calvinism and Arminianism presuppose that man's nature, in itself, is sinful and subject to damnation. That is one of the shared presuppositions both systems have. But is that really the case with human nature itself?

If that presupposition be found lacking, then BOTH systems fall apart and the truth is no longer a 'happy medium' but something else entirely.