Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN)

Meeting updates, information archive, and membership information.

Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN)

Meeting updates, information archive, and membership information.

GLSEN Fairbanks, Alaska

Meeting updates, information archive, and membership information.

GLSEN Fairbanks, Alaska

Meeting updates, information archive, and membership information.

Identity Inc

A non-profit organization for sexual identity issues.

Identity Inc

A non-profit organization for sexual identity issues.

Lambda Legal States Alaska

Legal issues affecting gays and lesbians in Alaska.

Lambda Legal States Alaska

Legal issues affecting gays and lesbians in Alaska.

Partners Task Force

Partial list of the legal marriage laws in Alaska.

Partners Task Force

Partial list of the legal marriage laws in Alaska.

Gary wrote:
> wrote in message

> > >
> > What, that regeneration occurs prior to faith? I doubt they accept the
> > last 3, but will let them speak for themselves.
>
> I'm sorry, Loren, but either you have not read Geisler's book,
> or misunderstand it. Geisler devotes an entire chapter proving
> from Scripture that regeneration FOLLOWS faith!
>
I never wrote that Geisler agreed with me or me with him. I simply
don't find his argument compelling. Again, I would point you some of
the more recent rebuttals in TJ's. I haven't purchased the TJ library
on CD for many, many years. But I would venture that version 6.0 would
provide you with a wealth of reading. That is a PC version. I don't
do Windoze.
>
> > >
> > Here is where you illustrate a failure to correctly represent main
> > stream Calvinism. I would suggest you read VanTil's account or
> > Warfield's or Bruce's works. I would also suggest you read the
> > commentary of the writers of the WCF.
>
> I have all of VanTil's works. I have also have two sets of
> Warfield's works. Both teach clearly the central point of
> Calvinism that regeneration precedes faith! This is the
> distinguishing doctrine of Calvinism. So also do all the
> other Calvinistic theologians I have, Hodge(s), Sproul,
> Clark, Buswell, and many others.
>
> Instead of doing what you do above, why don't you actually
> write or quote what you believe or why I have misrepresented
> Geisler? It should not be hard to write a correct definition
> of the doctrines of TULIP.
>
I think you have misunderstood me. I was not writing that you
misrepresented Geisler. I wrote that Calvinism was being
misrepresented. To the extent and degree with which Geisler
misrepresented Dispensationism in his diatribe, to that extent I have
stopped leaning on his scholarship. As I have commented before, it
seems that he and Harold Camping have both suffered doctrinally in
their old age.
>
> I am not saying what the Calvinist teaches! I am stating
> what Geisler Teaches! Got that through your mind?
>
Yes, but all I was doing was disagree with Geisler's conclusions. No
point in getting nasty.
>
> Since, Geisler states that anyone CAN believe, i.e., he teaches that
> man has free will, the reason that Geisler teaches that Christ's work
> is not applied is because the man who is enabled to believe by God
> refuses to believe. This is contraditory to Calvinism.
>
I find Shedd's explaination more normative in the understanding
Scripture's revelation. What Geisler advocates and seeks to defend
does not over throw, for one, Shedd's analysis. I have pondered Shedd
at every turn for the last year and half after the 3rd edition was
released. You feel