DDBible wrote:
> I have NEVER seen an Arian every come close to meeting any argument
> against the Trinity.
>
> "Arian"? You trinitarians are a hoot. I'd say that someone that rejects
> the trinity is a Christian. I have NEVER seen a trinitarian present an
> argument for the trinity based solely on Bible versus. Everytime you
> point out a glaring fallacy in their position they resort to philosophy
> to explain it away.

Maybe it got lost in the shuffle last time I posted, but what did you
think about the fact that Jesus Christ calls himself by the same name God
does?

In Exodus 3.14, the translators of the LXX render "I am that I am" as "I
am the one who is," and the exact same Greek is seen in Revelation.

-Ethan

((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))

Bart Goddard writes:
>
>adamst@no.spam wrote:
>
>
>>>I'd say, rather, that you were _convinced_ of the truth.
>>
>> I think this is semantics. But, even so, does God's grace *always*
>> convince the recipient of the truth? Does God offer His Grace to
>> *all* men?
>
>To your last question, God doesn't "offer" grace, He gives it.

Poor wording in my part. I should know better. Orthodoxy teaches
that God pours out His grace on all men. What I was trying to get
at was the answer to the question that you assumed I meant. To wi:

>In one sense, there is grace for all, because Jesus paid for
>everyone's sins. If we have to think of grace as a substance,
>then there is an infinite amount, and there is sufficient for
>all men.

That's part of it. Given that you feel it is sufficient (as I do)
for all men, does it "apply" to all men?

>To the first bit, yes, it's semantics, but it's the connotations
>of "forced" that make the pro-choice (heh heh) people into
>pro-choice people. If we suggest that man doesn't have
>free will, then all sorts of nonsense about "robots" and
>"forcing" and "unaccountability" go flying. "Forcing" is
>what a rapist or an evil Soviet brainwasher does.

How is it different for the Reformed position? Now I know full
well you are Lutheran, but my main objection on this thread and
others has been to the Reformed position which says that God
determined, before the foundation of the world (ie before he
created any men), who would be saved and who would be lost. If
this is the case, then God intentionally created some men for the
purpose of damning them. I see no way out of that trap, at least
for the Reformed position.

>Do I flee to the arms of free will doctrine, just because
>I don't like the images conjured up by "force"?

It's not just the images - it's the