Have you had a chance to read the article yet?
Jkl1122, you need to know that I used to hold to the Armenian doctrine having grown up in a Methodist Church. But after being challenged with Scriptures and instructed to memorize them. I saw that my former doctrines were wholly inadequate to explain the Sovereignty of God in the Scriptures and were based on Man's Reasoning.
One would think that God would treat all men equally, but the scriptures show He does not. One would think he loves all men equally, but the Scriptures show He does not and I have proved it to you through Scripture you have had no response to the Scriptures presented you. I challenge you to Memorize them to see whether they are so!!
Yes, I read the document and was sad to see that it attempted to rationalize God's sovereignty away and put mankind over it and play word games so that Electos does not mean Election and other spins attempting to show that predestination, does not mean Predestination and more such philosophications.
I was sad to see the attempt to try to prove that God loves all equally after I had asked you your take on "Esau have I hated, and Jacob have I loved" from "the womb"? and have not seen any response from you.
What about Moses, Samuel and John the Baptist? All These were chosen by God Sovereignly before they were born. Beyond this how they were brought to faith? The doctrines I saw had no way of explaining that. But Calvin (and I agree) they were wooed by God actively with His love and Irresistible Grace (too good to miss). Otherwise, one has to argue they were forced.
The followers of Armenius, like Palagues(sp?) based their philosophies that Sin had not affected the will of man so badly that they would not come to God. In this they ignored the Scripture in Romans I quoted you that "NO SEEKS FOR GOD".
YOU SHOULD BE ASKING THE QUESTION THEN: IF "NO ONE SEEKS FOR GOD", THEN HOW DO MEN SEEK HIM? The answer you should find is GOD. This is the only explanation.
I'm sorry, the doctrines in that document are contradicted directly by Romans. The will of man is horribly mangled and on his own man naturally abhors God and runs from him just as Adam and Eve did. Thus, the doctrine is woefully weak as to the effects of Fall of Mankind through Adam and Eve. Not only that but it underestimates Sin today.
The Doctrine of the Total Depravity of Man by the Church of Holland in 1918 after being presented the other beliefs of the followers of Amenius in 1610, was correct. They refuted it with Scriptures just as I have done (only with them it was years of deliberation) and not by one man.
I'm sorry to see, in the document that God is not glorified as the "Author and Finisher of Faith" and in not recognizing His Sovereign acts toward believers before they confess the Faith which He has given them.
The doctrine that God did not add to the church daily "as it says clearly in acts" and the idea that MAN did it, was refuted in the Doctrine of the Unmerited Election at the same time.
I have presented you demonstrations of the Sovereignty of God with many proofs, and you have given me only statements of belief that Man is the Sovereign elector of Salvation.
12 years ago, I used to believe that Man is the chooser, now after memorizing a ton of scripture (and not just cherry picking), I find that God has been at work, more in creation than I have ever thought, more Gracious than I ever thought and more Sovereign in each and every day than I ever thought.
In going back to the Doctrines of Armenius I would have to deny the Sovereignty of God as found in the Scriptures : "There is NONE WHO DOES GOOD, THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD... NO NOT ONE". Which is absolutely absolute without God's intervention.