Babies lack moral and mental capacity to make significant choices. They are dependent on adults for basic needs. As they grow, there intelligence, conscience, options, physical abilities, etc. grow exponentially. It is a logical fallacy to equate a fetus with a mature adult. Babies don't have a choice to be born, but adults make choices all of the time. What IS your point? Using your logic, why should I have a choice to marry, love or hate God, etc. if an aborted fetus or puppy does not?
What say you Christians ???
by wobble 277 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Deputy Dog
godrulz
What IS your point? Using your logic, why should I have a choice to marry, love or hate God, etc. if an aborted fetus or puppy does not?
I asked you a question about your "logic". I made no statement or claim. You claim men (humans) have free will to "chose" God. I'm asking about babies, they are humans, yet, you claim they have no free will to chose God.
-
PSacramento
DD, I know you believe in predestination but I am curious about soemthing.
Do you believe that a person can reject God? or that rejection is already predestined?
-
Deputy Dog
Psac
Do you believe that a person can reject God? or that rejection is already predestined?
How do you define unbeliever?
Don't all unbelievers NATURALLY reject God?
-
PSacramento
LOL !
Point made my friend.
-
Deputy Dog
Psac
or that rejection is already predestined?
And just for the record, I believe God creates unbelievers.
-
godrulz
Dog, R U hyper-Calvinist? Double predestination, decretalism, determinism, is not biblical. God does not create unbelievers. It is a chosen state (cf. homosexuality). Babies cannot do math or build cars, but that does not mean they do not have free will. Ability and free will are not identical. An immature baby has free will, but lacks the extent of moral/mental capacity to chose or reject God. In time, they will have this capacity that is innate, but not developed. A baby and a man are both human, but there are differing levels of maturity/capacity and opportunity. Just because a baby is not born running does not mean they are not human or will not do so in time.
-
designs
Now here's the thing- Jesus reveals xyz to Calvin and rst to Luther and mno to Wesley and all are different belief systems: Why did Jesus do that.
-
godrulz
Jesus/Holy Spirit/Bible did NOT reveal contradictory things to men. The obvious problem is the fallibility and bias of men (especially GB who claim direct revelation from God, but obviously not at all). The Bible must be properly translated and interpreted. There is one correct way to interpret Scripture. If mere men break hermeneutical principles, they may come up with wrong conclusions. If they have a Calvinistic assumption (deductive), they may import it on the text (eisegesis vs exegesis). The noetic effects of sin (our minds are duller after the Fall) also explains why equally capable, godly believers come to different conclusions on some peripheral issues (despite agreement on the essentials of the faith). Since Scripture is not a systematic theology book, it also takes some piecing together to formulate sound doctrine/interpretation. Sometimes manuscript variants, original language issues, etc. create issues that are ambiguous. We are not infallible, but why would you be so myopic to assume God is the problem, not us.
-
designs
godrulz-
But don't you see the inherent problem, all of these heavyweights felt Born Again, or some similar enlightenment, and came up with totally different conclusions. You can't partake of Communion in a Lutheran Church if you believe xyz and a Conservative Presbyterian Church will prevent you from partaking at the Communion Table if you believe mno.
All hearing the supposed voice of Jesus and reading the same Gospel.