It is demonstrable that the principles explained by Darwin in the theory of evolution are sufficient. We can use the same algorithm to enable computers to make designs for machines better than human engineers and to enable AI program to play human strategy games better than the world champion professional players of those games. It has basically demonstrated that the principles of evolution by themselves represent an intelligence far superior to our own. It shows that the kind of intelligence needed for design only requires the ability to follow a set rules – something which computers and the things of nature excel at better than we do. It means that in looking for God in this direction, we have been looking in the wrong place. God as the great watchmaker designer is more a product of Deism and antiquated science, not the Bible where God is portrayed as a shepherd.
You’re right - it certainly is “absurd” to claim that the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its radius is (approximately) 22/7 … mainly because 22/7 approximates the ratio of the circumference to its diameter .
So you think our genome is not designed by God but is the result of an accident of nature?
Wow, such a poor argument indicates that you’re really getting desperate now. To save yourself further embarrassment, why not just admit that Scripture proves you wrong?
The bottom line is, the believers in Matt 7:21-23 must have been “born again” in order to perform the supernatural feats that Jesus mentions … yet they Jesus says he will disown them come Judgement Day due to their “lawlessness” (v.23). In other words, your doctrine is wrong - being “born again” does not mean you are 100% certain of getting to Heaven.
Our genome is neither – no more than our memories are designed by God or the result of an accident of nature. Our memory and our DNA are both an accumulation of information which is product of both choices and the environment – an environment which includes those we have a relationship with (which theists believe includes God). Our DNA is the memory of the species including what it has learned about what works and what doesn’t work.
That’s pretty funny. I’m afraid that what it indicates, rather, is a failure in reading comprehension in your not understanding the difference between say and do, and that your declaring it a poor argument is a desperate attempt on your part to divert attention from the facts. In other words, it’s a red herring and not an argument.
Your bottom line is imaginary. It is notable that you did not respond to my subsequent point, which is where the real bottom line is, and which line you have not yet reached:
Please note that Jesus’ statements were in reverse order to how I argued them. He prefaced his statement about ‘many will say’ with ‘only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.’ What follows is Jesus giving a case in point, the point being that they have not done God’s will.
And then what does he say to them?
I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’
And here all this time you have been arguing that they did indeed know him at some point, were ‘born again’ and yet somehow ‘lost it’, lost having been birthed and thus having gone back into an antepartum condition. Good trick. What has been lost is… well, never mind.
After over ten weeks of my arguments trying to penetrate the impenetrable, I think I have learned something. 
Shalom. ← (Take that in the parting, goodbye ‘God be with ye’ contraction, sense of the word.)
When you have read the thread, at least starting with #105, @SkovandOfMitaze, please reply here with specific counterpoints, if you have any.
(Also read Maggie’s testimony first, please. I don’t expect it to be necessarily compelling to unbelievers, but Christians should be able to rejoice and recognize God’s providential sovereignty.)
I’ll probably never read the law and grace one. Sometime, which could be as late as winter, I’ll make a post with my belief and why. When I make a “ OSAS is false” for the congregation I attend I will copy and paste it here and then focus on countering something.
I’ll try to read Maggie’s story the month depending on its size and I’ll respond with what it means to me.
Don’t bother pasting anything until you’ve read the arguments that are already here.
It’s quite reasonably short (and should be exciting for believers to read and marvel at.).
Well Dale as much as I enjoy our conversations you have no bearing whatsoever on any choices I make. Eventually , unless I’m gone from here or some other similar event, I’ll end up posting about the errors of OSAS. It will be after I have the time to do it for the congregation I’m physically involved in. All of my long posts in here that I start as a thread comes from things being copy and pasted or generated based off other work. Whatever the arguments are, I’ve most likely have come accessed it many times when debating this in person, online, or when reading a book, listening to a podcast, or hearing it in person by a speaker. It’s a fairly old debate. First book I ever read about this subject was after hearing a pastor debate another pastor about it and that was roughly 17 years ago or so.
Though it also depends on if BL continues to be a site that goes beyond just the overlap of science and faith. I can’t really tale. But I’ll cross that bridge after I cross the others. Then if possibly I’ll share it here. If not, it’s ok because it wont be made for here.
It is quite clear that the Bible teaches both God’s absolute sovereignty and man’s responsibility. Arguments against once adopted, always adopted invariably discard some scripture because it is intellectually unacceptable, insisting proudly that we must be able to comprehend God’s inscrutable omnitemporality, his ‘timefulness’, rather than to humbly apprehend some of it.
You are still appealing to authority, your own or someone else’s, and not scripture (and there is a lot above in this conversation). Let’s have a real discussion instead of something canned. (And I’ve been a Christian longer than you’ve been alive. 
)
I never discuss if someone’s experience was real or not real, or if there salvation is real or not real. I’m confident that when the time comes I’ll be able to present my argument and defend it from scripture. There are very few subjects that I am confident I am 100% right in without any doubt after studying it and debating it. Everyone feels that way about something. For me this is one such subject. But it’s all fruitless discussion until everyone involved has the time to debate it. Which is the point of many of my posts. Not to debate it, but to state that not everyone agrees. Then mention some resources and let people check it out.
At the moment the the majority of my free time using social media is reserved for other places. When it comes to the hours and hours I’m willing to spend to go through and select the scriptures I’m wanting to use it’s mostly reserved for disciples at my local congregation and then disciples online from the same denomination around the world. It’s only after those that I pour work into other things at the moment.
You could have read this whole thread in the time that you’ve spent talking about not reading it. Okay, that’s an overstatement, but the pertinent parts you sure could have.
That is not a factor in Maggie’s testimony, because the facts are empirical. Just read it, for goodness’ sake. Or not.
I read her account. It’s has no weight to anything being discussed. I’m not sure how the leap was made by you. I believe God answers prayers. But I don’t see the relevance of the story she put forth and OSAS.
Reading the thread is not the issue. It will takes hours and hours to respond to everything. I just don’t have the time or desire. I think in the long run instead of a subthread s out grace and law I can just do a post abs line out a handful of verse and interpretation. It’s why I’ve not went all out with conditional immortality yet. Saving it for a thread when I have the hours free to do it. I’m heading to the bank, then back to a job, then to watch Psycho Goreman with my fiancée and then night kayaking. Talk to y’all later.
There is an intimate connection between God’s sovereignty in providence and our becoming his children. I am kind of amazed that it is not implicit to you. And once he has signed the adoption certificate, so to speak, who is going to erase his hand?
I agree with the first statement. I don’t agree with the implications of the second within the debate of OSAS.
We are called joint heirs now. Check this out and tell me what or who is going to reverse any of the facts: The Christian’s Confidence & Eternal Security, a list (it’s a single page).
Funny enough the very first one is usually let of my argument. How ironic.
Ezekiel 11:14-21
New American Standard Bible
Promise of Restoration
14 Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying, 15 “Son of man, your brothers, your relatives, your fellow exiles, and the entire house of Israel, all of them, are those to whom the inhabitants of Jerusalem have said, ‘Keep far from the Lord; this land has been given to us as a possession.’ 16 Therefore say, ‘This is what the Lord God says: “Though I had removed them far away among the nations, and though I had scattered them among the countries, yet I was a sanctuary for them for a little while in the countries where they had gone.”’ 17 Therefore say, ‘This is what the Lord God says: “I will gather you from the peoples and assemble you from the countries among which you have been scattered, and I will give you the land of Israel.”’ 18 When they come there, they will remove all its detestable things and all its abominations from it. 19 And I will give them one heart, and put a new spirit within them. And I will remove the heart of stone from their flesh and give them a heart of flesh, 20 so that they may walk in My statutes, and keep My ordinances and do them. Then they will be My people, and I shall be their God. 21 But as for those whose hearts go after their detestable things and abominations, I will bring their conduct down on their heads,” declares the Lord God.
So let’s break this down.
He says this is to all of Israel. To all those there and exiled, to everyone of them God will gather them and soften their hearts and put a new spirit inside of them.
So each and every single Israeli alive at that time was given a new heart and spirit. So my question is in the next few chapters do we read of any of them that commit sins? Does any of those who praise him brought out of exile with their new hearts sometime later on end up questioning God and sinning or commit false idol worship or did they all remain righteous?
The same can be said for chapter 36. For a fact repeatedly we read that god saved them all and cleansed them, snd then sometime later we see the same people called evil and many are destroyed in various ways.
These versus support that the salvation of the body is a kit the body as a whole, not the individual.
I’ll get to the others later on.