In article , zach says...
>
>
>Matthew Johnson wrote:
>> In article , zach says...
>> >

[snip]

>> Why do you ask, "have a choice... OR was it God..."?
THis is a false
>dichotomy.
>> Of _course_ he had a choice. And it was in foreknowledge of that
>choice
>
>So it was not God's plan in the first place, but rather He altered His
>plan after He foreknew that Saul would make a certain choice?

Are you just naturally argumentative, or did you forget to READ before you
clicked 'reply'? I said NOTHING to imply that He _altered_ His plan. What part
of 'foreknowledge' did you not understand?

>Is God a
>slave to all of human history and the operations of the universe?

Again, I said NOTHING to imply this. WHy are you making such rash accusations?

>> that God
>> chose him to be the "chosen vessel for spreading His name before the
>Gentiles" (Acts 9:15).
>
>That contradicts Saul/Paul having a choice.

No, it does not.

>You are saying that
>Saul/Paul made a choice (whether in the future or not is irrelevant,

Actually, yes it _is_ relevant.

>God's plan still depends upon Saul/Paul's choice)

No, because NOTHING in the Divine Will is contingent. The rules of causality we
are accustomed to do not apply when dealing with the Divine Will.

> and that God then made _His_ choice?

Here you snuck in the word 'then', which it TEMPORAL, even though you just
denied that it was relevant that Saul's choice is in the future. You can't have
it both ways, so make up your mind.


--
---------------------------
Subudcat se sibi ut haereat Deo
quidquid boni habet, tribuat illi a quo factus est.
(St. Augustine, Ser. 96)

((( 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.   )))


--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 1/25/05 2:41:45 AM ---