Talk:Conditional election
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Make sure to supply full citations when adding information and consider tagging or removing uncited/unciteable information. |
[edit] Started This Page - Incomplete
I started this page even though it's only a stub currently; very shortly I am going to try to expand it similar to Unlimited atonement and Conditional Preservation of the Saints. David Schroder 17:34, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
Hello David. I'm new to this wikipedia article contribution thing. I edited the page on conditional election. I'm actually kind of sheepish about some of the edits that I consider doing since some people have put a lot of time into their work and I also figured there would be potential for editing wars which is something I would want to avoid. I'm not so concerned about the edit on the conditional election page as it was a small edit which can easily be reversed. But I wouldn't have done it without discussing it first, and I didn't notice this discussion page until recently (I assume this is a format where the article can be discussed.
I removed your statement (unless it was from someone elses) to the effect that conditional election is really conditional from our perspective and unconditional from God's. It really looks like a conclusion that comes out of nowhere. I've read your article several times and I just don't see where this issue of different perspectives is explained in terms of election. I also suspect that most if not all major proponents of conditional election would not agree with this assesment. I could be wrong about that and if I am, I would recomend two things with regard to that statement: 1) preface it with "some advocates of conditional election hold that... 2) give some explanation as to how this difference of perspective arises. Of course we have perspectives on many things that differs from God's perspective, but that does not entail that our perspective on election is different from God's perspective in the way that you suggested. Robert Rohrs. 2:35 EST, 21 April 2006
I removed the comment "...and stands in some contrast to unlimited atonement..." If you can produce even one example of an Arminian writer/theologian who holds to conditional election yet rejects unlimited atonement as contradictory, then a statement such as "some Arminians see the two doctrines as contrasting..." might be appropriate. Otherwise, this is mere flagrantly biased rhetoric. Mike 14:33, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
I removed the opinions and the attempts to compare the Armenian view with the Calvinist view in order to keep the topic of the page Conditional Election. I also removed the Weasle Words note at the top because I think we've cleared that up. Lexi kate 21:27, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
