SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Yes, but I probably still would not understand. Like 99% of the population, I am inferior to him in intelligence.
Spammers wasteland
- Thread starter Delmar
- Start date
- Status
Yes, but I probably still would not understand. Like 99% of the population, I am inferior to him in intelligence.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Swelling does not mean what you think it means, in the Greek.
Eagles Wings
New member
Okay, glad to clarify.
Those who are born-again (regeneration) will continue to trust in Christ forever. One can never become unsaved, and that due to the Sovereignty of God in salvation.
Romans 8:30 (KJV)
musterion
Well-known member
But in reality they were effectively saved (as in safe) from eternity past by virtue of election which cannot be thwarted by man nor demon. Making faith moot, as Tam pointed out.
Oh, now you are a modern day "god"rulz, aren't you, Mayor, a member of the Scholar's Union of Academic Vanity ? Why don't you have your own "the Greek" course, Professor Demas, on the University of Phoenix "credible" web site, and impress all your cigar smoking, brandy sipping, country club/chat room friends, and use such impressive jazz, such as this lecture:
Most of you rookies are out of step with mainline, orhodox prooftexting, in the context of sound, Biblical hermeneutics. You are mudding the waters, and your exegesis/eisegesis is based on faulty constructs, and your cult is a modern sect, not accepted by most credible biblical scolars, and has been rejected by most credible biblical commentaries. Zeal without knowledge is not good. Sincerity does not create truth. Are you sure you are not a closet Calvinist? Your traditions of men has blinded you to balanced truth, as you cannot see the baby through the trees. You should not throw out the trees with the bath water.Within the evangelical, biblical tradition are a variety of non-essential views that can cause division, but few are as presumptious as you to attack our exegesis over controversial issues or nuances of articulation/understanding. Not uncritically accepting your personal, subjective views of some proof texts is indefensible, and does not shed light on your proof texts, as you filter it through your preconceived Penty presuppositions, which is inconsistent with orthodox Christianity, and is problematic. . . I will continue to clarify my beliefs in the face of Ad Hominem attacks, misrepresentation , and sweeping/hasty/broad generalizations(even as Paul and the Jesus Christ did), in the broader context of other relevant passages. Rejecting your proof texting out of context is not the same thing as rejecting the truth of the Lord Jesus' words in light of the rest of the word of God, as that is substantial, not presumption.A wrong assumption leads to wrong conclusions. It is a challenge to not retain preconceived ideas that cloud our understanding of all the relevant verses, not just proof texts.Doctrinal truths are often couched in historical settings. We need to find out what the passage means to the original audience, in light of church history, and mainline, orhodox theology. In sum, we should not allow cultural biases, preconceived notions,and figures of speech/wooden theological literalisms,subjective opinions, etc., blind us to diametrically opposed, mutually exclusive views, and morsels of balanced Bible truth, as the challenge is to not let our preconceived eisegeses distort our exegesis.
Hmmmphh, Mayor...Leave the heavy lifting to those of us that have had a 3 week summer "the" Greek course, from a hermeneutically approved, balanced, credible source.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
You are out of step with orthodoxy, orthopraxy, and orthodontics...MAD wacko.
What is the topic again?
Eagles Wings
New member
Ephesians 1:3-6
God has always known who are His own (from the foundation of the world), and in time (temporally) gifts them with faith to believe.
As faith is from the Holy Spirit, it is vital and central to our lives as Christians.
Nang
TOL Subscriber
What is "eternity past" to you? How would you describe it?
And ask Tam where faith originates . . the answer is not moot.
Nang
TOL Subscriber
There they go . . sinking down into Yuck Mode already.
You guys are so predictable.
Breenism is unbiblical and illogical. Your argument is vapid and fails to read “Peter, Paul, and Mary” closely. Your unbalanced view is a works based caste system in the early church for some vs all, etc. The anti-intellectualism of your in a hurry sect also shows when you reject “The Modern English” evidence that contradicts your Breen-ite proof texts. Context is also abused in your proof texting. Your arrogant personality is also grating.The key is proper exegesis in context, not importing Breenistic paradigms into proof texts. The key is to translate/interpret/apply properly.
The vast majority of godly Christians have not heard of Breenism. The best of conservative, biblical, evangelical scholarship rejects it if they have heard of it. You are like Paul Crouch, who turns sowing a seed for a love gift into the gospel and makes Breenism a cult (except you substitute hyper Breenism).You must have a defective Acts passage in your Bible to not see this. You wrongly assume that ultraBreenism hyper-in a hurry-ism is the only one that understands biblical grace or experiences the freedom and grace of God in Christ. We are not under your so-called one pace theory so it is a moot point. It is an insult to the majority of true believers and to the Holy Spirit to say only a handful of modern Breen-types understand the ark and the annointing or experience true liberty. My experience is that you guys are sectish and more legalistic than the rest of us.
And just what site is this?
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
There they go . . sinking down into Yuck Mode already.
You guys are so predictable.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PcGwkyzmPmA
Right Divider
Body part
There they go . . sinking down into Yuck Mode already.
You guys are so predictable.
You are a real downer, barbiturate, Endora.
Right Divider
Body part
So what you're saying is that God created some people with the explicit intent to condemn them to hell?
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
I believe we are on DebbieDowner.com
Yeh-it's a drag, real bummer, man...
musterion
Well-known member
Specific individuals? I disagree that that's what Paul meant.
Nang
TOL Subscriber
That's your problem . . .
Romans Chapter 9 does not speak of nations or classes of people or visible organizations, but of specifically described and named individuals.
God loved the individual person named Jacob, and hated the individual person named Esau.
Romans 9:13 and explanation for this is in Romans 9:8.
- Status