Theology Club: Acts 28 Teaching?

heir

heir

TOL Subscriber
Danoh said:
My point was not that you were aiming it at me.

Rather, that though we differ in our understanding of Romans 11, as to who is worthy of what there, and how, I am fine with where we each are about it.
Click to expand...
I am fine with taking heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continuing in them: that it shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee from the bad doctrine of believing that those in the body can be cut off which is exactly what believing that the Romans were saved before Paul's writing to them may lead someone to believe. So if and when you post that the Romans were already saved, that's what you'll get from me (and have gotten from me in more than one thread about the Romans). I'm fine with that, too.
 
glorydaz

glorydaz

Well-known member
heir said:
It's not so hard to see that they weren't saved at the writing of it, but became saved because of the writing of it as God foreknew they would believe! Rom.11:1-6
Click to expand...

Now that makes total sense. Well put. :thumb:


Jerry always seems to assume everyone was saved in all these letters.
 
D

Danoh

New member
heir said:
I am fine with taking heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continuing in them: that it shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee from the bad doctrine of believing that those in the body can be cut off which is exactly what believing that the Romans were saved before Paul's writing to them may lead someone to believe. So if and when you post that the Romans were already saved, that's what you'll get from me (and have gotten from me in more than one thread about the Romans). I'm fine with that, too.
Click to expand...

Your point here as to what some might do with the sense of Romans 11's "cut off" is one I agree with.

And many do just that with it - assert its asserts one can lose their salvation.

Just goes to show you and yours, and me and mine, have approached solving for that through the passages in a different way.

As you and yours are safely tucked away with me and mine in the Body, I am fine with you and yours holding a view that differs as to when the Romans ended up safely tucked away in same.

I am not fine with that with whom I should not be - with those who preach the lie of "once saved, ever unsure."
 
heir

heir

TOL Subscriber
Danoh said:
Your point here as to what some might do with the sense of Romans 11's "cut off" is one I agree with.
Click to expand...
They do and it stems from the belief (error) that the Romans were already saved before Paul. :sigh:

Onward, I go! :salute:
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Danoh said:
Hey, did you know there actually is a purported chapter 29?

Reads like an Acts 28er wrote it...

Is that, an almost Acts 28er, lol
Click to expand...

I knew it!

I think I would like to be called an Acts 26'er now.

Since Paul refers back to 9 in that chapter.
 
heir

heir

TOL Subscriber
SaulToPaul said:
I knew it!

I think I would like to be called an Acts 26'er now.

Since Paul refers back to 9 in that chapter.
Click to expand...
Oh! I'd like to be called a 9/22'er: 9 for obvious reasons like the BoC beginning there and 22 because that's when Paul spilled the beans that he'd be sent to us. And besides, who doesn't want to be 22?
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
heir said:
Oh! I'd like to be called a 9/22'er: 9 for obvious reasons like the BoC beginning there and 22 because that's when Paul spilled the beans that he'd be sent to us And besides, who doesn't want to be 22?
Click to expand...

:chuckle:

I'd like to be 30 again, and stay that way for a long long time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top