He cannot be resisted or rejected.

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
I must add that most people who come under the heading "Christian" are atheist and agnostic.

We know what you think and this is what you say:

Anyone who thinks that salvation is conditioned on anything a man thinks, does or says is atheist.

Paul certainly believed that a person must do something to get saved, as witnessed by his answer here:

"And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house" (Acts 16:30-31).​

According to your ridiculous ideas we must believe that Paul was an atheist!
 

Truster

New member
We know what you think and this is what you say:



Paul certainly believed that a person must do something to get saved, as witnessed by his answer here:

"And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house" (Acts 16:30-31).​

According to your ridiculous ideas we must believe that Paul was an atheist!

When Paul was converted he was:

on his way to say a sinners prayer?

give his heart Jesus?

answering an altar call?

going to commit himself to Jesus?

Going in peace or with murder in his heart?
 

ClimateSanity

New member
We know what you think and this is what you say:



Paul certainly believed that a person must do something to get saved, as witnessed by his answer here:

"And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house" (Acts 16:30-31).​

According to your ridiculous ideas we must believe that Paul was an atheist!
Could Paul believe on the Lord Jesus Christ before his conversion? I say no.
 

Truster

New member
So? Did he "believe" or "trust" that the Lord Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God? Of course he did. And that fact alone demonstrates that what you said here is just plain dumb:

Saul of Tarsus did not trust in the evangelism of salvation that is conditioned on the atoning blood and imputed justness of Messiah alone. Saul was holding the coats of the men who stoned Stephen...
 

Epoisses

New member
Saul of Tarsus did not trust in the evangelism of salvation that is conditioned on the atoning blood and imputed justness of Messiah alone. Saul was holding the coats of the men who stoned Stephen...

Jesus also said it was hard for him to kick against the pricks - Acts 26:14 implying that Saul had been resisting the Holy Spirit and conviction of sin before his conversion.
 

Truster

New member
Jesus also said it was hard for him to kick against the pricks - Acts 26:14 implying that Saul had been resisting the Holy Spirit and conviction of sin before his conversion.

In the Hebrew tongue; whereby it appears, that Paul spake not now before Agrippa in the Hebrew tongue, as he did before the Jews at Jerusalem, Acts 21:40.

It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks: this is a proverb borrowed from the Greeks, but used in many languages, denoting any who endeavour such things as will ruin or detriment themselves: and so do all persecutors; for they cannot harden themselves against God, his truth, or servants, and prosper, Job 9:4. Not to speak of other pricks, there is never an attribute in God, nor ever a faculty in their own souls, but they kick against, and will be themselves at last pricked by.(MP)
 

Epoisses

New member
In the Hebrew tongue; whereby it appears, that Paul spake not now before Agrippa in the Hebrew tongue, as he did before the Jews at Jerusalem, Acts 21:40.

It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks: this is a proverb borrowed from the Greeks, but used in many languages, denoting any who endeavour such things as will ruin or detriment themselves: and so do all persecutors; for they cannot harden themselves against God, his truth, or servants, and prosper, Job 9:4. Not to speak of other pricks, there is never an attribute in God, nor ever a faculty in their own souls, but they kick against, and will be themselves at last pricked by.(MP)

No, they were the pricks of conscience thru the Holy Spirit by Jesus Christ himself seeing he is the one who said it not the Greeks! You are hopelessly devoted to your false paradigm of the gospel that is never seen in real life. Christ is presently drawing all men to himself by the power of the Holy Spirit and some respond while most do not. Your false paradigm cannot explain conversion on it's best day. We can never take the credit to ourselves but those who resist conscience and the Holy Ghost will be damned eternally by their own fault.
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
Saul of Tarsus did not trust in the evangelism of salvation that is conditioned on the atoning blood and imputed justness of Messiah alone. Saul was holding the coats of the men who stoned Stephen...

So? Are we supposed to imagine that Paul didn't "believe" or "trust" that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God when he was converted? You prove over and over that your spiritual IQ is ZERO by such dumb statements as this:

Anyone who thinks that salvation is conditioned on anything a man thinks, does or says is atheist.

According to your stupidity Paul was an atheist because he taught that in order to be saved a person must "believe" or "trust" in the Lord Jesus:

"And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house" (Acts 16:30-31).​
 

Truster

New member
No, they were the pricks of conscience thru the Holy Spirit by Jesus Christ himself seeing he is the one who said it not the Greeks! You are hopelessly devoted to your false paradigm of the gospel that is never seen in real life. Christ is presently drawing all men to himself by the power of the Holy Spirit and some respond while most do not. Your false paradigm cannot explain conversion on it's best day. We can never take the credit to ourselves but those who resist conscience and the Holy Ghost will be damned eternally by their own fault.

If you were right then we are both safe. But, I am correct and so you are going to hell...


Repent and trust...
 

God's Truth

New member
PS in fact where the word trust is used in the OT it should be "confide".

All your fusing about words are not from God.

2 Timothy 2:14 Keep reminding God's people of these things. Warn them before God against quarreling about words; it is of no value, and only ruins those who listen.
 

Truster

New member
All your fusing about words are not from God.

2 Timothy 2:14 Keep reminding God's people of these things. Warn them before God against quarreling about words; it is of no value, and only ruins those who listen.

I don't argue about words with the saints because there is no need. I don't argue full-stop. I post grammatically and linguistically correct translations and transliterations and then people who hate the truth are up in arms against it.
 

Truster

New member
So? Are we supposed to imagine that Paul didn't "believe" or "trust" that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God when he was converted? You prove over and over that your spiritual IQ is ZERO by such dumb statements as this:



According to your stupidity Paul was an atheist because he taught that in order to be saved a person must "believe" or "trust" in the Lord Jesus:

"And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house" (Acts 16:30-31).​

Saul of Tarsus was atheist in the correct sense of the word. Because you are ignorant of that sense you are incapable of comprehension.
 

God's Truth

New member
I don't argue about words with the saints because there is no need. I don't argue full-stop. I post grammatically and linguistically correct translations and transliterations and then people who hate the truth are up in arms against it.

You argue about words and the Word of God says not to do that.

I gave you scripture that proves what I say.

You have NO scripture that says what you say, none.
 

Truster

New member
You argue about words and the Word of God says not to do that.

I gave you scripture that proves what I say.

You have NO scripture that says what you say, none.

There is doctrinal truth in everything I post. But, the natural man neither recognises nor understands the things of the Spirit, because they are spiritually discerned.

You are truth negative.
 

God's Truth

New member
There is doctrinal truth in everything I post. But, the natural man neither recognises nor understands the things of the Spirit, because they are spiritually discerned.

You are truth negative.

You will not take focus off of the truth.

You argue about words that do not matter.

We are told not to do that.
 

Truster

New member
You will not take focus off of the truth.

You argue about words that do not matter.

We are told not to do that.

I don't "argue" over words.

Are you saying that the words; repentance, conversion, God, Christ, truth, trust and evangelism don't matter?

Dream on in your ignorant little world.
 

God's Truth

New member
I don't "argue" over words.

Are you saying that the words; repentance, conversion, God, Christ, truth, trust and evangelism don't matter?

Dream on in your ignorant little world.

You are arguing saying repent doesn't mean repent, and all that other nonsense about words.

God gives us His message in our language.

You don't heed what the scriptures say.

God says not to argue about words.

You say, "Did God really say ___?" Genesis 3:1.
 
Top