So?
Yes - it is one sentence - in two parts - separated by a colon.
Do you understand the significance of the colon? What it is? What it is not?
Yes - the two parts go together - that is, they are associated with each other in the context of the whole sentence.
In the context of the whole sentence, [what I put in post #29] is plainly obvious.
Yes - it is one sentence - in two parts - separated by a colon.
Do you understand the significance of the colon? What it is? What it is not?
Yes - the two parts go together - that is, they are associated with each other in the context of the whole sentence.
In the context of the whole sentence, [what I put in post #29] is plainly obvious.
A semicolon is most commonly used to link (in a single sentence) two independent clauses that are closely related in thought. When a semicolon is used to join two or more ideas (parts) in a sentence, those ideas are then given equal position or rank.
I can't even put my head around what you are trying to say.
It is one complete sentence
I see no conflict here with my position
12 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God,
13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.
You said in post 29:
In this context, according to this definition, one cannot receive [anything] without one's own will coming into play.
I disagree. That verse is just stating that those who believed and received Him, He had secured their right to become adopted chidren of God, per Ephesians 1:5 as they had been predestined.
What do I have that God did not give me?
Take all the credit you want, I am not in that camp.
- 1
- Show all