Doctrine of Unconditional Election

Carbon dating is only good if you know exactly the rate of decay at every aspect of anything

There is no way to determine this rate pre flood. Hence any carbon dating that reaches before the flood should be ignored..

i don't know - that's why I'm asking? in spite of your reply above you still haven't answered. It's simple enough, and I'm surprised you haven't done so by now: do you believe that Christ alone is the Saviour. A simple yes or no will do.

lol

I do not see Gen 12, Gen 15 and Gen 17 nor do I see Lev 26 posted. Nor do I see you breaking down the verses in question, and proving how I have misinterpreted them

Your not responding at all. Your trying to push the conversation to you view by p[osting verses which have absolutely nothing to do with Gen 12, 15 or 17, Lev 26 then claiming you have answered me.

You have failed.

God did not promise in Gen 12, Gen 15, Gen 17 and make provision in Lev 26 for the future new world and new jerusalem.

You can post those passages until your blue. Until you go BACK the actuall passages I want to discuss, You will get now where. I do not want to discuss peter and revelation. i want to discuss Gen and Lev. Your refusal to even attempt just leads me to wonder if you are afraid to look at the actual passages, Because you KNOW that you can not IN those passages refute what I am saying

Its crazy.. We started this discussion with the gospel. according to rom 9 - 11. got sidetracked, and he wants to know if we are believers?? I don't get it

He does not want to look at the actually passages we have quoted..

That tells us alot. But hopefully it tells others who see it alot too..

why, if your arguing a point, are you afraid to look at the actual passages in question.

Why did yuo claim the Israel had no part in the abrahamic covenant, Yet when proven otherwise, Did you not repent and say you are sorry. But keep shifting the conversation away from the very passages which prove you wrong..

No, it would not.

By way of analogy, in the time of Noah's flood, God's "elected" or "chosen" means of salvation from the flood waters was the ark.

At the same time, whoever was found IN THE ARK was saved via God's "elected" or "chosen" means of salvation.

In the same way, whoever is ultimately found to be IN CHRIST who is God's "elected" or "chosen" means of salvation will be saved IN HIM.

if you and Kaylagrl will not claim to be Christians we have nothing to discuss regarding salvation. So then if not a Christian, then what is the bottom line according to your beliefs?

So, does that mean you then believe it is up to the individual to bring themselves to a faith in Christ, by which, is their salvation obtained?

Yawn...

Yawn makes no sense. Are you afraid for some reason to verbalize your understanding about how one becomes saved so
that we can know what you believe?

Saying that you "were adopted as Gods child" tells nothing. Is that your way of saying you believe that Christ is the Saviour?
A simple enough question. Yes, or, no? And if no, what then do you believe? What are you afraid of? Put your cards on the table

I yawned, Because this question was answered.

This also just proved you did not read what I quoted. Because if you did, You would not stick your foot in your mouth like you just did.

I guess me saying I called out for Gods mercy means nothing to you? you need to stop reading only part of what people say and read it all.

The tax collector called out to God

He went home justified.

I guess that does not work for me?

Once again, I am not playing your game, You want to deflect from the real issue, and not discuss the actual verses at hand..



I want to discuss Gen and lev and romans 9 - 11.. Not if you or I am saved or not.. That is not the context of this thread..nor does it matter, You can tell me your saved all you want, It does not prove you are saved.,

You realize of course the story of the tax collector was a parable, don't you?

And, in the parable, the publican wasn't saved by the fact that he called out to God, he was saved because his heart had been
changed by the Holy Spirit - he was given a humble and contrite heart by God through Christ - not of himself. The calling out to God was a result of that.

So then.... not a Christian?

You do realise he was saved because he called out to God.

We have already discussed this many days ago.

Your not born again while you are dead in sin, Justification MUST precede regeneration. In no court of law is the person released from his guilt before a write of justification is given.

Yes, we have so let's not do so again. Nevertheless, the questions remains: do you believe that Christ is the Saviour. Yes, or, no?
If no, then what is your bottom-line regarding salvation? You should be proud of what you believe and not trying to hide it - willing
to share it with everyone

Not quite.

God's covenants, both old and new, are regularly likened to marriage in scripture.

With this in mind, in much the same way that a natural bridegroom proposes to his bride, while she has the option of either accepting or refusing his proposal, Christ, figuratively speaking, proposes to us.

We then, in accordance with our own God-given free will, can either choose to accept or reject that proposal.

A couple of quick examples would be the following:

"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!" (Matt. 23:37)

"How often would I", with the "I" being Christ, "have gathered your children together, even as a hen gathers her chickens under her wings".

There is not only the will of Christ, but his will which he OFTEN expressed to the Jewish people of whom he was actually referring in context.

"And ye would not!"

There is the free will negative response of the people.

Along these same lines, we read:

Matthew chapter 22

[1] And Jesus answered and spake unto them again by parables, and said,
[2] The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son,
[3] And sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding: and they would not come.

In this parable, the "certain king, which made a marriage for his son" is God the Father, and his son is Jesus Christ. Here, the Father clearly is seen "calling" and "bidding" people to the "marriage" or "to the wedding".

This is both the Father's will and Christ's will.

"And they would not come."

This, again, is the free will negative choice of those who basically refused Christ's wedding proposal.

This should answer your question.

Okay thanks. I perceive it differently than you do, but I appreciate your reply.

rogerg said:
This is the only point of your post that I'm going to respond to
Exactly! They only want to talk about "the world of the elect". Never mind there is no mention of "world of the elect" in the Bible.

Wait a second, now that I think about it you've said over and over that I refused to answer this question of yours. Now
you say that we've discussed it many times. Hmmm - interesting.

Pre flood doesn't make any difference. According to those in the know, it is accurate out to 10-15,000 years.

That completely covers and beyond the YEC claim about age of the earth.

And carbon dating doesn't even come close to those numbers. They are WAY beyond those numbers.

And Gen 1:2 shows an indeterminant time gap between v.1 and 2.

Good God

If you have not figured this out by now, I can't help you.

If you think the answer is no I do not believe this after all I have said, your worse off than I thought.

Lets get back to what we were really talk about can't we?

You want to talk about whether I placed my faith in Christ or not. I want to talk about Gen 12, 15 17 and lev 26. something with which you keep trying to avoid.