Search results

Do you understand how differently may be harmonized with fairly/without favoritism?

GRFS (Deut. 30:19, Acts 16:31) is the work of God, who judges fairly based on the opportunity souls had to cooperate/be saved, indicated by the Parable of the Talents, in which the one talent may signify general revelation, five talents the OT and ten the NT.

No, this is an example of not understanding that God does not show favoritism both corporately and individually.

I agree, and this change from ignoring GW to accepting JC as Lord is made possible because of God's seeking grace: Jesus Himself expressed GRFS succinctly using three, four and five letter words: “Ask… seek… knock…” (Matt. 7:7). This indicates that God graces every sinful soul with the...

Okay, you can ignore those five Scriptures, but where are five supporting your point for me to do likewise?

My view is that Matthew's version of Isaiah 6:9 in Matt. 13:14-15 is the harmonization: "You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. For this people's heart has become calloused..."

Yes, which is why that rather than both sides denying each other's evidence, the approach we are using in studying the doctrine of election on the Hermeneutics thread is the systematic and dialectical method of citing Scripture supporting each side's argument and then work together to...

Well, I had copied them from a previous post, but that did not work when I refreshed the page.

With God all things are possible (Matt. 19:26), including your conviction. Not trying to change yourself was fertile soil, God wants to convict/transform everyone (1Tim. 2:3-4); He chooses those who choose to seek Him (Matt. 7:7, Tit. 2:11, Ezek. 33:11) . So what Scripture do you site to support...

So yesterday.

Thanks, I just retyped them during the Edit time period.

Okay, let's harmonize John 12:39 with these: Rom. 2:11, Gal. 2:6, Eph. 6:9, Col. 3:25. As I said previously, rather than both sides denying each other's evidence, the solution is for both sides to cite Scripture supporting each side's argument and then work together to harmonize them. (That is...

So true. In my case, neither my parents nor the Baptist church we attended was dogmatic about OSAS, so when I read the Bible for myself I did not have to kick against a goad but "merely" had to be open-minded.

It does less good to opine that a person's Bible-based interpretation is wrong without a speck of Scriptural support. 1. Jesus related the Parable of the Soils in hopes that souls including GW & Cam would want to be fertile soil. 2. Jesus related the Parable of the Soils... (Cam) ?

Yes, they and their followers were anti-Christ but not "the" only ones who were anti-Christ. My point is that you are referring to the ultimate Anti-Christ, but let us not fail to resist the others, whom we encounter now, whereas we may not be alive at the end/eschaton.

Now you failed to discern that I have been calmly discussing and answering your questions with Scripture citations, whereas your accusations manifest upsetness without sharing GW. I hope you will go back to where you became pejorative and take a friendly tack instead.

Where do you ever go beyond proof-texting to harmonizing? I first came to an understanding of such passages by 1970, when I began reading the NEB from beginning to end and seeking to harmonize passages by making margin notes, (in three other translations by now), so perhaps our disconnect is...

No, there's that failure to discern the meaning of words, because you accused me of saying that discernment needs to be verified by me, when what I said was that I have heard Trump express belief in Jesus and his policies promote biblical values and that I saw an article this morning reporting...

My additions are GW; your opinion ignores GW. Which is better?

You project and fail to look in the mirror. I have cited GW to support my views, but you merely manifest a divisive spirit.