Fiath Comes by Hearing

Status
Not open for further replies.
fltom said:
This is false


Three verses were presented two showed men could believe savingly

further as a reminder the original argument concerned whether the unregenerate can believe

one showed they can believe and fall away


the other two they could believe and be savedf




Again you argue against the one verse which was designed simply to show the unregenerate can believe

The original argument being simply whether they can believe

and leave unattended the other two which showed they can believe and be saved




not quite what the verse states

John 12:40 (NIV) — 40 “He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, so they can neither see with their eyes, nor understand with their hearts, nor turn—and I would heal them.”
the verse simply shows had these men not been hardened and blinded they could have repented and be saved
Please don't claim you have addressed the verse when you speak of nothing that is actually in the verse


The point

John 20:31 (NIV) — 31 But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.


These are dead, unregenerate men, without life, unbelievers, being addressed

reading they might believe and believing they may have life

it shows

one the unregenerate can believe through reading

two these men who were unregenerate by believing can gain life

contrary to your theology which states you must be made alive to believe scripture shows you must believe to be made alive

Your theology is contradicted by scripture
Click to expand...
All of this spam has been addressed.
 
preacher4truth said:
Utter nonsense and a denial of the word of God. It is nothing but man-glorying humanism, the old works-salvation good ol' boys club asininity.

You don't know anything about the context, and that text doesn't support your humanistic god of "libertarian, libertarian!!!"
Click to expand...

The humanistic god would be the your predeterminist man's philosophy that puts God is a box that limits God to having no other choice but to predetermine us.
 
4Him said:
All of this spam has been addressed.
Click to expand...
Well lets see your last comments concerning John 20:31 was you did not know what my point was

John 20:31 (NASB 2020) — 31 but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that by believing you may have life in His name.


You want to call that addressing it

And your last comment on John 12"40 wasot was a wonderful verse and you spoke of God enlightening and regenerating

when the verse speaks of none of those things

John 12:40 (ESV) — 40 “He has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, lest they see with their eyes, and understand with their heart, and turn, and I would heal them.”

what you call addresses leaves much to be desired
 
SovereignGrace said:
Flom and exegesis are mortal enemies. He think hermeneutics was a character played by Fred Gwynne.
Click to expand...
You guys are totally laughable

If you knew anything about hermeneutics you would know allowing scripture to interpret scripture is one of the most powerful ways to interpret it.

You guys however seem to think that is pitting scripture against scripture.
 
fltom said:
You guys are totally laughable

If you knew anything about hermeneutics you would know allowing scripture to interpret scripture is one of the most powerful ways to interpret it.

You guys however seem to think that is pitting scripture against scripture.
Click to expand...
Boy, your sure told us Leighton, Jr., didn't you?

#NowWhosAGoodBoy
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top