As usual. You try to deflect the conversation so it only goes your way.
I posted about john 1. You refused to discuss John 1, and instead when to another passage in john which has nothign to do with John 1.
I am trying to discuss. Your trying to deflect. Then claim I am not discussing just showing observations.
When your ready to discuss John 1. Lets do it. until then. I will let you ramble away.
I posted about john 1. You refused to discuss John 1, and instead when to another passage in john which has nothign to do with John 1.
I am trying to discuss. Your trying to deflect. Then claim I am not discussing just showing observations.
When your ready to discuss John 1. Lets do it. until then. I will let you ramble away.
What about John 1? Do you think you have a verse of Scripture that will somehow negate the validity of the other verses, which I have given? What kind of foolishness is this?
You gave me John 1:12 and conveniently left off the rest of the sentence in verse 13. Shall we look at the whole sentence then?
John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he the right to become children of God, even to them that believe on his name:
John 1:13 who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
Verse 13 - the back-half of the sentence makes CLEAR 3 things about verse 12 - the front of the sentence. That the "receiving", "becoming children of God" and "believing", have nothing to do with:
1.) The "blood", your DNA, your ancestry have nothing to do with it.
2.) The "will of the flesh", cannot will itself to become a child of God. Becoming a "child of God", is a right given only by God.
3.) The "will of man", No man can, in anyway teach something, perform something or physically do something that would grant you the right or have an influence upon God.
Verse 13 -"... but God." Which goes back to verse 12 and the portion of the sentence that sates: "...to them gave he the right to become children of God."
Over to you....