Can We Really Exercise Free Will?

[HeIsHere]

Not a problem at all. It's how Paul writes. Just like speaking in Angel language in 1 Corinthians. Paul does that but it's understood that he meant the opposite. But IF YOU TRULY studied the Bible and not a specific doctrine you would know what the majority of Christians know.

Until they let go of the false soteriology they will not truly understand scripture, that is how it works.
Especially a soteriology which creates a morally ambivalent god.

 

[Magenta]

Yeah, that's him, Magenta. He argued using the exact same logic about a different verse

He also denied there being a natural man, one without the indwelling Holy Spirit of God.

This is a common major error of FWers. They must at all costs contradict and deny 1 Cor 2:14.

The natural man does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God. For they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. 1 Corinthians ch 2 v 14

 

[rogerg]

He also denied there being a natural man, one without the indwelling Holy Spirit of God.

This is a common major error of FWers. They must at all costs contradict and deny 1 Cor 2:14.

Yep, they have to, and if they didn't, their whole belief system would be proven wrong - which it is.

 

[lrs68]

You've Got as bad as these others which refuse to see there errors, I actually had you down has having more respect for his word than the crowd you've been following here, ah well never mind, I guess you live and learn, that when it comes to making good judgement you can never be to careful, you've become like the rest of them now, little demi Gods, making things personal and all about me, treating themselves more highly, whilst making out they know God better, whilst they can't admit, God makes a person believe gives people repentance, goes against a persons fleshly free will, directs there steps chooses people for adoption , knows people's future, Gives sight to the blind changes a person heart and makes a person believe, they can't even answer the simplest of questions, without being dogmatic, and now you have dropped to there level.

If the majority of Christians see it differently than you did do it is most likely you are incorrect.

 

[lrs68]

Oh, wise one, and you've determined exactly how "Paul writes" and are using that to make a determination of spiritual doctrine, even those it was God who wrote Scripture not Paul. That's absurd. Where in Scripture do you find any instruction directing that technique? It comes straight from your own imagination! You're a danger to those who want to actually understand Scripture. By your own statement you proved yourself wrong. No wonder you always come to incorrect conclusions regarding Scripture. And it is a problem when you violate the clear direction in Scripture as to how it is to be read and interpreted.

We know how Paul writes because we have his letters and can determine such things. We don't make things up like you do by ignoring writing patterns and specific words used.

 

[NightTwister]

The astute among us will know that Abraham was promised an inheritance because he satisfied the condition/IF
of saving faith in the Lord per Romans 4.

But even that faith was given to him, so he contributed nothing. Same goes for the rest of the elect.

 

[Jordon]

If the majority of Christians see it differently than you did do it is most likely you are incorrect.

Yep all your answers have been what ifs, and because you can make a statement that's appeals to everybody doesn't make it right, anybody can appeal to everybody, just like his word declares everybody is given a chance but few are chosen.
you asked for scripture to back up scripture, it was provided to you on your request, you never gave answers for them, just a personal remark against me for your answer, and now you do the very thing you where against, which is not providing scripture just personal ideas and remarks against me, in your last few posts against me, Which puts you into this category of believers Ephesians 4:18

You have nothing that's worth answering here at all.

 

[Magenta]

If the majority of Christians see it differently than you did do it is most likely you are incorrect.

You did done a logical fallacy.

 

[rogerg]

We know how Paul writes because we have his letters and can determine such things. We don't make things up like you do by ignoring writing patterns and specific words used.

This is getting ridiculous. With you being the biblical scholar you are, I shouldn't have to explain this to you. But okay, what you're saying is that based upon man's own imperfect, subjective, undependable, perceptions of what he's reading - with it being completely untrustworthy - it should still be used to add to Scripture to formulate correct doctrine - and thereby not strictly using God's written word alone to understand God's other written words for formulating doctrine. In effect, by overlaying the written word with your assumptions of writing style that you desire to factor into it, you're adding a layer to Scripture that Scripture doesn't permit. No where in Scripture does it make provisions or allowances for interpretation through the lens of someone's impression of a scribe's writing style; nowhere in Scripture is there any example where it even remotely says anything like, "well these are the actual written words, but because of his writing style, you might want to look at it this way instead".
You would do yourself a big favor that, as much as possible, you stick solely to the basic written word alone and not add or infer anything beyond it. Sure, we are told to think and consider deeply what we're reading but that is completely different than of adding
another layer on top of it.

 

[lrs68]

Yep all your answers have been what ifs, and because you can make a statement that's appeals to everybody doesn't make it right, anybody can appeal to everybody, just like his word declares everybody is given a chance but few are chosen.
you asked for scripture to back up scripture, it was provided to you on your request, you never gave answers for them, just a personal remark against me for your answer, and now you do the very thing you where against, which is not providing scripture just personal ideas and remarks against me, in your last few posts against me, Which puts you into this category of believers Ephesians 4:18

You have nothing that's worth answering here at all.

Have I not only been discussing 2 Corinthians 4 in every post and because you have interjected other Verses I finally mentioned the Theologians?

I don't jump around. First of all, I am a Jew who can trace his lineage back to Seth and the true bloodline. Secondly, I am saved like you are through Jesus Christ and His Amazing Grace.

So you are talking to someone that before the age of 10 I already had the Torah memorized, the first 5 Books of the English Bible. By age 13 I had most of the Tanakh memorized which is the entire Old Testament.

In other words, I have been studying and knowing the Bible including the New Testament almost word for word before you probably were even born.

All you know is a doctrine. But I know the words that are in the Bible Itself. They are life that guide my life.

 

[lrs68]

You did done a logical fallacy.

Lol yeah I like jordon and was trying to say it nicely but ended up typing words not needed lol

 

[Mem]

But even that faith was given to him, so he contributed nothing. Same goes for the rest of the elect.

That faith is counted as righteousness was given to him, and the rest of us.

If the gospel truth is hidden it is because the god of this world's influence (2Cor 4:4), he supports or is the proverbial anti-"helper" of those doubts in which they 'comfort' themselves in their suppression of the truth.

 

[lrs68]

This is getting ridiculous. With you being the biblical scholar you are, I shouldn't have to explain this to you. But okay, what you're saying is that based upon man's own imperfect, subjective, undependable, perceptions of what he's reading - with it being completely untrustworthy - it should still be used to add to Scripture to formulate correct doctrine - and thereby not strictly using God's written word alone to understand God's other written words for formulating doctrine. In effect, by overlaying the written word with your assumptions of writing style that you desire to factor into it, you're adding a layer to Scripture that Scripture doesn't permit. No where in Scripture does it make provisions or allowances for interpretation through the lens of someone's impression of a scribe's writing style; nowhere in Scripture is there any example where it even remotely says anything like, "well these are the actual written words, but because of his writing style, you might want to look at it this way instead".
You would do yourself a big favor that, as much as possible, you stick solely to the basic written word alone and not add or infer anything beyond it. Sure, we are told to think and consider deeply what we're reading but that is completely different than of adding
another layer on top of it.

Have I not only been discussing 2 Corinthians 4 in every post and because you have interjected other Verses I finally mentioned the Theologians?

I don't jump around. First of all, I am a Jew who can trace his lineage back to Seth and the true bloodline. Secondly, I am saved like you are through Jesus Christ and His Amazing Grace.

So you are talking to someone that before the age of 10 I already had the Torah memorized, the first 5 Books of the English Bible. By age 13 I had most of the Tanakh memorized which is the entire Old Testament.

In other words, I have been studying and knowing the Bible including the New Testament almost word for word before you probably were even born.

All you know is a doctrine. But I know the words that are in the Bible Itself. They are life that guide my life.

 

[Magenta]

Lol yeah I like jordon and was trying to say it nicely but ended up typing words not needed lol

It was a logical fallacy whether words were unnecessarily added or not (though of course we agree they were).

 

[rogerg]

YOU said YOU factor writing style into scriptural interpretation. YOU said YOU don't consider all relevant verses. YOU said in this case, that there's only one word that matters for the interpretation of all of those verses. YOU said the related verses were completely dependent upon that one word. That is not the way to find the meaning of "words" nor the way to find correct doctrine

 

[Jordon]

Have I not only been discussing 2 Corinthians 4 in every post and because you have interjected other Verses I finally mentioned the Theologians?

I don't jump around. First of all, I am a Jew who can trace his lineage back to Seth and the true bloodline. Secondly, I am saved like you are through Jesus Christ and His Amazing Grace.

So you are talking to someone that before the age of 10 I already had the Torah memorized, the first 5 Books of the English Bible. By age 13 I had most of the Tanakh memorized which is the entire Old Testament.

In other words, I have been studying and knowing the Bible including the New Testament almost word for word before you probably were even born.

All you know is a doctrine. But I know the words that are in the Bible Itself. They are life that guide my life.

projecting again with your remark of all you know is a doctrine, , and you like me that much to think of me this very little, I'm not a person who walks around the streets with some banner over my head, maybe you think your doing me a favour, but your not, your walking into a lamp post, and im the little lamp post shining a light for you my Jewish friend. Now be Christian and be responsible and say I dint know if I'm completely right about Corinthians 4:3-4

Because It's you that's making unnecessary doctrines out of that verse, your power phrasing things in the the opposite direction against me again here,

You say I'm worshipping doctrines one minute then appeal to everybody, the next

This is what you call power phrasing things in the opposite direction, instead of answering honestly,

 

[lrs68]

YOU said YOU factor writing style into scriptural interpretation. YOU said YOU don't consider all relevant verses. YOU said in this case, that there's only one word that matters for the interpretation of all of those verses. YOU said the related verses were completely dependent upon that one word. That is not the way to find the meaning of "words" nor the way to find correct doctrine

No, I said that is what Scholars and Theologians and Preachers and Teachers and Evangelists and anyone in or have been to Bible College are taught to do.

Whenever you meet someone who doesn't compare Paul's Letters you immediately understand you are talking to someone who doesn't have much education studying the Bible.

How do we know it's probably Paul who wrote Hebrews?

Because we compare certain words and writing style to his other Letters.

But of course that's beyond your insight because you're literally spouting doctrine only that comes from the ideas of MAN.

 

[lrs68]

projecting again with your remark of all you know is a doctrine, , and you like me that much to think of me this very little, I'm not a person who walks around the streets with some banner over my head, maybe you think your doing me a favour, but your not, your walking into a lamp post, and im the little lamp post shining a light for you my Jewish friend. Now be Christian and be responsible and say I dint know if I'm completely right about Corinthians 4:3-4

Because It's you that's making unnecessary doctrines out of that verse, your power phrasing things in the the opposite direction against me again here,

You say I'm worshipping doctrines one minute then appeal to everybody, the next

This is what you call power phrasing things in the opposite direction, instead of answering honestly,

Well what you say comes from a doctrine and from people who present the doctrine.

 

[GWH]

One has to wonder why it is so important to them, to make the Bible read as though it is a book about barriers set up by their god.

I think they are very insecure about their supposed special elect status.
Their vitriol when faced with correct exegesis also makes me think they are extremely insecure as well.

They should be insecure since a God who hates the nonelect might very well trick them into thinking they are elect.

 

[Jordon]

Well what you say comes from a doctrine and from people who present the doctrine.

really what doctrine would that be then What's the doctrine called ?