Search results

But the topic of this discussion is not soteriology but God's attributes, namely his love. Stick to the topic of the love attribute and quit trying to conflate his attributes with soteriology. After all, His love did not require him to save fallen angels, did it? Since God loved Christ...

Yes, there is hope for you IF YOU one day can acknowledge and confess to God that you're a helpless, wretched, vile, depraved sinner with a desperately wicked and deceitful heart and cry out to the Lord to rescue you.

I'm saying that "royal lineage" isn't the topic in Rom 9. Rom 9 follows immediately upon the heels of the central passage in scripture that deals with Predestination and Unconditional Election, i.e. Rom 8:28ff. In fact, the passage is worth quoting because it tells us the reason behind what...

So what precisely was the condition under which the Father loved the Son, since he didn't need forgiveness? And now you're saying that God's love for sinners is conditional in nature because they need forgiveness? Equivocate much? Duplicitous much? :rolleyes:

I have already publicly on this forum acknolwledged my spiritual impotence, weakness, frailty and have praised the Lord for rescuing me from the jaws of the second death! But your PRIDE will not allow you to do that because your deceitful heart has lied to you; for you think your mighty...

No kidding, Dick Tracy! But only the CHILDREN OF PROMISE are the true Israel. What part v. 6 can't you understand? :rolleyes:

There is NO messianic lineage in Rom 9. You're eyes are lying to you! The focus is on Abraham's descendants, save for Pharaoh of course! Two of them were "children of promise" and, therefore, "children of GOD"! The other two were mere physical descendants of Abraham, and they were rejected...

So, God loves the Son conditionally because He needs forgiveness? And God loves sinners unconditionally because they're not in need of forgiveness?

Again, you are conflating love with your arbitrary selection of aspects of salvation, i.e. "forgiveness" OR "oneness". There is no secular or biblical definition of love that defines it as "forgiveness" or "oneness". Tell me: Does God love all his free moral agents, including the angels?

So...since by your own admission you (and the rest of us) have not attained to experiential perfection in this "already" eschatological state then this must mean that we nonetheless have attained to perfection in another sense of the "already", i.e. positionally -- that is to say by virtue of...

Another lie from the pit of hell! The passage does not say that God loves the ungodly! It says just the opposite! Rom 5:6-11 6 You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. 7 Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous man, though for a good man...

IOW, you cannot believe your lying eyes and how Rom 9:6 reads which is about why God's Word has not failed. There's nothing about Israel's failure in the verse, since at the end of the day, man's eternal destiny is in God's hands, which Paul clearly understood. Don't you know, yet, that man's...

First of all, you omit 3 other individuals. What happened to Ishmael, Issac and Pharaoh? Also, how we can know for certain that Paul clearly had individuals in mind is by his division of two kinds of Abrhamic descendants: One group of descendants were related to Abraham only by natural...

Good evening, Mz. Mem. I will certainly let you and Studier hash out your premise and your interesting questions and ideas; but I see a flaw in your premise that I'd like to bring to your attention. God created everything "very good"! But does "very good" equate to perfection? If the angels...

No it is not! You need to explain to us HOW God's dual nature of love (conditional and unconditional) do not violate the Law of Non-contradiction. How can God at once and in the same sense love some people conditionally and others unconditionally? Moreover, you have another serious problem to...

All of which are not contingent on THINGS he foresees the objects of grace doing!

This cannot possibly be! Ain't "us" a personal pronoun? Even if it is, this is a very easy fix for GWH. He turns a personal pronoun into an impersonal one -- and voila! The problem magically disappears. This is what FWers do to Rom 8:29. They turn "those" or "whom" in this verse into...

All GWH has to offer are his canned, rehearsed, spoon-fed proof texts, so called. His critical thinking skills are non-existent or very close to it.

So...things are predestined but not people themselves?

GWH's memory is shot. He willfully ignores other pertinent scriptures such as the fact that Jesus gives life to whomever He wishes! Eternal life is not contingent on man's "freewill" decisions. Sinners do not will themselves from their spiritual tombs.