E
EleventhHour
Guest
In other words you attack him by calling him bias and say he is contradicting scripture because you do not have answer for his arguments either.
Waiting......
In other words you attack him by calling him bias and say he is contradicting scripture because you do not have answer for his arguments either.
Good one!!
There is a part of me that feels that way for sure.... hitting my head against the wall is not fun!!
View attachment 210918
You just got done saying that you were beating your head against the wall and you did not care if I answered. So what exactly are you waiting on?Waiting......
It truly amazes me how you can refute someone’s arguments until you are blue in the face, but it’s like they did not hear a word you said (and there is a reason for that) then they have the audacity to falsely accuse you of not having an answer for their arguments.Waiting......
Waiting......
And yet the last reply to you went to each one your points and showed your error.It truly amazes me how you can refute someone’s arguments until you are blue in the face, but it’s like they did not hear a word you said (and there is a reason for that) then they have the audacity to falsely accuse you of not having an answer for their arguments.![]()
More attacks and no content.Don't hold your breath... he pretended I didn't have an answer for him when he re-vomited out the same nonsense he always does
so I reply with scriptures and he then ignored my post days ago...
Just a false accuser it seems...
And yet the last reply to you went to each one your points and showed your error.
More attacks and no content.
You just got done saying that you were beating your head against the wall and you did not care if I answered. So what exactly are you waiting on?
Funny....
I thought it would to much for you with each issue being addressed so let's do it in smaller chunks. So once againIn verse 39, the writer of Hebrews sets up the CONTRAST that makes it clear to me that he was referring to unbelievers, not saved people: But WE are not OF THOSE who draw back to perdition, BUT OF THOSE who believe to the saving of the soul. Those who draw back to perdition do not believe to the saving of the soul and those who believe to the saving of the soul do not draw back to perdition.
I find it interesting that the KJV reads - ..but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. The NKJV reads - ..if anyone draws back, My soul has no pleasure in him.” The NIV reads - And I take no pleasure in the one who shrinks back. Even if the "he" mentioned in relation to the shrinking back is the "righteous one" regardless, the first clause is clarified by the second clause in verse 39 - But "we" are not of those who draw back to perdition, but of those who believe to the saving of the soul.![]()
More attacks no content. Address the last post to dan please and if you prove it wrong I will recant and give glory to GODHypocrite.
You claim I show error in each point (attack without content)
After you claim I had nothing for your typical vomit. (which I then said I know how this goes we have been at this many times before)
Which you then falsely denied.
You are an accuser and a hypocrite who has never said anything of value that I've seen.
And it should also be noted that one can not draw back from something UNLESS THEY ARE IN A PLACE TO DRAW BACK FROM. And that place in which they were is the Just that was living by faith.
More attacks no content. Address the last post to dan please and if you prove it wrong I will recant and give glory to GOD
You are not fooling me for one second and the truth in post #126,157 still stands.I thought it would to much for you with each issue being addressed so let's do it in smaller chunks. So once again
Please follow along......
"But the just one shall live by faith;" "and if HE is drawing back," "My soul is not pleased in him." But we are not of those withdrawing to destruction, but of faith, to the preservation of the soul.
(Heb 10:38-39)
The word for drawing back is in the 3rd person singular. Proper grammar dictates if a word is used within the same sentence that a Noun or Adjective is used that is put forth in the singular that is the Subject, that the third person singular is reference to the subject. That would be the "just one" in the previous clause.
That is why most translation translate the passage with a "if he" or an "and if he" in relation to the word translated draws back. Because proper grammar dictates it. Incidentally the NET2's New Testament general letters is part of the work of one who is considered to be one of best Greek Scholars of our era. Daniel B. Wallace of the Dallas Seminary'. He would not have his name on it unless he approved. It is listed here along with numerous other translation that have that part of the translated properly.
But my righteous one will live by faith, and if he shrinks back, I take no pleasure in him.
(Heb 10:38 NET2)
"But the just shall live by faith;" "and if he draws back," "My soul is not pleased in him. But we are not of those withdrawing to destruction, but of faith, to the preservation of the soul.
(Heb 10:38-39 LITV)
But my just man liveth by faith: but if he withdraw himself, he shall not please my soul.
(Heb 10:38 DRB)
But my righteous one shall live by faith: And if he shrink back, my soul hath no pleasure in him.
(Heb 10:38 ASV)
But my righteous one shall live by faith: And if he shrink back, my soul hath no pleasure in him.
(Heb 10:38 RV)
but my righteous one will live by faith, and if he turns back, my soul will take no pleasure in him."
(Heb 10:38 ISV)
But the just will live (by) faith; and if he should draw back, my soul is not delighting (in) him.
(Heb 10:38 GUV)
But My righteous one will live by faith. And if he draws-back, My soul is not well-pleased with him”.
(Heb 10:38 DLNT)
And it should also be noted that one can not draw back from something UNLESS THEY ARE IN A PLACE TO DRAW BACK FROM. And that place in which they were is the Just that was living by faith.
So with all that being stated one must reason that either you are right AND GOD through the Holy Spirit inspired the writer of Hebrews to use bad grammar and sentence structure. Which would make the text imperfect. Or you have been misunderstanding the text.
You are not reading the posts to which you are responding to.heb 10
If you truly believe this is saying willful sin will make you lose the once and for all forever sacrifice of sin, you must also believe if you sin once on purpose you lost salvation forever.... He sat down, also read hebrews 6
.
If we are sinning willfully we are his adversaries because we trampled underfoot the Son of God and counted the blood of the Covenant a unholy thing and done Despite UNTO the Spirit of Grace.27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.
________
We are His children... not adversaries.... like vs 13 who He will make His footstool AFTER SITTING DOWN and perfecting us forever through Jesus
"But the just one shall live by faith;" "and if HE is drawing back," "My soul is not pleased in him." But we are not of those withdrawing to destruction, but of faith, to the preservation of the soul.39 But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.
No the following is facts. Your conjecture does not change this.You are not fooling me for one second and the truth in post #126,157 still stands.