I admire your stamina.Because "his faith" (Christ's faith) is being accounted to him, which faith justified Abraham.
I recognized the contrarian spirit of malice when a scripture was denigrated to the rank of pet verse.
I admire your stamina.Because "his faith" (Christ's faith) is being accounted to him, which faith justified Abraham.
Thats correct. I can not will my kids to be saved..I can not will for them to believe in Christ. they must believe themselvesJohn also said it was not of...the will of the flesh, but of God.
So that set of verses only reflect the current argument.
And while my explanation may not seem reasonable to you, your arguments are equally untenable to those on the other side of the discussion.
and here he is again..I admire your stamina.![]()
I recognized the contrarian spirit of malice when a scripture was denigrated to the rank of pet verse.
in that passage, where does it say GODS faith cause abraham to believe God?It was Christ's faith imputed to Abraham that gave him his belief. Christ's faith is the only faith that is righteous.
Again, what seems unreasonable to you, seems perfectly clear to another. And vice-versa.Thats correct. I can not will my kids to be saved..I can not will for them to believe in Christ. they must believe themselves
It causes the word to contradict itself..
John said but as many as received him, to THEM he gave the power or right.
Paul said Abraham believed God. and THEN it was accounted to him. and in the same mannor, iuf WE believe God, he will account it to us also.
the reason it is not reasonable. is because it causes the word of God to contradict. Which in my view. makes the word unbelievable..
in that passage, where does it say GODS faith cause abraham to believe God?
please word for word. I broke the passage down for you. You break it down for me
Its unreasonable that God says power is given to those who receive christ and you say power is given SO they can receive ChristAgain, what seems unreasonable to you, seems perfectly clear to another. And vice-versa.
I admire your stamina.![]()
I recognized the contrarian spirit of malice when a scripture was denigrated to the rank of pet verse.
well yeah, one can.That was/is my point. One cannot come to a correct interpretation from only one verse. All pertinent verses
must be considered. God did not write the Bible to be understood that way.
Its unreasonable that God says power is given to those who receive christ and you say power is given SO they can receive Christ
Its unreasonable to say Abraham believed God. and THEN it was accounted to him as righteousness. to say God imputed faith to Abraham, which caused Abraham to believe, and cause Abraham to be counted as righteous (justified)
its unreasonable that God claims to be a God of love. and tells us to love others as he loved us. But then picked and chose who to love and who not to love, in other words. telling us to do what he himself refused to do.
I can go on and on and on.
well yeah, one can.
Where did you find a "then"?
If you're going to criticize God for choosing based upon election, then what happens to those people, who for whatever reason outside of their control, cannot do that which you say they must do for salvation? Do you think God unjust in judging them for
reasons outside of their control? Would He be doing to them what (according to you) He himself refuses to do, or do you
choose to ignore that aspect?
dude, your pride runs deep.Well yeah, you can because you're not really interested in following the biblical admonitions it sets forth
for instructions as to how it should be read. It's no wonder that is why you keep coming to incorrect conclusion.
Where do you see the word Gods gave his faiht to abraham??
I am criticizing your interpretation of election. And your interpretation of Gods love. Not God
so you choose to ignore my question?
You do not tell a person thay have no excuse (romans 1) and then tell them they are condemned forever. even though he never gave them a chance to repent..
dude, your pride runs deep.
You keep attacking me with nonsense.. You assume you are right. I could use the same argument on you. But I chose to be more humble.
Your pride is your worse enemy.. I see perfectly clear my friend..
Are you guys engaged in a priding contest?dude, your pride runs deep.
You keep attacking me with nonsense.. You assume you are right. I could use the same argument on you. But I chose to be more humble.
Your pride is your worse enemy.. I see perfectly clear my friend..
You do not tell a person thay have no excuse (romans 1) and then tell them they are condemned forever. even though he never gave them a chance to repent..
Are you guys engaged in a priding contest?
God in His role as Christ. He gives the faith of Christ to all He makes born again, including Abraham.
we have been over this 100 times, these are gifts the spirit gives to those who have been saved and have been given the HS. Which paul in eph 1: 13- 14 sdays happens after we heard the word, then believe then we are sealed (given) the HS. Your gifts are THEN givenIt says that here:
[Gal 5:22 KJV] 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
No one will come to jesus with out being drawn and taught by God..The same argument can be made for your argument for those people who cannot come to belief for reasons outside of their control.
God owes salvation to no one. He gives it to whomsoever He desires to.
lol..You chose to ignore my question to you. Here it is again: if someone, through no fault of their own, cannot do those things that you deem as a requirement for salvation, then how would you assess God in not saving him, since it being
beyond his control? Explanation, please.