Featured None can come but those "given" - Jn. 6:36-40

Baloney, the animal that God killed in the garden to cover Adam and Eve did not sin, yet he died.

Children die as a consequence of Adam's sin, not because they have sinned. Paul clearly shows babies have not sinned in the womb, but millions of babies die in the womb every year.

Rom 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; )

You can't simply ignore scripture that is inconvenient to your personal doctrine. If all men sinned in Adam's loins in the garden as Biblicist believes, then Paul was wrong to say Jacob and Esau had done no evil. In Biblicist's view, both Jacob and Esau ate the forbidden fruit in the garden with Adam, and Paul would be mistaken here.

No, Paul said Jacob and Esau had done no evil in their mother's womb, they had not sinned "in Adam".

Likewise, Paul said he was spiritually alive until he learned the commandments. When he learned the law he was convicted as a sinner and spiritually died.

Paul was absolutely NOT a Calvinist.

 

Do yuo have any children, if so, have you ever had one go wayward, and still loved them, accepted them, but know that they will end up in a bad way, forceing them to 'do as they would will?"

Don'r you think Paul lamented over his own people the jews, willing to go to hell for them if that would save them, yet also knowing only a remant would be saved by grace of God?

 

I only have eight children, how many do you have?

And of course I love them, but this has nothing to do with the discussion at hand.

If God only died for a few select persons, why should Paul lament over the non elect? This makes Paul MORE loving than God, but it also sets Paul in opposition to God's will.

Of course, once you realize that Calvinism is total bunk, and that God desires all persons to be saved, then you realize Paul's will was the same as our heavenly Father's will, and that God is just as loving as Paul was.

Calvinism is absolutely nonsensical, you must throw your brain in the trash to believe it's false doctrines.

 

Oh yeah, Brother winman has seven kids, if I am remembering correctly. He and his wife were "fertile myrtles". They probably could have been like the Duggars and had 19 kids if she hadn't stopped. LOL.

 

The animals killed...God made them coats of skin...was post fall. If we, born after Adam, and he had never sinned, we would have been born in the same "upright" state he was in. But when he fell, we fell, too. Now we are born at enmity and it takes Christ to change that state we're into.

 

No kidding?

Nevertheless, an innocent animal that did not sin died because of sin. Likewise, children who have not sinned die as a consequence of sin.

The animal of course represents sinless Christ who died to pay our sin debt.

You simply do not like when I refute your false teachings, which is very EASY to do with scripture.

 

Biblicist loves to pull a single verse out of the scriptures and isolate it to attempt to prove false doctrine. He objects whenever anyone introduces other scripture that easily refutes his false views.

He is no different from John Calvin himself who would punish anyone who opposed him and disagreed with him. Like father, like son.

 

And I answered you that I will introduce any scripture that I believe refutes your false views.

You can do whatever you wish. You show that you fear opposition.

 

No on can/will come w/o first being drawn. Neither faction denies this. However, the rub is that our side states they will come, whereas the other side states that drawing doesn't actually mean they will come.

I was going to tie into this thread what Brother winman and I were debating, but someone apparently wants to play dictator.

Cool your jets, Brother and continue quoting yourself like you repeatedly do. I am done with this thread. Carry on!! :thumbsup: