Could some of your children be not elect of God?

1 made into 6.

 

You're reading The Bible, but there has been a twisting of the passage there, into a Wicker Chair.

It adds 'unbelief' to God's Revelation of Predestination and then misinterpreted inferences are sandwiched over 'law' and 'attained' to pervert them.

It's a pure rewriting.

 

Oh I am perfectly aware they are rewriting Scripture. That's the only way you can deny the doctrines of grace is to either rewrite parts of Scripture or ignore parts of Scripture.

 

Yep, attained, 'by the works of the law'.

Not there.

 

No. I'm saying the first recorded birth was a child of the devil.

 

We are all the children of Wrath.

Yes, Cain was left to The Wrath of God and was a murderer, who's supernatural evil influence was Satan, on his lost, blind soul.

Cain 'was of that wicked one' in that way.

Not by procreation.

Cain was not the offspring of Satan.

King James Version
"Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous." I John 3:12.

 

You claim the "doctrines of grace" like your flawed systematic theology has a monopoly on the phrase, yet my non-predeterministic doctrines of grace are more inclusive than yours and uses scripture to relay the truth of the Good News of a genuine offer of salvation for whosoever will believe, rather than leaving out the Bad News that only a lucky special few have been pre-selected to have the ability to respond to the light.

 

More inclusive? What in the world does inclusiveness have anything to do with anything?

 

You start with a premise that humans will seek God, apart from God calling them out.
It is a false premise. We see the first two sinners hiding from God, not seeking Him. God calls them. God graciously covers their nakedness (their guilt). God shows mercy toward them and gives them a promise of redemption and reconciliation through a promised one.
Your theology of grace is not more inclusive. In fact, it's not grace. It's human merit moving God to act. We call that works salvation. You just declare that all humanity can work their way to God by seeking and choosing. It's all inclusive works salvation. Grace. Grace is only God responding to your good works as you demand he respond. That's not even grace, even though you imagine it so.

 

'whosoever will believe' are The Elect from Eternity Past that God Preordained to Have Jesus Agree to Purchase them with His Blood, and The Holy Spirit Agreed to Bring those souls under the Preaching of God and Grant them understanding of their sin against God, Enabled Conviction in their soul, and Gave them The Divine Nature in The New Birth, to Repent of their Total Depravity, and Faith in Jesus to Have Died on ACCOUNT of their sin, personally, and Belief that Jesus Rose from the Dead, with the Power of Life Over Death, because God Accepted Jesus Payment for their soul.

False religious teaching don't know about How God Saves a soul, or from what.

They just pretend.

It's play 'church' that has very little use or love for God's Word and is heretical.

 

THERE'S THE WORD!!

THERE'S THE WORD!!

PARTICULAR SAID,
"THE FIRST TWO SINNERS..."

Wow!!

I lived to see it, tonight!!!!

YAHOOOO!!!

 

Preaching the Gospel while not being transparent that one believes most people do not have the ability to respond to it is just pretending...

To try to put darkness into the light of the Gospel is heretical.

(Joh 1:9) That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.


(1Jn 1:5) This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.

(1Jn 1:6) If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:

 

Not being transparent? What is not transparent? That makes no sense.

What darkness is being put in? Now you are just making stuff up.

 

So, "the preaching of the Gospel is foolishness", to you.

 

That's what I'm reading.

 

I'm sorry, are there people here who are shocked by that?

 

Telling a child, believe and you will be saved, but leaving out the part of your doctrinal teachings that most don't have such an ability is not being transparent. - and that's a nice way to put it.

 

Why do I have to put that in there. Preach to all as if they are elect because we do not know who is or is not. Your thoughts on this are just plain stupid. And that's a nice way to put it.

 

You might want to read that again rather than childishly try to put accusing words into my mouth to form your argument.

 

No, he had it right.