Featured Cornelius’ Conversion

Since you have admitted your own ignorance as to what Acts 10 means, I would be interested in you explaining how my understanding is “warped”.

Are you able to explain your objection, or are you only capable of insults?

peace to you

 

You think this, but clearly you think your idea and feelings are truth. That does not mean God agrees with your opinion

 

No, showing what persona you consistently emanate. You're ate up with CDS.

 

So stop bringing it up as your crutch. Let us address God's word and evaluate what God is saying. Is it wrong that hundreds of thousands of people read the Bible and observe scripture in a very similar way to what John Calvin observed? If hundreds of thousands of people observe similarly to John Calvin, yet have never read his writings, can we conclude that these truths are actually observable in the Bible? The answer is...Yes

Now, please stop falling on Calvin as your crutch to avoid what is observed in scripture.

 

You too. You're ate up with CDS.

 

I do understand the passage in context, but I see there is no chance for fruitful discussion with you.

thanks for the conversation.

peace to you

 

Stop claiming that Calvinism is Biblical. because it isn't. Certainly I'll be glad to keep it up
MB

 

These words are used many times especially when you've lost the debate.
MB

 

Wrong I'm devoured by the truth of God and you can't see it.
MB

 

Corny evidently worshipped God before his salvation, but he had no knowledge of Jesus, so Pete was sent to him to proclaim Jesus. Gospel, which Corny & household readily believed. As a Roman, he hadn't grown up with the knowledge of God, but he evidently heard it from the Jews he dealt with.

Apollos, like Corny, worshipped God without knowing Jesus, and, unlike Corny, had good Scriptural knowledge. And he also readily accepted & believed the Gospel when he heard it. becoming a powerful preacher for Jesus.

 

You are not holding to the truth as expressed by the Apostles in Bible though regarding this issue!

 

Both he and the Jailer are proofs of how that the Lord will make sure to get to his own the Gospel message that saves!

 

Really?

First, I haven’t lost the debate. I presented the passage in context and explained what it meant.

The other “debater” proclaimed his ignorance of the meaning of the passage. Therefore, any rejection of other opinions must be evaluated in light of his acknowledged ignorance of the meaning of the passage.

I have acknowledged the obvious with him, and now you, that fruitful discussion is impossible with those who proclaim ignorance and then reject out of hand any explanation contrary to their unbiblical bias.

Thanks for the conversation

peace to you

 

I have yet to talk about Calvin. However Reformed theology is very much biblical. Your hatred surrounding human depravity, unmerited election, limited atonement, irresistible grace and perseverance in faith is noted, but all of these issues are very much biblical.

 

Despite your assertion it is clear your assertion is not reality.

 

To whom? You in your dementia.
MB

 

However 'acceptable' these works may have been to God, they couldn't save Cornelius. Otherwise there would have been no reason for Peter to come and preach Christ to him.
Clearly Cornelius was seeking God. He had given up worshipping the pagan deities and was attending a synagogue where he will have been taught something of works salvation (Romans 10:1-3). He was diligently seeking to be saved by his works, but it is plain also that he had come to understand that he couldn't get right with God that way, and was seeking Him through prayer and fasting. Now there is a promise in the Bible that 'You will find [God] if you seek Him with all your heart and with all your soul,' yet even that would not have produced results on its own. But God, who had loved Cornelius from the foundation of the world and had been drawing him with lovingkindness (Jeremiah 31:3), arranged for Peter to come and preach the Gospel to him because, 'Since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe'

 

How do you define 'acceptable to the Lord' since you agree his works didn't save him? I confess I find the term difficult.
However, whatever Cornelius was, it was God who made him so. 'What God has cleansed you must not call common.' It was God who cleansed the heart of Cornelius and put into his heart the desire to do these deeds and to seek God, as of course it was God who put together the events that brought Peter to Cornelius' house. It is not possible that the deeds put God under any sort of obligation to save Cornelius, 'otherwise grace is no more grace.' 'Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt' and God is no man's debtor.