Search results

Let me just address a few of the above statements. Too many to address. 1) You either believe once saved always saved or you do not, the seem is double talk. 2) Without evidence, you are claiming I may be a deist. That is the old guilty until proven innocent fiction. It is an effort to...

I am a Progressive Dispensationalist, not a Traditional Dispensationalist. I believe the New Covenant saints are grafted into the promise of the Everlasting Covenant. Thus I am a Gentile descendant of Abraham. We had at least one dispensation, or manner in which God dealt with humanity...

Calvinism's falsehoods of the TULIP are nothing short of a demonic corruption of the Gospel of Christ. Claims without evidence, like the two above, only serve to divide rather than edify. For example, post #67 provides evidence that Acts 13:48 when properly understood through study does not...

Are we supposed to believe you do not know the word I was referring to is the Greek word translated as "ordained" in Acts 13:48, and not the English word "ordained?" As I said, there is nothing more I can say. Let us consider various translations of Acts 13:48 KJV = ordained NKJV = appointed...

I see a lot of verbiage, but apparently of the double talk variety. The issue is not the "light" brought by God to humanity, the issue is whether or not lost humanity is able to receive it and respond such that God saves them without being enabled by supernatural alteration. I say the lost are...

God allows repentance by not hardening the heart. That is the issue. I supported the view by explaining allow is the meaning in the context of repentance. I supported it by showing how God disallows repentance in those whose heart He hardens. such a Judas. Your response was the claim...

If we change the titles of some of the above Doctrines, such as Limited Spiritual Ability rewritten as Ability to Believe, and Preservation of the Saved written as Eternal Security, we get the acronym "GRACE" and thus can be referred to as the "Doctrines of Grace. " General offer of...

Once again a post of hate, directed at an individual, but changing the subject to hide false doctrines.

The logical fallacy of Personal Incredulity I see all the time. The word appears in the NT about 7 times, always referring to a mutually agreed upon arrangement. If you believe your translation is infallible, there is nothing more I can say.

Yes, born anew believers can carry out worthless activity and lose potential rewards. It is not my opinion that scripture says we are indwelt forever. It does not say we are indwelt forever, unless we overpower God and snatch ourselves out of God's grip.

Posting against the person fallacies fuels hate. The person who shot Mr. Kirk thought Mr. Kirk promoted "hate" probably because Mr. Kirk rejected the viewpoint that someone can change his or her God given gender. What if parts of my posts were not intended as insults, but as loving rebukes...

I think this is it: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/charlie-kirks-assassin-lived-transgender-partner-who-now-cooperating-fbi-sources

1) Enlighten means to imbue with saving knowledge? False. They were not saved and therefore did not have the things that accompany salvation. 2) Yes "taste" refers to experiencing something in the now, but does not have lasting effect. Jesus tasted death, but arose! 3) Partakers of the...

Yes! Calvinism claims the opposite of what scripture teaches again and again. Regeneration before faith? Chosen individually before faith. The lost do not and can not seek God. The lost cannot understand the spiritual things concerning the invisible attributes of God. I could go on but you...

There are no verses in Scripture that teach man can lose his salvation, none, zip, nada. All the usual verses address loss of the rewards of salvation. You still did not address the verses where God changes us spiritually which cannot be undone by human effort.

Once again addressing me and claiming personal incredulity. Just because I could not rule out one of the two possible meanings, does not mean I did not conclude it means one of them. The issue is your view cannot be found in scripture, but must be read into scripture. Please support your view...

Again, you seem to accept one translation as indicting exactly what God's word says. But that is absurd. The word translated in your version as "ordained" refers to a mutually agreed upon arrangement. You simply deny this truth, but offer no evidence. As many as took Paul's direction to...

I did not see an "Oops" but rather a change of subject. God allows repentance by not hardening the heart. That is the issue. I supported the view by explaining allow is the meaning in the context of repentance. I supported it by showing how God disallows repentance in those whose heart He...

I see where someone has claimed "Didomi" (G1325) is not translated as "allow" according to his source. Yes, some translation versions do not translate the Greek word ever as allow. But other do. Thus the implication I made the claim up, was posted, based on little or no study. No one, not...

I present my understanding of scripture as clearly as I can. Usually the response is taint so, with no actual rebuttal as to why it taint so. I have posted that no scripture supports Calvinism, except scripture does support once saved always saved. Here is what the OP said: Preservation of...