Featured Faith is a Good Work we do after being created in Christ !

This is your mantra. What it really shows is that you cannot answer Don. If you could you would. Because you can't you just throw this back at him, as do at me, Steaver, and almost everyone else on the board.

 

They are not "evaded," they are deliberately "avoided" as not relevant.
You cannot answer a question without coming back with your mantra: "Do you understand each and every one of my points...go through them first."
Sorry. That is not debate, and no one here is compelled to do your bidding first. Debate is you answering the question posed before you, not you evading their question by demanding something else from them. You demonstrate failure each and every time.

 

I did. I clearly pointed out that you misused Acts 16. What did you not understand?

 

Okay, let me try this again: you made an opening statement containing multiple points. I countered with an opposition of your first point. Now you're supposed to discuss why my opposing point is incorrect.

 

Please review post #17.

 

As I explained in post #17, your first point was that faith is a work; and then you defined work while omitting the definition of faith. You "forced" faith to adopt the definition of work. Then you used Acts 16:30 to support your point, while ignoring context of the jailer's question and Paul's reply to him.

Now it is your responsibility to discuss why you omitted the definition of faith, forced faith to take on the definition of work, and misused Acts 16:30 to support the re-definition of faith.

 

How is this evasion? I addressed your very first point. YOU are the one that won't debate what I've written about your very first point, so YOU are the one who is evading.

Be always ready to give an answer, as scripture says. If you won't discuss what we find problematic with your posts, then YOU are not defending God's Word, and are teaching falsehood.

Defend your first point against what I have written opposing it.

 

See posts 17 and 31.

 

I explained that in both the posts. What do you not understand about my explanation of your first point, and why it is wrong?

I have an additional question that may help: is English your first language, or is it your second (or even third, or more)?

 

You aren't going back and forth. You made an opening statement; I provided an opposing point refuting your statement. At this time, you haven't written *anything* that explains why my opposing point is wrong. You simply keep asking what your point was; I tell you; then you ask what your point was.

If I incorrectly identified your point, then it is YOUR responsibility to point out my error. That is called reasonable, intelligent debate.

SO - my posts 17 and 31 identify what I believe is wrong about your opening post. Please review them with me, and tell me what is wrong with my opposing point.

 

He has you guys chasing your tails. Don't feed into his posts. I learned that the hard way.