Ring ring -- reality calling.

"Everyone" does not mean all, but any one of all who believes the Gospel which is the power of God unto salvation

 

does this appear ambiguous to anyone else?

maybe you can clarify, yelsew.

 

Hey you might want to explain the word ambiguous to him jgray.

 

Thanks Yelsew, I left out a comma on the third line between do not, do; and I also need to correct the conclusion, conveniently emboldened, to read:

"...because the Gospel was not effectually applied to him by the Holy Spirit.

This statement was, of course, understood to mean what I said, but not to say what I meant, nevertheless, the referrant remains the same, that to the lost finds their condition to remain so because of the lack of the Power of God in the Gospel presentation they hear, not collectively among the group of hearers, but in that one who does not beleive.

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

 

well done

 

Amen! Npetreley.

Bro. Dallas

 

does this appear ambiguous to anyone else?

maybe you can clarify, yelsew. [/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]"EVERYONE who" = Any part of all who meet a criteria, or all of the "ones" who meet a criteria.
Whosoever = Any part of all.
If "all" is meant, "ALL" is used. For example: "For All have sinned",
"EVERYONE" = Every one, denoting individuals in numbers and if not modified by a word denoting a criteria like "who" is inclusive of all being identified.

 

No, because the will of man is not free. We are bound by the sin nature. Jesus Christ is the only man who enjoyed a free-will in his lifetime; all others' wills are in bondage to sin. If this were not true, the fallacy of 'man choosing by his free-will' would work, because man has no free-will this cannot be so.

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

 

If you refuse to face truth, there is nothing anyone can tell you.

There is none so blind as he who will not see.

It's OK for you to stay in your comfort zone and never find out the truth.

 

Neither election, nor irresistable grace have been scripturally refuted. When scripture is asked for the refutation of these doctrine, the best that is offered is to say scripture must be read through the filter of human experience.

Scripture does say, thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power. Ps. 110

and how then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? Rom. 10.14

My zone is comfortable because I have discontinued my attempts to undermine the Word of God and appease sinful men with it.

I believe we do harm to scripture when we add our filter of life experience, the search for truth should add the filter of scripture throughout our life experiences, but this filter is too fine and strains out too much that natural man does not want strained out, so we must, to please men, filter the word of God according to the intelligence of man, rather than the wisdom of God.

This is trully sad.

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

 

YOU JUST DID! You just attempted to alter the word of God! David, A Jew, speaking of Jews!

Who do you think Paul is speaking of in Rom 10:14? AGAIN, it is the Jews!

Emphasis and Parins are mine, Yelsew

 

OK Yelsew,

David was speaking of Christ in that Psalm, not Israel.

If Paul is speaking of Israel in Romans 10 as you suggest, then you and others must also eliminate the use of this 'roman road' to salvation, (vs. 9)

vs. 14 clearly states:

How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed?

You cannot filter that with anything brother.

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

 

Sorry my friend, but you lose on both counts!
David was a Jew, and Jesus was a Jew. Both were Israelites.

Beginning in Romans 1 Paul is speaking of and comparing to the Jews. He is relating the Gospel by which the Roman became Christians to to the Jews.

It is not possible to exclude vs 9
without excluding vs 8 and 10 too. Of course Calvinism would like that, because it stands out as a stumbling block the "completely helpless" Calvinists. That however, would mean the scriptures would be altered. And your Beloved Paul would be rendered ineffectual because of Altered Scripture.

The following is a continuous flow of thought from Paul. It begins before this text, and continues after this text. But this is the context from which you extract your proof texts. I contend that IN CONTEXT the parts that you extract for proof, do not bear up to be your proof, but do instead knock the props out from under your theology.

All has been foretold in the Old Testament
[Rom 9:25,26] Just as he says in the book of Hosea: I shall tell those who were not my people, `You are my people,' and I shall take pity on those on whom I had no pity. 26] And in the very place where they were told, `You are not my people,' they will be told that they are `children of the living God'

[Rom 9:27-29] And about Israel, this is what Isaiah cried out: Though the people of Israel are like the sand of the sea, only a remnant will be saved; 28 for without hesitation or delay the Lord will execute his sentence on the earth. 29 As Isaiah foretold: Had the Lord Sabaoth not left us a few survivors, we should be like Sodom, we should be the same as Gomorrah.


[Rom 9:30-33] What should we say, then? That the gentiles, although they were not looking for saving justice, found it, and this was the saving justice that comes of faith; 31 while Israel, looking for saving justice by law-keeping, did not succeed in fulfilling the Law. 32/33 And why? Because they were trying to find it in actions and not in faith, and so they stumbled over the stumbling-stone as it says in scripture: Now I am laying in Zion a stumbling-stone, a rock to trip people up; but he who relies on this will not be brought to disgrace.

CHAPTER 10
[Rom 10:1-4] Brothers, my dearest wish and my prayer to God is for them, that they may be saved. 2 I readily testify to their fervour for God, but it is misguided. 3 Not recognising God's saving justice they have tried to establish their own, instead of submitting to the saving justice of God. 4 But the Law has found its fulfilment in Christ so that all who have faith will be justified.

 

Yelsew,

First I want to say I love you.

Next, I want to say that Ps. 110 is not speaking of Israel It is Christ of whom David said, the Lord said unto my Lord, is Israel Lord over David?

Did Israel sit at the right hand of God?

Because this fails, I also do not accept your rendition of Rom. 10.

Rom. 10 is often used among 'free-willers' to bring people in along a so-called roman road, if the verses there cannot apply to the Sovereign Grace of God, then they certainly cannot apply to man's free-will; especially when they are used to 'convince' people in our modern time, many of whom are not Jewish I might add.

Thanks for calling me 'freind.'

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

 

Frogman,

David was an Israelite!
Jesus being in the descending lineage of David was and Israelite.

David, and Israelite, was speaking about His Lord who would be and Israelite too!


Why are you having so much difficulty with language?

 

To say this sounds as if you are saying Christ must believe as is referenced in Rom. 10. Are you saying that David is speaking of Paul's statement 'who shall ascend/who shall descend? If so, I never heard this before. Don't see the connection.

Bro. Dallas

 

Why are you having so much difficulty with language?

Your regional dialect is too different than my own.