Those whom the Gospel hasn't reached

I am sure there are some looney ones out there I have not heard.

 

And you know all of the ones you do not know about are looney too.

 

Anything NEW in theology can pretty much be guaranteed to be un-Scriptural. Any theory about Soteriology that is Scriptural, I have heard of. If it has not made it into any of the Theology text books, it's pretty much guaranteed to be nutty.

So, what is this "third" theory you have that perfectly harmonizes with every Scriptural passage?

 

Jesus' words, which I know FreeBaptist reveres:

“He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." John 3:18

"He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” John 3:36

 

Regareding what point of disagreemnt. Two contrary views. Only one can be right. Both can be wrong, in which case a third view can be possible.

 

What is your third position?

 

Regarding what? Give an example of two contrary Bible interetations you think that neither can be correct.

 

Did I say neither was correct? No. I said both have scriptures that do not perfectly fit. Think back, We were discussing C vs A.

 

Your the one who made that claim.

Both views are wrong. Names are already in the book, only to be kept in the book (Revelation 3:5; 1 John 5:4-5) or not to be written there (Exodus 32:33; Psalms 69:27-28; Revelation 20:15). Children are safe (Mark 10:14). Once we become of age to be held responssible we must again become counted as children (Mark 10:15; John 3:3-4).

 

Start a thread on that one. It's a discussion of its own.