What We Love to "Hear"

[Winman]

I don't recall of one instance of Christ healing the deaf or blind in which the person did not want to be healed.
Son of David have mercy on me...cried the blind man. He called out for Jesus and by calling Him "son of David", he revealed that He knew Jesus was the Son of God, the Messiah.

You are correct Amy, the scriptures repeatedly show the blind, lame, lepers, and others coming to Jesus. In fact, in several instances Jesus almost seemed to walk by and ignore the sick until they begged him to heal them.
Matt 9:27-31 And when Jesus departed thence, two blind men FOLLOWED HIM, CRYING, and saying, Thou Son of David, have mercy on us. And when he was come into the house, THE BLIND MEN CAME TO HIM: and Jesus saith unto them, Believe ye that I am able to do this? They said unto him, Yea, Lord. THEN touched he their eyes, saying, According to your faith be it unto you. AND THEIR EYES WERE OPENED; and Jesus straitly charged them, saying, See that no man know it. But they, when they were departed, spread abroad his fame in all that country.

Did Jesus come to them? No, he ignored them at first. Note that they followed him which is an incredible thing. How did they do this? I don't know, perhaps they found others to assist them. But they had faith, they knew Jesus would help if they persisted.
Did Jesus open their eyes before or after they believed? AFTER!
Faith comes by hearing, they had heard of Jesus, and now they too spread his fame so others could hear, believe, and then come to Jesus.

Get your theology from the scriptures, not by the teachings of men.

 

[Robert Snow]

Get out the whip Robert, it just aint dead like a corpse yet.

I'm not worried. I know the horse died of it's own free will.

 

[Amy.G]

I'm not worried. I know the horse died of it's own free will.

Poor horse.

 

[quantumfaith]

Poor horse.

Love it Amy.

 

[preacher4truth]

I understand! Each of you cannot answer the other allusion of (not only being spiritually blind) but also of being spiritually deaf and unable to hear Him, that He must enable us to do so. You can't glorify God in it, nor can you stand seeing Him glorified, nor can you accept the fact that He must do it all, and since you aren't exalted in it you resort to crayons and insolent behavior. Thus you label a thread, calvinistic in nature, which calvinism you fight on other threads constantly, but call what you can't argue against a dead horse.

Typical.

:thumbsup:

 

[InTheLight]

I understand! Each of you cannot answer the other allusion of (not only being spiritually blind) but also of being spiritually deaf and unable to hear Him, that He must enable us to do so. You can't glorify God in it, nor can you stand seeing Him glorified, nor can you accept the fact that He must do it all, and since you aren't exalted in it you resort to crayons and insolent behavior. Thus you label a thread, calvinistic in nature, which calvinism you fight on other threads constantly, but call what you can't argue against a dead horse.

Typical.

:thumbsup:

Distorting someone's theological position and then tearing it down seems to be typical of the debates in this corner of the forum, especially when it comes to reformed theology. Both sides are guilty of it.

 

[webdog]

Distorting someone's theological position and then tearing it down seems to be typical of the debates in this corner of the forum, especially when it comes to reformed theology. Both sides are guilty of it.

Put him on ignore like I did, it will keep you from putting up with his trollish banter. I've only had to put 2 people on ignore 6 years, and both made it a habit or trying to get you to sin.

Ironic, though, that Adam and Eve were not "deaf" when they were spiritually dead and God called them. Same with those who were with Saul when Christ knocked him from his horse. Those with him heard Christ.

 

[Amy.G]

I understand! Each of you cannot answer the other allusion of (not only being spiritually blind) but also of being spiritually deaf and unable to hear Him, that He must enable us to do so. You can't glorify God in it, nor can you stand seeing Him glorified, nor can you accept the fact that He must do it all, and since you aren't exalted in it you resort to crayons and insolent behavior. Thus you label a thread, calvinistic in nature, which calvinism you fight on other threads constantly, but call what you can't argue against a dead horse.

Typical.

:thumbsup:

Not true. We've been arguing against it for years and there is nothing new under the sun. Same argument, same scripture presented, and this topic has been argued more times on the BB than the stars in the sky.

It's not that we can't argue it, it's that after a point, it's just useless..... like a dead horse.

 

[Winman]

Not true. We've been arguing against it for years and there is nothing new under the sun. Same argument, same scripture presented, and this topic has been argued more times on the BB than the stars in the sky.

It's not that we can't argue it, it's that after a point, it's just useless..... like a dead horse.

I presented a passage of scripture, but you Cals ignored it. The OP argued that physical healings represented regeneration in the Calvinist view, the passage I showed completely refutes it. The blind men's eyes were not opened until after they had believed. It also showed man's participation, Jesus seemed to ignore these men until they persisted, following him and begging him to heal them.

We show you evidence all the time that refutes your views, but you simply ignore anything that does not agree with your doctrine.

 

[Luke2427]

Put him on ignore like I did, it will keep you from putting up with his trollish banter. I've only had to put 2 people on ignore 6 years, and both made it a habit or trying to get you to sin.

Ironic, though, that Adam and Eve were not "deaf" when they were spiritually dead and God called them. Same with those who were with Saul when Christ knocked him from his horse. Those with him heard Christ.

They were not physically deaf. God spoke in an audible voice. The fall does not affect one's ability to pick up sound waves.

 

[jbh28]

Distorting someone's theological position and then tearing it down seems to be typical of the debates in this corner of the forum, especially when it comes to reformed theology. Both sides are guilty of it.

Yeah, but Calvinists were predestined to do it, so they can't help it. Arminians did it on their own free will, so they are at fault. :laugh:

 

[Luke2427]

I presented a passage of scripture, but you Cals ignored it. The OP argued that physical healings represented regeneration in the Calvinist view, the passage I showed completely refutes it. The blind men's eyes were not opened until after they had believed. It also showed man's participation, Jesus seemed to ignore these men until they persisted, following him and begging him to heal them.

We show you evidence all the time that refutes your views, but you simply ignore anything that does not agree with your doctrine.

We need to get back to our debate. The thread that we were debating so nicely on was closed. You game?

 

[preacher4truth]

They were not physically deaf. God spoke in an audible voice. The fall does not affect one's ability to pick up sound waves.

Exactly.

I'm glad he has me on ignore.

That's the point, they can't distinguish between physical and spiritual hearing. There is a difference. His texts prove nothing as is usual.

I'm trying to get you to sin?

Please. You sin all on your own. If you can't handle good debate, put the one who has your goat on ignore, that way you won't have to face it.

Learn to distinguish between spiritual deafness and physical deafness. Let him who has ears to hear, hear.

My point is plain: Without Him intervening and doing the saving we are forever lost. He did it all. And if you all want to use the illustration that He made you see so you could be saved, He also made you hear too, spiritually. He did ALL of it or none of it.

 

[Luke2427]

Exactly.

I'm glad he has me on ignore.

That's the point, they can't distinguish between physical and spiritual hearing. There is a difference. His texts prove nothing as is usual.

I'm trying to get you to sin?

Please. You sin all on your own. If you can't handle good debate, put the one who has your goat on ignore, that way you won't have to face it.

Learn to distinguish between spiritual deafness and physical deafness. Let him who has ears to hear, hear.

My point is plain: Without Him intervening and doing the saving we are forever lost. He did it all. And if you all want to use the illustration that He made you see so you could be saved, He also made you hear too, spiritually. He did ALL of it or none of it.

Webdog and I have been on good terms recently and I hate to mess that up but what he fails to recognize is that he is a lightening rod for controversy himself.

Anyone who doesn't bend over for smart remarks is going to fall out with webdog until he learns to be more respectful in his posts.

He has been respectful to me the last couple of weeks and it has been a relief. I hope that he will learn to do this in all of his conversations.

I think that you have made some arguments that he cannot answer and must resort to insults.

I wish we would all learn to stick to the subject matter rather than get frustrated when someone points out our error and resort to personal insults and smart alek remarks.

We could make progress if people like webdog would learn to be more respectful in the way he posts.

That includes me- I am trying.

But Webdog is constantly slamming you rather than addressing your arguments. I don't think he understands that your aggressiveness toward him is riled BY him.

I hope this will cease.

 

[webdog]

Webdog and I have been on good terms recently and I hate to mess that up but what he fails to recognize is that he is a lightening rod for controversy himself.

Anyone who doesn't bend over for smart remarks is going to fall out with webdog until he learns to be more respectful in his posts.

He has been respectful to me the last couple of weeks and it has been a relief. I hope that he will learn to do this in all of his conversations.

I think that you have made some arguments that he cannot answer and must resort to insults.

I wish we would all learn to stick to the subject matter rather than get frustrated when someone points out our error and resort to personal insults and smart alek remarks.

We could make progress if people like webdog would learn to be more respectful in the way he posts.

That includes me- I am trying.

But Webdog is constantly slamming you rather than addressing your arguments.

I hope this will cease.

So much for being on good terms, huh?

Fact: If you are respectful to me and discuss topics, I do the same. When you start throwing around insults and attacks, send threatening PM's, and are down right un-christlike, I have no problem being blunt and throwing it right back in your face. I thought you approved of this approach? If you (and others) demand respect, you better give it out as well.

The fact you and I have been on good terms the past few weeks is due to the fact you have been civil. Do you see a pattern? Discuss things respectfully, I will do the same. Resort to insults and attacks, and I have no problem in bringing them to light. P4T is what is referred to in cyber world as an internet troll. All one has to do is go back and see his posting history to confirm this. I have him on ignore due to the fact he has caused me to sin by his PM's, and do not want that to be the case going forward.

Oh...and there hasn't been one topic of his (and yours) I "haven't been able to answer". You guys just don't like the answers given.

 

[webdog]

They were not physically deaf. God spoke in an audible voice. The fall does not affect one's ability to pick up sound waves.

Wait...I thought "dead is dead"...and what purpose is there in hardening a dead heart, or blinding a corpse?

 

[Luke2427]

So much for being on good terms, huh?

I don't think that is necessary. But the fact that you do is proof of what I am trying to say to you here.

You are a rooster. And you are fine around hens. But as soon as another rooster enters the roost- it is on.

I am a rooster and so is p4t. So we three have trouble getting along.

I like roosters. I think men ought to be roosters to some degree. But this trouble is over the top.

This needs to stop.

Fact: If you are respectful to me and discuss topics, I do the same.

It is my thinking that this is not 100% accurate. I think you need to consider the possibility that you can be a terrible smart alek FIRST and THEN folks get rough with you.

When you start throwing around insults and attacks, send threatening PM's, and are down right un-christlike, I have no problem being blunt and throwing it right back in your face. If you (and others) demand respect, you better give it to me as well.

[/QUOTE]

I agree with giving respect before expecting it. But I have in the past posted 30 pretty cutting insults you made in a couple week span.

You can be VERY insulting with those who are doing nothing but disagreeing with you.

I can too. But you have not seen this in yourself yet, apparently.

The fact you and I have been on good terms the past few weeks is due to the fact have been civil. Do you see a pattern? Discuss things respectfully, I will do the same. Resort to insults and attacks, and I have no problem in bringing them to light. P4T is what is referred to in cyber world as an internet troll. All one has to do is go back and see his posting history to confirm this. I have him on ignore due to the fact he has caused me to sin by his PM's, and do not want that to be the case going forward.

I recommend starting over, as I hope you and I have.

 

[preacher4truth]

Webdog and I have been on good terms recently and I hate to mess that up but what he fails to recognize is that he is a lightening rod for controversy himself.

Anyone who doesn't bend over for smart remarks is going to fall out with webdog until he learns to be more respectful in his posts.

He has been respectful to me the last couple of weeks and it has been a relief. I hope that he will learn to do this in all of his conversations.

I think that you have made some arguments that he cannot answer and must resort to insults.

I wish we would all learn to stick to the subject matter rather than get frustrated when someone points out our error and resort to personal insults and smart alek remarks.

We could make progress if people like webdog would learn to be more respectful in the way he posts.

That includes me- I am trying.

But Webdog is constantly slamming you rather than addressing your arguments. I don't think he understands that your aggressiveness toward him is riled BY him.

I hope this will cease.

That would be cool if this happened, but I don't see it. That he can never admit he is wrong, and wrong concerning the very elementary teaching of what the Gospel is, is scary and shows insecurity.

Several have PM'ed me about how can he not clearly see what the Gospel is as well as other passages. That he doesn't understand this is shocking to say the least. That he fights to maintain that he is right by rejecting what it is is outright error and needs to be stood against. If he wants to continue to ignore this central teaching and not admit he is wrong and in error to it, so be it. If he feels the need to continue to name call, so be it also.

I am open to being brotherly, however I cannot and will not allow the Gospel, the central truth of all Scripture to be watered down by him or anyone else. That someone doesn't know this central truth is unbelievable and plainly unacceptable. Period.

The name calling should stop. So should the slamming from him. He needs to admit his error then I can again respect him.

I won't back off any on what the Gospel is. Anyone who waters it down is in a serious situation.

 

[Luke2427]

Wait...I thought "dead is dead"...and what purpose is there in hardening a dead heart, or blinding a corpse?

Physical death did not happen immediately. Spiritual death did.

He could hear the sound waves that God's audible voice made with his yet alive physical ears.

 

[preacher4truth]

So you're only on good terms according to him as long as you're doing things his way, lol, and don't see another brother as being right?

How mature is that stand of yours webdog?