Search results

I don't know which translation of the Bible you use, but I have 7 translations, The King James Version, Revised Standard Version, New King James Version, The New English Bible, The Living Bible, The Good News for Modern Man, The New Testament in Modern English Not a single one translates vs...

Your view of predestination, the elect, were saved from before the foundation of the world. If certain people, the elect, are saved. what are they saved from? And what is the purpose of Christ coming to save them, when they are already saved? Also, in your view what happens to the non-elect?

So, you reject clear scriptural statements. Are you rejecting that they even are scripture? So, you believe that there is much in scripture that is not plain truth, thus we can ignore a lot of scripture? Why are the texts that were cited rejecting plain truth?

Another blank statement. No evidence, I have not ever seen you present a cogent support for your view as yet. You string some verses together, rarely are they speaking about the same context. You change words, insert words that are not present in the text. Take some time to build a sound...

Becoming a member of the Church, the elect, does not guarantee one salvation. One is joined by faith and baptism and anyone who enters is not guaranteed salvation because each and every person must follow Christ, must live according to His precepts. The NT is fill of advice on how we should do...

It refers to the elect, the Church.

The word election in scripture has a very specific use. There are five instances where election is used. Contrary to the reformed position it is never used in the sense of being saved. All five uses show the meaning of being chosen for specific purposes. Jesus Christ Peter refers to Christ...

As usual you end up with useless comments. The problem here is that you don't have anything to say about monkeys either.

You keep saying this, but the whole discussion has NEVER been about to whom the Bible was written. I already answer that as well. We (I) am trying to discuss one facet of that Bible, a teaching called the Incarnation/atonement/Work of Christ. Howwever you have not added much to the...

Not only nothing explicitly but nothing even inferring the elect. The Father gave Christ ALL THINGS, Col 1:20 which is very explicit what was given to Christ. Nothing about elect. It would have been easy for John to say ELECT, if it were true. Vs 38 even states that who comes to Him is not...

Another example of denying a clear teaching of scripture by simply omitting the text that would deny your whole theory of atonement and election. I know you read John 6:40 Vss 39 is a incarnational verse, It aligns with Col 1:20. God gave all men to Christ by virtue of Christ being born as...

You ignore evidence, clear evidence, undeniable evidence. It just does not fit your personal theory. You are writing about monkeys, while most of us are speaking about what scripture teaches.

Another nonsensical comment on my post. You continually evade the actual content and context. The context is not about non-elect either, just as it is not about elect. It is about what Christ accomplished through His Incarnation. I John 4:14, Heb 2:9, I John 2:2, John 4:42

Irrelevant response. You did not even attempt to answer my questions. As much as you claim scripture teaches limited atonement, you cannot back it up with scripture. All you do is state your opinion with no evidence.

You may not have understood all the evidence and comment to this point that clearly shows limited atonement does not, cannot exist in scripture. It basically denies everything Christ accomplished. So, here are some more texts that clearly shows Limited atonement is denied in scripture. Col...

Scripture itself is not written just for believers. It is for all men to be instructed from the scriptures. The Holy Spirit calls all men to repentance, through the Gospel. That Gospel is taught by Christians to non-christians through the working of the Holy Spirit. Once again, you evade...

I need some clarification. Do you believe in the Christ the NT presents? Do you believe Christ was Incarnated and how do you understand this concept? What is your understanding of the fall? The reason I'm asking is that your theology does not align with what scripture teaches on the above...

You are great at trying to squease a text into your theory of limited atonement. II Cor 5:14-15 is not even directly those you call them, elect. Here is what the verses are addressing. Paul says that we (apostles) judge thus. that if One died for all, then all died; and He died for all, that...

So, you actually have no evidence for your statement regarding Rom 5: 12-19 and I Cor 15:12-22. So when you have nothing you just change contexts so you can make your theory say what you want it to say. Context of Rom 1 has nothing to do with context of Rom 5. So, where is your evidence that...

Those verses have never been about the elect. By not understanding these verses and insisting they are about the elect, you cannot believe in the resurrection. We are in the Lenten period. All about Christ's suffering, death and resurrection. Does Christ's death and resurrection have a role...