Bob Hill's bottom line?

[billwald]

Bob Hill's bottom line is that anyone who reads the Bible and concludes that the description of "saved" applies to himself is "saved?"

 

[Spitfire]

That seems to be the overall attitude around here.

 

[elohiym]

And he claims to have repented, yet continues to sin by his own admission. :dizzy:

I don't get it.

See here: http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1134953#post1134953

 

[Turbo]

Bob Hill's bottom line is that anyone who reads the Bible and concludes that the description of "saved" applies to himself is "saved?"

Way to back up your claim there, billwald. :thumb:

Are you saved? :think:

 

[Delmar]

And he claims to have repented, yet continues to sin by his own admission. :dizzy:

I don't get it.

See here: http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1134953#post1134953

You sin too!

 

[Nathon Detroit]

And he claims to have repented, yet continues to sin by his own admission. :dizzy:

I don't get it.

See here: http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1134953#post1134953

I also sin.

I wish I didn't, but I do.

Thankfully, my sin has already been paid for, and therefore I need not ask again for forgiveness. :cloud9:

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Bob Hill's bottom line is that anyone who reads the Bible and concludes that the description of "saved" applies to himself is "saved?"

My guess is your taking a bit of "liberty" with the context of Bob Hill's statement.

 

[elohiym]

I also sin.

I wish I didn't, but I do.

Thankfully, my sin has already been paid for, and therefore I need not ask again for forgiveness. :cloud9:

:shocked:

You can't be that dense.

Think about what you just said in light of our recent debate.

 

[hitek357]

James 5:16 - Therefore, confess your sins to one another...

I sin. I wish I could NOT, but just the other day, some jerk cut me off in traffic, and I hated him for a brief moment...

 

[jeremiah]

Bob Hill's bottom line is that anyone who reads the Bible and concludes that the description of "saved" applies to himself is "saved?"

Wow, you talk about your easy believism!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Here, I have a better one for you, even better than the above, mocking description of salvation. Have you ever met a Calvinist who thought he wasn't saved?

Think about that one for a while. If I ever met someone who concluded that the Bible defined Salvation by the election of God, and then examined the qualities of the elect, and concluded that he was one of the unelect, I might consider Calvinism as a legitimate understanding of God's way of saving us. I personally have NEVER found even one person with the "honesty" to admit it!

 

[Turbo]

Wow, you talk about your easy believism!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Here, I have a better one for you, even better than the above, mocking description of salvation. Have you ever met a Calvinist who thought he wasn't saved?

Think about that one for a while. If I ever met someone who concluded that the Bible defined Salvation by the election of God, and then examined the qualities of the elect, and concluded that he was one of the unelect, I might consider Calvinism as a legitimate understanding of God's way of saving us. I personally have NEVER found even one person with the "honesty" to admit it!

Have you met allsmiles and Granite?

 

[Turbo]

elohiym, is it a sin to take the Lord's name in vain?

 

[Bright Raven]

Wow, you talk about your easy believism!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Here, I have a better one for you, even better than the above, mocking description of salvation. Have you ever met a Calvinist who thought he wasn't saved?

Think about that one for a while. If I ever met someone who concluded that the Bible defined Salvation by the election of God, and then examined the qualities of the elect, and concluded that he was one of the unelect, I might consider Calvinism as a legitimate understanding of God's way of saving us. I personally have NEVER found even one person with the "honesty" to admit it!

Ever Read Romans 7?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Think about what you just said in light of our recent debate.

:rotfl: Your point????

I haven't seen one even semi compelling point on this topic from you or Sozo.

It's a massive flop. Seriously, if I were you I would drop it and start over.... you are a mess.

 

[godrulz]

Bob Hill's bottom line is that anyone who reads the Bible and concludes that the description of "saved" applies to himself is "saved?"

Bob would clarify your misrepresentation and misunderstanding of your views if you give him a heads up. We do not always word things the way we should, so be slow to jump to conclusions.

 

[jeremiah]

Have you met allsmiles and Granite?

Are you saying that these two people believe in God, and that God saves people by election, and that they believe that they are the unelect, and expect to die and go to hell?

 

[jeremiah]

Ever Read Romans 7?

Yes, and what does that have to do with the false doctrine of 5 point Calvinism?

 

[Turbo]

Are you saying that these two people believe in God, and that God saves people by election, and that they believe that they are the unelect, and expect to die and go to hell?

They are both self-proclaimed "former Christians" who maintain that the "correct" interpretation of the Bible is the Calvinist one. In other words, they "concluded that the Bible defined Salvation by the election of God, and then examined the qualities of the elect, and concluded that [they are] of the unelect." In fact, just about every "former Christian" I encounter had a Calvinistic understanding of the God of the Bible, which contributed to their rejection of Him, since such a God would ultimately be the cause of all wickedness.

 

[Turbo]

elohiym, is it a sin to take the Lord's name in vain?

bump

 

[elohiym]

elohiym, is it a sin to take the Lord's name in vain?

Yes.

Exodus 20:7 Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

Your point?