Rebuttal of the dreadful doctrine of reprobation

Sonnet

Sonnet

New member
1Mind1Spirit said:
Do you know what reading in context is?

Timothy 4 starts out condemning putting stipulations on believers.

That's the context.

Believers.

He's not preaching to convert an unbeliever, he's confirming that believing is the only stipulation.

It's not the first time he's ever done it either.....


ROMANS 14

17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.

COLOSSIANS 2

16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

JOHN 6

55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
Click to expand...

Paul's assertion that God is the saviour of all people obviously transcends context.


Not even gonna look at yer link.
Click to expand...

Perhaps we need not continue debating then.
 
Cross Reference

Cross Reference

New member
Nameless.In.Grace said:
Thank You!!!!!!

I never want to disgrace Jesus.

If that were someone's personal conviction, I would not beat them.

But indeed, it is not mine.


Signature: "If I've offended you, that's me getting in the way of Jesus. If you search the Scriptures open to only the guidance of God's Spirit to Theologically level me..... I've succeeded."
Click to expand...

Welcome to the club, brother!
 
1Mind1Spirit

1Mind1Spirit

Literal lunatic
Note Paul using different words.

1 Timothy 5
8 But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.

1 Timothy 5
17 Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.
 
Cross Reference

Cross Reference

New member
Nang said:
Yes, it is God's promise of a Seed given in Genesis 3:15 . . . but it is error to either confound or separate the definitions God has given of Himself, to explain His economic workings and covenant fulfilments.

It is so easy to fall into either the extremism of Sabellian (Modalism) or Tritheism (three Gods), by poor understanding and wrong usage of language and/or Holy Scripture.

Posters on TOL will be carefully scrutinized and held to account for every word they post, by those who care about upholding the attributes and name of God Almighty.
Click to expand...

<Gag!!> You better check yourself, sister!
 
Cross Reference

Cross Reference

New member
Nameless.In.Grace said:
Tambora,

Is it wrong to recognize when someone is on pre chewed food, and politely tell them to get right soldier, read that Bible in Spirit, and study the Bible with the bible as the reference?

To tell them to devote time to scripture using Jesus as the Theology and the Spirit as the Commentary?


Signature: "If I've offended you, that's me getting in the way of Jesus. If you search the Scriptures open to only the guidance of God's Spirit to Theologically level me..... I've succeeded."
Click to expand...

Brother, their metality is that there is no need to because of absoluteness of "TULIP" with the notion that Calvin is the gospel. They have willingly sold themselves into bondage by offering themselves on his alter to be signed, sealed and delivered up to perdition. So severe their obtinacy no one can pluck them out of his hand. This is what the born again Christian is up against when discussing scripture with them.. Because their minds are made up and snapped shut, no one can get beyond the issue of salvation, per Heb 6:1. It is an anti-Christ disposition given them as their reward for their willful ignorance.
 
1Mind1Spirit

1Mind1Spirit

Literal lunatic
Sonnet said:
This is arrogance is it not?
Click to expand...

Nope.

If it was a debate there has to be a loser.

I have nothing to lose.

I didn't slam dunk you in my mind, but since you thought it was a debate you should think of it that way.

That is unless you can show by the context how the KJV translators got the usage of malista wrong.

Debate away, I've tried to teach you all I can.
 
Cross Reference

Cross Reference

New member
Lon said:
"She?" I thought Sonnet was a guy.


She said she/he wasn't a believer/Christian. Did that change recently?



Not a bad signature. As far as it depends on us, we can live in peace with all men, but I know at times I give offense specifically because a difference in life-philosophy is absolutely at odds with those who reject Him. -Lon
Click to expand...

<Here we go> What is that supposed to mean except the beginning of accusations by you . .in your typical convoluted scholarly way of course.
 
Sonnet

Sonnet

New member
1Mind1Spirit said:
Nope.

If it was a debate there has to be a loser.

I have nothing to lose.

I didn't slam dunk you in my mind, but since you thought it was a debate you should think of it that way.

That is unless you can show by the context how the KJV translators got the usage of malista wrong.

Debate away, I've tried to teach you all I can.
Click to expand...

No point responding - you wouldn't even consider my link.

I'll keep to those that wish to genuinely debate.
 
Sonnet

Sonnet

New member
Strong's Concordance

malista: most
Original Word: μάλιστα
Part of Speech: Adverb, Superlative
Transliteration: malista
Phonetic Spelling: (mal'-is-tah)
Short Definition: most of all, especially
Definition: most of all, especially.
 
1Mind1Spirit

1Mind1Spirit

Literal lunatic
Sonnet said:
No point responding - you wouldn't even consider my link.

I'll keep to those that wish to genuinely debate.
Click to expand...

There's nothing genuine about you or your tactics.


Ecclesiastes 1:9King James Version (KJV)

9 The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top