Search results

You are the one making the claim, not me. It isn't my burden to prove you wrong, it's your burden to prove your own case. Give me a reason to think that it's something other than nonsense and I will consider it. That is THE only reason I'm even here. What are you even talking about? The entire...

You've given me no reason to consider it. It's plain lunatic insanity. Those chapters are the crescendo of the single greatest theological treatise in the history of mankind and one that follows one of the most eloquent teachings of the difference between law and grace that it is possible to pen...

This was an emotional reaction. Prove me wrong. Show me the argument. Connect the dots for me glorydaz! You can't. Won't even try because you know for a fact that my difficulty in getting the purpose of this list into words has nothing at all to do with "adding to the gospel". You knew it was...

The difficulty putting this issues involved into written words has nothing whatsoever to do with adding something to the gospel AND YOU KNOW IT! This sort of response belongs in the mouths of people like Nang and B57. You're better. Be better.

I honestly do not know how to even respond to someone who thinks that Romans 10:10 is legalism. It like you showed up here and claimed the sky is red. It's flatly false, is what it is. IF you believe. What do you do with that IF? Clete P.S. You need to start responding directly to the...

Surprisingly difficult point to get across. I keep finding myself using double negatives. It isn't a point I would have ever expected there to be controversy about. As a result, I've thought more about this specific point than I probably ever would have had I not started this conversation. That...

Interesting point. Prove it. Obviously? Where is the evidence that there were people in Ephesus who had refused or otherwise failed to confess with their mouths the Lord Jesus Christ? Are you trying to say that having words pass your lips is some sort of "work" where once done you've somehow...

No one is suggesting that everyone is going to be saved. Quite the contrary. The entire point is that ONLY those who believe certain things will be saved. The question is what are those things. You seem convinced that my list is fine except that it is missing one point but then a few posts ago...

NO NO NO!!! I did NOT say that there was no explicit teaching that salvation is a free gift! There is no explicit teaching that if someone doesn't understand that particular truth then they are unsaved. Yes, yes, of course! I've already told you several times that you establish that salvation...

My entire point is that it is not possible to make an affirmative case from the biblical material that someone isn't saved if they fail to realize that their salvation is a free gift. That isn't sufficient to PROVE that it isn't necessary but, since the bible is where we go to get our doctrine...

No, I'm wanting the opposite of the all inclusive list. Is it possible for a person to not believe that God exists and be saved? No! Therefore, it is on the list. Is it possible for a person to be saved without admitting guilt of sin and acknowledging the need to be saved? No! Therefore, it is...

I'm not discussing people who don't get saved, only those who do, but... Even less? Now that would be directly pertinent to the question at hand! It is a bit confusing though! You're here telling me that I haven't included enough and now you're telling me that I could have included even less...

That isn't my argument and you know it. This is desperation on your part. If you can't respond without lying about what I've said, then lets just agree to disagree and let it go.

@glorydaz, Please respond to the following.... Just pretend that YOU preached the gospel to someone. You preached it precisely the way you think it ought to be preached. You included every point I've listed and you included every other point that anyone might think is part of the gospel. You...

So how is any of that in conflict with the six points I've presented?

They were preaching it for monetary gain. How do you suppose that can be done without altering the gospel? There isn't any way. You would have to add something. My point is that it almost doesn't matter what is added in regard to whether it has the power to save people so long as certain details...

Paul's letters where written to believers (i.e. that isn't what "I say" as though it were a matter of opinion). That doesn't mean that no unbeliever was ever exposed to his writtings or that unbelievers can't read and understand Paul's letters. It means that Paul wrote his letters to believers...

That's not true. First of all I never made any such claim but more directly, Paul was asked by the jailer how to be saved and we have to get the gospel of grace somewhere from his writings, right? Acts 16:25 But at midnight Paul and Silas were praying and singing hymns to God, and the prisoners...

Glorydaz, I don't know who taught you such a thing but it could not be further from the truth. It isn't even close to being correct. I can't even comprehend how it is possible for anyone to teach such a thing. I am literally flabbergasted. I can't even think of what to say except... NO! Clete

That's exactly right. Exactly.