badhorsie777 wrote:
I promise you I will look (again) with fresh eyes and prayer at the book of Romans

badhorsie777 wrote:
but of course you must know at least this much: that language such as "chosen..before the foundation of the world" seems to imply that it is not election which is based on faith, but rather the opposite.

badhorsie777 wrote:
Yamil: To be clear, what is the question you asked that I (obviously) missed?

Now to answer your question. The passage you quoted simply serves to illustrate that those who inherit eternal life do not inherit it based on their pedigree. Paul was simply attacking the Jewish assumption that simply being of the Jewish race guarantees one eternal life.

Election is based on faith not pedigree is what Romans 9 teaches.

R. K. Borill wrote:
Looks like Yamil's Snake Oil medicine is not working.

R. K. Borill wrote:
Your "dispy fever" is cooking your brains.

R. K. Borill wrote:
Your interpretation twists the text into something that is not there.

Nevertheless it serves to demonstrate the desperation of Calvinists to scrape the Scriptures in hopes of finding something that is not there.

Here is something that is there...

"For God so loved the world..."

Helps wrote:
Moderator Gamma
You have removed my post of 1/4/08 7:58 PM. Can you please clarify what you found offensive?
If it was my calling Mr Luciano a liar, perhaps you should review the posts between us and judge whether what I said was true or not. If I am wrong then I shall be more than happy to apologize. But, if I am correct, then you were wrong to delete the post

badhorsie777 wrote:
"so that the purpose of election should stand, God said Jacob have I loved, Esau have I hated"... Dr. Yamil and others, how does this show man's role in salvation? I believe in (and have had) a conversion experience.

So please tell me, what is the simple point that you are trying to make and what simple declarative statement does the Bible give that actually states what you want to state. This does not mean that one cannot rationally infer certain things, but when it comes to doctrine it is of prime importance that one does not start with inference but rather with what the Scriptures specifically state. Once we justly start with this point, then I can believe that we can logically infer certain things.

Now to answer your question..

The context in Romans 9 and the context of the OT scripture from which ....

Unfortunately, I can't say the same thing about you.
_______________________________________

Weapon of Mass Instruction
signing out

badhorsie777 wrote:
I would thank Dr. Yamil for his courtesy. THIS is how it should be. Arminians vs. Calvinists aren't advocating licentiousness or pornography - they are each concerned with doing right by God, so a bit more respect is due than I see shown often on the ol' net.

Before I answer your question, I would like to preface it with a warning. You being courteous to me will produce a lot of fire from the Calvinists in your camp, so I encourage you to prepare your heart. You will not be the last one to be blacksheeped by others here for being gracious to the opposition.

I also would like to preface with the humble acknowledgement that at the end we will probably still disagree. Although it is my intention to convince you of my position, I do realize that this may not be the end result. Nevertheless, I am content to know that at least we can understand each other's position without having the ad hominem fluff get in the way. I hope you feel the same way.

Helps wrote:
Strawman!!!
I did not equate the 2.

Helps wrote:
All I am insisting on is God's enabling; freeing the will that has been in bondage, so that the sinner may come freely.

Helps wrote:
The coming is of course the part of the sinner - God does not do that for the sinner, and no Calv would say as much.

Did you take the doctor's medication today?

Helps wrote:
So given that man has a free will, why does God feel the need to work in saved individuals to enable them to will anything?

Enabling is not the same as performing. I can enable you with a shovel but you still will have to dig.

By the same token, God has enabled you to live a victorious Christian life, but apparently, you still sin. Somehow, I doubt it was because God's enablement was weak.

The Facts Again wrote:
Those who don't want faith to be a gift of God support the centuries old Semi-Pelagian, now Arminian, works based religion.

Bird spotter wrote:
Hey Parrot, shut it!

You are the one who said it silly! You told us all that it was the grounds of our justification!!
Perhaps its the language that you are struggling with, again!

Really guys, its not as complicated as you would like it to be.

The dehvastating truth is that even if by any stretch of the imagination you were correct, you would still have to lurk around the impossible to prove that unconditional election is the means of salvation let alone the basis.

Paul described you guys as those guilty of robbing some of the simplicity that is in Christ.

Your unconditional destiny= anathema.

Otherwise I can have faith in a hamburger to save me.

The dehvastating truth is the nowhere in the Bible it states that unconditional election is either the means nor the basis of salvation.

The Calv's lose in all points.