Okay, holdon...
holdon said, "But you said that it did apply to regeneration earlier: 'Now how does a person who is ignorant, hardened, lifeless, and stupid suddenly turn the switch and decide to accept all the things of God?'. So, you are confused. And who supposed self-resurrection??? Are you trying to put something on me that I didn't say?
No, I
didn't, holdon. I said it is
not about regeneration. I said it is about
sanctification. Since you didn't read my words, I'll
quote them for you with a running commentary to aid you:
I said, "No, it doesn't reason exactly against me. I was saying the same thing. These people are ignorant, hardened, lifeless, and stupid. They don't have much going for them, do they? But here's the interesting part [i.e., the interesting part wherein I quite clearly argue that this part cannot be about regeneration]: Paul admonishes the Ephesians to 'no longer' (Eph. 4:17) walk in those ways. Now how does a person who is ignorant, hardened, lifeless, and stupid suddenly turn the switch and decide to accept all the things of God? Did the Ephesians just choose to stop doing all that, being who they were, 'by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind' (Eph. 2:3)? Nope. You have to admonish people to change their very natures [and if you had read up to this part, you would have seen that I'm arguing that admonishing thus would be stupid and useless--i.e., interpreting this to mean Paul speaks of regeneration of the heathen, not sanctification of the saints] if that's your scheme of salvation: 'children of wrath, change yourselves from within!' And at that point, who really needs God?"
Read first. Write second.
holdon said, "Again, you play unfairly (like so often in these debates) because I did not say that. where did I say "it rests in the wisdom of men"? But do you deny that Paul persuaded people to believe? If not you might want to review your interpretation the passage in 1 Corinthians."
Like I do so often in these debates? I think this is the first time I've ever
talked to you, but whatever you say, man. I know you did not
say that, which is why I said
"you must conclude," not, "see what you said!" Logical progression from your argument, that's all.
In a sense, then,
yes, I do deny that Paul was the effective agent for change in the hearts of men. Because that's absolutely ludicrous, and incredibly discriminatory against stupid people.
My interpretation of the 1 Corinthians passage is fine. I take from other passages which demonstrate a
common theme (isn't that crazy?). In other words, if Paul said in this one place that
"faith might not rest in the wisdom of men but in the power of God" (
1 Cor. 2:5), why would I have reason to believe that he
doesn't also think that the faith of the Ephesians, Thessalonians, Romans, etc.,
also rests in the power of God? Hence, why I said to look for the principle of the passage.
holdon said, "Because they were not from this world? That goes exactly against the teaching of Ephesians and a whole lot of other places: 'dead in your offences and sins in which ye once walked according to the age of this world'. So, again your understanding is wrong."
What are you
talking about? You quoted my words, which included
John 14:16-17, 26, which clearly says that the Holy Spirit is the one who gives truth; that's why I posted this: to demonstrate that the crowds to whom Paul was speaking were only shown what is true by the Spirit, not by Paul. Again,
overarching theme.
I don't know what you're rambling on about in Ephesians...
holdon said, "??? Where does it say that? Nowhere! The wind (type of the Spirit) blows whereever it wishes sure: pretty much everywhere on the planet. But what is it how we know: you hear its sound ! People that listen to the Spirit: those are born of the Spirit.
'And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that hears say, Come. And let him that is athirst come; he that will, let him take the water of life freely.'"
Get dead, lifeless, alienated, ignorant, hardened haters of God to choose to make themselves born again, and I'll worship you instead.
You can't choose to be born the
first time, which is how Jesus emphasizes His point: you can't choose to be born the
second time, either.
Oh yeah, another thing:
"But what is it how we know: you hear its sound!" This is why we can't have meaningful conversation: because you don't even make any sense. But let's dissect what you're
trying to say.
"But what is it how we know: you hear its sound!"
So what does the verse say?
"[Y]ou hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes" (
John 3:8).
So you're saying we know where it comes from and where it goes
by hearing its sound, but the verse says we hear its sound,
but do not know where it comes from or where it goes. That's pretty much bunk, holdon. You are, this time
literally--congratulations!--saying
the exact opposite of what the verse means.
holdon said, "Ah, but now you contradict yourself: The Spirit convicts the world. Jn 16:8."
Did you miss the part where I said that the Greek word "
kosmos" doesn't always mean "every last human being alive"? The rest of the verse reveals this, anyhow:
"And when he comes, he will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment" (
John 16:8).
Can I leave now?
