Search results

  1. heymikey80

    Does Romans 10 disprove particular atonement?

    Nah. I simply dont like the way it is shallowed down in English. Even in Greek, it isn't a couple of facts. That first item in Greek is a commitment. So it is actually pretty good if translated better. But it is not a plea. In fact it is further away from a plea. It is a statement of whose...
  2. heymikey80

    Does Romans 10 disprove particular atonement?

    I think you are trying to condense faith into a couple of facts. The message of faith is set upon facts, yes. But it is not the facts. It is the faith, the reliance on the Man, not simply an assent to facts.
  3. heymikey80

    Does Romans 10 disprove particular atonement?

    You read the reason why. Pauls is a listing of the facts, he already knows they rely on Christ. Or are you claiming only knowledge gets you "in?" Do people know, who are nevertheless opposed to Christ?
  4. heymikey80

    Can God's will and men's wills operate concurrently?

    It seems to me that wills can operate with one another, as long as one will is in the same direction as the other.
  5. heymikey80

    Actual statements by synergists

    Actually you didnt. You cited something, but never applied it to this sentence youre citing as somehow universal. Your cited reference already states, "The action of the verb will possibly happen, depending on certain objective factors or circumstances." Which, as you cited it, I thought you...
  6. heymikey80

    Does Romans 10 disprove particular atonement?

    Because it is true. What, you want apostles to spread a lie? Sorry, that just isn't right. Once again, you realize all people shall find this to be true. The Apostles knew that early recognition was a sign that someone was elect.
  7. heymikey80

    Does Romans 10 disprove particular atonement?

    "All those believing in Jesus should not perish but have eternal life." I believe if you were to take a look at James' qualification you would see the dismal consequences of simply affirming facts. "Why, even demons believe that ... and shudder." Although ai do believe that someone who relies...
  8. heymikey80

    Paul considered that Christ's resurrection was of universal salvific benefit (2)

    You're jumping to why of two limited views, but your view remains limited in effect. It's strange: Jesus doesn't say this is beyond His capacity to forgive. And of course this is a really poor distinction. Romans 3:9-20 already states everyone has already been condemned on this basis. No...
  9. heymikey80

    Calvinism Question

    The fact is, the perfect verb represents completed action. The time of the perfect verb is after the completed action. The present participle aligns with that time. Applying to 1 John 5:1a, "those believing" are after "born", because the time of the perfect verb is focused on the time at which...
  10. heymikey80

    Does Romans 10 disprove particular atonement?

    =snort!= Paul said it. Nothing to prove. The term is "custom", not "want" You don't seem to understand the difference between "clean your room!" and "you'll find things if you clean your room"? One is not the other. Let's get a few things straight. Paul did not preach v. 9 to unbelievers...
  11. heymikey80

    Does Romans 10 disprove particular atonement?

    Certainly not as Moses described the problem, as you call it. But I point out, Paul is already talking to people looking for a way of righteousness. You're trying to assert that's the unelect. Prove it. So you're saying Paul is preaching it to Jewish people, when Paul has been saying for...
  12. heymikey80

    Does Romans 10 disprove particular atonement?

    No, I'm not promoting two different gospels. The same conditions apply to all. The difference is that human beings need help. God gives help. People change due to God, not to people.
  13. heymikey80

    Paul considered that Christ's resurrection was of universal salvific benefit (2)

    I take God at His Word that He does not save everyone. A limited atonement actually means nothing more than that. Arminians are fond of "unlimited" though and so you define an atonement that doesn't atone. But that limits your atonement's power. I don't think we should limit God's power to atone.
  14. heymikey80

    Does Romans 10 disprove particular atonement?

    No. You took a really clear concrete statement and tried to make it abstract. Moses said it -- nobody has to bring it across the sea to deliver it, bring it up from the depths, down from heaven. It's right here. That was the difficulty resolved. Same's true of the gospel, for both the elect and...
  15. heymikey80

    Paul considered that Christ's resurrection was of universal salvific benefit (2)

    Then your point is defeated about limited atonement. At least in limited atonement "God knows who are His." His joy is directed toward their salvation. "Does God derive any joy in the death of the wicked?" If not, then Hebrews 12:2 expressly states it -- "for the joy set before Him, endured the...
  16. heymikey80

    Does Romans 10 disprove particular atonement?

    I don't think you have noticed the plain fact on the face of it. So I'll repeat it. Paul wrote descriptively. He didn't write imeperitively. Consider if Paul expected the elect and nonelect in the visible church to read what he said. No victory for unlimited atonement. Paul is writing out the...
  17. heymikey80

    Actual statements by synergists

    The subjunctive means that there's something else qualifying the assertion of the sentence. That is, it is not unqualifiedly true. The guy who wrote this wrote the subjunctive. It's why he used the subjunctive. It's intentional. The indicative is always available. He used the subjunctive. Heb...
  18. heymikey80

    Does Romans 10 disprove particular atonement?

    It's always more complicated than people want, though Paul clears up exactly who he is addressing in Rom 1:7, beloved of God, called to be saints. Granted, they're the people Paul assumes are in his audience. Interesting as well that even John distinguished "they" from "us".
  19. heymikey80

    Actual statements by synergists

    Still havent figured out the subjunctive I see. Yes the view you express is beyond silly. And I have pointed out my view, its really too bad you missed it. I got reps for pointing it out. So it is clear enough what the subjunctive refers to. It took down your assertion. And the assertion...
  20. heymikey80

    Actual statements by synergists

    What's missing from your view is what function the subjunctive serves. Why the subjunctive? "Care to share?" Or just cite all the functions of a subjunctive? Whats a subjunctive say? Once you know, you know why I brought it up. My main one is that learning is always by carefully checking...