Is it Wrong to Call Calvinism Unjust?

[Mark Quayle]

Deut30:12 fully destroys Monergism; the word-of-faith is IN every heart and mouth.

You are repeating yourself. Your assertion has no foundation. We've been through this one.

In our jurisprudence we recognize "not-guilty-by-reason-of-insanity" --- those who CANNOT choose between right and wrong, are insane.

What does God do with people who are insane? Condemn them? No, Scripture says the only thing that condemns us is REFUSING to believe -- 1Jn5:10, Jn3:20-21, and more.

What has this to do with the subject?

Your colleague was arguing that "God sculpted them into vessels-of-wrath which God PREPARED for destruction." Doesn't matter whether we embrace "double-predestination" (God overtly writing sin into their hearts), or "single" (He neglects them to their inescapable corruption), both views fully associate GOD with their wickedness.

...and that does not please God...

In a manner of speaking, he is correct, in that God made them for that purpose. The potter and clay figure implies "scuopted" or 'formed' as part of the figure. Romans 9 is pretty clear that this happens by the hand of God.

I do not claim that they are born sinless. I am saying that their creation 'in Adam" is cursed. They are consigned to reprobation because they sin, as is according to their own will; they are sinners --it's what they do.
They are not judged for having done nothing wrong.

I'm sorry, you're wrong; we are cursed until we BELIEVE and receive Jesus and the Spirit, it is the RECEIVED Spirit through Whom we are regenerated ("poured" in Titus3:5-6 is "received", see Acts10:45-47 with Acts11:15-17!)

You are arguing that "regeneration precedes belief", but Scripture plainly teaches "belief precedes regeneration".

You have tried before to show me more than this mere assertion. You cannot do it. The verses you show, none of them, demonstrate the sequence of causation.

"Titus3:5-6 is "received" --yes, so?

"Acts10:45-47 and Acts11:15-17" what about them?

Are you agreeing with me that regeneration is a work of the Holy Spirit? Good. So you are saying that the Spirit being 'poured out' is in fact the event of regeneration? The Spirit does as it will. (John 3) Are those possessed of the Spirit of God, not from time to time 'carried away' or endowed with extra measure of control by the Spirit?

And on and on we go. Yet you have not shown me how it is possible for the heart ruled by the flesh, and at enmity with God, dead in their sins, to do an alive thing, submittin to God's law in true repentance obedience, and to please him.

 

[renniks]

will happily agree that God has predestined some to reprobation,

Then you are a hyper calvinist. And your god is a monster who created most people for the sole purpose of damning them.

 

[Mark Quayle]

No one knows which category he is in, so that observation doesn't mean anything.

To be fair, 1 Cor 1:18 says, "For the word of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us who are saved it is the power of God." We also have the witness of the Holy Spirit within. We do know, but yes, we can fool ourselves, and many of us are fooled.

 

[BNR32FAN]

You explain your own scriptures, dont put your work off on somebody else. If I quote scripture I am capable of explaining them myself.

Putting my work on someone else? Your not even making any sense because I have explained every quote I’ve posted. The scriptures I’ve quoted refute your theology and you are incapable of explaining how these verses can be interpreted in such a way that they don’t refute your theology. I can explain every single verse you have and I’m willing to do so. So in short you’ve already lost this debate because you refuse to even engage in it.

 

[BNR32FAN]

If it was meant literally, which is what I think you are saying, you'd have to believe that every last human who ever lived is saved. Is that actually your belief??

Not at all. Why can’t Jesus die for everyone’s sins without everyone being saved? We still have to stand before Christ on judgement day and He will acknowledge those He chooses before The Father. Those He denies before The Father will burn in the lake of fire. Christ is the one who determines who’s sins are forgiven and who’s sins are not because He paid the penalty for all. All who are in Him will be forgiven, all who are not will not be forgiven. Just because Christ paid the penalty for all doesn’t mean that all are forgiven. That’s His choice.

 

[BNR32FAN]

And the correct choice of god? And having such good timing that when you fall, you will have the chance to repent before dying?

Well I’m confident that God’s plan will not allow a sincere child of God to burn for all eternity due to a technicality. Let’s not forget his kindness and patience that is so often mentioned in the scriptures.

 

[BNR32FAN]

No one knows which category he is in, so that observation doesn't mean anything.

How so? Does a person not know if Christ is residing in them? There will be clear evidence if Christ is residing in someone.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Break one of God's laws ever and you'd deserve to be eternally lost, save only that we believe that a Savior came to remedy that situation.

Only if he is capable of obedience. Would you say that your child deserved to be punished for disobeying if you told him/her to jump on top of a jumbo jet flying by at 30,000 feet and he/she failed to comply? Would the child “deserve” to be punished? Or would the child’s failure to comply be your fault?

 

[Albion]

To be fair, 1 Cor 1:18 says, "For the word of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us who are saved it is the power of God." We also have the witness of the Holy Spirit within. We do know, but yes, we can fool ourselves, and many of us are fooled.

Despite various verses that are similar to this one, I don't know that anyone can know for certain. We have to believe and trust, but knowing for a certainty....Hmmm.

 

[Albion]

Well I’m confident that God’s plan will not allow a sincere child of God to burn for all eternity due to a technicality. Let’s not forget his kindness and patience that is so often mentioned in the scriptures.

Worshipping a god other than the God of the Bible is a "technicality?" I don't think so.

 

[Albion]

Only if he is capable of obedience. Would you say that your child deserved to be punished for disobeying if you told him/her to jump on top of a jumbo jet flying by at 30,000 feet and he/she failed to comply?

Which of God's Commandments is like that? Not to steal? Not to worship false gods? Honor one's father and mother?

 

[Ben johnson]

Oh the picture seems beautiful to those who are “elected”. But to those who are not elected the picture is horrific. And how can man deserve to die in sin if he is incapable of refraining from sin if he has not received God’s grace to enable him to do so? Furthermore Calvin’s doctrines teach that man is incapable of doing anything to influence God’s decision to grant him grace.

You're right about that -- and I'm completely bewildered how some simple verses do not destroy that perception in proponents. I mean -- Jude23 says "save others, snatching them from the fire" -- well, WERE they ever IN danger of the fire? Calvinism says "no, they were always God's chosen-elect from the beginning!" (Oh -- now we'll have to mark out Eph2:3, "we were children of wrath (Hell!) the same as the rest?") And then there's Rom14:15, and 1Cor8:11, "do not destroy your brother for whom Christ died". Destroy? As in "his salvation"? Oh no, it can't mean that, it must mean "not really" (not sure what gets ruined, but it can't be his salvation).

We know Calvinism is true, so we'll just mark out Jude 23.
And Eph2:3.
And mark out Rom14:15, and 1Cor8:11.
And mark out Matt23:13, we can't really shut off one who "is entering in".
And mark out -- oh rats, the sharpie is dry; no problem, here's a box of 100.
(Those won't last long, better add that to my shopping list!)

So according to Calvin not only is man doomed because he is incapable of meeting God’s expectation of repentance but he can’t do anything to change that. He can’t even ask God for help or influence God in any way to become capable of meeting God’s expectations.

And we have to mark out Luke8:13, everyone knows the "unelected/unregenerated" cannot want to be saved, and certainly won't have joy thinking they ARE saved. (Someone probably mis-heard Jesus...)

Even tho Peter said in Acts 10:34-35

“Opening his mouth, Peter said: “ I most certainly understand now that God is not one to show partiality, but in every nation the man who fears Him and does what is right is welcome to Him.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭10:34-35‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

I made a list of the times "THOSE WHO" appears in conjunction with personal salvation, I found forty seven; and eight places that say "GOD who" but none are associated with personal salvation!

I'm still bewildered -- why would anyone keep a doctrine that demands so many mark-outs and stamping of verses with "NOT REALLY"? What's the motivation?



Eventually I hope anyone here clinging to RT, realizes there is no way he can know he's actually saved (like the TRULY-ELECTED in Lk8:15) and will persevere until death, or if he's only deluded/falsely-believing (like the CRUELLY-REJECTED in Lk8:13, in spite of their joyful believing they were saved God didn't really want them so they fell!). No, no Calvinist/RT can know, until his very last breath on Earth -- only perseverance until death proves who is real, and who is not. They'll protest and deny this ("oh the truly elect KNOW they are saved") -- but there's no doubt the joyful believers in Lk8:13 said that too! At first!

...until they succumbed to temptation, affliction, persecution, and fell away proving their faith was false and their joy empty...

Honestly -- how can anyone know? (1Jn5:11-13!)

 

[Ben johnson]

You are repeating yourself.

Well you know, I told you I was old; the first thing old people lose is their memory.
I forget what goes next...

(I have been known to repeat myself when I think it's important.)
(I have been known to repeat myself when I think it's important.)

Your assertion has no foundation. We've been through this one.

I've forgotten, please be patient and explain it again? How does, "It's not in Heaven that someone must go get it and give it to us, to make us hear it that we may observe it" -- how is that not completely opposite to Monergism, "God must sovereignly change hearts and regenerate people, giving them saving-faith and new hearts so that they irresistibly believe and persevere"?

How is Deut30:12 not the absolute opposite of Monergism?

What has this to do with the subject?

Simply that someone who cannot choose to pursue righteousness (violated by Rom2:4-11 and others, like Jn3:18-21) is by definition, "insane". Your view has God condemning people long before they exist, and when they're born His prehistoric condemnation prohibits them from ever escaping their "just, godly sentence of condemnation for their sin" -- denying that their sin is only the consequence of God's dictate and they are absolutely the same as the criminally insane! That also violates the definition of "just".

In a manner of speaking, he is correct, in that God made them for that purpose. The potter and clay figure implies "sculpted" or 'formed' as part of the figure.

Sorry, there are THREE VESSELS -- God does not sculpt innocent clay into wickedness. Can you not see that is the same thing which infuriated Jesus in Matt12:25-31? Do you really believe God's house can be divided?

Romans 9 is pretty clear that this happens by the hand of God.

Not even close. First, Romans 9 is part of a TRIPLET, and cannot be separated from chapters 10, and 11; they must be read together. (The same as Romans 6, 7 and 8 are a triplet -- Rm6 is about "born again", chapter 7 is about the war between the new nature and the old, and chapter 8 is the solution -- we are not supposed to live in chapter seven, but in chapter eight!)

Romans 9 is simply teaching, "If God wants to also save Gentiles, who are YOU oh Jewish person to object?!"

Three vessels, brother Mark -- the only way to think there are TWO vessels ("atimia-dishonor/wrath-God-prepares-for-destruction"), is to mark out Rom2:4-5 "by stubbornly refusing to repent they store up wrath for themselves!" Which is it -- does God MAKE them into "vessels-of-wrath", or do they "store-up-wrath-for-themselves"? Can't have it both ways.

I do not claim that they are born sinless. I am saying that their creation 'in Adam" is cursed. They are consigned to reprobation because they sin, as is according to their own will;

How do they have a "WILL"? What is within their ability to choose? Honestly?

they are sinners --it's what they do.

In a very offensive episode of "The Simpsons", Homer excused his sinfulness, "That's just the way God made me." (No, it wasn't!)

They are not judged for having done nothing wrong.

What was within their ability to choose?

You have tried before to show me more than this mere assertion. You cannot do it. The verses you show, none of them, demonstrate the sequence of causation.

"Titus3:5-6 is "received" --yes, so?

That's the point -- regeneration is by the POURED Spirit, "poured" is "received" (100% rock solid with Acts10:45 "the Spirit was POURED", and Acts11:15-17 "they received the Spirit AFTER BELIEVING").

In bold rock-solid terms, Titus 3:5-6 sequence is:
1. Believe in Jesus
2. Receive the Spirit
3. Regeneration is by the Spirit-whom-He-poured-through-Jesus-our-Savior

Regeneration is by the poured/received Spirit. That's after salvation. What's the defense against this? BTW, can a person "have life" before regeneration? John wrote his letter to convince people to believe, and believing they may (then!) have life! Jn20:31. What's the defense?

"Acts10:45-47 and Acts11:15-17" what about them?

Regeneration is by the Spirit-who-was-poured, Titus3:5-6; "poured" is "received" is "after belief", it's the same "ekcheo-poured" in Acts10:45 and it's after belief in 11:15-17, and that's before regeneration. Any way to deny this?

Are you agreeing with me that regeneration is a work of the Holy Spirit? Good. So you are saying that the Spirit being 'poured out' is in fact the event of regeneration?

Absolutely not -- "poured", is "received". Now, while regeneration is essentially simultaneous with receiving the Spirit, we do not receive the Spirit before believing. And He does not regenerate from the outside!

The Spirit does as it will. (John 3)

No, that is NOT what John 3 is teaching! We cannot see the wind as it blows where it wants, but we can hear it, we know it's there -- it's the same with those born of the Spirit, we cannot see their spiritual birth but we can detect spiritual birth by its effects!

In no way is Jesus telling Nicodemus "the Spirit moves on a few whom He wants and does not move on others He does not like"! It's the WIND that "blows where it wills", when he says "so are those born of the Spirit", those-born do not blow where they will, Jesus is simply teaching Nick that "a believer's spiritual birth may be as invisible as the wind, but it's just as real and can be known by its effects!"

Are those possessed of the Spirit of God, not from time to time 'carried away' or endowed with extra measure of control by the Spirit?

Are you talking about spiritual gifts?

And on and on we go.

And why is that? I perceive that most verses cited by those who perceive "OSNAS", are ignored by those of OSAS.

Yet you have not shown me how it is possible for the heart ruled by the flesh, and at enmity with God, dead in their sins, to do an alive thing, submitting to God's law in true repentance obedience, and to please him.

I can do that right now -- Rom6:17-18 -- "Thanks be to God that though you were slaves of sin, you became obedient from the heart and ...freed from sin you became enslaved to righteousness (22) ...enslaved to God."

Eph2:4-8, "God showed His great love for us, WHEN we were dead in our sins God made us alive ...by grace have we been saved ...by grace THROUGH FAITH have we been saved!"

Saving-faith happened WHEN we were dead, we were made alive; remember we just read together John20:31, "having-life" comes after believing!

The whole difference between us, Mark, is sequence -- is regeneration by the POURED Spirit in Titus3:5-6, or not? Is "poured/received" AFTER belief in Acts10:45 and 11:15-17, or not?

And which way does "saving-faith" flow? Is it a gift FROM God TO the saved, or is it something He commands from all men? Whose faith is it?

 

[Ben johnson]

In no way? So sure are you? No wonder you get these things wrong!

Yes, I'm sure --- it's the word "ALL" that has the equality! "SO THEN all, EVEN SO all". Calvinists claim the second "all" is not all, but perhaps "only some-of-all-types"! See 1Tim2:4 where they make the same claim "It doesn't mean every last person, but only some-of-all-types". No, "all" must really mean everyone, because it includes "kings and all authority", exceeding the scope of who will be saved.

To avoid calling your statement 'false' I will call it 'mistaken' or 'ignorant'. I can't tell you how often Arminians who claim Calvinism does it, do this --they take at 'first glance' face value what fits their thesis, and dive deep to explain away other passages. This doesn't need to be deep --it is simply a statement that in like manner as condemnation came through Adam, life and justification came through Christ. It also is a statement that nobody can escape the fact --i.e. that just as it was only in Adam that death came, it is only through Christ that life comes.

It's equating the "ALL".

SO THEN condemnation came to all men, EVEN SO justification came to all men.

The first pas-anthropos, is the same as the second pas-anthropos.

Reading the logical progression of Paul's rhetoric here, (even if only the immediate context, it can be seen what he is saying --in fact you have to ignore the immediate context to render your take on verse 18!) the verse preceding it says, "17 For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive an abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ!"

Now if you can explain to me how those who receive an abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness who reign in life through Jesus are in fact absolutely EVERYONE who ever lived,

Never said that; condemnation came conditionally -- to be condemned, one must sin. Verse 12 states everyone meets that condition.

Likewise, justification came conditionally -- but not everyone meets THAT condition, verse 17 says only those who receive His grace and righteousness are justified.

and how Paul's emphasis in 17 and throughout the statement he is making here by the repeated use of the word 'one' is making a completely different point, i.e your claim, that the "all" in the first, indicating death was efficient in all men, implies logically that life is efficient in all men through the second iteration of the word 'all', then we can continue the discussion.

Flat out, do you believe that salvation is offered to all men, every man and woman created? (If "no", then what is your take on Acts17:26-31?)

The rhetorical form of 18 "So then, just as one trespass brought condemnation for all men, so also one act of righteousness brought justification and life for all men." says that as through Adam all died; only though Christ are any made alive.

That's right; and it completely fits the condition of "only those who receive God's grace and righteousness".

19 explains again: "For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.…" (aha, you hoped I wouldn't put 19 in there so you could pounce on me with it: "see, it uses 'the many' in the first case, and 'the many' in the second case, so both are the same, and mean the same!" Yes, they mean the same --that nobody bypasses the principle --that Adam brought death, and Christ brings life."

It's a question of scope -- is atonement limited by God, or limited by men?
(Hint -- who limited the guests in Matt22:2-14 --- the KING, or did one man choose all by himself business, another choose farming, and a third refused the king's clean clothes? Who was called, and who decided which person is elected?)

Paul's focus here and throughout Romans is not that everyone will come to Christ and be saved, but that only through Christ are any saved. You have to ignore huge swaths of Romans to conclude he is saying everyone will be saved.

You misunderstood what I said; not everyone will have faith. And now I think you have enough verses that you begin to realize Jesus died for the WORLD, for ALL MEN (Acts17!), and those WHO choose God and righteousness live, but those who prefer sin and darkness die.

 

[Mark Quayle]

I've forgotten, please be patient and explain it again? How does, "It's not in Heaven that someone must go get it and give it to us, to make us hear it that we may observe it" -- how is that not completely opposite to Monergism, "God must sovereignly change hearts and regenerate people, giving them saving-faith and new hearts so that they irresistibly believe and persevere"?

How is Deut30:12 not the absolute opposite of Monergism?

I'm old too, lol. Explain, if you would, how it IS the complete opposite of Monergism. I can then show how you are wrong.

To explain to the negative is very hard to do --it would involve making assumptions about the claim to the positive that I'm not sure are correct. Thanks, but I've already spent way more time on this than is warranted.
----------------------------


Ben johnson said: ↑
In our jurisprudence we recognize "not-guilty-by-reason-of-insanity" --- those who CANNOT choose between right and wrong, are insane.

What does God do with people who are insane? Condemn them? No, Scripture says the only thing that condemns us is REFUSING to believe -- 1Jn5:10, Jn3:20-21, and more.

Mark says, "What has this to do with the subject?"

Ben says:

Simply that someone who cannot choose to pursue righteousness (violated by Rom2:4-11 and others, like Jn3:18-21) is by definition, "insane". Your view has God condemning people long before they exist, and when they're born His prehistoric condemnation prohibits them from ever escaping their "just, godly sentence of condemnation for their sin" -- denying that their sin is only the consequence of God's dictate and they are absolutely the same as the criminally insane! That also violates the definition of "just".

There's some rather obvious logical sloughing going on there, I think. How is the inability to pursue righteousness by definition "insane"? Is not the will free to choose as it will? Do they not make actual decisions? Is a person who hates everyone and repeatedly murders as many as he can counted insane? These people often choose good, they may intend good, but sin is still at their rotten core. They are not insane. You may say they are unwhole, lacking the Spirit of God indwelling them, and being slaves to sin (surely you agree they are slaves to sin, since you believe the Bible), if that makes you happy to say they are 'unwhole', but they are not insane.

Furthermore, if some of them are insane how are they not still at enmity to God, and relegated to damnation for that? You make the ability to choice, not will, the turning point, and that, you do out of your own reason and sensibilities, not out of scripture. Yet, I say even the insane can choose. Modern jurisprudence has no authority over God's judgement. If that bothers you, though, consider the fact that he looks on the heart to judge the deeds.

 

[Ben johnson]

To be fair, 1 Cor 1:18 says, "For the word of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us who are saved it is the power of God."

That's a secondary (one of the Fifty-Seven-Secondaries thought to promote Sovereign-Predestined-Salvation). The refutation of "predestined-salvation" is in verse 21 --- "God is well pleased, THROUGH the foolishness of the message preached, to save those who believe!"

Under Calvinism, the heart is regenerated first, changing the message from "foolish", to "wisdom"; but there is Paul saying God saves those who believe through foolishness --- so it is belief that changes the message from "foolish", to "wisdom".

Is there any way to deny this? If sovereign monergistic pre-belief-regeneration was the theme, how could it say "through-the-foolishness-of-the-message-preached"? How could it work? It can't, can it? Any defense?

We also have the witness of the Holy Spirit within. We do know, but yes, we can fool ourselves, and many of us are fooled.

If by "fooled" you mean "deceived", that is Scriptural; we (the saved) can be deceived away from God by our own sin, James1:14-16. By demons, 1Tim4:1. By deceitful men, Col2:6-8 (and there are many more verses like these).

Paul says we are at the SAME risk of deception-away-from-Jesus, as Eve experienced in the Garden. 2Cor11:3. I've cited that many times, no one has denied it...

 

[Ben johnson]

I'm old too, lol. Explain, if you would, how it IS the complete opposite of Monergism. I can then show how you are wrong.

To explain to the negative is very hard to do --it would involve making assumptions about the claim to the positive that I'm not sure are correct. Thanks, but I've already spent way more time on this than is warranted.

I hope you will read the long post I just made, the Scriptural points are solid; if wrong, I look forward to your explaining what the verses really say.

"Sovereign-Predestined-Salvation" (Calvinism, Reformed Theology), is based on the premise that God "zaps" people with new hearts unilaterally, monergistically; without prior believing or turning to Him. To be direct, God PUTS the "word-of-faith" in a few, who then irresistibly believe and are saved. That is the "I", in TULIP.

But Romans10 says the word is in our hearts and mouths, and it's the same WORD-OF-FAITH they were preaching about Jesus --- that word is in every heart and mouth, both those who can confess believe and be saved, and it is in those who disbelieve turn away and perish. Calvinism promotes that "God gets the word-of-faith and puts it in a few" (and therefore it's infinitely too far for most), but Deut30:12 says it's NOT too far it is IN our hearts and mouths!

Monergism has suffered a mortal blow with these two passages; can that be denied?

 

[Mark Quayle]

Yes, I'm sure --- it's the word "ALL" that has the equality! "SO THEN all, EVEN SO all". Calvinists claim the second "all" is not all, but perhaps "only some-of-all-types"! See 1Tim2:4 where they make the same claim "It doesn't mean every last person, but only some-of-all-types". No, "all" must really mean everyone, because it includes "kings and all authority", exceeding the scope of who will be saved.

Actually I claim the first and second are the same. And used the same way.
Nobody escapes the principle. It is in Adam alone that any are cursed with the sin nature and spiritually dead. It is in Christ alone that any are made alive.

Yes all does refer to everyone. But it does not MEAN everyone. It is ONLY REFERRING to everyone, in that there are none to whom the principle does not apply. Are you a universalist?

 

[Mark Quayle]

That's a secondary (one of the Fifty-Seven-Secondaries thought to promote Sovereign-Predestined-Salvation). The refutation of "predestined-salvation" is in verse 21 --- "God is well pleased, THROUGH the foolishness of the message preached, to save those who believe!"

Under Calvinism, the heart is regenerated first, changing the message from "foolish", to "wisdom"; but there is Paul saying God saves those who believe through foolishness --- so it is belief that changes the message from "foolish", to "wisdom".

Is there any way to deny this? If sovereign monergistic pre-belief-regeneration was the theme, how could it say "through-the-foolishness-of-the-message-preached"? How could it work? It can't, can it? Any defense?

You keep doing this. merely asserting it is so. The scripture doesn't tell you that there is any way for the lost, apart from God's enabling, to believe, yet you say it is in that sequence, with regeneration as a result of faith. In spite of your many quotations showing God (and others) telling people to believe, and that say that salvation is by faith, you neglect to show how this faith is possible in the slave to sin, who will not submit to God's --indeed cannot, according to Scripture. God must change them. They are not sufficient to the task. Faith is the direct work of the Holy Spirit --it is not something separate from the Holy Spirit. And, NO, MONERGISM DOES NOT SAY WE DO NOTHING. but that God does it in us. Our efforts do not increase his or make them any more valid or effective. Faith is, or isn't. Degree of faith is irrelevant, KIND of faith is not irrelevant.

 

[Mark Quayle]

I hope you will read the long post I just made, the Scriptural points are solid; if wrong, I look forward to your explaining what the verses really say.

Don't hold your breath. I would like to, and if you were the only one to talk to I would do so, but there are too many here, plus, so far, what I HAVE read of what you have said do not do the job, so I have no expectation that you will show me anything I have not thought of or have not refuted at one time or another, nor even that any of them prove your thesis through a different reasoning.than I have heard or considered in the past.

MOST of your posts I only hit the top one or two points and move on, for lack of time. It takes me a long time to post. I have become rather blind, just for starters, and it already has always taken me a long time to compose my writing.

I mean none of this by insult. I simply don't have the time.