Debate now available

Just found this on facebook...have not listened to it yet;


The Romans 9 Debate is Now Available
by Rich Pierce
While this is definitely an interesting exchange, it is not a very good debate. The topic was supposed to involve both sides presenting a positive exegesis of Romans 9 so that the audience could compare and decide for themselves. Professor Flowers chose to make a presentation on Total Depravity... http://www.aomin.org/…/the-romans-9-debate-is-now-available/











The Romans 9 Debate is Now Available


While this is definitely an interesting exchange, it is not a very good debate. The topic was supposed to involve both sides presenting a positive exegesis of Romans 9 so that the audience could compare and decide for themselves. Professor Flowers chose to make a presentation on Total Depravity (which was the topic he had originally suggested), and then make some surface-level comments about how his position would be relevant to particular sections of Romans 9. Hence, the formal debate was basically uncontested, but the secondary debate (total depravity) was only partially contested, as James did not get to make a positive presentation on the topic. Despite this (all too common) problem, the discussion is very useful in comparing Reformed theology and exegesis with what calls itself “traditionalist” Southern Baptist views. Here is the link


Alpha and Omega Ministries
... http://www.aomin.org/…/the-romans-9-debate-is-now-available/

 

read this today;

http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.p...ervations-on-the-leighton-flowers-discussion/

found this video now...I just started listening now
http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php/2015/05/13/first-video-of-romans-9-debate-posted/

 

I now see how one sided it was.The same errors repeated over and over on BB were answered here by Aaron over and over were repeated in the debate.

 

I watched it once so far.
He never responded to Dr.Whites opening statements on Romans 9 except to deny them .
he denies the whole premise of Romans 9 then tries to substitute an idea that Abrahams seed was called ....not for salvation....but for a noble purpose...to tell the world about the messiah.
Now...Israel and the called gentiles are to proclaim the gospel.....so like a part of an onion skin is part of an onion....but that is not the main thing .

For years we saw him developing his flawed ideas on here , and many many times Aaron and others took his ideas to task..
So now he used this to promote a book with his failed ideas in it.
We have heard these ideas here on BB.......he goes to subjective meanings on judicial hardening, some of his philosophical stylings about contra casual choice, a reference to Augustine and gnostics, like crabtown cowboy tries every once in awhile, and then he quotes fron clement, which did not hold up when Dr.White actually asked him questions about it.

Dr.White kept attempting to call him back to the salvation issue which he side stepped and denied over and over. He just kept skating around it...mentioning Romans 9 several times and never really getting into the verses except by long distance general references.....to which Dr. White responded saying mentioning Romans 9 is not the same as discovering what the text reveals..

 

Why would that poll be removed except for censorship?

I initially gave him credit for trying to see if his ideas would stand up in this kind of forum. They did not. Now it looks like there will be some revisionist history that will take place trying to do damage control:wavey::thumbs: