To Be or Not To Be: That is the question of James 2:5

No, the view is totally consistent with all scripture including Romans 3.

 

For readability, but just going with the actual text, as about 10 versions did works just as well.

 

Since no one else is posting, I assume all the non Calvinists realize corrupting the text to fit man-made doctrine is wrong.

 

The truth is though that it does fit within both Context and the Greek Grammar and construction!

 

Why would try to translate it in a way that contradicts other scriptures?

 

Asked and answered dozens of time. Does the verse say no one ever seeks God at any time, the Calvinist interpretation. Nope.

 

Utter bogus assertion. About 10 translations render the verse without "to be" therefore nothing in the context, Greek grammar or construction requires the corruption.

 

Yet another denial of Calvinism, the published doctrine is total spiritual inability. Full Stop

 

We believe than sinners still seek after a god, but that is one of their own making, not the real one!

 

Still is permitted to be done as a valid way to express what was intended.

 

Utter false claim, Matthew 23:13

 

Just because the bible can be corrupted does not mean we should tolerate corruption. Adding "to be" alters and corrupts the text. Use one of the 10 or so versions that do not insert "to be" or put it in italics so you can ignore the corruption.

 

Who are the ones trying to enter in> the elect of God....

 

Yet another utterly false statement, if the men of Matthew 23:13 had been elected they would have been put into the kingdom by God.

 

Yes, His elect chosen out by God beforehand!

 

Please read Matthew 23:13 and if that does not answer your question, there is nothing I can say. No need to waste effort if all you have is denial and deflection.