1. We all profess to be Christians that you call free wheelies. We believed, is why God chose us out of the world and saved us, put a new song in our mouth and orders our footsteps. Do you not consider us Christians?
When you get to heaven brother Bob, it is not because you were an Arminian or Calvinist.
Rather, it is because you trusted Jesus as your Savior and Lord.
I know of no well-bred Calvinist who would say that you are not a Christian.
We just differ on our soteriology.
But you are certainly my brother in Christ and a child of God.
Amy, if you actually read my posts you will know my position. I repeat for what the third time now? It is ok to say "I don't know" if the Bible is silent, or especially in a way that God says are secret.
It is not ok to say "I don't know" when the Bible gives a clear answer.
If you say, I will have to study that...I don't know yet, that is ok too.
But to say "I don't know" neither can we know when the Bible tells us is not acceptable.
For what it is worth Bro Bob, I had my doubts at one time though I still figures you were a true Christian. I have seen wise postings from you on a lot of other topics.
I don't know your heart but if I were to see you in person, I would consider you a brother, I would be friendly and would be happy to have good fellowship with you.
No bait at all.
This is what was said, please read carfully:
I said:
To that you replied:
You may say that the Bible does NOT tell us on this issue, but you have to agree that if the Bible does tell us on ANY issue, then we can't say that "I don't know 'cause the Bible doesn't say"
See what I mean?
Surely you agree in principle, even if not in this application, right?
NOt backhanded at all. Just a truthful response.
There was a time, many months ago that I wondered.
But I realized that I was wrong to think that and I have seen many wise things from him in other topics.
If anything, it was an apology for ever doubting.
I would hope that on other topics we could always be friendly and gracious, yet firm when we disagree.
The NIV is not my first choice of translations, which is why I did not originally choose the NIV for quote format.
I went with what I believe is a more appropriate translation.
But that's what it says in the NIV - enabled.
Although I don't prefer the NIV, it is still a reasonable translation of the passage.
What else could it mean that "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father." What is granted him by the Father except the ability to come to Jesus?
That's what enabling means.
Then why didn't you respect my honesty?
I don't like the NIV, and I don't normally use it.
But it does contain the very word Amy questioned, and it is a reasonable translation of the verse.
So I quoted a more appropriate translation first (since I favor it), and then quoted the NIV to illustrate that it really does have to do with being "enabled".
This illustrates that it isn't my private interpretation.
It is how the NIV translators put it.