Paul taught that Revelation 20:4 was a current reality

[Spiritual Israelite]

I’m saying if you accept special cases as a way to fill in an area in your theology that may not be clear, then you have increased the number of unclear areas in your theology.

Wrong. I'm done with this. I don't need to waste any more time on this nonsense that distracts from actually discussing scripture.

Look at the handyman hermeneutics label. A frequent changing of one’s method of interpretation to patch the holes in one’s theology.

I'm not doing that. I've had it with you. If you are just going to make false accusations towards me then I don't want to waste my time on you.

 

[PinSeeker]

Hmm, so His coming as a thief happens to dead people who have no worldly possessions.

He will return, and it will be sudden. Even dead people ~ who themselves are not unconscious and certainly will not be unaware ~ do not know the day or the hour.

I don’t know about that one, I’ll have to think about it.

Well, if you're going to think about anything I've said, don't first misunderstand or misconstrue... what I have said. :)

Grace and peace to you.

 

[PinSeeker]

Yes, only I have misrepresented your beliefs.

This is one of the first true statements you have made.
You have continually said to me, "You claim this, and you believe that," as well as "Calvinists claim this and Calvinists claim that," and every time in error, making some kind of ridiculous caricature of these things instead of acknowledging what I and Calvinists really "claim" and/or believe. And as I said, this is exactly what Arminians do in order to defend their beliefs/understandings.

I on the other hand have only carried out exactly what you have said to its logical conclusion,

You haven't misrepresented mine at all because you somehow know what I believe better than I do.

No, you've told me, and I've pretty much used your exact words.

LOL. My goodness, PinSeeker, you have no self awareness whatsoever.

Well I'll certainly dismiss this... LOL!

You would know a lot about making false allegations having made them several time regarding my beliefs.

I've only repeated your words. In the few instances where we've actually been talking about something you've said. About 90 percent of this exchange has consisted of your wrongful characterizations of me and Calvinists in general.

However patient you think you've been with me, I've been equally as patient or more with you.

Ah. LOL!

You ooze arrogance.

On occasion, yes, I'll accept that, and apologize. But this is certainly a pot calling the kettle black. :)

You apparently think you are incapable of misunderstanding and misrepresenting my beliefs, even unintentionally!

Um, no...

I can't fathom how arrogant you must be to believe that.

I don't. :) But yet again, you're tagging me wrongly. :)

Now, no matter what you might think of me (I couldn't care less), do I come across to you as a liar?

No. Why do you even ask such a thing? But telling me I believe something, and then me replying that I don't believe that something, but then you saying I believe that very same something again, is... puzzling. I guess what I would say, SI, is that in my mind, for someone to be a liar, they have to make a habit of it. I think it very possible for someone to lie about something but still not be a liar, per se. :)

...why would you think I would just make that up?

Is that what you got from me saying (and I quote myself), "As for "stupid," I would need you to point out the post where I said that. Maybe I did; I'd... kinda like to know..." Really?

I even responded by referring to your "stupid beliefs". Yes, that wasn't the best way to respond, but I didn't appreciate what you said and I reacted in the heat of the moment. I apologize for that statement.

Apology accepted. But not needed. I really don't care, SI. No offense intended. At this point, I literally don't care. :)

If you want, I will find that post and give a link to it. You seem undecided about that. Let me know.

It's funny that you say this, because this is in response to my having said, "As for "stupid," I would need you to point out the post where I said that. Maybe I did; I'd... kinda like to know..." :) Dude. Forget it. :)

Let me know. It will take a bit of time to find it on my part since we've made a number of posts since then, so I don't want to take the time to do that if you can just take my word for it. I accept your apology, but if you don't think you even said that.....anyway, never mind. Forget it.

Yeah, forget it. Good Lord. :)

What is this "woodenly speaking" stuff? It's meaningless.

No, just on its face. At face value, Having no nuance. In that sense "wooden."

No, in your view a non-elect person CANNOT believe no matter what they do because you think that a person only believes if God gives them faith.

Well, aside from the fact that... there you go yet again wrongly characterizing my view (despite what I have said numerous times) telling me about my view, characterizing it very wrongly (again, even after several clarifications)...

God is absolutely the giver of saving faith:

• Paul attests in Ephesians 2:8 ~ "For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,"
• The writer of Hebrews does, too, in defining this faith as "the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen." We do not assure or convict ourselves, Spiritual Israelite. Now, we might struggle with assurance ~ we might wonder if we really have this assurance and conviction ~ but that doesn't mean we have not received it, have not been given it. That struggle is a completely different thing; it's actually doubting God Himself, which, you will agree, I'm sure, that we should not do.
• And, the writer of Hebrews also says "Jesus (is) the founder and perfecter of our faith."
• And, every bit as clearly as anywhere else, Paul says in Romans 12 that "(we) should not think of ourselves more highly than (we) ought to think, but think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned."
• And again in 1 Corinthians 12, Paul tells us that faith itself is a gift of the Holy Spirit:
  • "there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who empowers them all in everyone. To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. For to one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills."

Do you still believe that saving faith is manufactured in anyone by that person himself or herself? Because... see directly above... that belief would be absolutely contrary to the Word of God. Hey, Spiritual Israelite, I'm not asking you to believe me, really. Believe God. There's His Word, verbatim.

Why can't you be honest about this?

I would ask you the same question. You will not be honest about what I have repeatedly clarified are my views and beliefs; you persist in characterizing them very wrongly.

No matter what you think of what I say, I feel the same way towards the things you say. Just know that.

I'm well aware of that. :) But when you're caught in your own words... Well, see above.

None of that takes into account man's responsibility and whether or not we are predestined based on God's foreknowledge of what we would do.

Ah yes, foreknowledge. I addressed that earlier. Yes, Romans 8:28 speaks of "those whom God foreknew." But Paul is talking about a limited number of people, Spiritual Israelite. If we take this foreknowing to mean only a cognitive "seeing what we would do," in that sense, He knows every one and every thing. He knows exactly what everyone is going to do. But again, Paul is talking about God's foreknowing only a certain group of people. So it cannot be a mere pre-cognition of what someone would do. And, the verb "to know" is used in this Greek context in the same sense as "to love." It is also used that way in the Hebrew in various places in the Old Testament, such as, Adam knew Eve, and she bore a son (Genesis 4). Well of course he knew who is wife was, cognitively, but obviously that knowing is far, far more than just recognition, or knowing who she was.

Does what you said here not imply that those who are not "predestined for adoption to God as sons through Jesus Christ" are instead predestined to what occurs to those who are not children of Christ, which is eternal punishment in the lake of fire?

No. Unless you want to say, as I said before, by elimination. And, as I said before, He could have not predestined anyone in the way He did the elect, and would have been absolutely just in doing so. We are all deserving ~ from birth ~ of this eternal punishment. "But God..."

Okay, again, no offense, but we're going in circles now. Not I. :)

It doesn't bother me if you do that when it actually calls for it.

And it did. :) And you may call that my opinion. :)

Grace and peace to you.

 

[WPM]

This is one of the first true statements you have made.
You have continually said to me, "You claim this, and you believe that," as well as "Calvinists claim this and Calvinists claim that," and every time in error, making some kind of ridiculous caricature of these things instead of acknowledging what I and Calvinists really "claim" and/or believe. And as I said, this is exactly what Arminians do in order to defend their beliefs/understandings.

I on the other hand have only carried out exactly what you have said to its logical conclusion,


No, you've told me, and I've pretty much used your exact words.


Well I'll certainly dismiss this... LOL!


I've only repeated your words. In the few instances where we've actually been talking about something you've said. About 90 percent of this exchange has consisted of your wrongful characterizations of me and Calvinists in general.


Ah. LOL!


On occasion, yes, I'll accept that, and apologize. But this is certainly a pot calling the kettle black. :)


Um, no...


I don't. :) But yet again, you're tagging me wrongly. :)


No. Why do you even ask such a thing? But telling me I believe something, and then me replying that I don't believe that something, but then you saying I believe that very same something again, is... puzzling.


Is that what you got from me saying (and I quote myself), "As for "stupid," I would need you to point out the post where I said that. Maybe I did; I'd... kinda like to know..." Really?


Apology accepted. But not needed. I really don't care, SI. No offense intended. At this point, I literally don't care. :)


It's funny that you say this, because this is in response to my having said, "As for "stupid," I would need you to point out the post where I said that. Maybe I did; I'd... kinda like to know..." :) Dude. Forget it. :)


Yeah, forget it. Good Lord. :)


No, just on its face. At face value, Having no nuance. In that sense "wooden."


Well, aside from the fact that... there you go yet again wrongly characterizing my view (despite what I have said numerous times) telling me about my view, characterizing it very wrongly (again, even after several clarifications)...

God is absolutely the giver of saving faith:

• Paul attests in Ephesians 2:8 ~ "For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,"
• The writer of Hebrews does, too, in defining this faith as "the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen." We do not assure or convict ourselves, Spiritual Israelite. Now, we might struggle with assurance ~ we might wonder if we really have this assurance and conviction ~ but that doesn't mean we have not received it, have not been given it. That struggle is a completely different thing; it's actually doubting God Himself, which, you will agree, I'm sure, that we should not do.
• And, the writer of Hebrews also says "Jesus (is) the founder and perfecter of our faith."
• And, every bit as clearly as anywhere else, Paul says in Romans 12 that "(we) should not think of ourselves more highly than (we) ought to think, but think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned."
• And again in 1 Corinthians 12, Paul tells us that faith itself is a gift of the Holy Spirit:
  • "there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who empowers them all in everyone. To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. For to one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills."

Do you still believe that saving faith is manufactured in anyone by that person himself or herself? Because... see directly above... that belief would be absolutely contrary to the Word of God. Hey, Spiritual Israelite, I'm not asking you to believe me, really. Believe God. There's His Word, verbatim.


I would ask you the same question. You will not be honest about what I have repeatedly clarified are my views and beliefs; you persist in characterizing them very wrongly.



I'm well aware of that. :) But when you're caught in your own words... Well, see above.


Ah yes, foreknowledge. I addressed that earlier. Yes, Romans 8:28 speaks of "those whom God foreknew." But Paul is talking about a limited number of people, Spiritual Israelite. If we take this foreknowing to mean only a cognitive "seeing what we would do," in that sense, He knows every one and every thing. He knows exactly what everyone is going to do. But again, Paul is talking about God's foreknowing only a certain group of people. So it cannot be a mere pre-cognition of what someone would do. And, the verb "to know" is used in this Greek context in the same sense as "to love." It is also used that way in the Hebrew in various places in the Old Testament, such as, Adam knew Eve, and she bore a son (Genesis 4). Well of course he knew who is wife was, cognitively, but obviously that knowing is far, far more than just recognition, or knowing who she was.


No. Unless you want to say, as I said before, by elimination. And, as I said before, He could have not predestined anyone in the way He did the elect, and would have been absolutely just in doing so. We are all deserving ~ from birth ~ of this eternal punishment. "But God..."

Okay, again, no offense, but we're going in circles now. Not I. :)


And it did. :) And you may call that my opinion. :)

Grace and peace to you.

Our theological beliefs are very similar. I am Reformed, I believe in the doctrines of grace, I am Amil. But I am Idealist on Revelation, and not Partial Preterist, although I agree with a lot of Partial Preterism's views on Daniel 9 and large parts of Matthew 24, etc. I respect much of your doctrinal writings.

I am requesting that you tone it down with Spiritual Jew. I realize you have rubbed each other up the wrong way. That happens. He is a quality brother and one of the most able advocates of Amil i have ever encountered. What you agree on is 99%. Do not let the 1% divide you. There are many on these boards that we disagree with that advocate gross error. Spiritual Jew is not one of these. He is a tremendous writer but and even greater Christian and friend. He has been a loyal companion to me in the heat of many battles and a warrior of Christ second to none. I cannot speak more highly of him.

You seem a quality brother also. I am still getting to know you.

But it grieves me to see you both fighting.

Please strive to work with him. You will reap the benefits, God will be glorified and the Amil cause will be better advanced on this forum.

 

[PinSeeker]

Our theological beliefs are very similar. I am Reformed, I believe in the doctrines of grace, I am Amil. But I am Idealist on Revelation, and not Partial Preterist, although I agree with a lot of Partial Preterism's views on Daniel 9 and large parts of Matthew 24, etc. I respect much of your doctrinal writings.

Thank you, WPM. You might explain what you mean by your idealism on Revelation, but don't feel obligated.

I am requesting that you tone it down with Spiritual Jew.

I've been very even-tempered with him.

He is a quality brother and one of the most able advocates of Amil i have ever encountered.

Very well.

What you agree on is 99%. Do not let the 1% divide you.

I think this is... misdirected. :) But, point taken.

There are many on these boards that we disagree with that advocate gross error. Spiritual Jew is not one of these.

Not acknowledging that faith is the gift of God is an egregious error. But again, point taken.

He is a tremendous writer but and even greater Christian and friend. He has been a loyal companion to me in the heat of many battles and a warrior of Christ second to none. I cannot speak more highly of him.

Glad to hear it. That doesn't give a Christian leeway to speak to others as he has in this thread, though.

That is why it grieves me to see you both fighting.

Again, I think I have been very even-tempered and patient through this whole conversation. But patience does wear thin. Again, point taken.

Please strive to work with him. You will reap the benefits, God will be glorified and the Amil cause will be better advanced on this forum.

I think I've striven pretty well, WPM. But yet again, point taken.

Thank you for your kind words and words of wisdom. Grace and peace to you.

 

[WPM]

Thank you, WPM. You might explain what you mean by your idealism on Revelation, but don't feel obligated.


I've been very even-tempered with him.


Very well.


I think this is... misdirected. :) But, point taken.


Not acknowledging that faith is the gift of God is an egregious error. But again, point taken.


Glad to hear it. That doesn't give a Christian leeway to speak to others as he has in this thread, though.


Again, I think I have been very even-tempered and patient through this whole conversation. But patience does wear thin. Again, point taken.


I think I've striven pretty well, WPM. But yet again, point taken.

Thank you for your kind words and words of wisdom. Grace and peace to you.

I added a line which you might of missed:

You seem a quality brother also. I am still getting to know you.

 

[WPM]

Thank you, WPM. You might explain what you mean by your idealism on Revelation, but don't feel obligated.


I've been very even-tempered with him.


Very well.


I think this is... misdirected. :) But, point taken.


Not acknowledging that faith is the gift of God is an egregious error. But again, point taken.


Glad to hear it. That doesn't give a Christian leeway to speak to others as he has in this thread, though.


Again, I think I have been very even-tempered and patient through this whole conversation. But patience does wear thin. Again, point taken.


I think I've striven pretty well, WPM. But yet again, point taken.

Thank you for your kind words and words of wisdom. Grace and peace to you.

I am sure He believes faith is a gift from God. He has to. There is no Plan B. It is as clear a truth as one can find in the Bible.

The doctrines of grace are as liberating a truth as Amil. It allows the Word to be complete and make sense.

 

[PinSeeker]

I added a line which you might of missed:

You seem a quality brother also. I am still getting to know you.

Didn't miss that. Is there such a thing as a "non-quality brother?" :) And there's only so much you can get from a message board... :)

I am sure He believes faith is a gift from God. He has to. There is no Plan B. It is as clear a truth as one can find in the Bible.

Agree on the clarity, but from what he's said in this and other threads...

The doctrines of grace are as liberating a truth as Amil. It allows the Word to be complete and make sense.

The Word is complete and does make perfect sense ~ it is God's Word after all. But even well-intentioned folks misunderstand things therein for... various reasons... :) But, yes, to what you say, here... even more than that, really. But sure.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[grafted branch]

Well, if you're going to think about anything I've said, don't first misunderstand or misconstrue... what I have said. :)

There is one point I would like to clarify, is watching one of the determining factors as to whether a person is saved or not? Do we have to believe and watch to be saved, not just believe?

 

[grafted branch]

@WPM Can I ask you a question? I’m not looking to debate you or cause friction between you and other Amils, I’m just wondering where you stand on a particular issue.

The last few days I feel the Spirit leading me away from the Amil position and even deeper into the Preterist position.

I feel one of the core and strongest points for Amil is that Jesus is the resurrection and was resurrected first. I think that point is absolutely true.

My question is do you support the principle that there are instances where a word such as “resurrection” can have a unique meaning that doesn’t agree with any other instances of that word?

 

[PinSeeker]

There is one point I would like to clarify, is watching one of the determining factors as to whether a person is saved or not? Do we have to believe and watch to be saved, not just believe?

I would say no, but that being watchful...

...in an eager, anticipatory, and expecting way, of course, and living now in light of that...​

NOTE: remember Colossians 3:4 ~ "When Christ Who is your life appears, then you also will appear with Him in glory..." ~ and Hebrews 12:2 ~ "...let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus, the Founder and Perfecter of our faith, Who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross..."​

...much like obedience and good works, and even belief itself, is a result of having been saved. Something we do, of course, but because of our being no longer of the devil but of God (Romans 6:17), because of our new, God-given identity in Christ (Colossians 3:2-3), and because of God's ongoing work, by His Spirit, in us (Philippians 2:13).

Grace and peace to you, GB.

 

[PinSeeker]

@WPM Can I ask you a question? I’m not looking to debate you or cause friction between you and other Amils, I’m just wondering where you stand on a particular issue.

The last few days I feel the Spirit leading me away from the Amil position and even deeper into the Preterist position.

I feel one of the core and strongest points for Amil is that Jesus is the resurrection and was resurrected first. I think that point is absolutely true.

My question is do you support the principle that there are instances where a word such as “resurrection” can have a unique meaning that doesn’t agree with any other instances of that word?

:)

 

[grafted branch]

I would say no, but that being watchful...

...in an eager, anticipatory, and expecting way, of course, and living now in light of that...​

NOTE: remember Colossians 3:4 ~ "When Christ Who is your life appears, then you also will appear with Him in glory..." ~ and Hebrews 12:2 ~ "...let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus, the Founder and Perfecter of our faith, Who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross..."​

...much like obedience and good works, and even belief itself, is a result of having been saved. Something we do, of course, but because of our being no longer of the devil but of God (Romans 6:17), because of our new, God-given identity in Christ (Colossians 3:2-3), and because of God's ongoing work, by His Spirit, in us (Philippians 2:13).

Grace and peace to you, GB.

Ok, thanks, I’ve thought about the possibility that the “coming as a thief” could be referring to something that happens to dead people and I can’t find any other references to support that idea.

One of the most clear examples of the “coming as a thief” being meant for those who are alive is in Luke 12:39-48. Are there any other scriptures that show “coming as a thief” happening to dead people?

 

[PinSeeker]

Ok, thanks, I’ve thought about the possibility that the “coming as a thief” could be referring to something that happens to dead people and I can’t find any other references to support that idea.

Well, not to insult your intelligence in any way, but I think you're not getting what I'm saying, really. In the Bible, to be dead, Grafted Branch, does not mean to be non-existent or lacking in consciousness... does not imply in any way lack of existence or consciousness... either in this life or after. In other words, there are dead people walking around among us right now ~ which is not to say they are not living and breathing... :) (I'm kind of smiling in saying this, but it's no laughing matter) ~ and... well, what I just said, that even folks who have physically died are not dead in the sense of being non-existent or unconscious. Biblically speaking, death, or being dead, is a state of being, both in this life and after.

One of the most clear examples of the “coming as a thief” being meant for those who are alive is in Luke 12:39-48. Are there any other scriptures that show “coming as a thief” happening to dead people?

Hmmm... Well, I think you agree that in this passage, especially verse 40 ("You also must be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect"), the imagery used by Jesus here is indicative of the unexpected nature of His second coming. And He's speaking to people who have now long since died. It would not make any sense for Him to have said this to His immediate hearers if what He was saying was not applicable to or intended for them, right?

Now that I think you agree with, but this next part maybe not so much. But:

So, even though He hasn't returned yet ~ because, as you agreed, the fullness of the Gentiles has not been brought into Israel and the partial hardening now on Israel has not yet been removed, and thus not all Israel is saved yet (Romans 11:25-26) ~ what He said in Luke 12:40 is still, even now (in view of what I said above about being dead), relevant to His original hearers, even though long deceased. So really, I would say even the very passage you point out here is indicative of what you say you are not seeing.

And I would also point out Jesus's parable in Luke 16:19-31... Even now long-deceased folks (like the rich man in Jesus's parable here) are expectant, really ~ in one way or the other, if you get my meaning, waiting... and watching... In this passage, we can and should understand the rich man to be dreading what he knows is coming; thus his desire to warn those who have not yet died. <shudder> That's a very frightening thing to say the least.

I understand you are leaning towards full preterism; I would encourage you not to do that... :)

Grace and peace to you, GB.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

No. Why do you even ask such a thing?

Why would I ask you if you think I'm a liar? Because you didn't believe me when I said you called something that I said "stupid". I wouldn't make that up.

Apology accepted. But not needed. I really don't care, SI. No offense intended. At this point, I literally don't care.

I don't, either. And I don't care to continue the discussion any longer because we got away from discussing scripture. Also, we each think the other often misrepresents the other's views, so there is no point in arguing with straw men any longer.

 

[PinSeeker]

Because you didn't believe me when I said you called something that I said "stupid". I wouldn't make that up.

Again, Spiritual Isrealite, I only said, "If I did, I don't remember it; you'd have to remind me of it." I did not say ~ nor did I insinuate ~ that you were lying or that you made it up. I only said, "If I did that, I don't remember doing it." Good grief.

I don't, either. And I don't care to continue the discussion any longer...

Very well. Yes, we're in agreement on that for sure...

...we each think the other often misrepresents the other's views...

But only one of us has actually done that, and over and over again.

LOL! Sorry... now I'm just having some fun with you. :)

...there is no point in arguing with straw men any longer.

I mean, you just don't like being made to look silly, I get it, but I certainly didn't do that on purpose. Really, you kinda did that to yourself... :)

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Our theological beliefs are very similar. I am Reformed, I believe in the doctrines of grace, I am Amil. But I am Idealist on Revelation, and not Partial Preterist, although I agree with a lot of Partial Preterism's views on Daniel 9 and large parts of Matthew 24, etc. I respect much of your doctrinal writings.

I am requesting that you tone it down with Spiritual Jew. I realize you have rubbed each other up the wrong way. That happens. He is a quality brother and one of the most able advocates of Amil i have ever encountered. What you agree on is 99%.

I appreciate your kind words, but when it comes to how salvation works, he and I disagree very strongly (we've each made that more than clear). But, since I supposedly misrepresent his view all the time, maybe we actually agree.

But, we do have similar eschatological beliefs. But, maybe that is what you were referring to specifically.

Do not let the 1% divide you. There are many on these boards that we disagree with that advocate gross error. Spiritual Jew is not one of these. He is a tremendous writer but and even greater Christian and friend. He has been a loyal companion to me in the heat of many battles and a warrior of Christ second to none. I cannot speak more highly of him.

Thank you again. I first learned of Amil in 2006 when I joined Bible Forums and my understanding largely came from your posts there. And I remember getting insight from David Taylor and Shirley, also. I remember everything you were saying just making complete sense to me, but it was some things that I just hadn't thought about before.

You seem a quality brother also. I am still getting to know you.

But it grieves me to see you both fighting.

I did tell him that I love him as a person. :)

Please strive to work with him. You will reap the benefits, God will be glorified and the Amil cause will be better advanced on this forum.

I will admit that discussing soteriology on an eschatology forum is probably out of place. So, it's best that we not continue that particular discussion here.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Again, Spiritual Isrealite, I only said, "If I did, I don't remember it; you'd have to remind me of it." I did not say you we lying or that you made it up. I only said, "If I did that, I don't remember doing it." Good grief.

Good grief, indeed. God forbid that I imply something from anything you say.

But only one of us has actually done that, and over and over again.

There's your arrogance rearing its ugly head again. Thinking I'm the only one who has done that. Good grief. Get over yourself.

 

[PinSeeker]

I did tell him that I love him as a person. :)

Yes, you did tell me that... :) It seemed quite insincere... :)

Ah, yeah... I mean, if we met face to face, I'm sure we'd like each other. Really.

God forbid that I imply something from anything you say.

Well, God forbid you make it into something entirely different that what it was. Which is exactly what you did. But that seems to have been a recurring pattern of yours in this thread.

I will say, Spiritual Israelite, that I do agree with much of what you have posted before, and that you have a lot of very, very good things to say. Maybe it seems to me you get a little too... passionate... about it from time to time, but still, yes, you have a lot of very, very good things to say. This is at least somewhat of an olive branch (just in case you don't get that)... :)

There's your arrogance rearing its ugly head again.

Right, and yours as well here... But as for me, certainly, my heartfelt apologies.

Thinking I'm the only one who has done that.

Hmm, arrogance... No, you're not the only one. Agreed. :)

Good grief. Get over yourself.

Hmmm... :)

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I am sure He believes faith is a gift from God. He has to. There is no Plan B. It is as clear a truth as one can find in the Bible.

What do you mean exactly? Are you talking about saving faith being given to people and that God chooses who will have saving faith and who won't? If so, I don't believe that. I believe in man's responsibility, which is taught repeatedly in scripture. I believe man has no excuse to not have faith (Romans 1:18-32). If a person can only have faith if God causes him or her to have faith, then a person who isn't given faith would have an excuse for not having faith.

The doctrines of grace are as liberating a truth as Amil. It allows the Word to be complete and make sense.

What are "the doctrines of grace"? I believe my doctrine promotes God's grace at least as much as Calvinism does. Believing that God graciously and genuinely offers salvation to all people (Titus 2:11) while making them responsible to willingly choose to accept it or reject it does nothing to take away from His grace.