jago wrote:
Pilut, have another look. Salvation is not even a word in the sentence.

Correction, but it is. "For by grace are ye "saved" through faith and that not of yourselves. "It" is a nueter pronoun and thus must refer back to a neuter antecedent, of which "grace" nor "faith" are not. They are feminine nouns.

Incidentally, Socrates from Iowa is also correct in

"Faith is a gift of grace poured out on all whom the Holy Spirit has regenerated in the new birth. We can not have true faith till we have been circumsized of the heart and now love the God whom we as enimies before hated.
Eph 2:8-9
Eze.36:26-27
Deut 30:6
The dead must be given life before we have faith Eph 2:1f"

Mike wrote:
They have difficulty with the reality that actual dead people, and actual live sinners, are not the same thing.

Mike wrote:
Answer 2: If I say yes, will you agree that Lazarus being a corpse is not the same as a man being a sinner?

Romans 8:8 tells us "So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

v9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

While you are in the house, maybe you can answer the question.

How was Lazarus able to answer the call from Jesus to come forth when he was dead?

Mike from NY. You still missed the point. If you talk to a corpse, what are the chances it will answer you.

Minnow wrote:
Eph 2:1 "And you hath he quickened, (MADE ALIVE) who were dead (Means "DEAD") in trespasses and sins"
Only God raises the dead.
*ALL* the glory to God.
NIL to man.

Mike wrote:
Grace and faith both precede salvation, therefore they both precede regeneration. See how easy?

How was Lazarus able to answer the call from Jesus to come forth when he was dead?

Michael Hranek wrote:
Observation Post
It would be my opinion that we do ourselves great disservice and don't nearly honor God anywhere we should when we "chop up" the salvation He gives us in Jesus Christ at such great cost to Himself instead of standing in absolute of the completeness of what Jesus has accomplished for us. Further I believe such 'chopping up' of Salvation can stunt a person in their faith and hinder their growth as a child of God.

(1) foreknow,
he also did
(2) predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

Romans 8:30 Moreover whom he did
(2) predestinate,
(3) them he also called: and whom he called,
(4) them he also justified: and whom he justified,
(5) them he also glorified.

Michael,

It is the word of God that rightly divides the order of salvation.

Michael Hranek wrote:
Observation Post
Can anyone be save, and that would be from the wrath of God apart from justification?

Mark 10:27 And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible.

Romans 8:33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth.

Man has not the ability, morally or otherwise to save himself, save the grace of God. If salvation were left up to man, he woulld be trying to work his way into heaven by every means necessary even his free-will. That is why it is impossible for men, but with God, all things are possible.

Michael, from reading your post, I believe you are closer to the truth that those like JD/Casob who deny the power of sin and the necessity f God sovereignly intervening to deliver them and free them from the bondage it has on them.

Casob wrote:
The "solas" are appealing to the worthless fleshly pride of religious humanity and is a means to draw attention to the elevated status with which they regard themselves. (In My Opinion)

Minnow wrote:
JD
It is criminal of you to post to me.
You are supposed to be ignoring me.
Now don't dare indulge in such "fleshly pride" again.

Nominative case
Thou art worthy (2nd person singular)
Ye must be born again (2nd person plural)

Objective case
I say unto thee (2nd person singular)
I say unto you (2nd person plural)

Possessive case
Thy word is a lamp (2nd person singular)
Your words shall betray you (2 person plural)

What usually happens if it is preceeded by a definite article such as "o"or "ta" in the Greek? Does that imply a literal meaning of the adjective or noun. Why have a definite article if it's not to be interpreted that way?

You scored several knockout blows to Casob/JD's dispensationalism with your post, however your last jab was uncalled for.

Try reposting the questions posed to him without the sarcastic remarks as the questions were definitely very valid. That is why your post was pulled.

However we are faced with one problem. It appears in the Greek numerics, they are all in the plural. For example, in the parables (Matt. 18:12) it refers to "an hundred sheep", (Mark 4:20) "And these are they which are sown on good ground; such as hear the word, and receive it, and bring forth fruit, some thirtyfold, some sixty, and some an hundred." The Greek word for "hundred" εκατον is also in the plural. Does that mean "hundreds of sheep" or the individual brought forth hundreds of fruit?

Also in Rev. 20, in the Greek, the word "chilia" is preceeded by a definite article "ta" which could be translated "the".