JD wrote:
I hope no one can ever read my commentary and come to the opinion that I am teaching that God has different ways of salvation. That would be tragic.

At the core - the very CORE - of our differences, Yamil, as best as I understand it, is a hermeneutic difference. You say that to take some passage and view it through the whole of scripture is incorrect, where I see that all scripture is theopneustos (god-breathed) therefor will harmonize upon scrutiny.

A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another (John 13:34).

But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you (Luke 6:27-28).

Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse (Romans 12:14).

Do not repay anyone evil for evil. ...If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. ..."If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head."...(Romans 12:17-21).

Do not repay evil with evil or insult with insult, but with blessing, because to this you were called so that you may inherit a blessing (1 Peter 3:9).

terry evans wrote:
Hi Doc, (not)
How do you do (it)
Your whole comment was worth (less)
more than most of your other comments
before. ...
Plese as with scripture
use your FREEWILL to read only the
parts you like.(or understand)
Love
terry

I am also frustrated with elements of this issue, I grant that up-front, but I believe (as the other "side" does) that I'm dealing with folks who haven't been enlightened for whatever reason to the level of understanding that allows me to see things clear as a bell. As a result, the "un-enlightened" (and I'm sure y'all think it of me) are only acting as they are expected to. Let's all agree, Yamil, JD, Terry, others, to remember this. We fight darkness, not its victims.

Dr. Yamil Luciano wrote:
Election is based on faith not pedigree is what Romans 9 teaches.
I understand that some use such a verse to teach unconditional election but the passage does not even give the slightest hint.

JD wrote:
My whole point in bringing this up in the first place is to demonstrate that no reformed can be true to the context of any passage or more precisely, be true to the words of Scripture.

kevin wrote:
20-20
Do you have faith that your car will start in the morning?
Do you have faith that you will wake up?
Do you have faith that when you turn on the shower, water comes out?
In my 3 examples, this type of faith includes everyone, saved or unsaved.
Therefore is this faith from Yahweh?
Based on the clavies/reformies faith is a gift to Yahweh's elect.
But how can we describe faith in these examples?
Where is it wrote that Yahweh gave me the gift of faith, that when I turned the shower on, water came out.
You guys have missed the boat, heck the dock when it comes to faith.
Kevin

To JD: My point with rom 11 is that, when quoting Is59, paul seems to use just enough to make his point, but the original isaiah quote includes "to those that turn from their transgression", leading me to believe that Israel, having had the law and prophets, the oracles of God, are doubly blessed when they believe, but without repentance, there is no other plan of salvation. We know this from scripture as a whole.

Dr. Yamil Luciano wrote:
OH well I ran out of room again.

Allow me time to come back with a deeper answer, and hopefully what I think 1) isn't stupid and 2)will fit in these little response boxes grrrr......

JD wrote:
Then I hope, given what you say above, that you will not mind if I test you....

My first thought, personally, is that in ch.2 Paul describes the true jew as one circumcised inwardly. This sacramental language, where the sign and the spiritual truth it represents are used interchangeably, seems to be common among the various authors of scripture. Another example which come to mind in this area is 1 peter - that baptism saves you... we know it is union with Christ that applies his righteousness to our account which actually saves us.

But back to your original question... Out of zion comes a deliverer... Jesus already CAME. You read this as if we are to expect a future deliverer... I REALLY REALLY don't understand what you're asking or WHY, jd. I'll try to address everything else you asked later.

JD wrote:
Are you accusing me of making up concepts and presenting unscriptural ideas, dude?...I hope there has been a time in your life that you have done this and you have been born again of the Spirit. If not, please do so today!

Andrew Graham wrote:
Brothers, if we are the Body of Christ we cannot be divided. We may differ, but we must preach the simple and perfect Gospel of Jesus Christ to all.

"so that the purpose of election should stand, God said Jacob have I loved, Esau have I hated"... Dr. Yamil and others, how does this show man's role in salvation? I believe in (and have had) a conversion experience. The difference is that I credit God with instilling the heart in me that cried out to him (I'll grab scriptures when I have more time)... but what say you all?

Now - with labels out of the way - this is clearly something that a guy like me has some vested interest in. I can say, with more hours of open-minded contemplation, and loving brothers on both "sides" of the arminian/calvinist debate, that the 5 points of calvinism are most assuredly derived from scripture. As a response to the opposite allegations, these 5 points are outstandingly well documented and defended in so much church history. However, as a "summary" of a reformed believer, they can give the impression of coldness to someone who thinks "this is what they believe".