R. K. Borill wrote:
Nonsense writes,
You have to be an elect person to hear with your ear do you? Duh!
RK responds,
Duh! Yes.
Ephesians 2:8-10 KJV
[8] For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: [9] Not of works, lest any man should boast. [10] For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

R. K. Borill wrote:
Nonsense writes,
You are adding your own hyper-Calvinistic gloss.
As opposed to what your Arminian "I can hear by myself" or "I saved myself" heresy?

Not able to counter from the Bible? So you choose not to address the main issue. The Bible isn't important to you so you choose to distract with red-herring arguments.

I'm beginning to wonder whether you are not Presby of a thousand monikers. Same MO, and same low level acumen. Hope your church members can think better than their 'minister'.

Good bye Presby of a thousand monikers.

Re: your comment below - the text does not address the same issue. Also, it doesn't mention 'hearing'. But being a good Scripture twister, you are allowed to read it in.

R. K. Borill wrote:
Your Ad Hoc is a bit of trickery, which makes it appear that you are offering conclusive logic when in truth it makes you appear to be either lazy or is unable or unwilling to prove your argument. The fact that you add ad hominem insult reveals your desperation.
In truth, faith does come by hearing but what is the rest of the verse you butchered. "And hearing by the word of God."
If God does not grant hearing then no sinner will hear.
Ephesians 2:8-9 KJV
[8] For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: [9] Not of works, lest any man should boast.
Acts 11:18 KJV
[18] When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.

How does 'hearing by the Word of God' mean God given internal hearing?

He is emphasizing what he said at v14 viz. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

R. K. Borill wrote:
Logic? Let's see. You say that we are reading infants into the text when there are no words stating "X-Rated" ADULTS only. If repentance can not occur without faith, and faith and repentance are gifts of God's grace, then your conclusion is that God had limited his gifts to an X-rating. This is a faulty conclusion and fallacy because . . .
Well some one forgot to tell John the Baptist and the prophet Jetemiah.

From someone supposed to minister God's word! Amazing!

Ever occurred to your challenged mind that God grants repentance and faith through the preached word? Faith cometh by hearing etc.

R. K. Borill wrote:
R. K. Borill responds,
You obviously did not see the proof texts that had posted earlier. But be that as it may if you want to live as the Jew, knock yourself out man. You have my approval. But, why stop at the Sabbath? Why not go all the way?
I just choose to follow the example of Christ who met with disciples on Sunday and the Apostles who did the same.
Galatians 4:9-10 KJV
[9] But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? [10] Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.

The Sabbath finished at sunset on Saturday, and so the first day started with the sunset.

R. K. Borill wrote:
Sensible writes:
Proof, if one were needed, that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, especially in the wrong hands!
R. K. Borill responds,
This fallacy is a deliberate distraction (Red Herring) in which a proponent of a premise is criticized rather than his argumentation. It is easy to tecognize the desperation inherent in character assassination.

R. K. Borill wrote:
MG writes:
My understanding of this verse is that they met on the Saturday Sabbath to break bread as they always had. It was Paul's last day with them so he kept speaking into the first day (Saturday sunset to midnight).
Saturday is not "the first day of the week; it is the last day of the week". How hard is this to agree with??

Proof, if one were needed, that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, especially in the wrong hands!

Lev 23.32 It shall be unto you a sabbath of rest, and ye shall afflict your souls: in the ninth day of the month at even, from even unto even, shall ye celebrate your sabbath.

R. K. Borill wrote:
Mike from New York writes,
R. K. Borill wrote:
Acts 20:7 KJV
[7] And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.
Which was already 6 hours into Monday.
Mike where do you get this. The New York time zone. This is a priori fallacy. I can understand why you would take this approach since you clearly have a vested interest as your motivation.

The Sabbath finished at 6pm on Saturday. At what time did the disciples meet to break bread?

2 possibilities:

1. After 6pm on Saturday, as this would still be considered the 1st day of the week.

OR

2. Anytime the following day, so long as it was before 6pm.

Presumably RK Borill assumes scenario 1 and Mike NY scenario 2.

Personally I think Mike NY is correct.