Bart Goddard <goddardbe@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "gary" <biblicist@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
> news:FBC39339-C9B7-D660-CD23-1E32B47F814E@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> >> I didn't say God was our enemy, but that we are His enemies,
> >> and that's what Scripture says. I keep citing Scripture and
> >> you keep rebelling against it. I wonder why that is?
> >
> > Another try:
>
> You can try to continue digging in the wrong place, but
> you'll still end up with a hole where you don't want one.
> If you're going to "try", then "try" to understand:
>
>
>
> > So, no, we WERE His enemies, but no longer.
>
> Since we're talking about the moment of conversion,
> the issue is how does one decide to listen or learn
> (or whatever it is you have a guy do to earn his way
> into heaven) when he is an enemy of God, which he
> IS before he's saved.
>
> You're little obsession with verb tense is just another
> diversion. If your doctrine can't answer hard questions,
> maybe you need better doctrine.
>
Bart, I think there's a communication problem here. If I understand
Gary correctly, he's saying that before the cross, all men were God's
enemies. After the cross, through this unique act of Christ, all men
have been reonciled to God. So that now the cl***** are (reconciled,
saved) and (reconciled, unsaved). But, if that's so, then it begs the
question, "what does it mean to be reconciled but unsaved" or it's
equivalent "what does it mean to be not an enemy of God but unsaved"?
The problem isn't so much verb tense but rather, what does "reconciled
to God" mean as concerning the unsaved.
((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a
moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org
for details about this group BEFORE you post.
)))
|
