Just as the Bible does not have to use the word Trinity to teach the doctrine of the Trinity, in Rom 9:4-5 (ESV) Paul has demonstrated he is talking about the gifts and calling of the Jews:Your opinion is noted. Where did Paul call those things in 9:1-5 as "gifts"? That's your problem. He didn't. But we know what he DID describe as gifts of God.
The teaching is obvious to those who want to hear.They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises. 5 To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ who is God over all, blessed for ever. Amen.
I was using your language of Christian OSAS. I do not support it as such. I support perseverance of the saints which I have demonstrated to you over and over from Scripture. I will not repeat.At least you do note that my doctrine is Christian. Because is comes directly from the Bible.
Please don't ignore post #1297, where I gave 5 reasons to believe eternal security.Just as the Bible does not have to use the word Trinity to teach the doctrine of the Trinity, in Rom 9:4-5 (ESV) Paul has demonstrated he is talking about the gifts and calling of the Jews:
The teaching is obvious to those who want to hear.
Perseverance of the saints is a command of Scripture. Not a fact. Not all believers persevere. The Bible is clear on that. Just as the Bible is clear that Christ died for everyone, and all believers are eternally secure.I was using your language of Christian OSAS. I do not support it as such. I support perseverance of the saints which I have demonstrated to you over and over from Scripture. I will not repeat.
No, FreeGrace. Here you are using a straw man logical fallacy. When you engage in the use of logical fallacies you use flawed reasoning. This makes logical engagement with you impossible.Rational vs Irrational
Reasonable vs Unreasonable
Those who reject eternal security believe that Rom 11:29, which says that "the gifts of God are irrevocable" only refers to Rom 9:1-5, which is a list of things that Israel has. But are NEVER described as gifts anywhere in Scripture.
In that instance you used a red herring logical fallacy that did not relate to the topic being discussed. It was your attempt to divert attention away from the context of Rom 11:29 (ESV).Please don't ignore post #1297, where I gave 5 reasons to believe eternal security.
What I said was totally logical and straightforward, and demonstrates the very flawed thought process that you have engaged in. But you are free to choose whatever words you want and describe anything any way you want.No, FreeGrace. Here you are using a straw man logical fallacy. When you engage in the use of logical fallacies you use flawed reasoning. This makes logical engagement with you impossible.
This is mere opinion. No facts to back it up at all. Where does Paul describe anything that Israel has as a gift of God?I have been trying to show you in context that Rom 11:29 (ESV) refers to the Jews and is a verse that applies to the Jews. But you refuse to hear it. I'll try one more time.
Nice list. But I failed to see any mention of "gift" in regard to anything in your list. How do you know that any of these were considered gifts? Where, in the entire Bible, are these things called gifts?Look at the immediate context of Rom 11:29 (ESV):
- 'a partial hardening has come upon Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in' (11:25);
- 'in this way all Israel will be saved' (11:26) ;
- 'The Deliverer will come from Zion' (11:26);
- 'he will banish ungodliness from Jacob' (11:26);
- 'this will be my covenant with them [Israel] when I will take away their sins ' (11:27);
- 'As regards the gospel, they [Israel] are enemies for your sake' (11:28);
- 'as regards election [of Israel], they [Israel] are beloved for the sake of their forefathers [of Israel]' (11:28);
- Then comes Rom 11:29 (ESV), all in the context of speaking of Israel: 'For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable'. Notice how verse 29 begins with the Greek, gar, which is a causal particle or conjunction meaning for, therefore, because, etc. It means that it is linked to the verses that precede it. It is a conclusion reached, based on the previous discussion. So Rom 11:29 (ESV), based on the Greek grammar, refers to Israel and not Jewish or Gentile Christians.
- So, the gifts and calling of God that are irrevocable (11:29) refer directly to the nation and people of Israel.
- To conclude otherwise is to violate both immediate context of Rom 11:29 (ESV) and Greek grammar.