- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
16 Apr 18
2 edits
Show me the strawman argument ThinkOfOne taking this subsection of my posts.
Hebrews 9 [is] about Jeremiah's prediction:
"And not through the blood of goats and calves but through His own blood entered once for all into the Holy of Holies, obtaining an eternal redemption." (Heb. 9:12)
That is the meaning of -
"For I will be propititous to their unrighteousnesses, and their sins I shall by no means remember anymore." (Heb. 8:12 comp. Jer. 31:34)
You decide whose word you are going to take on this - the Atheist's or the book of Hebrews.
ThinkOfOne, identify the strawman argument please.
It is an argument as to whether one is going to take your authority or the authority of the New Testament book Hebrews.
You say YOU know better.
Christians say the Bible knows better in the book of Hebrews.
I don't see a strawman. I see a controversy over belief verses unbelief - perhaps a dispute over the authority of divine revelation verses unbelieving atheistic speculation.
16 Apr 18
Originally posted by @sonshipIf you think eternal redemption means that you can escape the consequences of sin, you are sadly mistaken.
Show me the strawman argument ThinkOfOne taking this subsection of my posts.
[b]Hebrews 9[is] about Jeremiah's prediction:
"And not through the blood of goats and calves but through His own blood entered once for all into the Holy of Holies, obtaining an eternal redemption." (Heb. 9:12)
That is the meaning of -
"For I ...[text shortened]... decide whose word you are going to take on this - the Atheist's or the book of Hebrews.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
16 Apr 18
2 edits
Originally posted by @rajk999And if I don't think that then you have no case.
If you think eternal redemption means that you can escape the consequences of sin, you are sadly mistaken.
Remove yourself and let ThinkOfOne argue.
Folks it doesn't matter if you tell Rajk999 somthing 100 times. He won't get it.
Loss of reward - a consequence of failure to be sanctified.
"In anyone's work is consumed, he will suffer loss, but he himself will be saved yet so as through fire." (1 Cor. 3:15)
This suffering a loss is a consequences for being defeated for those yet eternally saved.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
16 Apr 18
3 edits
Hebrews 9 [is] about Jeremiah's prediction:
"And not through the blood of goats and calves but through His own blood entered once for all into the Holy of Holies, obtaining an eternal redemption." (Heb. 9:12)
That is the meaning of -
"For I will be propititous to their unrighteousnesses, and their sins I shall by no means remember anymore." (Heb. 8:12 comp. Jer. 31:34)
Point out the strawman argument ThinkOfOne.
16 Apr 18
Originally posted by @sonshipThat is the meaning of -
[b] "For I will be propititous to their unrighteousnesses, and their sins I shall by no means remember anymore." (Heb. 8:12 comp. Jer. 31:34)
Point out the strawman argument ThinkOfOne.[/b]Read back through our discussion. Compare the points of what I wrote with what you were arguing against.
16 Apr 18
1 edit
Originally posted by @sonshipActually 1 Cor 3 says that he will be destroyed.
And if I [b] don't think that then you have no case.
Remove yourself and let ThinkOfOne argue.
Folks it doesn't matter if you tell Rajk999 somthing 100 times. He won't get it.
Loss of reward - a consequence of failure to be sanctified.
[quote] "In anyone's work is consumed, he will suffer loss, but he himself will be saved yet so as thr ...[text shortened]... ]
This suffering a loss is a consequences for being defeated for those yet eternally saved.
Not loss of rewards .. DESTROYED.
Where is the eternal redemption in that case.
SOME are eternally redeemed.
Some lose rewards and eventually redeemed
Some are destroyed.
THE WHOLE STORY ..
WITHOUT CHERRY PICKING AND
WITHOUT TWISTING.
Is the only way to the truth.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
16 Apr 18
2 edits
Originally posted by @thinkofoneYou cannot identify the strawman argument ?
Read back through our discussion. Compare the points of what I wrote with what you were arguing against.
You want me to go back and notice something else?
No, the most important thing is that you are using words in Jeremiah 31 to prove that Hebrews is wrong.
Ie. "The Old Testament makes the New Testament lying."
Basically that is what you're teaching.
As an Atheist you will selectively apply authority of revelation WHEN it suits you to argue against the Gospel.
An Atheist Bible thumper who selectively thumps on passages IF they seem to rationalize unbelief in the Gospel.
I think some here can see that you've been refuted on trying to use Jeremiah and Ezekiel to fight down the Gospel of Christ in the New Testament.
16 Apr 18
Originally posted by @sonshipI'm suggesting that you figure out the straw man yourself. You do this all the time jaywill. You read what someone has posted, twist it up into something else in your mind and then attack that instead of addressing the topic at hand. In the past, others have pointed that out to you as well. Do you recall that happening?
You cannot identify the strawman argument ?
You want me to go back and notice something else?
No, the most important thing is that you are using words in [b]Jeremiah 31 to prove that Hebrews is wrong.
"The Old Testament makes the New Testament lying."
Basically that is what you're teaching.
As an Atheist you will selectivel ...[text shortened]... se Jeremiah and Ezekiel to fight down the Gospel of Christ in the New Testament.[/b]