But You are not as Context speaks decisively against your viewSo the answer is no them. Excellent.
Your catching on
You are bearing false witness
Luke 7:30 (KJV 1900) — 30 But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him.
1 Samuel 8:7 (KJV 1900) — 7 And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.
Psalm 81:11–14 (KJV 1900) — 11 But my people would not hearken to my voice; And Israel would none of me. 12 So I gave them up unto their own hearts’ lust: And they walked in their own counsels. 13 Oh that my people had hearkened unto me, And Israel had walked in my ways! 14 I should soon have subdued their enemies, And turned my hand against their adversaries.
Was it his council
Jeremiah 32:35 (KJV 1900) — 35 And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.
they should burn their children in the fire or did He council against it?
you just ignored them
Your ignored the evidenceProve all things, plural, refers solely to inheritance, singular.
Enough dodging Mr I know everything
Except the text does not say that and neither did you.Your ignored the evidence
You are bearing false witness
Luke 7:30 (KJV 1900) — 30 But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him.
1 Samuel 8:7 (KJV 1900) — 7 And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.
Psalm 81:11–14 (KJV 1900) — 11 But my people would not hearken to my voice; And Israel would none of me. 12 So I gave them up unto their own hearts’ lust: And they walked in their own counsels. 13 Oh that my people had hearkened unto me, And Israel had walked in my ways! 14 I should soon have subdued their enemies, And turned my hand against their adversaries.
Was it his council
Jeremiah 32:35 (KJV 1900) — 35 And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.
They should burn their children in the fire, or did He council against it?
You just ignored this just as you have ignored multiple other scriptural contrary facts to your theology
PS your latest argument is unreliable as well. The all things does not refer to the inheritance but all things which happen in the life of one who is promised an inheritance
Quote meExcept the text does not say that and neither did you.
You have already made one false claim about my view of the meaning of allContextually you cannot prove your orginal claim so Tom must make another claim he cannot prove. He is still claiming contextually all things refers to anything involved with inheritance. It's called moving the goal post around.
You want me to quote something you did not say? LOLQuote me
You have already made one false claim about my view of the meaning of all
Quote me to show you are not just making another false claim
Then address these verses you have been ignoring
Luke 7:30 (KJV 1900) — 30 But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him.
1 Samuel 8:7 (KJV 1900) — 7 And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.
Psalm 81:11–14 (KJV 1900) — 11 But my people would not hearken to my voice; And Israel would none of me. 12 So I gave them up unto their own hearts’ lust: And they walked in their own counsels. 13 Oh that my people had hearkened unto me, And Israel had walked in my ways! 14 I should soon have subdued their enemies, And turned my hand against their adversaries.
Was it his council
Jeremiah 32:35 (KJV 1900) — 35 And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.
They should burn their children in the fire, or did He council against it?
You just ignored this just as you have ignored multiple other scriptural contrary facts to your theology
PS your latest argument is unreliable as well. The all things does not refer to the inheritance but all things which happen in the life of one who is promised an inheritance
No, I want you support a claim you made about what I statedYou want me to quote something you did not say? LOL
Which you failed to mention before. You still have not proven all things, which now apparently refers to those promised a inheritance, is restricted in this sense. You simply change your story. I need to see it contextually which I believe you know was what I was asking and are simply dodging the question.
I never made a claim about something you said. A little reading comprehension goes a long way.No, I want you support a claim you made about what I stated
Why can't you do it?
Further I want to deal with the fact it has already been shown there are things which transpired which were not according to his council
instead of avoiding them.
Can you do it?
I did not make a claim about anything you stated. LOLNo, I want you support a claim you made about what I stated
Why can't you do it?
Further I want to deal with the fact it has already been shown there are things which transpired which were not according to his council
instead of avoiding them.
Can you do it?
Now you are running from your statementsI did not make a claim about anything you stated. LOL
What does council mean Tom. Define your terms
Nothing to run from. I never made any claim.Now you are running from your statements
"Contextually you cannot prove your orginal claim so Tom must make another claim he cannot prove. He is still claiming contextually all things refers to anything involved with inheritance. It's called moving the goal post around."
Make up your mind you made a claim about what I stated or you didn't make a claim about itNothing to run from. I never made any claim.
Well, that's easy. First you claimed it dealt sole with inheritance. That won't work right? Now it's everything involved with inheritance. STILL NOT PROVEN CONTEXTUALLY and won't be. Hence the constant diverting.
I made no claim about anything except first it was sold inheritance and now everything that has to do with inheritance. Neither position you have proven or even attempted to prove CONTEXTUALLY.Make up your mind you made a claim about what I stated or you didn't make a claim about it
Which one? Do you know ?
Again quote me
Again provide quotesI made no claim about anything except first it was sold inheritance and now everything that has to do with inheritance. Neither position you have proven or even attempted to prove CONTEXTUALLY.
Fail
So your saying you did not originally claim it has to do with inheritance? I take it back them. It does mean "all things" then. Good to see you come around.Again provide quotes
I claimed the context concerned inheritance and in particular the one who has an inheritance (relating it to Rom 8:28 and stating it afterwards) and I showed all things do not work out according to council of GodSo your saying you did not originally claim it has to do with inheritance? I take it back them. It does mean "all things" then. Good to see you come around.
See post 1184 for your orginal claim
Not originally you didn't. LOLI claimed the context concerned inheritance and in particular the one who has an inheritance (relating it to Rom 8:28 and stating it afterwards) and I showed all things do not work out according to council of God
Disproving the idea all things transpire according to the council of God
Oh but I didNot originally you didn't. LOL
Second
Prove your claim in the text itself. Should be easy for a Biblical scholar such as yourself. Let's hear it.
But you did not prove that did youOh but I did
I claimed the context concerned inheritance and in particular the one who has an inheritance (relating it to Rom 8:28 and stating it afterwards) and I showed all things do not work out according to council of God
Disproving the idea all things transpire according to the council of God
Trying to limit the fact to the verse alone is just an effort to avoid the evidence
You are in denialBut you did not prove that did you
Saying it don't make it so. Romans 8 is not Rphesians 1. POOR EFFORT
