quote:

ORIGINAL: KingJamesBond

umcbee,

quote:

I think you fail to see and understand that in the above verses , Paul is telling us what God has revealed to Paul and the other apostiles , that God made them the preachers KJB.

quote:

Paul is not refering to you or me or anyone else , except to himself and the other apostiles.

This might sound rude or offensive but to be totally honest those are the exact responses that could be expected from a free-willer.

quote:

It shows how much free-willers lack in understanding plain and simple truth found in Scripture.

quote:

It also shows how free-willers will try to toss aside sound and clear Scripture (it does not apply) with the hope that sound Scripture does no damage to their glorious wills.

quote:

The thing is...this Scripture kills free-will DEAD even if people wont let go of the stink.

quote:

Let us put what you say to the test and see how it works out since you claim none of this text applies to you.

quote:

1THEREFORE, SINCE we do hold and engage in this ministry by the mercy of God [granting us favor, benefits, opportunities, and especially salvation], we do not get discouraged (spiritless and despondent with fear) or become faint with weariness and exhaustion.

You have no ministry at all by the mercy of God? You cant think of any ministry at all that you engage in that is by the mercy of God? That would mean you are not even a minister of the gospel to anyone.

quote:

God has not granted you any favors, benefits, opportunities....and especially not salvation? Are you spiritless and despondent with fear....faint and wearly with exhaustion?

quote:

2We have renounced disgraceful ways (secret thoughts, feelings, desires and underhandedness, the methods and arts that men hide through shame); we refuse to deal craftily (to practice trickery and cunning) or to adulterate or handle dishonestly the Word of God, but we state the truth openly (clearly and candidly). And so we commend ourselves in the sight and presence of God to every man's conscience.

Is the above text is more text that you feel does not apply to you?

quote:

I wont even argue with you about it.

quote:

I do not think that you handle the Word of God properly.

quote:

That can be cleary seen by the way you responded to this Scripture text with a; Paul is not refering to you or me or anyone else , except to himself and the other apostiles.

quote:

Free-will and human ability is a distortion of truth.

quote:

3But even if our Gospel (the glad tidings) also be hidden (obscured and covered up with a veil that hinders the knowledge of God), it is hidden [only] to those who are perishing and obscured [only] to those who are spiritually dying and veiled [only] to those who are lost.

That last text refers to "unbelievers" which would actually exclude Paul and the Apostles.

quote:

5For what we preach is not ourselves but Jesus Christ as Lord, and ourselves [merely] as your servants (slaves) for Jesus' sake.

Since by your own words that last text does not apply to you...you are ready and willing to preach about yourself. We have seen that.

quote:

That is why you have so much of a desire to preach about you and your free-will and your ability.

quote:

I really feel that the above text applies to me and I am ready and willing to deny myself and preach anti-self and pro-Lord.

quote:

color=#CC0000]6For God Who said, Let light shine out of darkness, has shone in our hearts so as [to beam forth] the Light for the illumination of the knowledge of the majesty and glory of God [as it is manifest in the Person and is revealed] in the face of Jesus Christ (the Messiah).

Since none of this at all applies to you...you are free to preach about yourself (free-will) and claim that God has not commanded light to shine in your heart and He has given you no knowledge of the majesty and glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

quote:

Instead of preaching that God did any of those things in your heart, you can preach yourself and that it all happened by your own glorious free-will.

quote:

7However, we possess this precious treasure [the divine Light of the Gospel] in [frail, human] vessels of earth, that the grandeur and exceeding greatness of the power may be shown to be from God and not from ourselves.

And of course you read that text and claim that it does not apply to you either.

quote:

You are free to preach that none of that applies to you.

quote:

When you read all of that Scripture text and then you claim that none of it applies to you, why would I even want to argue the case?

quote:

We reformed already know free-will and human ability is untrue, so why would we ever suppose you could somehow cram truthful Scripture into it?

KJB

quote:

ORIGINAL: kelman

Why would I say it would be better that all the unsaved were never born since Christ never said it? He said that only of Judas. Yes, you are the one putting forth that idea - no one else has - including Christ.

You are simply attempting to argue a point no one has presented...sounds very much like a strawman. Scripture doesn't teach that because God predestined some to salvation and not others that it would have been better had these "others" not been born. Scripture doesn't teach it nor does RT.

quote:

quote:

I didn't say anything about "using his name". The prophecies say is that someone would betray Christ. They do not say "Let Me choose one particular soul to do it".

I know that you didn't. I was pointing out how specific you appear to want the prophesies to be. Christ DID choose one specific soul to do it - Judas.

quote:

And by that time, Judas had already put himself in the disposition to be able to do something like that.

Huh?....Christ put Judas in that position to fulfill the prophecy. His disposition to sin?...yep, that was all his own desires and inclinations even though God predetermined the Crucifixion. It cannot be adequately argued otherwise.

quote:

Jesus chose someone He knew would betray Him and hang himself instead of repenting.

No, Jesus is God. With God, it is never a matter of simply knowing the future like some ultra-advanced crystal-ball fortune teller. These were events that were "certain" to happen and if certain to happen they must be preordained. And, with this particular event it cannot be argued the one doing the ordaining was God.

quote:

quote:

Jesus had warned the Jews about an unpardonable sin (another concept rendered meaningless with unconditional reprobation), and many had already committed it; Judas included, apparently.

What you appear to be surmising is NOT the meaning of the unpardonable sin.

quote:

quote:

You all are throwing verse 11 around (pasted to v16 at that), but do you even know what you're reading as well as responding to?

Oh, please, I didn't "paste" vs 11 to vs 16. I gave you the proper explanation of the passages (repeated below) which include both those verses, although, it seems you'd like them to disappear.

"They are brought into the chapter in order to show God's prerogative to elect strictly on the basis of His own will without consideration of human deeds in order to show forth His mercy.

We see this explained in vs 11 "(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;)" and the "purpose of God" is shown to us in verse 16 "So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy."

It is "God's purpose in election"(vs 11) to show mercy to whom He pleases(vs 16)."

quote:

Of course it is discussing God's purpose of mercy, instead of works or the flesh. For that's what the two groups represented!

You fail to see that it speaks very specifically of the individuals as the following shows:

"So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy."

"For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee,"

"Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth."

"Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?"

"Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?"

"As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated."

quote:

So the other group were those with faith in Christ who covered their sins, hence, "mercy". God could have fixed it so that people could save themselves by their own efforts, but instead had a "purpose of God in election demonstrating His mercy on whomever He pleases".

Paul is not using the illustration of Jacob over Esau simply to make the point that God can choose in whatever way He wants. Rather, he uses the choice of Jacob over Esau to demonstrate what God's purpose in election is.

Your pov does not address how it is that God chooses to save by faith as opposed to works. Or rather, how does this demonstrate His purpose of mercy unless salvation by faith is as unconditional as election by birth.

quote:

This has nothing to do with unconditional reprobation, which would render this meaningless also, as every lost person is said to be that way solely because they are "blinded" or "hardened" by God.

Actually, they are "lost" because they are sinners.

quote:

Anyway, God has given us some of His reasons. It is to demonstrate His mercy, love and justice. It is to glorify Himself in Christ and Christ in Him. It is for Him to have a people of His own. Do you think God owes us something?

quote:

WHAT is really being asked here? "Yet" find "fault" for what? "Why would God unconditionally choose someone else and not me/[others], and save them by 'enabling' them to repent, yet leave me/[others] in this helpless state...yet still hold me/[them] responsible [i.e. 'find fault'] for my sin, and send me/[them] to Hell when I/[they] couldn't even 'resist His will' to place me/[them] in this state ... in the first place?". This is what people are asking Calvinists today, who then in turn simply project this into the text. But is it in the context of what the hypothetical person was asking Paul? Calvinists assume so... But "ability to repent" is not being discussed here. Neither is any inescapable state or fate. Paul had just mentioned Jacob, Esau and Pharaoh, These may be individuals, but what were they being used to illustrate? Step back another few verses: "not the children of the flesh are children of God; but the children of the promise are counted for a seed." (v.8) Paul argues that simply being "Abraham's children" does not make one a child of promise, because for one thing, Abraham had other children beside just the Jews. But God had declared that "In Isaac shall your Seed be called." (v.7) Being from Isaac also wasn't enough, because Esau also was his child. But God had still unconditionally chosen Jacob (v.12, 13), not because of any righteousness of his (Jews thought that their forefathers must have been chosen because of being more righteous, thus "works" rather than "Him that calleth"), for they were not even yet born when God made this decision.(v.11) So the whole point here is that it must be more than physical lineage from Abraham. The next step is that even being of Jacob's physical lineage is not enough.
To further demonstrate God's choice of men for these purposes was not "unjust" (v.14) Paul goes into the whole story of Pharaoh. No Jew thought of what God did to Pharaoh as being "unjust" (after all, it was for their sake, and that's what mattered to them!) So then what Paul is getting to nobody also should think is unjust. The whole context is two groups: "the Children of the flesh", and "the children of promise". It says nothing about the individuals in either group being unconditionally elected or preteritioned into those groups. It just assumes two groups, and emphasizes that what many thought was the class that mattered (Jew as opposed to Gentile) was actually not the right one.
... let's look more at ... "Shall the thing formed say to Him who formed it, 'Why have you made me this way'?". Made them what way? Predestined to Hell? Sinners who "chose to sin in Adam" Helplessly unable to repent, yet "held responsible" to repent and left in that state? Passed over for "saving grace"? Once again, none of the above concepts are what was being discussed! (A reader would have no reason to even assume they were any of those things in the first place!)

The focus is on "children of promise" as opposed to "children of the flesh". According to Ephesians 2:3, we all started out as "children of wrath" Thanks to our "depravity" (sin from Adam), nobody is born in the latter state, and so the former, as an eternal state of condemnation, is not what God unconditionally "makes" anybody. This should prove once and for all that the question and Paul's answer have nothing to do with Calvinistic reprobation or preterition. God has declared that there are two groups: Physical Israel (which is in the same spiritual status as the rest of humanity) and spiritual Israel (Romans 2:28, 29).
"Why did God make us physical Israel only if that doesn't make us the true children of promise? As much as we try so hard to keep the Law He gave us, why is he still finding fault or not accepting us as we are? Didn't He create us as His people? Could we have resisted His will to create us this way, if this is not what He counts?" THIS is what is being asked! HERE is where Paul says "who are you to reply back to God?" He as "the Potter" sovereignly laid out a plan, involving two categories of people; the first had a purpose, but this purpose is not the salvation of the individuals in the group, but to pave the way for the second. It's this second group one must be apart of, and who are we to question this plan? (This still says nothing about a person's inability to cross from one group to the other.

quote:

Seems like an accurate description of Pelagianism. Most say that their free will choice is simply made based on a noetic understanding of the Gospel....where's the "grace" in that?

quote:

quote:

Then, we are given a certain proof text to be told we should not even ask the question (but again, this is not the question being asked in Rom.9).

No one's said you "should not even ask the question". Besides, God's sovereign election does not rest on Rom 9 alone.

quote:

Like FG said, he's the one asking the question, and you just try to turn it back on us, under the premise that "if God foreknows a person will be lost, then it is still 'taunting'; so we might as well just say God preordained him to be lost".

Who made up this new rule? How has the "other side" somehow become immune to answering questions? I've answered the question honestly and correctly....so, has everyone else. In fact, it's been answered over and over and over and..........

What's wrong with asking a similar question? One, which btw, has remained unanswered. Instead, all we get is free will rhetoric about ability which has nothing to do with the question being asked. I don't think it's an unfair question.

quote:

Huh?...."naturally disappear"?...the obsession has gone on page after page...doesn't look like it's "disppearing" anytime soon. Why should I withdraw the question?...just because no free willer has an answer? It's a valid question that free willers should be able to answer. My answer to FG's question didn't have a bit of "speculation" in it. It was totally based on Scripture.

quote:

LOL...well, that is what they call him. Since I've given at least three reasons why God elects, why persist in saying "unknowable". Now, it is true that God does not reveal everything to us about Divine Election, or many other things for that matter, still He does reveal some information. Is it your position that you know all the reasons God does what He does? If so, you would be in violation of Scripture. If not, why condemn RT for the same?

quote:

You said OUR sense of rightness - not ancient Israel's. Besides that is NOT what Israel commonly did - God specifically gave this command to slaughter every man woman and infant.

quote:


quote:

It's amazing that we dig up the most gory examples out of the OT as the model of what is "good news" today!
Rather, what is amazing is the inability of some to answer another question asked of them - do you judge God holy and righteous when He commanded the slaughter of every man woman and infant Amalekite?

quote:

quote:

...it can actually be seen as a kind of mercy on their (the children's) part. Wow...talk about the ability to justify horrific deeds...

quote:

Which, btw, was a perfectly reasonable question to ask in the light of some stating they are in a position to judge the deeds of God.

Why? You agreed with Dio and his view is that he is able to judge God. You want to backpeddle now?....fine, just say so.
No, I did not "agree" to any such thing. You accused us of that.
Nope, that is NOT true I didn't "accuse" you of anything. Dio specifically said that he could judge God holy and righteous because of the deeds He did. And, you agreed. You don't now - fine.

quote:

Dio put it in a way that did sound like it could suggest that, and I would not have put it in the same way. Yes, he did repeatedly put it that way.

quote:

This is why I even joined in this branch of the discussion in the first place, with a different way of putting it. So just because I'm clarifying his point, you have me "agreeing" with what you interpret the point to be. You didn't clarify his point. Apparently, you simply made one of your own. Dio was emminently clear, there was nothing to interpret. Perhaps, you should be more cautious with what you're ageeing to.

quote:

What is all too clear is that you have forgotten NO ONE attributes sin to God.

quote:

Hmm, are you also agreeing with Dio that Katrina was a JUDGMENT of God?

quote:

Uh, why do you think the doctrine was codified at Orange?....because it was the established teaching of the then church although, of course, there were detractors....that's what it proves. It's absurd to say Augustine was simply reacting to Pelagius. He was defending the then position.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Carico

quote:

ORIGINAL: FreeGrace

quote:

ORIGINAL: kelman

quote:

ORIGINAL: FreeGrace

quote:

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: kelman
Anyway, you do realize that the free will philosophy results in Christ simply taunting those individuals He KNOWS are condemned? Why is that? Why would He do such a thing?

Nice try in your feeble attempt to twist my charge against the calvinists against me, but it won't work.

Problem is you can't even manage a "feeble" answer to what you consider a "feeble" question, why is that?

Are you speaking of my WHY question to the calvinists? If so, I gave the FW answer when I first gave that question. Where were you?

You're one to ask. Why bother replying when you don't even read what you're replying to?....that's really weird. You've gone way beyond dodging, now claiming absolute blindness because you apparently can't answer.

One more thing, kelman. The ONLY REASON Jesus would tell those He KNOWS are condemned is because He ALSO KNOWS they WOULD avoid dying in their sins IF they believed in Him, which is something the calvinists claim cannot happen.
Why can't you explain WHY Jesus told those you consider not chosen for faith to believe in order to avoid dying in their sins? Your failure to answer this WHY question reveals the failure of calvinism to be a credible theology.

So then you think that unbelievers know there's a hell and they can't wait to suffer eternal agony rather than spend eternity in bliss. Is that correct?

quote:

If so, then you are 100% WRONG as any atheist will tell you. They do not believe in hell because they cannot believe something they don't understand as 1 Corinthians 2:14 and 2 Corinthians 4:4 also explain.

quote:

So not only do you disagree with the bible, you disagree with unbelievers as well.

quote:

Why do you think atheists say that Jesus and the bible are a fairy tale?

quote:

ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHe

quote:

It may be a good thing which Rom 2:10 talks about "and glory, and honor, and peace, to every one who is working the good," (Young's)
An ability to obey an obligated, mandated responsibility is a good thing which all mankind has.

What do you think "the good" is in this verse: which Rom 2:10 talks about "and glory, and honor, and peace, to every one who is working the good," (Young's)
They are them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life(Rom 2:7)

I think you need to go back and read where this started, you are missing the point...

quote:

quote:

Okay, if God eternally foreknew that Moses would pray,

If? There is no if here...

quote:

quote:

Explain how God could stop the car accident if it was eternally settled. Prays for Him to intervene would be fruitless.

Yes it would be, just like a prayer that would seek to avoid Him putting Pharaoh into power to show the world His great power... If God decreed the wreck it will happen... He said there will be a day of judgment, do you believe it may or may not happen?

quote:

your view doesn't agree with the fact His counsel stands forever... You version has in His counsel in limbo...

quote:

quote:

With eternal foreknowledge, God is powerless to avoid anything because it is already settled. But in an open system, God can plan things and avoid things.

Avoid what? The fall of man? Judas betraying Him?Christ going to the cross? How about Job being dealt with harshly by Satan, oh wait God lowered the protection around so it would happen...

quote:

quote:

You do know that one may have a purpose & fulfill that purpose arbitrarily.

You do know you are attributing the vanity of man to God to make your point?

quote:

quote:

Example:
I purpose to find a partner to make my business grow.

Stop... You and or the partner are not God... End of story...

quote:

quote:

There was no criteria, without any rule or standard for judgment which to base the decision on.
Fact remains, to base a decision solely on ones own will is the definition of arbitrary; as you have God doing.

The following states why God did what He did...

Romans 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;

quote:

quote:

So God's criteria is God's own Inclination to favor Jacob more than Esau;

Only if that's what YOU gather from Romans 9:11

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

Esau was just as bad as Jacob.

Bingo! Finally you are getting the clues!

Wow, great! & I though God was impartial, not a respecter of men.
Boy, was I wrong.

If He had picked the "good" one He would be a respecter of person... Of course there are no "good" ones... And God is clear in Romans 9:11 on why He did what He did...

quote:

quote:

The deciding factor is God's own Inclination to favor Jacob more than Esau;

Only if that's what YOU gather from Romans 9:11

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

You do know that the definition of partiality is "undue bias"

You do know that doesn't amount to hill of beans... You may wish to interpret scripture with the dictionary and humanism but I am not bound to because you believe it's the proper method.

How do you interpret the bible?

With the bible....

quote:

quote:

Do you create new definitions for critical words & use the new definitions just to make your theology to make sense?

No...

quote:

quote:

Why did God hate Esau?

Does His doing so require your permission?

quote:

quote:

Does God hate every non-elect child before they are born?

We know He hated one...

quote:


ORIGINAL: FolkSingerBlues


I didn't know we were "playing"...is this a game?

quote:

I am however interested in the comment you have made about "if one believes God's word is for on purpose". Please expound.

quote:


ORIGINAL: Diolectic

Don't you think I already did that?

quote:

Are you seeing the absurdity of your POV.

quote:


All things may or may not happen at a certain point in time.

quote:

Pharaoh may have obeyed God & by that God would show the world His great power.

quote:


However, according to you, all is vain, nothing realy matters except for God's toy to unwind.

quote:

God's council is an open contingency that could go both ways, HE has decided (in a point of time) for it to go one certain way.

quote:


According to your POV, it was supposed to happen.

quote:

No, I was only proving that purposes can be arbitrary.

quote:

According to you, God is not arbitrary just because He has a grand purpose.

quote:

What was the criteria that God used in His purpose and to form His purpose?
How did God come to the conclusion of His council?

quote:

It is a valid example.

quote:

Unless you can prove the criteria that God used in His purpose and to form His purpose.

quote:


Okay, I got it.
The reason is that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calls.

quote:


What are the criteria that God used in His purpose and to form His purpose?

quote:


What do you gather from Romans 9:11 for God's criteria to favor Jacob?

quote:


Since both were equal & God chose one just because he wanted to for an ambiguous, arbitrary purpose.
This is favoritism.

quote:

All you keep saying is that God has a leaning of the mind or will toward Jaco over Esau or a disposition more favorable to Jacob than Esau for an ambiguous council & an arbitrary purpose.

All your saying is God's criteria is a perfect plan set/fixed in eternity according to God's so called council and arbitrary purpose.

quote:


It is an arbitrary purpose, because God does not use any reference point to evaluate his decision in His purpose exept Himself.

quote:


God has no basis for comparison of the things in His purpose exept Himself.

quote:

This is Arbitrary and you can not explain how it isn't.

quote:


From your POV, I gather that God chose one just because he wanted to for an arbitrary purpose(which is truly favoritism).

quote:

God having a leaning of the mind or will toward Jaco over Esau, a disposition more favorable to Jacob than Esau for an arbitrary purpose, with an ambiguous council.

quote:

The council can not be not real because councils need time to be confirmed & you say ther was not an open time for this to happen because everything was fixed/set in eternity.

quote:

Not asking for permission, quit avoiding the subject.

quote:

If God's favor to Jacob is not arbitrary, nor is the purpose arbitrary, what is the criteria to choose?

quote:


What is this mysterious Council that was made "before" eternity

quote:

ORIGINAL: KingJamesBond

Folksinger,

The natural man always and naturally resists the Holy Spirit.

This does not mean that the Holy Spirit cannot overcome the natural man with surppasing power.

The Holy Spirit even though it is always naturally resisted is capable of overcoming resistance.

Acts 7:51 shows that stubborn people with uncircumcised hearts and ears are always opposing the Holy Spirit.

You stubborn people with uncircumcised hearts and ears!

You are always opposing the Holy Spirit, just as your ancestors used to do.

That is why when the reformed claim there must be a change in the person from without before the person will accept things of the Spirit without opposition..........the reformed are correct!

It is not free-will. It is God working on the will of man.

Natural people do not change themselves to accept what they always resist.

Change comes from the outside to the inside.

Deuteronomy 30:6 speaks about what God has PROMISED to do;

Moreover the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your descendants, to love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, so that you may live.

Yes, Jesus is the light that comes into the world and gives light to every man. But every man naturally rejects and opposes the light that is given.

John 3;

19The [basis of the] judgment (indictment, the test by which men are judged, the ground for the sentence) lies in this: the Light has come into the world, and people have loved the darkness rather than and more than the Light, for their works (deeds) were evil.

20For every wrongdoer hates (loathes, detests) the Light, and will not come out into the Light but shrinks from it, lest his works (his deeds, his activities, his conduct) be exposed and reproved.

21But he who practices truth [who does what is right] comes out into the Light; so that his works may be plainly shown to be what they are--wrought with God [divinely prompted, done with God's help, in dependence upon Him].

Anyone that comes into the Light has only done so because God caused it.

Anyone left to themselves hates the Light by nature and naturally resists all things of the Spirit.

Take care,

KJB

quote:

ORIGINAL: FolkSingerBlues

I think it was said best in John 3:21
in the NIV it states it this way...
"But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God."


"lives by the truth"..."...he who practices truth"...those are interesting phrases. I contend that the truth being referred to is following the leading of the Spirit, which we are lead by through The Word. If we try to "practice" truth based on what we feel is truth that will never work. If we "practice" truth taught to us by the Spirit (the teachings of the Bible) then we are following the Spirits leading.

If one has heard the word of God, then he is NOT left to himself..rather the Spirit has led him.

quote:

Even if UMCBEE did handle the text poorly (and I'm not saying he did)
there is no excuse for saying what you did.

Why did you neglect the rest of my post?

For that matter why do you neglect most of the questions I ask?

quote:

I think you fail to see and understand that in the above verses , Paul is telling us what God has revealed to Paul and the other apostiles , that God made them the preachers KJB.

Paul is not refering to you or me or anyone else , except to himself and the other apostiles.

quote:

Paul's ministry does not apply to me , as Paul says our gospel v. 3 does not apply to me : it applies to the gospel given to Paul by divine revelation . It was not given to me as it was to Paul . Maybe you think God gave it to you just like He gave it to Paul .
Its abundantly clear that you have no case to argue

quote:

Paul's ministry does not apply to me , as Paul says our gospel v. 3 does not apply to me : it applies to the gospel given to Paul by divine revelation . It was not given to me as it was to Paul . Maybe you think God gave it to you just like He gave it to Paul .
Its abundantly clear that you have no case to argue

quote:

Why did God do that to Paul instead of letting Paul use his free-will?

Favoritism?

KJB