J. P. Boyce is often cited, by those of the "born again before faith" view, as one who supported their view. In my recent entry on Steve Hays, the verbose Gene Bridges has left a comment to me about Boyce and Carroll and I have partially responded. I have shown how Boyce did not believe this, for his conclusion says that regeneration is not complete till faith. However, in his speculation on regeneration preceding faith, he said that there is, between regeneration and conversion, "not only antecedence, but in some cases an appreciable interval."
If the "born again before faith" crowd can cite Boyce and claim him as one of their own, then why do they tell us that there is no chronological order between regeneration and faith, only a logical one? If they accept Boyce, then they must quit saying this, and affirm that there is "an appreciable interval" between regeneration and faith!
So, quit being inconsistent in regard to Boyce!
I will have more to say on Boyce and Hyperism soon.
No comments:
Post a Comment