Cart Before the Horse?

[pnattmbtc]

I said in the post where.  Look at the post. 

Samie:There's none.

Why are you doing this?  Yes there is.  Just read the post, dated Posted Friday at 3:43 PM.  

 

[pnattmbtc]

Yes, your position is in contradiction to what Scriptures say. And the best proof there is no other means of obtaining faith is your utter inability to provide even one and its scriptural basis.  8 days since asked, and still counting.

Samie, you're out of order here, and being puerile. I was first, and presented the flaw in your argument, one which is not dependent upon an example.  You need to address the argument.  Then, and only then, after we've addressed my argument, which comes first, we can come back and address your question of an example, but my argument does not depend upon an example, and I refuse to respond to you in such a way where one could infer that it does.

I want you to understand and recognize the validity of my argument, which does not depend an example.

The argument is that your argument is assuming necessity, where only sufficiency can be inferred.  I disproved necessity by the following argument:

1.To receive the Holy Spirit, one must have faith.

2.Therefore faith cannot be available only as fruit of the Holy Spirit.

[pnattmbtc]

I did not repeat what I said.  I repeated what Scriptures say but to which you disagree.

If you repeated what the Scriptures said, but did not repeat what you said, then what you say is not what the Scriptures say.

[pnattmbtc]

But how do you get the Holy Spirit in the first place?  It is by believing in Christ that we receive the Spirit.

Samie:Unscriptural.  How can you believe unless you are led by the Holy Spirit?

The idea that it is by believing in Christ what we receive the Holy Spirit is unscriptural? What do you think happened in Acts?  Galatians 3:2 says explicitly that we receive the Spirit by faith.  How do you think we receive the Spirit?

  On 9/25/2015, 5:43:38, pnattmbtc said:

No I'm not.

Yes, you are.

What are you talking about? 

  On 9/25/2015, 5:43:38, pnattmbtc said:

Do you recall what I wrote about the woman at the feast at Simon's house?  If you don't recall, I'll write it up again.

You don't have to frame up that woman. Just tell me how you can exercise faith without it.

To exercise faith is to believe in Christ.  We have been given the ability to believe in Christ, which involves gratitude, appreciation, and thankfulness, which I explained in discussing the story in Luke 7.  I've also spoken of the principle of reciprocity, which is built into us (the desire to return a favor).  To "have faith" in the sense of salvational faith, is to have Christ.  We receive Christ by faith; when we do that, then we "have faith".  Before that, we have the ability to believe, the ability to receive Christ, but until we receive Christ, we have not received Him. 

 

 

  On 9/25/2015, 5:43:38, pnattmbtc said:

I agree with this, that we believe as a result of the leading of the Holy Spirit.  What I'm asking you is, how to do you get the Holy Spirit without believing?  To be led of the Holy Spirit is not the same thing as having the Holy Spirit.  See Acts for example.  The Holy Spirit is given to those who believe in Jesus Christ, but in order to believe in Christ in the first place, we need the Holy Spirit to convict of sin and righteousness, and lead us to Christ.  If we respond, then we may be filled with the Spirit, and that's where Galatians 5 comes into play.

For me, it's really simple.  Separate from Christ, we cannot bear fruit.  

Right, and how do we receive Christ?

Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me. (Rev. 3:20.

We receive Christ by responding to His invitation, to allow Him into our heart.

The fruit we bear, Scriptures call fruit of the Spirit, one of which is faith.  Without faith, one can't believe.

Faith and believe are from the same greek word "pistis".   God has given us the ability to exercise faith.  To "have faith" is to have Christ, whom we receive into your heart by faith.

 If one can believe then he has faith, which proves he is already attached to Christ.  When one is in Christ, then he has the Holy Spirit. 

If one can believe, then all one can conclude is that one can believe.  Anyone can believe, because all have been given that ability.  But not all have received Christ.  Again, to "have faith" is to have Christ, because we receive Christ by faith, and when the Scriptures talk about having faith, the Scriptures are talking about those who have received Christ by faith.  To "have faith" is to be a believer in Christ.  Just because one can believe does not mean that one is a believer in Christ, which is what one could infer from your statements. 

Edited September 27, 2015 by pnattmbtc

[pnattmbtc]

Samie, I have a request for you, and I'll do what I'm asking later when I can, probably Sunday.  My request is that you explain to me what you think God's point of view is in the plan of salvation.  That is, what is important to God, what is He trying to do, and how does He go about doing this.  Please explain this in detail.

Samie: Already explained in detail in my thread "Understanding the Gospel Through the Book of Life".

You never addressed things from God's point of view, which is what I'm asking.  You spoke of how you see things working, from your point of view.  I'm asking from God's point of view; what is God trying to accomplish?  And how is He going about this? 

[Samie]

Samie: 

1. while separate from Christ, bear fruit first, one of which is faith, and believe; 
2. attached to Christ and become children of God.  

Pnatt:

1.The person is presented the gospel and the Holy Spirit convicts the person of his sin and need for Christ.
2.The person repents, and believes in Christ, receiving Christ as his savior.
3.At this moment the person is born again, justified, forgiven, converted (all synonyms) and receives the Holy Spirit.

I'm amazed that you would think that these two lists are the same. 

I said they are worded differently; they mean the same because they are both cart before the horse.

[Samie]

 

Why are you doing this?  Yes there is.  Just read the post, dated Posted Friday at 3:43 PM.  

To write the verse itself is much shorter than your post I quoted above.  Again, what verse?

[Samie]

Samie, you're out of order here, and being puerile. I was first, and presented the flaw in your argument, one which is not dependent upon an example.  You need to address the argument.  Then, and only then, after we've addressed my argument, which comes first, we can come back and address your question of an example, but my argument does not depend upon an example, and I refuse to respond to you in such a way where one could infer that it does.

I want you to understand and recognize the validity of my argument, which does not depend an example.

The argument is that your argument is assuming necessity, where only sufficiency can be inferred.  I disproved necessity by the following argument:

1.To receive the Holy Spirit, one must have faith.

2.Therefore faith cannot be available only as fruit of the Holy Spirit.

That's your own argument, not mine. That's acceptable for you, but not for me.  Just show one other means (which you said there are, just like your sleeping pills analogy, remember?) and your Scriptural basis for it, and we're done.

9 days since asked and still counting.

[Samie]

If you repeated what the Scriptures said, but did not repeat what you said, then what you say is not what the Scriptures say.

According to you.

[pnattmbtc]

  Quote

Samie: 

1. while separate from Christ, bear fruit first, one of which is faith, and believe; 
2. attached to Christ and become children of God.  

Pnatt:

1.The person is presented the gospel and the Holy Spirit convicts the person of his sin and need for Christ.
2.The person repents, and believes in Christ, receiving Christ as his savior.
3.At this moment the person is born again, justified, forgiven, converted (all synonyms) and receives the Holy Spirit.

  5 hours ago, pnattmbtc said:

I'm amazed that you would think that these two lists are the same. 

Samie: I said they are worded differently; they mean the same because they are both cart before the horse.

They are not just worded differently, they are two completely different lists.  Do you not see this?  For example, let's consider item#1.  From what I actually wrote: 

 1.The person is presented the gospel and the Holy Spirit convicts the person of his sin and need for Christ.

What you represented as being what I wrote:

1. while separate from Christ, bear fruit first, one of which is faith, and believe; 

 

You can see these are not the same, can't you?

The lists have a different number of items, and the items themselves talk about different things.  It really makes me wonder if you understand what I'm saying if you think your list is the same as mine.

Edited September 27, 2015 by pnattmbtc

[pnattmbtc]

To write the verse itself is much shorter than your post I quoted above.  Again, what verse?

You are being a bit exasperating.  Please have some consideration for the person you are discussing things with.  I quoted a text for your, and then you said there was no such text, and I told you I already quoted it for you, and to look at the post, and rather than doing this you simply repeated yourself that there was no such text.  And I asked you again to look at the post, and you repeated yourself again.  And I found the post for you, and asked you to look at the post.  Please look at the post. 

[pnattmbtc]

Samie, you're out of order here, and being puerile. I was first, and presented the flaw in your argument, one which is not dependent upon an example.  You need to address the argument.  Then, and only then, after we've addressed my argument, which comes first, we can come back and address your question of an example, but my argument does not depend upon an example, and I refuse to respond to you in such a way where one could infer that it does.

I want you to understand and recognize the validity of my argument, which does not depend an example.

The argument is that your argument is assuming necessity, where only sufficiency can be inferred.  I disproved necessity by the following argument:

1.To receive the Holy Spirit, one must have faith.

2.Therefore faith cannot be available only as fruit of the Holy Spirit.

Samie: That's your own argument, not mine. That's acceptable for you, but not for me.  Just show one other means (which you said there are, just like your sleeping pills analogy, remember?) and your Scriptural basis for it, and we're done.

9 days since asked and still counting.

Of course it's my argument. Whose argument would it be?

It's a sound argument.  It's been 10 days and you haven't responded to it.  10 days and still counting.

If you choose to ignore an argument, fine, but why should you expect me to respond to you as if my argument didn't count for anything? 

[pnattmbtc]

If you repeated what the Scriptures said, but did not repeat what you said, then what you say is not what the Scriptures say.

Samie: According to you.

This is simple logic.  Anything I write is according to me, of course.  It's puerile to have a post that points this out.  Who else would it be according to?

Please make some effort to address the arguments made.

I'll use different language this time, but presenting the same process of conversion.

Starting point: person is unconverted.

1. The Gospel is presented to the person, and the person perceives Christ knocking at the door of His heart.

2.He responds by repenting of his sin, confessing it, and inviting Christ into his heart.

3.At this point he is converted.

Do you agree with this?

[pnattmbtc]

Galatians 3:2 tells us we receive the Holy Spirit by faith.  Where did this faith come from?

Edited September 27, 2015 by pnattmbtc

[8thdaypriest]

 

This is simple logic.  Anything I write is according to me, of course.  It's puerile to have a post that points this out.  Who else would it be according to?

Please make some effort to address the arguments made.

I'll use different language this time, but presenting the same process of conversion.

Starting point: person is unconverted.

1. The Gospel is presented to the person, and the person perceives Christ knocking at the door of His heart.

2.He responds by repenting of his sin, confessing it, and inviting Christ into his heart.

3.At this point he is converted.

Do you agree with this?

Not quite.

I would like to use a native in the jungle of Kenya.  Up to this point, they practiced human sacrifice.  No knowledge of Christ whatsoever.

1.  A native film team, composed of converted former pagans, comes to the village, and they show "The Jesus Film".  The man in the film, looks just like "the man" this native "saw" in a dream the night before.  In the film, our native "sees" this man declared "the Son of God", sees Him do miracles, sees Him crucified, and sees Him risen again. 

2.  Our native is strongly convicted by his dream, and by the story presented in sound and pictures (which he has never seen before).  He HEARS the film team explain that the One true God has offered THE PERFECT SACRIFICE - His own Son.  

3.  Suddenly our native realizes that all the human sacrifices offered by his village, were "not good enough".  He "believes".

4.  The film team ask if anyone would like to become a servant of the One True God, and His Son.  Our native stands up. 

5.  The film team now educate the future "servants" of Jesus, in how to serve Him.

6.  Some decide the rules are too hard.  Others decide they will serve.  They confess their old sins, and ask forgiveness.  

7.  Our native is baptized and goes on to serve His LORD. 

In my scenario, the person is "converted" BEFORE he confesses his old sins, or repents of them. 

I guess it depends upon your definition of "conversion".  What's your definition?

 

[Samie]

The idea that it is by believing in Christ what we receive the Holy Spirit is unscriptural?

What is unscriptural is your idea that people can have the HS, can have faith and can believe without having been attached to Christ first. For me, it is cart before the horse.

[Samie]

 

Of course it's my argument. Whose argument would it be?

It's a sound argument.  It's been 10 days and you haven't responded to it.  10 days and still counting.

If you choose to ignore an argument, fine, but why should you expect me to respond to you as if my argument didn't count for anything? 

Oh was it 10 days since your asking? How could that be when I asked first? But as per my count, it's but 9 days, inclusive reckoning. Here's our discussion flow:

1. Based on my computer time reckoning, on 9/17/2015, 8:58:37, I posted:

What I am simply emphasizing is that we cannot believe unless made spiritually alive first.  Again, it is because believing is exercising faith (Greek pi,stij pistis, noun;  pisteu,w pisteuo, verb).  Faith is fruit of the Spirit (Gal 5:22), and Jesus said we cannot bear fruit UNLESS attached to Him (John 15:4, 5).  And I believe it is only when we are attached to Him Who is our Life (Col 3:4) that we are spiritually alive.  So to say that one has to believe first to be attached to Him, is for me, placing the cart before the horse.

2.  You resonded to the above post on 9/17/2015, 11:35:28, and said there's flaw in my argument:

There's a flaw in your logic, which I may return to later, but for now I'll just comment that if you use the phrase "spiritually alive" to mean "converted", which is how everyone understand the phrase, then by substituting "spiritually alive" for "converted" in your sentence, we have, "having faith can occur BEFORE conversion:" = "having faith can occur BEFORE being spiritually alive", which everyone agree with.

So we're back to the same point, which is by "spiritually alive" you have some other thing in mind that nobody else does, and I doubt that anyone else understands what you mean, but the best I can make out is that it means "able to believe", so what you are saying is in essence that before one can believe, one must be able to believe.

3. On 9/18/2015, 6:28:53, I asked you to show where the flaw in my argument was:

Flaw? I'd be glad to be shown where.

4.  Your response to the above post on 9/19/2015 did not mention your question on how to get the HS: (Highlighting and emphases mine)

Sure.  Here's your argument:

1.Faith is the fruit of the Spirit.
2.We cannot bear fruit unless attached to Christ.
3.We are only spiritually alive if we are attached to Christ.
4.Therefore to say one must believe first to be attached to Christ is putting the cart before the horse.

The flaw I have in mind is with step 1.  You are interpreting this as being a necessary and sufficient condition, but it's only sufficient.  That is, it is true that faith is the fruit of the Spirit, but that did not mean that that's the *only* means one may obtain faith.  It might be, but it need not be.  We have to look into the evidence further to decide.  Allow me to explain further.

Suppose I say, "A good night's sleep is the fruit of taking a sleeping pill."  That's a true statement, but it does not mean that taking a sleeping pill is the *only* means by which one may obtain a good night's sleep.

This is the flaw in your logic; you are assuming necessity when only sufficiency is stated.  You would have to prove
necessity in order to make your case.

5.  And then I asked you to show what other means do you have in mind. The date shown in my computer is 9/20/2015, 6:48:23 as the time of posting. This date - 9/20/2015 - is when I started the count of 9 days, inclusive reckoning.

You are saying that there other means to obtain faith.  But the faith I am referring to is the faith which God gave to every man (Rom 12:3).  The faith I am referring to is the faith obtained from only One Source - God, and from only one specific means - God's giving it to every man. How? Through His Son. By being attached to Him.

Now can you tell me what other means do you have in mind from which to obtain faith? Please cite Scriptural basis, if any.  The demons seem to also have faith since they also believe (Jam 2:19), but I guess their faith is derived from another means and from another source.

 6. Your response to the above post was on 9/22/2015, still no mention of your question on how to get the Holy Spirit.

By being attached to Him?  Where does it say that?  That is, where does it say that the faith which God gives to every man is be virtue of being attached to Christ?  I read that a measure of faith is given to every man, but not "a measure of faith is given to every man, which they receive by virtue of being attached to Christ."  Rather, Jesus says that we must be attached to Him, and the means by which we are attached to Him is by faith.  He is the vine, and we are the branches.  Apart from Him we can do nothing.  How to we become attached to Him?  By the faith which is given to every person.  If we were already attached to Christ, why would Christ point out the need to be attached to Him?

The Scriptures simply say that God has given a measure of faith to everyone.  There are no pre-conditions added to this statement.  Jesus said, "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whsoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life."  In order for this to a possibility, God gave us the ability to believe. When we believe, we are born again, receive everlasting life, and become a member of the family of God, a holy priesthood, of which Christ is the cornerstone.

7. Since your post above-quoted did not touch the issue of the other means which you say there are for obtaining the HS, but instead that tenor of your post wants to deviate from the current issue of the other means, I responded and reiterated my request for you to provide the other means whereby one may obtain faith. Here's that post of mine:

Let's stay first with the issue you raised that there are other means whereby man may obtain faith. You were saying that my logic is flawed because there are other means whereby one can obtain faith, not just from being fruit of the Spirit.  Again, what other means do you have in mind, and your Biblical basis for them?

To make this already lengthy post a bit shorter, I will just quote your very first post where you asked how to get the HS, after my asking you of the other means to obtain faith, here (emphasis mine):

The Scriptures tells us that God has given each one a measure of faith.  This is not qualified.  It does not say "God has given each one who is attached to Christ a measure of faith." or "God has given each one who has the Holy Spirit a measure of faith, as fruit of the Spriit."  *Everyone* has been given a measure of faith, whether attached to Christ or not, whether or not they have the Holy Spirit.

Consider Romans 8:9 that says that unless we have the Holy Spirit, we are none of his.  If we don't have the Holy Spirit, we cannot have the fruit of the Spirit, which is faith.  So how can we get the Holy Spirit, since we don't have faith?

This is where you have the cart before the horse. Here's the problem:

1.To get the Holy Spirit, one must believe.
2.But if faith is only possible as the fruit of the Spirit, then how can you believe?

And we know there are people who do not have the Holy Spirit, because they identified as such in Romans.  So how can these be saved?  How do they believe?

I first asked you to cite the other means you said there are on how to obtain faith and your Scriptural basis, on Sept 20.  You first asked me how to get the Holy Spirit, Sept 24.  How did you come up with 10 days, brother? If you cannot make it correct in the issue of reckoning which to me is of lesser importance, can you be correct in what is being discussed which is of greater importance?

Now, forget the reckoning and cite just one other means, which you said there are, to obtain faith and your Biblical basis for it.

And by the way, I have already answered you on how to get the Holy Spirit, hoping you'd provide the other means to obtain faith. You may have just missed that post, here.

 

[Samie]

 

They are not just worded differently, they are two completely different lists.  Do you not see this?  For example, let's consider item#1.  From what I actually wrote: 

 1.The person is presented the gospel and the Holy Spirit convicts the person of his sin and need for Christ.

What you represented as being what I wrote:

1. while separate from Christ, bear fruit first, one of which is faith, and believe; 

 

You can see these are not the same, can't you?

The lists have a different number of items, and the items themselves talk about different things.  It really makes me wonder if you understand what I'm saying if you think your list is the same as mine.

They are not the same being worded differently, but I said they mean the same because they are both "cart before the horse scenario".

You believe that the unconverted person is NOT attached to Christ yet, while he who is converted is already attached. But you say that the unconverted (still NOT attached to Christ yet) must believe first and then he is attached (or converted). For me, that's cart before the horse, because believing is the exercise of faith which is fruit of the Spirit (Gal 5:22), and only those attached to Christ can bear fruit (John 15:4,5). And I have repeated this for soooooooooooooooooo many times.

[Samie]

You are being a bit exasperating.  Please have some consideration for the person you are discussing things with.  I quoted a text for your, and then you said there was no such text, and I told you I already quoted it for you, and to look at the post, and rather than doing this you simply repeated yourself that there was no such text.  And I asked you again to look at the post, and you repeated yourself again.  And I found the post for you, and asked you to look at the post.  Please look at the post. 

If there is one to feel exasperated, it should have been me, not you, brother. Here's why:

1. I posted the following:

Where in the Bible does it say that one needs to have faith to obtain the Holy Spirit? Or, that is what you think the Bible says?  And then use what you think Scriptures say to back up your own concocted claim that there are other means by which to obtain faith, which until now, since more than a week ago, you cannot give even one.

Did you forget that God has given faith to every man? And that faith is fruit of the Spirit, a fruit which one can only bear when attached to Christ. The fact that God has given faith to every man simply means all has faith; all can bear fruit, one of which is faith, because they are attached to Christ. And all attached to Christ are God's children, therefore the Holy Spirit leads them because:

^NRS Romans 8:14 For all who are led by the Spirit of God are children of God.

The sequential order as per Scriptures: 1.  attached to Christ first and become God's children; 2. led by the Holy Spirit; 3. bear fruit of the Spirit, one of which is faith, and then one can believe.

Sequential order as per pnatt: 1. while separate from Christ, bear fruit first, one of which is faith, and believe; 2. attached to Christ and become children of God.  Clearly, pnatt's position is cart before the horse.

 2. To my above post, you responded with a long post, but I truncated it to save space, and only showed your answer to what I asked in red above:

I said where.

. . .

3. To your posted reply, I responded with:

 You don't know where? Of course, there's none.

 4.  To which your reply came:

I said in the post where.  Look at the post. 

5.  I looked up the post, and since there's none (the only verse there is in that post is the verse I quoted: Rom 8:14), I replied:

There's none.

 6.  Then came your reply:

Why are you doing this?  Yes there is.  Just read the post, dated Posted Friday at 3:43 PM.  

7.  But since there is none, I replied:

To write the verse itself is much shorter than your post I quoted above.  Again, what verse?

And then you replied I'm being a bit exasperating.  Can you see it's you who looked like being a bit exasperating? But I am not at all exasperated by the way you replied to me in this issue, brother.

[Samie]

 

This is simple logic.  Anything I write is according to me, of course.  It's puerile to have a post that points this out.  Who else would it be according to?

Please make some effort to address the arguments made.

I'll use different language this time, but presenting the same process of conversion.

Starting point: person is unconverted.

1. The Gospel is presented to the person, and the person perceives Christ knocking at the door of His heart.

2.He responds by repenting of his sin, confessing it, and inviting Christ into his heart.

3.At this point he is converted.

Do you agree with this?

I agree based on the condition that the "conversion" you speak of is conversion to Christianity. 

But if you are talking of "conversion" as being attached to Christ, then No, I don't agree, because it was Christ Himself Who attached us to His Body on the cross (see Eph 2:11-19). To say otherwise is, for me, cart before the horse.

[Samie]

 

This is simple logic.  Anything I write is according to me, of course.  It's puerile to have a post that points this out.  Who else would it be according to?

Please make some effort to address the arguments made.

I'll use different language this time, but presenting the same process of conversion.

Starting point: person is unconverted.

1. The Gospel is presented to the person, and the person perceives Christ knocking at the door of His heart.

2.He responds by repenting of his sin, confessing it, and inviting Christ into his heart.

3.At this point he is converted.

Do you agree with this?

I agree based on the condition that the "conversion" you speak of is conversion to Christianity. 

But if you are talking of "conversion" as being attached to Christ, then No, I don't agree, because it was Christ Himself Who attached us to His Body on the cross (see Eph 2:11-19). To say otherwise is, for me, cart before the horse.

[pnattmbtc]

Not quite.

I would like to use a native in the jungle of Kenya.  Up to this point, they practiced human sacrifice.  No knowledge of Christ whatsoever.

1.  A native film team, composed of converted former pagans, comes to the village, and they show "The Jesus Film".  The man in the film, looks just like "the man" this native "saw" in a dream the night before.  In the film, our native "sees" this man declared "the Son of God", sees Him do miracles, sees Him crucified, and sees Him risen again. 

2.  Our native is strongly convicted by his dream, and by the story presented in sound and pictures (which he has never seen before).  He HEARS the film team explain that the One true God has offered THE PERFECT SACRIFICE - His own Son.  

3.  Suddenly our native realizes that all the human sacrifices offered by his village, were "not good enough".  He "believes".

4.  The film team ask if anyone would like to become a servant of the One True God, and His Son.  Our native stands up. 

5.  The film team now educate the future "servants" of Jesus, in how to serve Him.

6.  Some decide the rules are too hard.  Others decide they will serve.  They confess their old sins, and ask forgiveness.  

7.  Our native is baptized and goes on to serve His LORD. 

In my scenario, the person is "converted" BEFORE he confesses his old sins, or repents of them. 

I guess it depends upon your definition of "conversion".  What's your definition?

 

I wasn't laying emphasis on the timing of the events, as they all happen at the same time.  The Spirit convict of sin, righteousness, etc., presents the sinner Christ, the person believes, and is converted.  There could be other sins the Spirit brings to light later.  Maybe the only sin He brings to light at the beginning is the sin of unbelief.  Certainly the work wouldn't be exactly the same for every person, but the same general principles would apply; one is a sinner and has a need for Christ, Christ is received into the heart.

Regarding what conversion means, that's a good question.  I think of conversion as a change of mind, of how one looks at things.  Before being converted, Christ was an unimportant part of life; after conversion, He's everything.

[pnattmbtc]

Oh was it 10 days since your asking? How could that be when I asked first? 

No, I asked first.  I presented my argument, and asked you to respond to it.  You went on this tangent, and didn't respond to the argument.

I noticed another problem with your argument, which is that you are relying on Galatians 5:22, for which the consensus is that the fruit of the spirit is "faithfulness" or "fidelity".  The greek word "pistis" is usually translated "faith", but here it has a different meaning, which can be inferred, in part, by the cart/horse issue that has come up.  Given that we receive the Holy Spirit by faith (Galatians 3:2), how could we receive that faith from the Holy Spirit?

New International Version
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,

New Living Translation
But the Holy Spirit produces this kind of fruit in our lives: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,

English Standard Version
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,

Berean Study Bible
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,

Berean Literal Bible
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,

New American Standard Bible 
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,

King James Bible
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,

International Standard Version
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,

NET Bible
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,

GOD'S WORD® Translation
But the spiritual nature produces love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,

New American Standard 1977 
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,

American Standard Version
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,

Douay-Rheims Bible
But the fruit of the Spirit is, charity, joy, peace, patience, benignity, goodness, longanimity, 

Darby Bible Translation
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, goodness, fidelity,

English Revised Version
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,

The KJV is several hundred years old. The word "faithfulness" does not appear in the KJV, so it could be that "faith" had that meaning, just as "pistis" in the greek.  So from this standpoint the argument doesn't work either.

[pnattmbtc]

They are not the same being worded differently, but I said they mean the same because they are both "cart before the horse scenario".

But that's not the problem.  The problem is you present a list of event which was the sequence of events as I saw it, and it was completely not something I either believe nor had written.  You should not have done that. 

[pnattmbtc]

You believe that the unconverted person is NOT attached to Christ yet, while he who is converted is already attached. But you say that the unconverted (still NOT attached to Christ yet) must believe first and then he is attached (or converted). For me, that's cart before the horse, because believing is the exercise of faith which is fruit of the Spirit (Gal 5:22), and only those attached to Christ can bear fruit (John 15:4,5). And I have repeated this for soooooooooooooooooo many times.

I think you would be better off quoting something I had written and then commenting on that.  For example, where did I write anything about being attached to Christ?  You've written out what you believe, and I've responded to that, but I don't recall writing anything about being attached to Christ.

Regarding Gal. 5:22, this is talking not about exercising faith, but faithfulness.  We receive the Spirit by faith (Galatians 3:2), so faith is the horse, and the cart is the fruit of the Spirit, which we receive when we believe in Christ.  Romans also talks about this.  The Spirit bears witness that we are children of God, and if we have not the Spirit, we are none of his.

Paul divides people into two lists.

1.Those who believe, have the Spirit, are children of God.

2.Those who do not believe, have not the Spirit, and are not children of God.

I have another point on this same post of yours, which I'll make separately.