In reference to the word of Romans 10:17 Elder Claud Cayce once wrote:
"The word here is the speech of God. God speaks to the sinner who is dead in sins, and by the power of that speech the sinner is made alive in Christ, made alive from the dead..." (Cayce's Editorials, Volume 5, pages 123, 124)
But, Elder Cayce, if Romans chapter ten is about “gospel time salvation” how is the word not about…well, you know…the gospel? And doesn’t the fact that you claim the word to be the speech of God, or the direct voice of the Son of God, prove that you’re treating Romans 10 as if it was speaking of eternal salvation, in particular regeneration? Otherwise, why the need to give it an anti-means interpretation?
Since the cunning debater is no longer with us to respond, maybe some of his devoted followers will, and tell me whether they think the elder was correct on Romans 10:17, or that he was guilty of one of the most obvious contradictions I have ever seen.