Search results

1) To draw a distinction between every human and every creature and then only imply every creature is a subset of humanity is pure malarkey. 2) Every one of Peter's audience is non-germane to the discussion. 3) Yes, everyone who does not heed the gospel will be destroyed, but that is...

Some words are used interchangeably, but the words listed in the OP are not.

When the CT and MT agree over and against the TR, only an only-ist would post "taint so." The NASB runs from the controversy by adding to the text "O God" in italics. Not their finest hour.

Yes it is. As Mr. Churchill said, "Is this the sort of tommyrot up with I must put."

I have no idea where such nonsense come from. Christ died as a ransom for all, those to be saved and those never to be saved. Thus He provides the means of reconciliation to anyone who hears and understands the gospel, but only those who "receive the reconciliation" are those God intended to save.

I claim to be a bible student, studying God's word as commanded in scripture. I do not claim to have any credentials indicating my view should be accepted over any other studied view. That bag belongs to those who peddle God's word. Yes, I do say, with scripture, that portions of the gospel...

If two similar but different Greek words are translated into the same English word, then those reading the English translation can not see any distinction. That IS the problem.

Again, the issue is not whether any poster's speculation answers the question, but what does God's word say. 1) If God wants... Some might read this as suggesting God might not want everyone to come to him. Scripture is clear, God desires all people to be saved according to His redemption...

False doctrines arise from poor translation choices, such as translating a word that means "in" as if it meant "to."

Thanks

More addressing me and running from the topic. Folks, this is all they have. The word used by inspiration in 1 Corinthians 3:1 refers to lost unregenerate people, and Paul used spiritual milk to address them, as he also did addressing new born believers. The verse invalidates their false...

Yes, the Greek word translated "to" and "in" is the preposition "en: with the primary meaning of to be within something. Translating "en" as "to" is rare, with most modern translations going with "in." Exceptions using "to" include the RSV, NRSV, but not the ESV, the NIV and NKJV. However...

Apparently "the border is secure" didn't ring in the blue dorm.

On and on, change of subject posts are posted by those offering falsehood. Did Paul, speaking to brethren address them in the same way he spoke to unregenerate lost individuals? Yes. Their off topic posts are a smokescreed to hide biblical truth. That is why they post in my opinion...

Not addressing Mark 16:15-16, but addressing Colossians 1:23, we have two different statements presented by the translators. In the KJV, quoted above, we have the statement that the gospel has been preached to every creature which is under heaven." However, if we look at the NASB, we have...

False claim belittling me and avoiding the topic. Why these advocating their indoctrination think the use of fallacious argumentation has merit is beyond me.

The American culture that embraced "Westerns" has aged pretty much out of existence. I used to watch western's on TV in 1950, with John Wayne, James Steward, Hop-a-long Cassidy, and of course the Lone Ranger. But the idea of people with their word as their bond is no longer. The non-stop...

Yet another false claim based on an agenda driven viewpoint. No mention of 1 Corinthians 3:1 which says Paul used spiritual milk to speak to lost/unsaved people.

Pointless to continue Sir.

Yes, the primary purpose was to show that the two Greek words were not used interchangeably, and that therefore the use of one in 1 Corinthians 3:1 indicated Paul spoke to lost unregenerate people using spiritual milk. Opposition seems based on an agenda driven effort, rather than rational...