Search results

Israel has about 6 months to launch a pre-emptive strike. Time is of the essence.

Thanks. I see more where you are coming from you with that more fullsome explanation. I think we will just have to agree to disagree on this one; I am happily agnostic on the subject of eschatology ("no-one knows the day or the hour and all that") and content to leave it all up to God when the...

Hmmm...unless you believe in a universal redemption or are a hardcore monergist Calvinist, then you must agree that some form of response to grace is required in order to be saved. Now we can argue till the cows come home about whether that response is to have faith in Christ and His atoning...

Whatever happened to 'play the ball, not the man'?

It's OK, Johnv; we're all liars and trolls according to JohnDeereFan - you're in good company. In fact, I'm beginning to see it as a compliment.

It's a means of communication of grace which God has provided freely for us.

Which bit?

Sorry, still don't see any mention of earned grace here.

OK, I accept that DHK was the one who explicitly referred to treatment of the Jews in the Matt 25 Judgement and I apologise for having gotten the two of you confused (it's kind of difficult to keep track of who's said what on a thread like this). However: 1. It was an honest mistake, not a...

Did you not read what DHK posted? He was the one who mentioned the Jews first. Please read what he said again. When I referred to the Jews I made sure I prefaced my remarks by saying "according to you (DHK)"; that does not mean that I share his belief that this passage is about the Jews; in...

OK, I will endeavour to thus acquit myself. But I don't appreciate being called a liar or a troll by some here; those who do will be ignored by me in future. You said: JohnDeereFan similarly (post #44 I believe) spoke of these three judgments. Firstly, your interpretation of the passages...

Calling someone a troll is a personal attack. Deal with it. Ok, whatever; it's sad to see someone who professes to be a Christian taking that attitude. No, I'm saying there's something seriously amiss with this particular interpretation of the Word of God. Don't presume to tell me what I do...

OK, but that's no sola Scriptura, that's suprema Scriptura. And with the latter I have no issue. Nor do any other (true) Anglicans (TEC excepted of course but I wouldn't call them true Anglicans).

Yes, I will: on another thread, you called me a troll*, and on this page you likened my behaviour to posting dog logs through someone's mailbox. I've about had enough of this. *If I'm a troll, how come I've managed to rack up >7000 posts? I can tell you the Mods are pretty hot on trolling...

Care to enlighten me, then?

Er...no it isn't - and I'd appreciate you laying off the personal slurs and slanders; there's been quite enough of that from you. Because it's classic pre-millenial dispensationalism read into rather ambiguous passages of Scripture. I'd like to know where else he gets this view (three(!)...

The Church of England is nowhere near as liberal as the TEC. OUr parish website, for example, is here.

Do you guys want fries with your Kool-Aid?

Then why bother with preaching on a Sunday (or indeed any other time)? Why not just say to the good folk who come into church, "read the Bible in your pews and figure it out for yourselves"?

TEC have effectively written their valedictory as members of the Anglican Communion.