Search results

For the umpteenth time, "none that seeks after God" does NOT mean "none that ever seeks after God." When people are sinning they are not seeking after God, thus none seek after God all the time or when sinning is the contextual scope of the phrase. Paul, under inspiration, repurposed this...

Rev 1:8 WEB 8 “I am the Alpha and the Omega,[a] ” says the Lord God,[b] “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.” Footnotes 1:8 TR adds “the Beginning and the End” 1:8 TR omits “God” The NASB footnotes "is to come" with the better "is coming" because the verb is in the present...

Certainly, scripture does not preclude that possibility, but unless you can cite scripture which precludes angels being created before the earth's creation day, you are simply making an argument from silence.

Obviously scripture teaches all things are not predestined. Things happen by chance. In order for a choice to be a choice, alternate outcomes must be a reality. If only one outcome is possible, it reduces the meaning of choice to picking which of two doors that access the same room. :)

We we can agree on this, Jesus sacrificing His life on the cross provided the means of reconciling the whole of humanity to Himself.

On and on, this poster posts non-germane nonsense. The many seeking the narrow door is now falsely claimed to not be seeking after God. I kid you not.

I am sure there is a distinction there that I am missing, but the key distinction is Jesus was not made to be sin!!! That is what matters to me. When scripture says He born our sin, my NASB says He offered up (to take upon Himself the penalty of) our sins . I definitely do not believe Jesus...

I want you to address why Paul spoke to new Christians in the same way he spoke to men of flesh. This seems too much to ask. Many spiritually dead sinners seek the spiritual milk narrow door, clearly teaching what you clearly deny. God said salvation does not depend on the person who wills...

On and on, addressing my comprehension, and running from scripture. Address the carnally acting believer, and not the men of flesh. Obfuscation on display. Everyone should comprehend Paul spoke as to "men of flesh" using spiritual milk. To deny this is an agenda driven effort to nullify...

Ever hear someone say "God helps those who help themselves?" Some may think this is a quote or paraphrase of some particular verse. But is it a biblical principle. If we help ourselves by humbling ourselves before our Lord, does our Lord promise to help us? I think yes. God opposes the...

Recall our founding, and Sam Adam's refrain, I have no king but Christ. Now those overturning our Judaeo Christian values shout, No king but Marx, No Crown but Tyranny What the Brown Shirt actions confess all...

Anyone who believes God is not the author of sin, believes at least some of our choices were not predestined, which defines Open Theism or Partially Open Theism.

On and on, change of subject question after change of subject question, smokescreed bellowing smokescreed. Men of flesh are natural people, unregenerate, not indwelt, nonspiritual. Did anyone see where the fact Paul spoke to men of flesh using spiritual milk was explained. No? Gee Whizz...

First, the main point is Jesus was not sin nor in a sinful state. I do not want to gloss over the key to reconciliation, the just for the unjust. Second, I believe God's characteristic of being just, requires reconciliation, something received for something given (or not given in this case)...

Did Jesus cease being God's Son on the Cross? In my opinion, the answer is no. In order to be the just for the unjust, Jesus had to be perfect, without blemish. Yes, God treated Jesus as sin on the cross, but hat was necessary for Jesus to become the means of reconciliation for unjust humanity.

Romans 2:15 NASB in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience testifying and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, If we consider the Greek verbs in this verse, are they passive or are they either middle or...

Once again these posters address me, and run from the fact Paul spoke to men of flesh, the unregenerate lost, using spiritual milk. Can they answer the question, why did Paul use spiritual milk when talking to the lost? Nope. So they change the subject, thinking the "folks" are too dull...

The godless left has taken over the Democrat Party, and is attacking Judaeo-Christian values at every turn. But what does this new talking point actually mean? Well like all vague phrases, it means what the hearer thinks it means. For me it means No King of Kings, No Crown of Thorns.

Light overrides darkness, darkness is the absence of light. Thus when God created light, He separated it from the darkness. As far as we know, both actions had occurred when mentioned, so the claim they did not occur simultaneously is once again, adding to scripture. Lets see, scripture does...

Once again, this poster addresses my supposed disability, and does not address why Paul spoke to men of flesh using spiritual milk. Folks, this is all they have, they read into verses what they do not say, and nullify verses that preclude their additions to scripture. Commentary J-F-B Paul...