Search results

Oops! He literally cites Genesis 2, which is about Adam and Eve. Ephesians 5 31FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND SHALL BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH. The body of Christ is Christ's bride, just as Eve was Adam's body and bride. LOL It's so...

LOL If Paul doesn't use the "bride" but uses the word "espoused", does that debunk me? He already told you Adam and Eve is a deep mystery that concerns Christ and the Church! Ipso facto, what ever Eve was to Adam, that is what the Church is to Christ! Eve was Adam's own body, and was formed for...

When you affirm the Church is the body of Christ, you already concede the Church is the bride of Christ, because Adam's bride, Eve, was his own body, "bone of my bone, flesh of my flesh", and Christ is the antitype to Adam (Ro 5; 1 Co 15). Pretty straightforward.

Years ago, I learned that the Bible teaches that only the Church could be the New Eve : 1. The typological evidence in Scripture points to the Church being the New Eve, not Mary : i. Adam was the head of the human race, and Christ is the head of a new human race (Ro 5; 1 Co 15), ii. Eve was...

If @bigboyjohnson had read before responding (Proverbs 18:13), he would've known that I do not deny the idea that we are responsible for believing the Gospel, and that we are also responsible for walking in faith after believing the Gospel, and that it is the Grace of God that allows people to...

You are not worth my time. Welcome to the ignore list! Titus 3:10As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him,

LOL You already admitted you didn't even read what you're calling "false doctrine". You're arrogant and puffed up, and, according to Proverbs 18:13, you're a fool. Either humble yourself, and engage in honest dialogue, or shut up and scram.

Proverbs 18:13 is going to hell fire, then, because Proverbs 18:13 called you a fool for responding to a matter before even hearing it.

LOL What does He say about false accusation, like you've brought against me, claiming I say this and that false doctrine just so you can attack that straw man false representation? You want to attack, that's all. You're not interested in engaging in discussion.

OK feel free to get lost because you have nothing intelligent or helpful to say, just idiotic unthinking "discernment" that makes you into a fool, according to Proverbs 18:13. Imagine being so idiotic--"I don't know what this is, I haven't read it, but I don't believe it, and I know it's...

If you hadn't been a fool, and shamed yourself, but read before responding, you would've read that I don't believe any of the lies you are falsely accusing me of believing. You haven't read what I have said, which contradicts your "baloney" false accusation. LOL How can you accuse me of saying...

I don't know what your conception of being "under Grace" is; to me, it means you are "under the jurisdiction of Grace", meaning that the Spirit of Grace is in authority in your life, conforming you to God's good pleasure. It does not mean "everything you do is fine", or else Paul wouldn't have...

Being said to be "under Grace" and "within the Law of Christ" (1 Co 9:21) are one and the same : you can't be "under Grace" OR "within the Law of Christ", nor "under Grace" AND NOT "within the Law of Christ" (or vice versa). You can't be "within the Law of Christ" and NOT be "under Grace". How...

One of the major objections to this doctrine that is raised by so-called "Torah Observant" Christians is Acts 21. So, how can Paul affirm (to James, et al) that he "keeps Torah" when we know that he explicitly teaches that he is not under the Law, but is under Grace, because he died, thus, the...

I shared this in another site in response to a user who had raised an issue that was not directly pertinent to the topic, but, because it is an important question that a lot of people get confused about, and which does not really have entirely coherent responses, I thought I'd give it its own...

The question of whether the early church fought OSAS is a claim about church history, it is not a claim about whether the Church was right or wrong in their fight against OSAS. You should know I've had many threads on the topic, and how everyone stopped even responding, so I don't think it will...

The issue with saying "OSAS is true" is it will lead to debate about whether it is or isn't when this is about a historical issue of the Church. Please do not defend OSAS here. It's not the discussion.

Yeah, that's my honest assessment. Yeah, it's not edifying to go on a rampage accusing everyone--it offends others, and it destroys conversations

I've said all I need to say, and I stand by it. I can see I'm not getting through to you, and I want to stay on topic, so I won't keep beating a dead horse.

Do what? I gave the example of Peter, so, clearly, I'm not saying anything like what you're talking about (ie, a straw man of my position). The mercy I referred to was in God's dealing with Peter--answer that, don't change topics or ascribe views I never espoused to me. I think there are...