Search results

Right, diet causes self-harm--and we know why people do it, that it is for pleasuring the body, the desires of which wage war against the mind, according to Peter and Paul, and hundreds of thousands die from that pursuit of pleasure in the US every year, bc they die of heart attacks, strokes...

1. Universalism ignores the reality that some people cannot be forgiven for their sin, and Jesus did not die to atone for their sin, because their sin cannot ever be atoned for, because it is really eternally offensive--blasphemy of the Spirit. Jesus's sacrifice could not pay for that sin...

But again, if it is a personal choice that is leading to self harm, and "love does no harm", aren't we correct to identify their activity as not walking in love, but after the flesh (since walking after the Spirit means walking in love)? And since gays "receive in themselves the penalty due...

I understand we should not "despise" or "pass judgment" on others, but if a person is choosing to do something they think is wrong, or that they think is right, what is the basis for their conviction--and if their conviction has good reason for being that way, why wouldn't it be right to try to...

Apparently, the animals changed (even biologically) after the fall... so it may also be that humans also changed (even biologically) so that they cannot sustain a completely raw vegan diet. Raw vegans do have to supplement with B12, because we don't have a good source for it (meat eaters obtain...

1. Yeah, that is it : had you availed yourself of the information already shared in this thread, you wouldn't have said, "I just can't figure out where the idea that OSAS comes from Gnosticism comes from!" You are responding to a matter before hearing the matter, as Proverbs 18:13 says not to...

That's because you're answering a topic without knowing what you're answering, as Proverbs 18:13 warns against doing.

The topic is a historical claim; being that that is the nature of the topic, in order for you to disprove the assertions made about OSAS, you have to bring historical counterclaims about OSAS.

No one is against anyone being "secure", the discussion is simply about historical claims.

You really ought to address the historical claims. You can't, right?

It does not at all follow : Gnostics had their set of deviations from the Gospel, and Orthodoxy developed its own deviations from the Gospel.

Empty claims--present historical counterclaims to the historical claims made in the video presentation.

This thread is not about the "practicality" of either position, only about the historical claim that the Church fought OSAS during its early years as part of its fight against Gnosticism, because OSAS was a doctrine unique to Gnostics.

1. I'm saying "be on topic", and that's "condescending"? BE ON TOPIC. 2. "Welcome"? It's MY thread. YOUR IRRELEVANT / OFF TOPIC THOUGHTS ARE NOT WELCOME HERE ON MY THREAD.

Again, you prove you are not capable of engaging in discussion. I won't be responding to any more of your irrelevant rambling here.

If you don't like the topic, and you won't discuss it, then scram.

Irrelevant.

The OP has a video which expounds on the reality that OSAS was only known among the Gnostics early on, and how the early Church fought OSAS as part of fighting Gnosticism--I was hoping the thread could remain focused thereupon.

Though I haven't found a single honest believer in OSAS--they are, to a man or woman, incapable of honesty or consistency--part of the issue with "Behold" may be a language barrier. He has said he lives in Israel, so maybe English isn't his first language.

Strawberries don't taste like powder and butter. As far as vegan meat substitutes, I'm not really crazy about them. Nevertheless, the topic is about working through Biblical difficulties of the issue, not about preferences about flavors.