Search results

The ECF writings are no substitute for reading the Bible. But let's be candid, the Bible doesn't have an answer to every theological question. Searching for those answers can be informed by ECF writings. Take baptism of infants, for example. The Bible neither commands nor forbids it...

ECF writings shed light on how the earliest Christians understood their faith. Why wouldn't we want to explore that? Particularly when we consider how close some of their writings came to being included in the canon.

You guys are hysterical! How many more dance steps are left?

David, can we assume you post on this website in order to communicate with others, be they like-minded or not? If so, I need to point out that you are not communicating well. Your posts are largely unintelligible as responses to what they purport to respond to. You may well have some valid...

So here is David's syllogism: 1. Man was created in God's image. 2. Man is spirit and soul and body (1 Thessalonians 5:23). Therefore, 3. God is spirit and soul and body. I guess David thinks God had a body at creation, long before the incarnation of the Son. I think otherwise. I guess...

When you were a minute old, and the umbilical cord was cut -- were you a sinner then?

Suppose A and B both pass, but A lives a far godlier and pious life than B does. Will the exact same result await both A and B in the afterlife? (I am thinking about 1 Tim. 4:8 here.)

I agree that the Word was God from the beginning. But the "Us" in the first chapter of Genesis is a reference to the Pantheon of gods (of whom Yahweh was the Chief) that the ancient Israelites believed existed. Let's just agree to disagree on that, and move on. But I'd still like to know if...

Agree. Not sure why @David in NJ doesn't. He and I share a fair amount of theological views, but his continual pointing to "Elo·himʹ" as somehow relevant to positions we happen to share just has me mystified. He is completely dug in on this "It's-plural-so-it's...

No. Are you a young earth creationist?

It's a nice place to be. Are you a young earth creationist?

Brother, you need to immerse yourself in the study of Linguistics. What you are citing is a cute myth. In reality, that is not how languages emerged. Verse six is particularly cute: "And the Lord said, “Indeed the people are one and they all have one language, and this is what they begin to...

This has ZERO to do with creation of languages.

Man crated EVERY language.

But what has this to do with the Hebrew language?

Still not understanding you. Are you saying that the Hebrew matters because it indicates "GODS" = Plural = Identity = Truth = Salvation?

I guess I'm just missing your point. Nobody doubts that the Hebrew OT was available to Jesus. He quoted from it quite a few times. Why is this important?

So, "God-fearing" is something akin to "God-awestruck" -- and not "fear" in the common English sense of the word. Got it. For a moment there I thought we might be working out our salvation with fear and trembling in the classical sense!

But not until late in the first or early in the second century, when the Peshitta Old testament came into being in classical Syriac (a dialect of Aramaic). Likely John (the last NT writer) had access to the Hebrew Old Testament, but very unlikely that he had a copy of the Peshitta at his...

I am here. What's your logical challenge to the Son's two natures (you and @Johann have called them "spirits," but I prefer "natures" if you don't mind). I'll try to address it.