Search results

Right, Good. And ethnicity is not the determinate of that. Right. Spiritually, of the Spirit. Not necessarily ethnicity. Right. But they are descendants of Jacob by the Spirit, not by the flesh. Thank you; the same to you. Peter did. <smile> I think that was just a mistake by...

Arminianism and provisionism... Right, I didn't say you didn't. And really, the tone in which you said what you said, I gathered that you were acknowledging at least some degree of similarity. I just said they were. You seem to be making it painful for yourself, really ~ reading things into...

It does, it just doesn't call it "true Israel," but the concept is unmistakable. Paul writes in Romans 9:6-8, that... "not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but 'Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.'...

Actually, in post 126 above, Spiritual Israelite, I missed that you actually had said "direct correlation," rather than "positive correlation," which is what I had said. The two are different. Since then we've been missing each other. So again, yes, I do agree with you that there is no direct...

So glad to hear you are at least somewhat geographically astute. Me, too. <smile> But God's true Israel is a people, and they ~ we ~ will inherit the earth. <smile> Grace and peace to you.

In your opinion. Okay, we can agree to disagree, I think, right? Sure. That was not my insinuation. Absolutely. This is not something to argue about, but I think that's kind of backwards... unless you're saying that not all dispensationalists are premillennial; premillennialism is a subset...

Not in God's economy. You might take a look at Romans 2:28-29, and Romans 9-11 ~ specifically 9:6-8 and 11:25-26. And Galatians 3:26-29, and Ephesians 2:11-22. You might consider what the land promise really is, as Jesus proclaims it in Matthew 5:5. Yes, of the Spirit, as Paul speaks of in...

That seems to me a problem, but fair enough. Neither do I. No, that's not it. <smile> Your manner of "conversation" is very, very abrasive. And not just with me. <smile> Ah, okay. <smile> Grace and peace to you.

It seems a simple question to me, CAZ. Who is Israel? Well, Jews, I presume you would answer. If so, okay, then, who are God's true Jews? You know, just one other comment... And this is not particularly directed at you or anyone else, specifically, but there is so much, shall we say...

Okay, well stop understanding that, because that's not what I do at all; never would I do such a thing. Well, if you say that, then I say you're not really hearing what I'm saying. Dude. I said that was a tongue-in-cheek thing. Goodness gracious. Not something to be flippant about...

The positive correllation of Calvinists and Amillennialists is not false at all. Calvin didn't write a lot on eschatology and Revelation, not because he was not reformed in his understanding of it ~ he was one of the chief reformers, you know ~ but because that wasn't the issue that he focused...

I do, actually. However... and this is a really big 'however'... <smile> Huge, actually... <smile> He or she will return, having never truly departed, but only ~ for a time ~ thinking he or she had. We are kept in the power of God... which you agree with, I know... and even our faith is a...

No, I'm most certainly not... <smile> That's the second, with regard to the first and second as portrayed in Revelation 20. The resurrection he's speaking of there corresponds with the second resurrection of Revelation 20. As I have said, this same Paul clearly talks about another kind of...

You know, it's really no big deal, but amillennialists and Calvinists are very strongly positively correlated, SI. Most ____ (either one) are ____________ (the other). I'm betting you'll argue with that, too... <smile> Grace and peace to you, SI.

Hm. Okay, well, that ~ to me, anyway ~ is a weird (and unexpected) response. <smile> He was focused on the fact that we are Calvinists, so, I said, Calvinists. Perhaps I should have said, "Calvinists also certainly agree..." <smile> Sure, I agree. I would hope that all Christians agree...

Now, this is a tongue-in-cheek response, but... <smile> ...we might get a smaller mansion in heaven... <smile> Sorry... I mean, there's a point to be taken from that, but...<smile> No, Jesus talks about the greatest and the least in heaven, so I do think each member of the elect will fall...

Nope. See above. Jesus's resurrection was most certainly physical. And ensures that ours (our part in the second resurrection, upon His return) will be like His (Romans 6:5). Okay, that's enough. <smile> Calvinists certainly agree with this. Jesus, Who was and is one with the Father, the...

Nope. That's not quite what I'm saying, SOTM. There is only one physical resurrection. And, at the final Judgment, both those on Jesus's right and those on His left will have experienced it ~ all at once, generally speaking, but the ones on His left immediately after the ones on His right...

Really. <smile> Yes. A "five-pointer." <smile> In the same sense that Paul exhorts us to "make our calling and election sure." He's not certainly not saying we can lose it... if we are truly elect and truly regenerate, born again of the Spirit. Certainly, the faith we've been given should...

Sure. Thanks. <smile> I mean, yeah, I really mean that... Warnings for us all. Thank you. Grace and peace to you.