Search results

That's what I've been telling you guys... :) And Wrangler, and all you fine fellows... :) Grace and peace to you all.

Well, regarding non-trinitarians, it's actually all three ~ indoctrination, reading miscomprehension, and intellectual dishonesty ~ to varying degrees. Total non sequitur. "Man is God thesis"? Pish. A total mischaracterization, and demagoguery. No, God made man: "The Word became flesh and...

LOL! No... :) That seems to be all you, Rich. You and your cohorts here. But I don't think that makes you (or other like-minded folks) a troll. Just... wrong. :) And wrongness is deserving of being called out for what it is and refuted. But a "troll" is one with ill intent towards his...

Nope. Look at it again, Rich. "...there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist." Not even the word 'God' is the subject; the subject is actually understood, and 'is' is the verb...

Ah, shifting the point away from the point. I see... :) But yes, the parts of speech, the modifiers... it's all there. But because this is just a message board, I couldn't draw it out here as I could have on a whiteboard. But it would have looked... well, sort of like so: No, Rich, I...

Nope. Very clear means very clear. :) Such wrangling ~ pun intended ~ is totally unnecessary. :) And false doctrine, which, yes, often results from false reading and imposition, is... false doctrine. :) Rather than you having learned that, I would say that you've manufactured that for...

I'll take all this... stuff... :) ... as a 'yes' to my assertion that the Holy Spirit is a third distinct Person, Who is one with the Father and the Son and they one with Him (in the same manner as Jesus said that He and the Father are one, that He is in the Father and the Father in Him). :)...

That was not my suggestion, Rich. Not at all. Paul makes his context very clear there, and the sentence structure is very clear. I would ask you the very same question, Rich. From this "question," I trust that you know what a complex appositive phrase is, and that's exactly what we're...

So... I know you're replying to Rich, here, Behold, but I'm not sure I get you... not sure if I understand exactly what you believe. Do you or do you not understand the Holy Spirit to be a third distinct Person, Who is one with the Father and the Son and they one with Him (in the same manner as...

Um... you're preaching to the choir, TF. I'm... right with you. :) Grace and peace to you.

Totally with you, there, Rich. But the issue is concerning what is truly written... :) So to your quote: Agreed. :) No, but a clear declaration that there is only one Father and one Lord ~ a direct refutation of the common belief at the time (and even today in some circles) that there are...

Of course not. That's just a terrible caricature of what we are saying. It is not that we "don't have a choice," or even that we "don't make this choice freely." We do have a choice, and we must make it, but the question of who is elect of God and who is not does not depend on our choice, but...

Your making that assertion does not make it so. It does no such thing. Sure, God's desire is that all would come to knowledge of the truth, and God's heart is that all of His creation would be redeemed. But God will not compromise His justice, which is what He would have to do to save...

God elects some to salvation. Others He does not. The free call of the of the Gospel is given to the entire human race and thus general in nature. But the inward call of God is specific in nature and is given only to His elect by the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit. Scripture is very...

It's just conversation, Jack. In answer to your question here, you're whole demeanor. Ease up on that. :) Wow. Do you see the heart as God does, Jack? I mean, Jack, people may be wrong about this or that, but it is not necessarily "Satanic." My goodness. So, Kingdom Hall... do you...

Okay, fine, I didn't know he she actually said that, but I really don't care. Yes, if he/she believes all babies go to Hell, he/she is wrong. However... she said, "Yes they do if they have not been saved in eternity past, before the foundation of the world!" So she put a qualifier on there...

I don't think, Jack, that Jun ~ or any other like-minded individual ~ thinks that all babies go to Hell. What I understand him (or her?) to be saying (and I agree) is that not all babies are members of God's elect. Now, we can't verify or refute that (more on that in a moment), because God's...

In no way do I "look down on" you, Earburner. I am, um, kind of astounded at your mischaracterization of God... :)... but I don't look down on you. There is no "creed of a Trinitarian," really, Earburner. But the trinitarian's understanding from God's Word is that our God, the God of Abraham...

I... literally don't care. What I've said in my posts has been quite sufficient. And as I said, you've "accompanied" somebody else down that rabbit hole, apparently just yourself. :) That's what I've been telling you all this time, Robert. That seems to be all you, Robert. Nope. But you...

You have no idea how much I literally don't care. :) No, I've been saying you are unconditionally wrong about "unconditionally saved OSAS." Which you continue to be. All the rest of this latest post is total nonsense. But by all means, keep going ~ and keep confirming to everyone how...