Search results

I'm afraid your equivocation is nothing but a distinction without a difference. Your "explanation" dies the death of a thousand qualifications. The bottom line is painfully clear. Neither Jesus nor Paul required a "choice" between celibacy and vocation. The choice they invoked was between...

Excuses, excuses, excuses.

@APAK Now that your attempted red herring has failed, let's see how you get around my main argument. You know -- the one you conveniently left out of your complaint. Here it is again: John does, in fact, refer to Jesus as "the word" more than once. Joh 1:14 And the Word became flesh and...

Nope. You contradicted yourself. Here it is again:

Wrong question. Does your "practices, devotions, doctrines" contradict the clear teaching of Scripture? If the answer is yes, then they are to be rejected. Plain and simple.

The bottom line here folks is simple. While unmarried and celibate is better for ministry, it's not a requirement. And it only applies to those who "are able to receive it" (Matt. 19:12) and those who have been given this "gift" (1 Cor. 7:7). Rome goes off the rails by making it a requirement.

I see that you continue to contradict yourself and Scripture. Once again, you assert that "logos" never refers to Jesus while at the same time admitting the exact opposite in your OP. Here's what you said in your first post: John does, in fact, refer to Jesus as "the word" more than once. Joh...

And I feel sorry for those who don't go to church because they contradict the clear teaching of Scripture. Heb 10:24 And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, Heb 10:25 not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and...

Once again, context is indispensable when it comes to hermeneutics. The meaning of the PRESENT TENSE verb "eimi" in John 8:58 is not ambiguous in the least. Literally translated, "eimi" means "I am existing." For Jesus to say "before Abraham WAS, I am existing" makes absolutely no sense, unless...

Wow, okay. No wonder you've embraced an indefensible heresy. Let's try this: The Apostle John says that "logos" = God. And "logos" = Jesus. Therefore, Jesus = God.

The first rule of hermeneutics is context, context, context. Your strange take on Php. 2:6 falls apart as soon as verse 7 comes into play. The only way to grasp something is to already have it in your possession. You cannot grasp what you don't have. Likewise, you cannot "empty" yourself of what...

Not sure why you can't see it. Here's what I said again: 1. No sir, "logos" has quite a wide semantic range -- most of which you seem to ignore. And it's John, via context, who determined how "logos" is being used. I don't know who "they" are, but "they" had nothing to do with the obvious way...

1. No sir, "logos" has quite a wide semantic range -- most of which you seem to ignore. And it's John, via context, who determined how "logos" is being used. I don't know who "they" are, but "they" had nothing to do with the obvious way John is using it. He points to Jesus as the word all the...

And there we have it folks. Therein lies the problem. Scripture as whole stands in the way of a Frank Sinatra style Christian “walk.” Sing it everybody. “I did it my way.”

Wrong. Paul wrote 2/3 of the New Testament. Peter refers to Paul's writings as Scripture. 2Pe 3:15 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 2Pe 3:16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in...

He calls himself "dattaswami8." The title "swami" is in there. He also mentions an 8th century Indian theologian named Shankara. Based on these things, it appears that he is "Hindu."

Wow, I don't know what to make of that. lol

According to his profile he hasn't been around since June of last year. I don't think you're going to get an answer.

I agree. When Jude references "the faith once delivered to the saints" he would have had a set of core beliefs in mind.

Watchman Nee's comments on Romans 5:12-19 given in the video above are spot on. Definitely worth 27 minutes of your time.