Search results

That would be frustrating! Good reason to have a copy of both sorts? Might be interesting either way, comparing the standard layout to the chronological. I wonder if having a chronological copy would help me keep track of when Israel was exiled or not in the OT....I can never keep it sorted in...

I'm sorry, I struggled to follow your thought train at times here. I think you are arguing for the 'new man', the regenerated Christian, the love of Christ within them, being a 'restraining force' within the world? And that therefore those without Christ are the very antithesis of restraint...

Ok, firstly, I was not actually saying brain-eating zombies...it was a joke...the dead walking. Sorry if that threw things off track. However, I think, apart from that, you may have missed my point (or else I'm missing yours, which is always possible). Christian belief rests on faith, of course...

Huh. How very interesting, thank you! I had only the other day come across reference to a bible that lists things chronologically...not sure I'd come across them before that. Can you imagine how big a job it must have been, wading through all the scriptures and then listing them all in order?!

What does it do with Genesis/John, if you don't mind me asking? Does it string passages of both together, like that passage you just quoted from John, which obviously refers to 'the beginning', and also 'in the beginning', or does it still do it book by book? Do you think it changes your...

There are so many of them in the bible. Some outright, like the Matt 27 verse, but other ones if you just stop and think. Like: what was God doing before "he created the heavens and the earth"? It says "in the beginning". Well, that was OUR beginning, but it wasn't his. He is eternal. What was...

No, he is not the author of confusion. But sometimes there are things in scripture we just don't need to know. Let me give you another example. And behold, the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom. And the earth shook, and the rocks were split. The tombs also were opened...

Not really, sorry. People have ideas, they can point to scriptures they think perhaps might refer to it, but nothing outright, nope. And what I mean by things that might infer to it; people might point to Rev 20, where an angel 'binds' satan. Or Jesus, where he speaks of 'binding' the strongman...

Forgive me, but what you ask is impossible. For the reason that Paul never states who the restrainer is. Therefore any discussion on who it may be must, by speculation and assumption, become a debate. Sorry.

I think at times it can be both Israel and Church. We see foreshadowing events all throughout scripture, but that doesn't make the 'first' event less real than the final event, if that makes sense. Likewise, the 'gentile' church, which was, in a very real sense, grafted into the elect nation of...

Ha...sorry...I tend towards that sometimes!

I think there's a difference between nuts and flights of fancy. There are people who see the horizon and recognize it's a boundary that might be fun to play with, entertain notions of bumping up against, but ultimately, not a sane proposition to go past. There are others, however, who view the...

:D Oh! such a good response! Doesn't it feel that way sometimes? When you're just scrolling through all the bizarre theories with your mouth somewhat agape....Where do people find these things?

An abomination? No see, here I have to thoroughly disagree again. The bible retains that language for the worst sort of deliberate desecration. For the majority of Catholic laity, I would say that what they recognize in mass is mistaken doctrine at worst. And yes, transubstantiation finds no...

Hi Brakelite, thanks for your answer, and for not dismissing the...genuineness...of these people I know. For truly, it would be wrong to do so, I feel. I was sitting here, pondering your answer, wondering where I go, which question I should ask next. And here's the thing...I don't doubt that the...

Well, perhaps it's only strange from your point of view! I told you these people loved and followed Jesus as their Lord and Saviour. They have a clear and visible passion for Christ...not the Pope. They attended mass, but pray to Jesus, acknowledge him for their salvation. So...I believe my...

Well, that's the most marvelous non-answer I've ever received. Thank you. Cleared it right up. Very convincing.

The problem is, I know several people who attend the Catholic Church who are deeply devoted to Jesus as their Lord. And while, no, I cannot honestly say if that faith will stand the test of time, neither can you know if that love and devotion is not as genuine as it seems. It is simply not on...

I agree that there are many....aspects...of the RCC that, as you pointed out that the reformers pointed out, are not biblical. However, where I have real trouble trying to see it from your perspective is that while they have many peripheral teachings that are fishy, many of their core teachings...

It's one thing to disagree with someone over theological differences...as we all do here...but I find it a little on the nose to have you basically say that I'm making Peter a liar. If you don't agree with me, say so. If you find my exegesis troubling, show me where I'm wrong. As I'm about to do...