Search results

If I may offer a rationale: The confusion and differing ideas come from the way that God has revealed Himself over time. It's not meant to be a doctrinal issue, but a teaching method of first-things-first...ie.: "In the beginning God..." vs. "In the beginning was the Word...and the Word was...

Care to explain the title?

You are speaking against (anti) Christ -- God's Spirit does not come to the flesh at all. According to Christ, one must be born again of the spirit of God. This is not working. I am happy to discuss it, but I don't want to hear your anti-Christ doctrine, as if you had any authority to correct...

Revelation 20:6 Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years. The first resurrection referred to here speaks rather of "the last who are first"...

Good...a bit philosophical, but good. ;)

You had it right the first time. If one takes a serious look at that Luke 12:45 passage with the knowledge that Jesus referring to the generation of that time, told them "the things which must shortly take place", saying “Surely I am coming quickly.” Then Paul follows up with foretelling...

Yah, this is true. I tend to lean completely away from thinking along the lines of things according to the world however. I suppose I do because it's like a point for the world every time. I prefer to stand back and say no to the world, that I may know the greater things of God by His own terms...

I would say he is missing more than a few cogs. The problem with timelines is they are according to the times of men and the world. Those who look to God should know better than make the world and men the measure of the things of God...unless one is only interested in the history of the world...

Nice try! Enjoy your slumber. PS...since you have made it your prooftext, who is referred to in "Thou shall not kill?"

I am aware of these things you bring up. But you have assumed things that God has not presented as such. Contrary to what you say: Good is not perfect. The soul is not the spirit (even if all things were of God whom is spirit). Nor are all spirits good. Mankind is captive without a Savior. One...

Again you are equating what God has not equated, but has defined differently than you are doing here of your own mind. In the beginning God referred to His creation as "good", even "very good"--which is not the same as "perfect" which does not come until Christ. But you have assumed that good...

No, it is as I said, the creation was only an "image" of what was to come.

No, that is backwards. You are out of order. Man was first created as a mere "image" of God, then "breathed into his nostrils the breath of life." The passage is a foreshadow of all that was included since before the foundation of the world--but not given until it was attained by Christ. As it...

No, you misunderstand. This is the mystery of the cross, which is death to all, but life to those who are God's. Which is not murder or sin, but pleased God. This is why things are not adding up for you and causing questions.

No--I explained that. Not killing in the way you mean, but putting an end to sins. Which yes, is the death of some, but life to others.

It doesn't appear that you understood what I have just said. I am speaking of "a time, times, and half a time", with that 3.5 days or years, being that "half a time", and the "time, times" appointed "To finish the transgression, To make an end of sins, To make reconciliation for iniquity, To...

It would appear that you have some misconceptions about what is written here. The two are not wicked--nor removed from the Kingdom, but torment all who live in darkness and in the flesh, for they are sent of the Spirit of God bringing an end to all who live according to the flesh. These two...

Yes, but that perhaps is another discussion. What I was referring to is what God and Christ had combined regarding whether or not the flesh is born with a sin nature. Good point though.

I don't disagree with what you are saying here, but would offer that what you have presented--as do the scriptures, is merely the mechanics of the foreshadowing made in the flesh, compared with their fulfillment in the Spirit. Which is not to say, as it is written, "the dead do not rise" as some...

It is what Jesus said that makes sense. Therefore, I do not assume the flesh is born with the spirit, but rather that we must also be born [again] of the Spirit. Again, the scriptures do not say "The soul of man is a spiritual being created in God's image", but rather that the flesh is born...