Search results

That idea is what is properly termed "carnal reasoning"--it doesn't result from having read Scripture, and (unintentionally, I'm sure) contradicts Scripture. 1a. You can't lose something you didn't earn? Adam and Eve lost a whole lot that was a "gift" they hadn't earned. How? Sin. 1b. Esau did...

1. Though I know Paul's statement in Galatians 2, I've also heard an argument (that I'm not entirely convinced by, but also leave room that it might be true) that might make me doubt that the Apostles aren't my betters... there was something that, over and over, set Peter apart, for instance. 2...

Why are you raising OSAS? It's off-topic. People are trying to get to the bottom of Jesus as God here. We cannot tolerate having the thread "littered" with off-topic discussion.

You realize you don't need to be talking to me in order for me to be able to report you right? I could report you for things you say to anyone else on this forum. The fact that I haven't should show I don't intend to report you for your misbehavior. Now, then, you have no reason not to come...

@BreadOfLife "Let us reason..."

@Christophany @kcnalp @ByGraceThroughFaith @Enoch111 @Pearl @tigger 2 @GISMYS_7 @Wrangler, "Spare the rod, spoil the child"... here are the Scriptures : Ezekiel 16 32Adulterous wife, who receives strangers instead of her husband! James 4 4You adulterers! Don’t you realize that friendship with...

Actually, I won't be reporting your evil behavior anymore--it was apparently on account of those reports (according to a Mod) that they shut the previous thread, where you and your ridiculous religion were being shredded, down. I invite you to join me on my new related thread.

@kcnalp I recommend raising the fact God is "Husband" to His People--he won't stick around!

Clearly, @Wrangler does not appear to receive correction--he's already been told many times his signature has an error (ie, it claims the whole Bible was written by Jews when it wasn't) and he refuses to correct it. This shows his attitude toward truth (including the arguments I brought against...

Obviously, I meant "What does 'not equal' mean in this context?" Anyone knows what "not equal" means outside of this context--something like "not the same"--I, again, was asking what you were trying to say in this context (because everything you've been saying here has been nonsense).

Guys (@Christophany @kcnalp @ByGraceThroughFaith @Enoch111 @Pearl @tigger 2 @GISMYS_7), lol I've been telling you this doctrine is his Achilles heel--he pretended to discuss it, now when questions are asked that he can't answer he's on the run. Whenever he brings this up in the future, just shut...

LOL Exactly. Shut you right up.

Go back and read.

So, again, you recognize your dilemma : "God relates to His People as 'Husband', and Jesus is clearly 'Husband' to God's People... but I am trying to say Jesus is not God... dangit, what can I say? Oh! The weak link is I can EMPTILY and BASELESSLY and WITHOUT PROOF and OUT OF THIN AIR merely...

1. No, I do not--you want to pretend that I'm being dishonest because it fluffs your little pillow. 2. You're saying God changed--changed His relationship to His People.

What does “not equal” mean? At this point, what we have is you emptily asserting God ceased relating to His People as Husband, despite : 1) No Scripture to back it up. 2) God doesn’t change. 3) James equates “friendship with the world” with “enmity with God” and “adultery” (they’re married to...

1. Humans have a God—He also submitted to baptism which seemed out of order. He was a human. 2. We aren’t told when the Revelation was given—could’ve been prior to His ascension. 3. Christ is God’s Son. A son is subservient to his father. Why do you have a problem with that?

Again, you’re here saying God ceases to relate to His People as “Husband”—God is the same yesterday today and forever though so what verse are you relying on to reject the reality that God is Husband to His People? James accuses his audience of being “adulterers and adulteresses” in connection...

It actually is—as stated some of the people passed seamlessly from Old to New (ie, the branches in Ro 11 which were never cut off).

I don’t believe you’ve actually proven that. It’s just an empty claim.