Search results

Being unitarian, I found if I don't slander, and make decent rebuttals, the board doesn't care much. Respect the "orthodoxy", and perhaps they will respect that you believe differently.

Your interpretation is poor. Jesus was saying if someone considered their parents too much rather than disregarding them; miseo is the verb, that they were unworthy and shouldn't follow him. It is not as you view it, lamely. There seems to be no hyperbole in any your quotes of scripture. Move...

God despises and disregards the wicked. If we are righteous, we will have his consideration. A God without hate or disregard of evil, is one without consideration for the righteous.

A limited and feeble definition. You quoted a word using a modern Greek lexicon. The classical definition was far different. Explain that. It means to think according to a specific thought. Perhaps it only has to do with reasoning, not consideration. Agape is consideration as "love" and thou...

The perfect question. Where something can be done to redeem a person is often rare, and most people are not evil; evangelism is overrated.

Again, agape has nothing to do with true love, or justice. What is agaped determines if someone has good character. That is, you, since you couldn't even determine which was the modern from the classic.

I meant love not law. I must be getting a headache.

But agape seems to be way before it, since theoro appears in Modern Greek dictionaries first. Here some help with your defeciency: θεωρέω, θεωρῶ; imperfect ἐθεώρουν; (future θεωρήσω, John 7:3 T Tr WH); 1 aorist ἐθεώρησα; (θεωρός a spectator, and this from θεάομαι, which see (cf. Vanicek, p...

I am not the one who redefines punishment of the wicked as unconditional [love].

There in the NT, are plenty of examples where it isn't conditional love. You were desperate, weren't you? It was also lame. I am not the one pretending love is both consideration and enjoyment of someone else. Disgust can about a good individual, but at least, in your disgust you would be...

It's the first definition. Why did you use an AI as one of your sources? I suspect you would do anything not to look stupid.

You don't quote any major scholars, and you lamely insist that what happened to Ananias, and Sapphira was consideration and unconditional love. You only think you have won. One should not consider someone or anything that would kill them. Consideration is not unconditional love, nor is...

I find your stupidity very stimulating.

Delusional. Did Peter "love" Ananias and Sapphira? He disregarded them. Sorry but bible translators have mis-rendered my command, and traditionalists have applied the opponent word to persecutors. This suggestion is doable, but the command to consider one another as Christ considered his...

Apostacy means rebellion. Hence the Jewish rebellion against Rome.

Most church history post-NT is just a guess.

I suspect it was the beloved apostle John who was the actual overseer.

Selfless and sacrificial love it is not. You have to consider doing something for someone for it to be legit. It isn't love, it is what people love. Consider they opponents. Loving them is already impossible. Consideration is not just affection, and fits perfectly with the word consideration...

Exactly, consider i.e. agapeo (grk inflection approximate) yourself. Won't cha be my neighbor?

Consider thy neighbor, not love thy neighbor.