Search results

Ugh. <chuckles> Grace and peace to you, RDB.

Hmmm, well, for example... <smile> ...neither does the word 'trinity,' but we talk about the triune Godhead often. We have plenty of words that are absolutely descriptive of Biblical things and concepts. To automatically label something as a "false representation" that "causes confusion" is...

@Fred J And now back to Revelation 20 and the resurrection... <smile> Yes, the mention in Revelation 20:4-5 of a first resurrection strongly implies that there is a second resurrection. The difference between the two is that... well: First resurrection: Spiritual and individual in nature...

Fred, grace and peace to you in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. There is a "true Israel," clearly, in God's Word, although those exact words don't appear. Paul says in Romans 2:28-29 the following: "For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and...

Great! I ~ as a... five-point Calvinist... <smile> ...believe exactly the same thing. But then the question is, Who is the one Who ensures, by His power and His good work in us, that we meet those conditions? <smile> Among other passages, remember 1 Peter 1:5, that we "by God’s power are...

And Who is truth? <smile> Grace and peace to you in the Name of this "Who," LY!

Yes... In your opinion. Yeah, I get it. Okay, well, that's an erroneous opinion. We have established ~ whether you deny it or not ~ that circumcision was the Old Testament sign and seal of the covenant, and that baptism is the New Testament sign and seal of the covenant. The Lord commanded...

The only thing I would add to this, if I may, is... well, three things: 1.) Jesus said, "I did not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it." He says nothing about making it passe'... or defunct, or no longer applicable or active and binding. 2.) Jesus also said that loving the Lord your...

Even though I've supported it with Scripture, and others have acknowledged it. Okay, fair enough. You're welcome to your... private opinion <smile> ...for sure. No, circumcision was a real thing, for sure, certainly not a metaphor. But if you say that, then to be consistent you have to call...

To you. I get that. Well, it does, even to you, I think, but you've just made up your mind, and you're dug in on it, and that's that. Yeah, I get it. Even though I've supported what I've said with Scripture extensively. Hm. But all the exhortations to be baptized are for the men hearing...

We are. Both. The two are one and the same. We, as followers of Christ, are God's elect, and thus in Christ and members of God's Israel, His household. From this I would point out two things: Well, not stopping with Ephesians 2:17, but carrying that passage to its conclusion: "...one new...

Obviously so, sure. Although... at least to a large extent, I don't think it's an interpretation problem. <smile> Vain (not "vein"... there are no blood vessels involved here...). <smile> But yeah, maybe so, in the sense of, well, neither one of us being able to reconfigure the other's...

Well, but it is possible... it depends on which baptism we're talking about, and who ~ or Who (capital 'W') ~ is doing the baptism, right Ronald? <smile> Grace and peace to you.

God's covenant is with His people. Because we are Israel, yes, all His true Jews, who are those in Christ, yes. And this means that His covenant is with us. You have to take both of these Scriptures into account: 1) "He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised. Every male...

Which I got... and thought I enunciated that. I agreed with what you said, but that was beside the point. Right; previously agreed... Well, agreed, but that's really neither here nor there. Although... God did ordain every day of our lives before there was yet any one of them, as David says...

Well, it does; it seems to me you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. And I think the larger issue is one's understanding of what water baptism is and why we administer it. Certainly we are to do so; none of us are in disagreement about that. Right, I totally agree, but, yeah, I think you're...

Absolutely irrelevant. No one is to be denied access to the covenant/promise of God for any reason, even age or comprehension of signficance. And how would denying God's promise to anyone, even a baby, glorify God. And... how would doing so even... well, do something very different than...

It does. Circumcision used to be, in the days of the Israelites, and baptism is, since Jesus's first coming, the sign and seal of the covenant. Which is not to be denied anyone for any reason, and given to all children, even infants of believers. Fair enough, at least you admit to the...

Still on this seven- or eight- day week thing... goodness gracious. Yes, there are seven days in a week. I'm not sure why you apparently think "Amils" think there are eight; I guess it's because some poster on here mentioned something about the eighth day some time back in this thread... Yes...

I pointed you to Colossians 2:11-12, where Paul is very clear that in the early church, baptism had replaced circumcision as the sign and seal of the covenant. Well, it was about the promise of God, and baptism (formerly circumcision, as I said above) is the sign and seal of the covenant. And...