Search results

Yes, I did. Do you agree disagree with that? Right. Do you agree or disagree with that? Keep in mind I'm talking about true believers who are saved there.

You're trying to reason with someone who is unreasonable. It can't be done.

That's not what is indicated here... Matthew 22:2 “The kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who arranged a marriage for his son, 3 and sent out his servants to call those who were invited to the wedding; and they were not willing to come. 4 Again, he sent out other servants, saying, ‘Tell...

What do you think I am dead wrong about exactly? You thought I was wrong about believing that only the unsaved will appear before the judgment seat of Christ, but that's not even what I was saying.

Do you not know what a strawman argument is? You thought I was saying that only the unsaved will appear before the judgment seat of Christ, did you not? That's the only part of my post that you quoted. You proceeded to show that believers will also appear before the judgment seat of Christ...

Your education is not helping you to see my point. I'm not saying education is bad or worthless, I'm saying our level of spiritual discernment is not dependent on that. 1 Corinthians 2:13 These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches...

I was talking about learning what scripture actually teaches, not learning what others believe. LOL! What an ironic statement. You didn't seem to have any problem telling me about your theological education here, as if it's supposed to mean anything to me. Look here. This whole thing started...

Yes, let's stop talking just because I'm not bowing down to you while you're up on your high horse, propped up by your pride over your education. Okay then.

No, that's not true. You are changing the text to fit your doctrine. You see the rewards we receive in this life as relating to the judgment seat of Christ, right? I disagree, but let's just assume that's true for the sake of argument. What does Paul say? 2 Corinthians 5:10 For we must all...

I see that you ignored everything I said and you're childishly trying to change the topic of the thread despite my saying that I'm not interested in having a OSAS vs. NOSAS debate with you here right now. If you started a thread with that topic on the General Theology forum or the Soteriology...

It's not possible for a future physical temple to be God's temple. You need to give up on this fairy tale. The two physical temples of God in the past were ones that He ordained and would come and visit His people in. The temple of God now is the church (Ephesians 2:19-22, 2 Corinthians 6:16)...

Did you not read what I actually said? I'm saying that you need to include Matthew 24:35-25:46 and ALL of the Mark 13 and Luke 21 accounts into your framework. Not just the parts of Mark 13 and Luke 21 that parallel Matthew 24:4-34, but all of what is written in them. Are you just not willing...

LOL. I'm apparently speaking to someone who needs to humble himself and learn how to be teachable in a spiritual sense. I'm not impressed with your education even a tiny bit. It means nothing if you've not actually learned what the Bible teaches, which appears to be the case. You seem to be...

For the love of God, will you stop misrepresenting my views already? You've been doing that for about 20 years and you need to grow up already and stop doing that. When did I say that I believe Zechariah 14:3 is about 70 AD? Never. What have I said about it? You have no idea because you don't...

You need to put more effort into studying scripture than this. It's never a good idea to make a doctrine out of one verse. That verse does NOT reject my statement at all. What the verse does say is that those in the church will appear before the judgment seat of Christ, but it does NOT say that...

He's saying that the 12 apostles taught a gospel where all these things he mentioned: "faith, repent, baptize, lay hands & pray" were required for salvation and that Paul taught a different gospel where only faith is required. Which is ridiculous because there is and always has been just the one...

Where? Are you just talking about Luke 3:37 where Enoch is included in the genealogy of Jesus? That's not Jesus talking there.

So, what is your understanding of "the inhabited world" then? Can you try to be more specific? What does this mean in relation to what we're talking about? I removed that comment from my post well before you responded to it, so I guess you started replying well before you posted the reply...

Where? Can you tell me which verse(s) you are referring to here? I'm not really arguing that 1 Enoch should be included in the canon, but, certainly, the text that Jude quoted from 1 Enoch lines up with what scripture teaches or else he wouldn't have quoted it. So, there's no reason to just...