Search results

Like... teaching that Jesus would come back over 20 years ago?

I always accept all Scripture that says what it says. I reject the use of Scripture where one tosses it out on the table like a used snot rag, and says nothing of what they are trying to prove.

Having a few big Churches does not mystically rank them in the top 15, nor does their size imply that they teach truth. One Church has 16,569,036 members in 2019. That is the Church of Latter Day Saints, the Mormons. They have several services every Sunday too! Tell me, how many members were in...

As usual, you throw the Bible against the wall and suggest something must stick! Assurance, and even security of salvation is spoken of, but never "eternal security." (BTW, all three deny "eternal security" because all three are conditional).

I don't believe that Calvary Chapel even dents the top 15 denominations in the U.S.A.

"Eternal Security" is not in the Bible, and is no "Biblical statement." "Eternal Security" is a specific doctrine that concedes no conditions. I would use the term "assurance" of salvation, or even "security" in Christ, which would speak of security/assurance with conditions.

While it was while reading Scripture that God revealed Himself to me, it was not brilliant prose, magnificent doctrine, or what I read before this that moved me so deeply. I read John chapter 1 and was unconvinced and unmoved. But the simple story of Jesus turning water into wine, while no deep...

Appropriately in the "Spotting Heresy" thread! I see it! I see it!o_O Faith in your heresy is not faith in Christ!

God no more saves us without our consent than He makes us pure without our consent. If this were not so, this verse would never exist.

"These things have I written unto you, that ye may know [presently, at this very moment, present tense] that ye have eternal life, [even] unto you that believe [right here and right now, in this very moment present tense] on the name of the Son of God." 1 Jn. 5:13. No present tense saving...

Jude 21 and Hebrews 3:12 were swiftly swept away, and the presumption that Eternal life is not conditional as Scripture states, was assumed in the eisegesis of 2 Timothy 2:11-13. If you have to dismiss so much of the Bible to "arrive" at a certain conclusion, then I would suggest that there may...

The hyper-dispensationalism you propose is philosophy, and not Biblical Theology. Jude 21 is speaking to Christians. You cannot tell someone that they must keep themselves "in" the love of God, if they are not already "in" the love of God. As for Hebrews 3:12, it is impossible to "depart" from a...

I agree with your answer, yet not every "Church" functions, or can be classified as a true Church. I do not think that we are commanded to fellowship in any Church that is fatally wrong in their doctrine. Sometimes it is not as easy to find a functioning Church as one might think. If I go to a...

I have been to Heathen Doctrine "Churches" that make not recycling to be a sin! The resources are here for us. God made it that way. But stewardship makes perfect sense. If someone donates a car to a missionary, the regular care and maintenance makes sense. If you drive it abusively, or do not...

Why would you dig a hole and put a Church in it?:eek:

Astonishing! Joe cannot remember if he has had a cognitive test! Joe Biden Claims He's Taken Cognitive Functioning Test Despite No Record of One In December Exam

Joe wants masks to be mandatory! Actually, his handlers want him to wear a muzzle... I mean, "mask" to stop him from sniffing!

Is that why she always votes for it? Being "Catholic," how is it that she votes for sexual perversion, stealing from the rich and giving to the poor? Pelosi does not love abortion? Nonsense!

"It is a faithful saying" made me wonder... is there any evidence of this? What I mean is, was Paul saying that was a circulating Creed already in existence? Looking at the Greek, I am not sure if this is the way to go. It can mean "Faithful is the word (or 'saying') which could mean that Paul...

The argument that one verse is speaking to believers, and the other is speaking to unbelievers, is not exegetically derived by this passage in my opinion. "If we" is the same audience in both places. To arbitrarily change the audience and who "we" is in this passage to be believers in one...