Search results

Oh, so Jesus a few minutes later said, "Before Abraham was, I was", right? Oh, no? He said, "Before Abraham was, I AM"? Oh, yes, He did say that. That's a funny way of speaking, right? More than funny - it's nonsensical...UNLESS YOU EXISTED BEFORE ABRAHAM EXISTED WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT HE MEANT...

How about you look at all the texts, instead of reading one and closing the Bible? The OT says YHWH is the Shepherd. The NT says Jesus is the Good Shepherd. Scripture says there's only ONE Shepherd. The OT says YHWH is the Rock. The NT says that Rock was Christ. Scripture says there's only ONE...

Piety? No. Flesh out which verses are being misused in order to substantiate false doctrine? Absolutely.

Not the actions of man, but the CHOICES of man. Calvinists claim we're incapable of choice, and the OSAS crowd thinks choice = works, when in reality choice = thought. I believe the Bible fully teaches our outward actions are merely the evidence of our chosen inward spiritual condition, by...

Not quite. He argued that only those Jesus never knew are told to depart, therefore if you're Once Saved, then you're Always Saved.

Brace yourself: the Catholic church actually denies Jesus Christ came "in the flesh" and is why the Bible identifies the Papacy as "Antichrist". How so? It has to do with the doctrine of the "Immaculate Conception", which surprisingly doesn't have a thing to do with Jesus - it's about the birth...

Unless you can show me something else, my belief is Jesus is fully God in the highest sense of the word. So, to answer your first point, Scripture says "Holy and Reverend are His NAMES" -- "names" denoting plurality of the names of the LORD aka YHWH. His name is also "Jealousy". So, here's three...

He doesn't believe a saint can be lost? According to what I've read of him, he doesn't believe so, and appealed to Matthew 7:21-23 as "proof" for it.

I can't find a single verse that says salvation is never lost once it's obtained because the promise of it, unlike the unconditional love of God, is most certainly conditional: on condition we repent. The OSAS crowd seeks to have salvation cover willful, deliberate, habitual, presumptuous...

What about the ones who will confess He has come in the flesh, but proceed to preach against Scripture? Even the Roman Catholic church claims Jesus came "in the flesh" and they are completely off base Scripturally. That's why we need to "despise not prophesyings, prove all things, hold fast to...

It's a fine line between the truth and the OSAS License to Sin, but a line we must nevertheless recognize. What you're describing is total surrender where habitual, presumptuous disobedience is not an option - which is no less unreasonable than the non-negotiable expectation of faithfulness...

Why should there be anyone to question whether the "Word" here is fully divine or not, when we know it's referring to Jesus, Who Himself says He's the "I AM", the Creator God of the OT?

What do you think it means?

I grew up Baptist and much of my extended family attended the same church. I was brainwashed Sunday after Sunday by this unBiblical interpretation you present, as if Moses and James are offering two options for salvation, the one by faith and the other by perfect obedience. Moses and James...

I'm trying to have a nice life, but the record keeps needing correction: "If you are trying to be saved or sanctified by law..." That's your words, post #53...did someone hack into your account or are you mistaken? BTW, Jesus settled the "earned salvation" issue once and for all in Luke 17:10...

No, it was for you. You mention something about obtaining salvation by the law, so I made the point that obedience doesn't save nor does disobedience condemn - our choices do that and our works are merely the outward evidence of that inward choice.

I see you don't want to discuss Matthew 7:21-23 KJV - one can only conclude that you know you can no longer use it as a "proof text" for OSAS, but you're unwilling to admit it. Matthew 24:12-13 KJV proves that the "many" are saints which will wind up in hell, and you're guilty of preaching the...

That we ought to stop using it as a "proof text" for OSAS.

If you haven't figured it out, what I'm interested in is not your style of cursory, surface reading, but digging into Scripture at the level of the verse and examining whether what we derive from it is evidence for our positions or not. Therefore, I've decided to stop reading your posts until...

All hail Behold, the King of Strawmanville (psst - I'm not a Calvinist) OSAS is "Calvinist Lite", which you subscribe to, bro ;)