Search results

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...

No, but post-millennialism is closer to correct regarding the timing of the millennium, that it is prior to the second coming of Christ, but like pre-millennialists, they too are futurists, holding that God's millennium has not yet begun. As I have said, God's millennium cannot be merely future...

<chuckles> I've said that, Ronald. Yes, I agree. Effectively ~ by not choosing them to be saved ~ he does. But, right, He does not outwardly choose who will be lost. Well, because of their natural proclivity to sin... so sinfulness. Right. So, none are deserving of salvation, and actually...

All irrelevant. The part I "chopped off" I was in agreement with you on, so no need to address it further, but only the part(s) of what you said where resolution was lacking. Relevant to this, I care not about two things: a) whether you think it matters or not, because it does, even if you...

That's not belligerence, is it, Davy? LOL! "If," Davy, which is the first word of my sentence there, denotes a conditional statement, Davy. So an if-then statement... I didn't accuse you of anything. I suggested that possibility, yes. If you're affirming that, then... well the "then" in my...

Right, so I "chopped it off," because that part was not in error. <smile> You can treat others like kids and/or idiots all you want (though you shouldn't), but I'm not playing that game. Well, Davy, if it hasn't been clear to you before, although I do believe the two passages to be closely...

I didn't say it was. Baptism is an outward sign ~ given to us by God; a sacrament, in that case, like the Lord's Supper (communion) ~ of the promise that God has made, which is to be the God of the parents and their children. So in that sense it is much like the rainbow that was given to Noah...

Right... He doesn't explicitly do so, no. However... <> Let me put it to you this way, Ronald. If you make a choice between one thing and another, choosing the one thing, then don't you, by elimination, actively not choose the other, and in effect make a choice concerning that other thing...

Well, they may not have actually sinned yet at some point after they are born, but the propensity for them to sin, the state of their heart, even from birth, is such that they will, without fail, sin outwardly. I think you agree, but it is this propensity to sin, the natural state of their...

Right, and seven times over, actually. Revelation 19 being the sixth and Revelation 20 being the seventh.... <smile> Grace and peace to you, David.

<SIGH> I haven't accused you of anything, Davy. That's just it; what you're talking about is not a difference, per se, but rather that what is partial now will be completed then. What is being made new now ~ as God says in Revelation 21:5 ~ will be fully new then... the New Heaven and New...

I don't even understand what you're talking about here. I mean I get that you're so entrenched in what you are entrenched in that you can't ~ or won't ~ listen to plain reasoning, but still, yeah... "used that 'redemption' idea to establish that Christ's kingdom is present"... I mean that...

Well, are believers on Jesus Christ, right, so we should just leave it at that. Yep, I know what you said... <smile> Right... I don't, but you singled that one out from what I had said, so I was replying to that... Sure, agreed. <chuckles> Who are you to tell me what I have or have not...

Goodness. How long, O Lord? <smile> I'm chuckling at... well, not all, but some... of the things you're saying and apparently think... <smile> And it's not always the same chuckle, if that makes sense... it depends on your context... <smile> No need; I agree, but by extension He's talking...

The fact that I've said the millennial reign of Christ is not future only but a very present reality now... and that we are ruling with Him in the fact that we have been "made alive together with Christ ~ by grace we have been saved ~ and raised up with Him and seated with Him in the heavenly...

Again, we think very much the same thing about each other, here, Davy, concerning several things... <smile> Oh, there's no "trying" about it. It is what it is. Well, right, agreed, and I'm trying to redirect you to that.... <smile> Well, right, but again, there is a very real sense in which...