Search results

You know, it's really no big deal, but amillennialists and Calvinists are very strongly positively correlated, SI. Most ____ (either one) are ____________ (the other). I'm betting you'll argue with that, too... <smile> Grace and peace to you, SI.

Hm. Okay, well, that ~ to me, anyway ~ is a weird (and unexpected) response. <smile> He was focused on the fact that we are Calvinists, so, I said, Calvinists. Perhaps I should have said, "Calvinists also certainly agree..." <smile> Sure, I agree. I would hope that all Christians agree...

Now, this is a tongue-in-cheek response, but... <smile> ...we might get a smaller mansion in heaven... <smile> Sorry... I mean, there's a point to be taken from that, but...<smile> No, Jesus talks about the greatest and the least in heaven, so I do think each member of the elect will fall...

Nope. See above. Jesus's resurrection was most certainly physical. And ensures that ours (our part in the second resurrection, upon His return) will be like His (Romans 6:5). Okay, that's enough. <smile> Calvinists certainly agree with this. Jesus, Who was and is one with the Father, the...

Nope. That's not quite what I'm saying, SOTM. There is only one physical resurrection. And, at the final Judgment, both those on Jesus's right and those on His left will have experienced it ~ all at once, generally speaking, but the ones on His left immediately after the ones on His right...

Really. <smile> Yes. A "five-pointer." <smile> In the same sense that Paul exhorts us to "make our calling and election sure." He's not certainly not saying we can lose it... if we are truly elect and truly regenerate, born again of the Spirit. Certainly, the faith we've been given should...

Sure. Thanks. <smile> I mean, yeah, I really mean that... Warnings for us all. Thank you. Grace and peace to you.

No, John certainly does not contradict himself... <smile> No, not quite; we who are born again and thus in Christ "share in the first resurrection" (Revelation 20:4-6), which is an aggregate or cumulative description of all believers being born again of the Spirit and raised in Christ...

Hmmm. Well, I think you are conflating a couple of very different things here. I pointed out what John says (in 1 John 2:19) regarding those who fall away, or "go out from us"... He says: "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued...

No. <smile> Well, it does in the sense that the second ~ physical ~ resurrection, because of the occurrence of the first resurrection ~ and spiritual and physical (with Jesus in the New Heaven and New Earth)... exemption from the second death ~ is ensured and certain. <smile> Well, His...

SOTM, can you put all these thoughts into a very small nutshell and state your point (or points...) with all this? :) Grace and peace to you.

In... your... "humble" opinion. <smile> You're the one who originally brought up defining certain things, and said you had them all correct ~ without actually defining anything ~ Ronald. Look back through the record and bring some things up if you want. Again: In... your... "humble"...

Okay, fair enough, so let's talk about some of the terms, which you brought up, so, you first. <smile> But you understand them in a certain way, which may or may not be correct. Ah, well, I would say the exact same thing, but you and I disagree, so either one or both of us is wrong; we cannot...

It does not. Or, at least far, far less than it should. <smile> Nobody's saying what you think "doesn't make sense," really, Ronald. But regarding just about anything, it is very possible for something to make sense and but still be... very wrong. Grace and peace to you. Not true at all...

I'm not accusing you of anything, Ronald. All I said was, yes, as you yourself define these terms, you understand them. Which, by definition, is circular reasoning. It is what it is. It's not irrelevant at all, nor am I mistaken regarding your shouting and arguing. Your direct quote was ~...

The only question to me is whether at the time of Noah's flood the continents were actually situated on the globe in the same locations as they are today (or at least close...). The idea of one continent ~ Pangaea ~ is generally accepted, and in my view, it is possible that this was the state...

Yes, as you define them, you understand them. That's circular... <smile> ...but okay. I don't think you're ignorant, Ronald. <smile> You know, it's fine to discuss these things, but I think there's absolutely no justification for shouting at each other or really arguing. Don't you? Not on...

Yes, from heaven. What "ruling with a rod of iron" means would probably be a point of contention between us. And, you don't understand ~ or you may; if you do, you reject ~ the idea of the now and the not yet. Hmmm, well "tolerates" and/or "winks" or anything like that is quite ridiculous; I...

These two sentences are contradictory to each other, Ronald. Let me break this down... So yeah... Ronald, I'm glad (overjoyed, really) that you agree that Jesus is King now, but what you say after that, that "Jesus's kingdom is not on earth today," is a direct contradiction of what you agreed...

Jesus, Who is seated at the right hand of the Father, certainly does these things now. Right. But their lack of adherence does not lessen the fact that Jesus is King now. As He said, His Kingdom is not of this world. Right, and then in person, not merely (although it is certainly no mere...