Search results

Oops, Paul tells the Gentile believers (Ro 11) "the Jews were cut off for unbelief, and you stand by faith", then tells them they also can be "cut off" if they don't continue in the faith... so, did the Gentile believers Paul is addressing "trick" God into grafting them in (obviously, being...

Well, we do have the example of the Galatians who had been "bewitched" (Gal 3:1) by a "persuasion" that did "not come from Him Who" called them (Gal 5:8), with the result that they were "so quickly deserting [God]" (Gal 1:6). To be clear, in that the persuasion they had come under had not issued...

Eschatology is hard, maybe we all "understand in part" "as through a mirror dimly"?

For your consideration : the more general categories of "Monergistic" and "Synergistic" may be more convenient, because they cover broader swathes, because "Arminian" is a subset of "Synergist", but the Orthodox and Roman Catholics are also "Synergists", but I don't think they would call...

It seems you would agree with the notion that judgment/justification is not something that happens just once (I ask bc the topic seemingly probes this question)?

I like this question--justification or condemnation follow judgment. When judgment, assessment, occurs, justification or condemnation, the adjudication, follows--when we believe, we are justified and at peace (Ro 5:1), so we must have been judged at that time, yet, also, we are justified or...

Why does John have no problem calling both Annas and Caiaphas, father and son, "high priest"? There can only be one high priest, right? So, is this not a case establishing that two men may be called after a certain title ("high priest"), even though the nature of the title is such that only one...

Idk why we can't have a simple discussion. Not many are capable of it. Why? Auntie Jane, you were able. Idk why others can't. There has to be drama. Half of the thread is drama , not substantive. Think of what we're missing out on. Sad.

Thanks for interacting!

1. Just spitballing, examining possible believable arguments that could be raised against what I've proposed/asked about. 2. More than there not being a moral law forbidding incest, the law, at least at the very start, was that they commit incest ("Be fruitful and multiply"). This, to me, is an...

A good argument (I think--at least from one perspective) against the inevitability of our return to our original diet has come into my mind : the original order was also incest ("Be fruitful and multiply"), and there is no expectation that we will return to that. 1. On the other hand, the...

On my phone now, so I'll be brief. I agreed with a number of the things you said. Did you have any thoughts on reconciling Christ as an agent of restoration to the original order and the warning against men forbidding the eating of certain foods? I'd like to hear if so. Were you meaning to...

Now it makes sense why I had placed you on ignore--there's no point in even discussing anything with you. Au revoir!

Don't get mad at me that you made a fool of yourself. You said what you do is debunk false doctrines. So Christ's doctrine is false? That's like claiming I said there's only such a thing as rape--no legitimate form of intimacy. To repeat the first post, I welcome thoughtful discussion, but...

I don't have a "doctrine". Quote where I have a doctrine that men must be vegan. You got out over your skis, because you love talking as if you know something.

The OP already preempted and granted objections, some of which you raised, and invited conversation from others who've given thought to the question. It does apply : you wouldn't have raised the objection that was already raised had you read. If you really had read, what was the purpose of...

Hast thou read the OP? Or Proverbs 18:13?

Please recall that I only raised that issue as an example of my argument that something can be a holy command at one point in time, and become a sin at another point in time. Please recall that I only raised that issue as an example of my argument that something can be a holy command at one...

Thanks for the interaction so far--again, per the OP, I do not claim to have a firm answer.

But "future" is relative--now IS the future compared to Noah's day. I do not care what anyone does, I'm asking a question about the Bible. Irrelevant : the point is that God's Holy Commands can, at a later time, become abominable sins. "... but I say make no vow at all... anything beyond...