Search results

Pharaoh is no different than any other vessel of dishonor. He is different than any other vessel of honor. Stranger

If God can save people in the Protestant camps He can certainly save people in the Roman camp. Stranger

Actually your's is a volcano god. He is of your own creation dependent on your good works to your 'fellow man'. Oh you are nice to your dog? How sweet. Touching, of course. I guess that is supposed to mean something. That you are a good man? You see and serve only the outside. (Pro...

I don't know why you are responding to a post you already responded to. Are you feeling insecure? Trying to start over? Again, it doesn't bother me if it is an attack or a disagreement. It matters not. Stranger

Adam and Eve did not thwart God's intent Both they and Israel rebelled against God. They did not thwart His intent. The fall was part of the plan of God. Israel's rejection of their Messiah was part of the plan of God. Are they responsible? Yes. But they did not thwart God's plan...

As I said, that's fine. I have no problem with either. Stranger

Scientists cannot provoke anything to give any appreciation for visions of God. How stupid. You can give one LSD and he may think he is having visions, but they are not of God. Visions from God come from the Spirit of God. Not from any stupid chemical. Stranger

That's fine. I have no problem with either a disagreement or an attack. Stranger

No, God raised up Pharaoh for the right purpose, His purpose. It wasn't possible. No, Pharaoh could not overcome God's hardening of his heart. 'If' is a stupid question. That is not what occurred. Because God's word would be fulfilled. No it is not possible for man to thwart God's intent...

That all sounds well and good. But in reality, both are the same. You are attacking the position of the person that holds that position. You are in essence attacking the person. If you think their position is stupid, and say so, then it reflects on the person. And likewise, they to you...

But you don't have the Spirit of Christ. That is a reality. Stranger

Biblical writers when the speak of God, they mean God. (Gen. 1:1) "In the beginning God". Simple as that. All the rest of your post is just more bs. Stranger

What if? What if? What if? What if a frog had wings? He wouldn't slap his butt every time he hopped. Why is 'bios' and 'zoe' an indication that eternal life isn't physical also? Stranger

I appreciate the link but I am quite comfortable in my understanding of the atonement at this time, which I believe to be Biblical. Stranger

It all depends what you call 'attacking'. Just because I disagree with you and say so, and show you are mistaken, is just part of it. Call it what you like. I don't see how it is unbiblical. I don't see how it damages our witness. I don't see how it is disobedient. If you cannot defend...

When Paul was on a missionary journey and taking the gospel to other peoples he did use what he could to build a bridge to open the door to the gospel message. But try going to a church that Paul had established and bring with you some false teachings, contrary to what he taught, and you see...

Actually I have never head of any such theory. My understanding of the 'atonement' comes Bible studies and commentary helps. This is why I said it is not either/or, irregardless of what theory one may hold to. If any makes it either/or, then I believe they are mistaken. Stranger

It is not a question of either/or. God is a loving, merciful, just, wrathful, vengeful God. Stranger

There is something wrong with this statement. (John 6:38) "For I cam down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me." (Luke 22:43) "...Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done." (John 8:28) "...When ye have...

I see. Thanks. That too can be helpful. Stranger