Search results

We've been through all of your arguments, it seems--you have gone to these same passages over and over and over in various threads I've made--and I've given my responses, and we've differed.

1 Corinthians? Paul says the Corinthians are carnal.

The word "refute" is not the word "refuse" : "refute" means "disprove" or "debunk".

I believe in a form of OSAS : those who fall away retroactively never partook of Christ, they are blotted out, they become never-have-believed, so, in a sense, OSAS.

I think I gotta address this after I get back home. Too much to type on a phone.

You're agreeing with me. Why start with "No"? Manicheanism is Gnosticism. Google AI : St. Augustine did not explicitly teach the doctrine of "Once Saved Always Saved" (OSAS) in the way that some Protestant denominations understand it today, but his writings on the necessity of God's grace and...

The Gnostics taught it, and the Church, refuting the Gnostics, refuted OSAS for the first few hundred years. Later, Augustine "Christianized" OSAS. He had been a Gnostic previously. It's interesting to note, though, that unbelief comes through sin--sin hardens the heart, and turns it into a...

We've gone through this already. I gave my responses, you differed.

I don't know that I believe that people will be saved as long as they trust God. What makes that difficult to understand is that we will be justified by our works in the coming judgment--and people who sin are condemned not justified (Ro 14:23). So, it's like, there is a way of viewing this that...

Yep. To me, it's just reading the Bible. I wouldn't be holding to these ideas for no reason. Paul exclaims "how far past finding out are His ways". He said that because he knew the Scriptures and couldn't figure them out (without revelation). God's Word is just not that easy to understand...

Yep, as stated, I don't know how to reconcile all of these things--one thing I won't do is be dishonest with myself, throw some of the doctrines out, just so I can think i found a consistent coherent conclusion.

We've already discussed them at length--we differ.

Sure did, yet, I can't help seeing, throughout Scripture, that the upcoming judgment on how we have lived as Christians is the final word on whether we will retain eternal life. Matthew says it (Mt 18, 25), Paul says it (Ro 2), Hebrews says it (Heb 3, 10), James says it (Ja 2), John says it (Jn...

It all fits together, i just don't know how. Lol thanks!

It may just be a matter of emphasis. You who really emphasize Christ's atonement may have a helpful and right emphasis.

Yeah, Jesus taught the same as Paul : in Matthew 18, the man had already been forgiven, and he was to forgive on account of that, and had the forgiveness extended to him rescinded because he did not forgive. These are one and the same teachings.

1. I think Jesus used the Law appropriately (1 Ti 1:9)--testing people to see if they would be honest about whether they measured up to the standard, or would lie and claim to measure up ("You know the commands..."). That's the same way it is used today. Jesus said the sinner who asked for mercy...

Of course we're not under Law.

I agree it doesn't--if I thought it did, I wouldn't spend time seeking to understand what it is actually saying (ie, reconciling this doctrine with that doctrine).

I was trying to help you make your argument. Maybe you don't know what I believe because I can't make heads or tails of the entire message of Scripture taken as a whole, and that was what I was explaining