Search results

I laughed when reading this, but it's true. A big part of their problem is a lack of attention to detail. Especially details given in the New Testament.

When you continue reading from there, it becomes even more clear. Romans 9:7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. 8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of...

That is very clear. I have no respect for him whatsoever. He is a false teacher who has no regard for the NT whatsoever. Agree. That says it all about him. He doesn't want to get it. I agree. So, why are we bothering with him? I'm not sure. I don't think I will for much longer.

This is nonsense of the highest order. You are blatantly twisting scripture to fit your doctrine and it's shameful and unacceptable. There is no basis whatsoever for thinking that Paul changed the subject in verse 25, regardless of whether or not a comma should be there. None. I just can't take...

So? Of course there was a distinction in a physical way, but Paul's focus in Romans 9-11 is spiritual. You're just not getting it. Paul was talking about making some of His fellow Israelites who had been hardened and blinded IN HIS DAY jealous because of the salvation of the Gentiles so that...

He has made it clear that he does not believe that Jesus is fully God. He believes Jesus did not exist in any way, shape or form before He was born of the virgin Mary. But, how can someone be partially God? That's nonsense. God is eternal. So, if Jesus is God then He is eternal (has always...

Right. But, Isaiah 65:20 clearly relates to the new heavens and new earth, so why do you not take what you said here into account when interpreting it? All of this is about the new heavens and new earth: Isaiah 65:20 “See, I will create new heavens and a new earth. The former things will not be...

And you kept it from us all that time. I'm kidding. Not sure how I didn't see it before. It's always fun to discover something new.

Why did you not address what I said in my post? Do you think the new covenant described in Jeremiah is a different new covenant than described in 1 Corinthians 11:23-34 and 2 Corinthians 3 that Paul applied to both Jew and Gentile believers? You acknowledged that there is only one new covenant...

I agree. This really saddens me when I see people deny fundamental Christian truth like this. Since Jeremiah 31:31-37 doesn't explicitly mention Gentiles that means the new covenant can't apply to Gentiles? That seems to be his entire argument. But, New Testament scripture clearly applies the...

All of them are. Why would the new covenant only be partially in effect? That doesn't make any sense. It's either fully in effect or not in effect at all. You say the new covenant doesn't apply to Gentiles, but scripture says it does. 1 Corinthians 11:23 For I received from the Lord what I also...

Show me in the Old Testament where the promises God made to Abraham and his seed are applied to Jesus and those who belong to Jesus, including Gentiles. You won't find that explicitly. And, yet, Paul wrote this: Galatians 3:16 The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. Scripture does...

It's a part of us along with the body and spirit. 1 Thessalonians 5:23 May God himself, the God of peace, sanctify you through and through. May your whole spirit, soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. There seems to be a very close connection between a...

At least you acknowledge that His kingdom currently exists. That's progress. Yes, but He will be delivering His kingdom to the Father when He comes at the end of the age, which is what is taught in 1 Corinthians 15:22-24 and Matthew 13:40-43. So, at that point the visible kingdom will be what...

Well, he obviously did if you actually read what he said, so you are then saying he is in error. That's a bad idea. Yet, he very clearly did. You once again, are denying the obvious. I get the feeling that the New Testament isn't very important to you since you don't seem to accept anything...

Yes, it is.

Yeah, I guess I did miss that it was something coming from a creed rather than from you. You still didn't make it clear anywhere in your post that you don't believe that Jesus is eternal, you dont believe that He created all things and you don't believe that He existed in any way, shape or form...

Excellent! I had never noticed this about Revelation 3:11-12 before. It definitely places the timing of the coming of the New Jerusalem at Christ's second coming and not 1,000+ years later as Premils imagine. Is this something you recently noticed? I hadn't seen you post about this before.

From another galaxy maybe? Certainly not from earth. :D

Romans 11:11 Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious. 12 But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how...