Search results

::ew::

My understanding of Reformed theology is that it's built on Augustine. I don't like/agree with Augustine very often.

Haven't heard of him either. My reading interests skew towards the ancient. I know the early church fathers pretty well, but I don't know many modern authors. The ones I do know are the ones who deal in the ancient... Heiser, Coogan.

Never heard of Randy Shank. The Bible treats Jacob and Esau as nations, as well as individuals: Genesis 25:23 And the LORD said unto her, Two nations [are] in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and [the one] people shall be stronger than [the other] people...

Ah... I see. That works well with my understanding of prophecy - that it isn't prediction, but rather God stating what He's going to do. And then doing it.

You're basically just re-stating the Reformed idea that pre-destination occurs at the level of individual people. It's clear to me that election belongs to a group, rather than individuals. Individuals may belong to the elect group, or they may not...but have the possibility of joining that...

There was a prophecy that each son would become a nation and that the older would serve the younger. Genesis 25:23 23 And the LORD said unto her, Two nations [are] in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and [the one] people shall be stronger than [the other]...

Is Melchizedek a theophany? If so, it doesn't make much sense to pay tithes to... yourself.

I think the idea of groups being considered corporately is correct. But I think you haven't enough groups. There is the elect, Abraham's children. There are those outside the elect group. And then there are those who have been removed from the elect due to offense - the sons of Esau.

The word ἁρπάζω (harpazo) is in Scripture, and our word rapture is the etymological descendant of the same root word. ἁρπάζω to seize, carry off by force The KJV translators have rendered it as "caught up."

I didn't actually advocate for discarding Genesis. If that's what you understood... then you didn't understand. But you're right, we're off-topic. So... evolution? I don't care to make scientific objections to evolution. I find that dull. I have moral objections to evolution. I read about...

I'm not anti-Genesis. I've spent more time studying Genesis than probably any other book of the Bible. Genesis is dear to me. When I say "there's nothing in Genesis that isn't elsewhere" that could also go for every other book of the Bible. In fact, it SHOULD go for every book of the...

The creation story is covered in Job 38-41 in more detail than it is in Genesis 1. Also, I don't believe in a literal six 24-hour days for creation. And that does beg a question - not of what is true and reliable - but of what is literal or figurative. That's a good question that we should ask.

Since the 18th century, scholars have come up with a number of theories to explain why Genesis repeats many of its stories, why most of the patriarchs have 2 different names, and why God Himself is referred to variously as LORD, God, or LORD God. One such theory, which I find compelling, is...

My quarrel is with those in the church who misinterpret it to prop up bad theology. For instance, denying burials to stillborn children for a 1000 years, because Augustine interpreted the story of Adam to mean that babies are born in a state of guilt and go to hell. In this conversation...

Yes, he did, but the Bible doesn't give us the history for all the apostles after Jesus' ascension. It follows Peter, Paul, and John, with one tiny epistle from James, and a few verses about Phillip and the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts. My source was Foxe's, so that's what I gave. I find that...

Yep, Foxe did the work of accumulating the church traditions. I don't intend to re-invent that wheel here. What about you, David? Do you think that Thomas, Mark, etc went and were apostles in Gentile nations? Or were all the apostles except Paul sent only to Israel?

Nope. Genesis isn't the only source of information on... anything. Name a doctrine in Genesis and I can show it you elsewhere.

Yes, we would still understand sin. Paul already tells us "all have sinned" and talks about the "first Adam" and "last Adam." He also covers God's covenant with Abraham. Psalms and Job have the creation story. Again, there's no doctrine in Genesis that doesn't also appear elsewhere in the...

Fox' Book of Martyrs