Search results

Ummmmm, can you point me to the post where I made this claim? I didn't think so . . .

If you can't get past "Epignosis" - then you can't invent "OSAS". It's that simple. You are under the dekusion that the NT was written in English. When you are ready to admit that it ws written in Koine Greek - let me know . . .

My entire purpose for arguing the definition of Epignosis is to sho that this passage is NOT a defense of OSAS - but proof against this false doctrine. If you're NOT a proponnt of OSAS based on this passage - then we have no argument here. However - if you are trying to PROVE OSAS based on this...

We agree on OSAS. I am not a proponent of this false Calvinist coctrine. As for James 5:16 - the original Greek says "ham-ar-tee'-ah", which is the same word used throughout the NT for "sin". I don't kow why the KJV chose to change this to "faults", unless there was an OSAS agenda there . . .

Actually - you're wrong. IF the Bible had been written in English - you might have a point. However, it was written in Koine Greek, so you're WRONG. There is NO single-word English transliteration for "Epignosis" - so "knowledge" is used instead, when translated. Epignosis means, "a full...

And that's why we always need to go back to the original Greek. The word used here is Ηαμαρτια (ham-ar-tee'-ah), which is the same word used for "sins" in verses 15 and 19.

Then YOU hould tell the Holy Spirit He made a mistake when He inspired James to tell his BORN AGAIN readers to "confess your sins" (James 5:16). I'm sure He'd appreciate the correction . . .

And your point in post #460 was simply to argue with me - and NOT in a fruitful way. Stick to the TOPIC of the thread. If you have a different opinion regarding that - THEN post something related. But if you're simply going to nitpick about a word because you don't know the definition - then...

Ahh - okay. The Immaculate Conception isn't about MAry anyway. It's ALL about Jesus. Mary's sinlessness is simply the fulfillment of the Ark of the Covenant because of her role as the Ark of the NEW Covenant. As in every other case - God's plan is perfect . . . OT - The Word was written by...

Uhhhh, No. Didn't you READ my post?? I laid out a Scriptural argument. I ended it with this challenge. Thank you for illustrating that you couldn't find me an example, though . . . Oy . . . Perhaps, a secular, historical example might help you to understand what an "office" is - and WHY it...

HUH?? An "arugument" is simply a discussion of 2 or more opposing opinions. This ENTIRE forum is built on arguments. So, instead of constantly countering every single thing I say - open up a dictionary . . .

Then you FINALLY agree with me because this is what I've been saying ALL along. This is what John was saying aas well. We ALL sin - but living a LIFE of willful sin is NOT the same as occasionally stumbling in the pursuit of living a godly life. Sooooo, why are you arguing with me if you...

That's beautiful. A Protestant telling me that Protestantism is corrupt. As for the Church NOT existing as ONE visible entity just because YOU say it has ceased to exist - who gave YOU the authority to usurp the words of Christ? He told Peter that the gates of hell would NOT prevail against...

Ummmm, first of all - can you show me where Paul say that the ONLY way the Church ahould meet is in the way described in 1 Cor. 14:26-23?? If you actually READ the verses that precede this, you will see that Paul is again scolding the Corinthians for their lack of order. This is an...

If you take what you just said literally - then the bible is FILLED with lies. David sinned - AFTER knowing God. Peter sinned - AFTER kowing Christ. According to YOUR literalistic, NON-contextual views on Scripture - they were both LOST and went to hell.

Ummmm, I didn't say that I respected them. I said that they were "well-respected" - and thay are. And if if ALL you cn do is offer a flat denial of what I presented without counter-evidence, then you've already lost this argument . . .

No - YOU need to read John and ALL of the others in their proper context. Scripture does not contradict itself. ALL Scripture harmonizes - but you cherry-pick and divorce one or two verses from the rest of Scripture.

No - it's talking about born again believers who have an EPIGNOSIS of Christ rejecting the Word and falling back into darkness. ONLY a born again believer can have an "Epignosis" of Christ, which is a full, experiential and relational knowledge. It is NOT simply an intellectual knowledge. ALL...

No. Living a LIFE of wilful sin is NOT the same as a Christian striving to be pure and stumbling.

Sorry - but the NT wasn't written in 21st century English. It was writen in 1st century Koine Greek - and you simply cannot get around the linguistic facts regarding the workd "Epignosis". BOTH the author of Hebrews and Peter could have used TWO other words (oida/gnosis) for the kind of...