Search results

Certainly there is a problem of people making claims about God and the scriptures that are not of God at all. But you cannot categorically dismiss all spiritual claims--when the scriptures themselves say the opposite. "Do not quench the Spirit." 1 Thessalonians 5:19 Indeed, it would be better...

First the rant? :) That's cool. The nature of God and His Son...is Emmanuel: God with us...at least at First. This is a bridge given to mankind amidst the manifestation of all things good and evil in the world...a bridge back to God. That first, is the nature of the world--it is us and our...

No. By removing the Spirit, you take away the key of knowledge. The words themselves "are foolishness." Such would be a repeat of history, a return of pharisaical law.

Yes, that is, as long as we remain in the knowledge that the scriptures must be "spiritually discerned", because all language (including the scriptures) has been purposely "confused" by God...an act that has not been rescinded.

With credit to Jonathon Cahn, this is a reversal or turning back of all things to their origin, just as God has foreordained a return of Israel to the land. In this case, that would mean that similar churches to those we read of in the book of Acts would return. But instead (in reverse order)...

That certainly fits the context, and so I might even agree. However, if we are to accurately come to know God fully, we should be learning that even unity among [for lack of a better term] the Godhead, is only part of Him explaining. In other words, His breaking things down for our elementary...

I understand, but the problem with that and wordsmithing all of scripture, is it assumes that men have providence over God's word rather than God. In this case it assumes that the Greeks accurately have a word for a God that they have just learned of. Even so, even if we allow them the benefit...

I think I see the issue that @Kermos is having with what you wrote: The thing about God "seeing the beginning and the end in the now", is that it's not a prediction of things that have not yet occurred. It is rather, that the creation of time does not make for it's own reality-- God's timeless...

2 out of 1440 minutes?? You must be a vote counter.

Yes, and even in a very simple and logical sense...not considering Jesus as God leaves massive holes in a ton of scripture.

Good! Here is what I was responding to: ...But I do see that perhaps it was just to point out the distinction between the Father and the Son. Nonetheless, John 1:1 is quite clear: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1

Darn, now I gotta go deeper where I was trying to avoid :) But you asked. God not only created Time as a unique means limited to the world, to unpack all truth to all people and all generations, but He did it in such a way that it is an equal exposure to all generations without advantages for...

Before I go beyond the scope of this conversation or encourage even more speculation and conjecture, let me just say: ...It doesn't say.

I am not saying that the scriptures were inspired in vain. Not at all. But you are leaving out the planned confusion placed upon all language by God, a type of blindness placed upon his own chosen, and his method of revelation of all truth line upon line, here a little, there a little. And here...

I didn't say angels, but rather that Satan came among the sons of God in his presence. As for Habakkuk 1:13, you apparently assume that God did nothing to Satan...the same assumption Habakkuk made.

That is your own logic speaking. Surely God is not limited to what you find to be plausible. With that logic, neither would you be able to explain the rising of the dead in Thessalonians 4:16-17 or in Matthew 25:31-46. As for "credible theologians", were there any before Christ, who's...

Hope in the scriptures is one thing, evaluating the conjecture of varied interpretations is another. Believing in the literary foolishness and confusion is even worse. There is but One true means of discerning the scriptures, and although it may prove to be curiously interesting, that way is...

What is your challenge? I was not referring to whether or not Satan was a fallen angel, but rather that he was indeed in heaven (in the presence of God).

Job 1:6-7 6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came among them. 7 And the Lord said to Satan, “From where do you come?” So Satan answered the Lord and said, “From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking back and forth on it.”

Stop focusing on literary interpretations--they are "foolishness" (according to scripture). Instead: Simply READ...and wait for understanding by God's spiritual discernment. That is the promise. On the contrary...language has been clearly stated in the scriptures as "confused" by God. Why...