Search results

Not so. The parable is, first of all, not about those who are "saved". Again, "saved" by definition, means "saved." You may want to question whether or not God is true or a liar, but I do not and know better. Then, the parable is not about "one faithful servant." It is about multiple possible...

There is a greater complexity with Peter, than simply referring to the parable for general salvation points. Jesus "washed" Peter personally, but most of the disciples and believers would have to wait until He sent the Holy Spirit with the saving spirit of God. The point is, that salvation only...

There is much there to be considered...all hinging on a very big "if." All worth study and understanding. But, none of those "servants" have yet to receive their salvation...for the Master had not yet returned. Salvation is the gift of rebirth in the spirit of God - we must be born again. This...

There is no timeline. It's a story line. History, is his story. Time is of the world. He who is timeless has laid out what "is" "in Christ" in a way that we can experience it in detail. We're slow. He's fast. He has manifest all things "according to His likeness", not according to the world...

You say that it was obvious that the servant was a believer. But the parable does not, only that he was a "servant." No...a person cannot loose salvation. If they could, "salvation" is the wrong word. You confuse "promise" with "salvation." It is the "promise" of God's provision of salvation...

This is fun! "Evolution" is a term for those who need eons to learn the truth.

No. If I show/tell you the truth, it will be my terms, not yours. You can ask...nicely.

Whose the liar now? ...and I quote:

Post #1142 ...but since you missed it, I better explain: Peter was entrusted with his contributions to the Canon. But Jesus, in addition to Peter's own name and given name, called him "Satan." Which, is apropos...since he is considered first of the Popes.

You asked for a quote. If you are not thankful for my help, you don't have to be a ___ about it. In the future, say nothing.

That is so twisted.

I answered and more. I even gave an example, which also shows where you stumbled...but you did not hear.

Your faith brings a smile to my face - God bless you! As for that "something greatly better." We have been told that "we see [only] in part", but also that Christ would "send us another Helper, the Holy Spirit, to lead us into all truth." It is by the latter that I answer you: It is Time that...

(CNN) -- Liberal American Catholics greet almost anything uttered by Pope Francis with glee, but his latest pronouncement has them scratching their heads. Headlines proclaiming "Pope says evolution, Big Bang are real" could have been written in 1950. That's when Pope Pius XII announced that...

If you sincerely wanted an answer to your question, you would ask without making your own claims. Nonetheless, I have already given you the answer.

You show your ignorance. Ultimately, only God has providence over His word. But all things come in parables - even the written word. So, then, there is the written word which is tainted with the wickedness of the world, and there is the word in spirit which is infallible but only discernible in...

the point is, God is working all things (even the error of men) together for good.

"Pagan" and "Satanic" were your terms and accusations. My word was: "Antichrist." And by your own measure, you shall be judged. But again you are wrong. It is the providence of God to allow Satan to rule the world for a time, to make evil, and to involve wicked men and a wicked generation in...

We have God's promise that his word shall not return void. Moreover, what man can insure his own error will go on forever? None. Only God has that ability, but his word is not error, and so the truth prevails regardless of men - He alone has providence.

This is evidence that "Christ came in the flesh", and that alone. But we also have evidence of His transfiguration, His ascension, and His going "to the Father" whom is [only] spirit. He is the same, but the context is indeed different.