Search results

@Dougcho Please stop with the weird colors, and bolding your entire posts. It is against the forum rules. I'm not saying you can't use color, but coloring your entire post, and bolding your entire posts, the latter is explicitly not allowed, and the former is annoying to have to deal with, and...

There is nothing wrong with calling referring to the pre-Incarnation LOGOS by those names.

Not what Scripture says. There's no magical fairy dust (figurative) that God uses to harden or soften people's hearts. God doesn't force people to believe. He can send the Holy Spirit to work on people's hearts, but ultimately, they are the ones who either harden their hearts against the...

There is in John 1. "LOGOS" (the Greek word used) is translated "Word" in most Bibles. Right, he was not called those names before. Yet we still say New York was founded in 1625, long before it was officially named "New York." Jesus was conceived in Mary, despite not being given the name...

The order is important. One is called, then if he accepts the calling, he is chosen. If he doesn't accept the calling, then he cannot be chosen. No, you can't assume that. That would be eisegesis, not exegesis. Don't read your beliefs into the text. Let the text say what it says, and...

From the very text Paul was quoting: And the Lord said to her:“Two nations are in your womb,Two peoples shall be separated from your body;One people shall be stronger than the other,And the older shall serve the younger.” https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis25:23&version=NKJV...

Jesus is the LOGOS. The LOGOS was given the name "Jesus" on the 8th day after his birth. The LOGOS was the one conceived in Mary's womb. You sound like someone who was banned a while back, who said that the child conceived in Mary's womb was not the LOGOS but some human, who then had their...

"Elect" does not mean "called." It just means "chosen to accomplish a purpose."

Redefining words to fit your doctrine isn't how this works.

This is literal heresy. Shame on you. Do you know what the word used in John 1:14 is that is translated as "dwelt"?

Gobbledygook. God is one God. He is three Persons. That's what the Bible teaches. Not whatever nonsense you've been hooked into. Look, I don't have any problem with God creating an image for His Son to indwell, and that He then made man in that image. But of course, that's not what you're...

Good point.

This here. When God tells us to bring criminals to justice, He is exercising that right. To add to what you said: God has the absolute right to bring anyone from this life to the next at any point in time and for any reason and through any means He deems fit. Be that through a flood. Be that...

Why? There is nothing wrong with discussion. Just because we're biased on this forum doesn't mean we can't have civil dialogue about our beliefs. So long as you're not breaking the rules, we have no problem with you engaging in discussion against our position.

The answer is three-fold: 1) Because we're not God, and don't have authority to not punish criminals. God forbade judges from showing mercy to those who commit crimes. 2) Because NOT doing so teaches the child that he can get away with his actions. 3) Because NOT doing so turns the child into a...

I think you'll find that God specifically told Paul to avoid the cities of the churches addressed in Revelation. Took him completely around them. Jerusalem is not in Asia Minor. The churches in Revelation are. Coincidence? I think not.

Apparently this is a real thing that happened:

It happened. Even a cursory glance at the article and linked pages would tell you that. It normally wouldn't be a problem. This is just how far our society has collapsed. Threats to society should not be tolerated. Clete addressed this sufficiently, and I agree with him. We are not able...

I think God will do rightly on that side of the river. But punishments for crime must still occur. "Your eye shall not pity, life shall be for life."