Search results

WHAT? I didn't translate the bible! Every translation of the bible I've ever read says that Jesus promised the criminal hanging next to Him that they would be together in Paradise that very day. At bottom, I have the plain reading of pretty nearly any bible you want to quote and you have your...

It's proof because the only reason that term exists in Christian doctrine is because Jesus Himself told one of the criminals hanging next to Him, "Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise.” (Luke 23:43) That sounds like proof to me! How much more proof do you need? If you...

Well, once again, I am taught the lesson of never giving anyone a compliment. I mention your ability to think and the next thing you post is all but absolute proof that you try you best not to do so. The fist half of this post was written before you had ever read the post through and so is...

It depends on what you mean by "die". I disagree. Had He not intentionally laid down His life, He would never have died at all. His body was so devoid of the curse that His body didn't even decay while He was in the grave. There's no evidence that He would have ever experience the geriatric...

Of course this is true as we have not yet arrived at the day of redemption. (Philippians 3:12-14, Ephesian 4:30 ) That would depend on what is meant by "perfect", wouldn't it? The fact is that we were created with immortality in mind and so I doubt very much that there is any such potential...

Whats so hard to understand about it? There was a time when God was Spirit only and then Jesus was conceived in Mary's womb and God became flesh and took on a nature that was not only physical but human. Then He died and was resurrected with a glorified (i.e. perfect and immortal) body which...

Not the Son of God? Who else would He be? Who else could He be? Who does @Hilltrot say it is? John 1:14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. 15 John bore witness of Him and cried out...

That's a great line! :chuckle:

It seems like we're mostly in agreement. Is there something in particular that you think we disagree on regarding John 1 or the divinity of Jesus Christ?

(y) Oh well, I agree with that for sure. Half an hour on this website alone would provide all the proof of that anyone would ever need. That doesn't make it something other than philosophical though. Like with any line of thinking, we are susceptible to error at any point along the line. In...

Okay. I see. Welcome to my ignore list. There should be some sort of marker so that I don't have to waste a week discussing anything important with lunatics.

The problem with this notion is that John chapter one very clearly teaches all the above! It explicitly states that "Logos was with God" (logos ēn pros theos) and that "Logos was God" (logos ēn theos) and that Logos became flesh (Logos ginomai sarx). You seem to be imposing a contradiction...

You keep saying things that could mean more than one thing and that I agree with if you mean it one way and that I disagree with if you mean it another way. I want to avoid talking past one another and so can you unpack that sentence some for me? How would what you're saying there manifest...

At least my education is sufficient to permit me to write cogent posts on a website that people can read and make sense of, not to mention make arguments that have something to do with the topic at hand rather than bringing up something you I exactly nothing about, like my debate opponent's...

(y) That's a very philosophical statement you just made! I'm not sure what you mean. I understand that any use of sound reason tacitly concedes the existence of God but that's a far cry from "the fear of the Lord", right? There are a great many scientific advancements that have been made by...

You've given no such examples nor do any examples exist. And there is no such thing as the irrational communication of truth. Communication, whether from God or from anyone else, may take different forms (e.g. writing, spoken words, visions, emotions, etc) but they are all rational if they have...

So do you agree or not? Are science and philosophy two truly different things or aren't they? You seem to want it both ways. Of course there is a sense in which they are different things but my point was that in the fundamental sense, they are the same thing. That "thing" being the application...

It is concepts of timeless eternity and exhaustive divine foreknowledge that are the "construct for (of) mankind" and is a human rationalization not the truths of scripture that explicitly states that God does live in time and does not have anything close to an exhaustive knowledge of the future.

It is impossible that I will ever understand how someone can contradict themselves so consistently while thinking that they are saying something profound. I just do not get it. Lon talks about loving God not just with our mind "but with our hearts, abilities, and desires as well." as though it...

Saying it doesn't make it so. There was nothing at all clear about your last post. Except that He didn't say that! What's more is that He absolutely could have said just what you suggest, if that's what He meant and Abraham would have totally understood it without any problem whatsoever...