Search results

One follows necessarily after the other. Thus, there's nothing wrong with including one with the other.

It's fake. From what I heard, she has a channel dedicated to doing silly stuff like this.

Because context matters. You're trying to mix contexts, and it doesn't work. Something that I explained to you in post #315.

The believing Jews of James' day (post Paul) were saved by grace, but their salvation was not achieved. Their salvation is the return of Christ, and the establishment of His Kingdom.

I meant what I said. If you can't see it, that's your problem, not mine. You don't just get to dismiss what the Bible says because it doesn't comport to your theology, Hoping. Words mean things. If you don't like what they mean, because it doesn't fit your beliefs, then the problem is you...

You're still missing it. You said: I corrected you: You keep speaking in present tense. I'm talking in past tense. How is that so hard to understand? Answered: So now... Because the law alone cannot save. It requires the under-girding of grace, as Paul states. This is something that...

Either way, there wouldn't be as much heat as has been suggested. https://kgov.com/hydroplate-theory-heat-problem-walt-brown

I might just be thinking of the "cold repacking" (z-pinch).

And sliding on an almost perfect lubricant. Or the energy is stored, as Stripe said, as potential energy in the mountains.

This is one book that I can say IS authoritative.

Weren't most of the reactions in the subterranean chamber regarding this process of releasing carbonates endothermic? Iow, the reactions resulted in less heat, not more?

NO. https://theologyonline.com/threads/the-gospel-of-the-kingdom-and-the-plot-twist.59834/post-1889993 The problem I've noticed is that people don't catch the tense of what we say, and then get confused when we say what we say. The Bible teaches that the Jews WERE, past tense, saved by...

Just asserting that "people can identify however they like" should get you flogged, let alone the nonsense she's promoting. It should not, repeat, SHOULD. NOT. EVER... be discussed in public, for to do so is to compromise on reality.

Chapter, verse. The tongue of the wise uses knowledge rightly, But the mouth of fools pours forth foolishness.A fool despises his father’s instruction, But he who receives correction is prudent.The lips of the wise disperse knowledge, But the heart of the fool does not do so.Harsh discipline...

Unbelieving Israel (the natural branch) was cut off (of Jesus). Then the Gentiles (the wild branch) was grafted on (to Jesus). No. Jesus is not Israel, neither unbelieving Israel, nor the Remnant that did believe, not in this context. You can't have your cake and eat it too, here. Yes, yes...

Why do you think that I think that? Because I don't.

Where there's life, there's hope.

No, that's how it works. The moment you add law to grace, it becomes law. This is why you don't understand the Bible. Moot, A) because the Bible describes a tree that brings forth a new fruit every month of the year, and B) because you're begging the question that Christians do not sin...

You were asked what we were grafted into. In the context of the question, "Branch of Israel" means Israel, because ISRAEL was the branch that was cut off. Jesus is the one we are grafted into. How can Jesus be cut off from Himself? Irrelevant.

You're still avoiding the answer, Eric. Let's try again: Was Abraham (who can be considered his tribe's government) wrong for doing what he did to rescue Lot? Or was what the kings of the nations did that took Lot and his family and possessions a just reason for Abraham to go to war against...