Search results

Yeah, I remember that now and my reaction to the way its worded is the same now as then. It seems to imply that James (the Lord's brother and biblical author) was one of the Twelve. Also, I don't think its all that uncommon for someone to refer to "the apostle Peter" or "the apostle John". If...

Only if you ignore the context. Paul is not lamenting an unredeemed position. He is lamenting an unredeemed body. Our flesh has not yet been redeemed. We are still living in what Paul calls “this body of death.” That is precisely why believers still physically die. Bodily redemption is...

What?! It absolutely is not referring to an unsaved man! I'm very surprised to see this coming from you. You are the ONLY non-Calvinist (Augustinian) that I've personally ever seen make this claim about Romans 7. It certainly is not normative Mid-Acts Dispensationalism. Indeed, I see no means...

Which was what, exactly?

James was not an apostle in the same sense the the Twelve and Paul were. Israel had twelve and only twelve Apostles (capital A). The Body of Christ has one and only one Apostle. James was an apostle in the same sense that Barnabas was. It feels to me like an important distinction to make.

The accuracy of your statement depends entirely on just what you mean when you use the phrase "prone to sin". How would you square your statement above with the following passage... Roman 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin. 15 For what I am doing, I do...

No, it just felt a little weird having to be so explicit, that's all. If I remember correctly (which may not be the case) I was pointing it out in correction of what I thought someone else was implying. It's been a while now though so I may not be remembering that correctly.

Yes but not in the sense of being one of THE Twelve Apostles. That distinction is intuitive, isn't it? James wasn't selected by lot to replace one of the Twelve nor was he filled with the Holy Spirit at Pentecost and by the time any of the other the Twelve died, Israel had long since been cut...

It is true that their posts are quite similar but I think it's mostly my fault really. I tend to focus on what is being said and don't pay close enough attention to who is saying it.

Why are you guys wasting time responding to "arguments" that are based on things that have nothing to do with hardly anything at all? Derf and Lon, based on what tiny scraps of their posts I see by virtue of what gets quoted in other people's posts, are making arguments about minutia and you...

Quite so. (y) Of course the point is that neither of those boys were the New Testament author, the leader of the Jerusalem church and the one who sent men to check out Paul's ministry.

I wonder why there was never another response? The fact that Adam is willing to acknowledge the existence of unfulfilled prophesies in the Bible means that he's light years ahead of most Christians when it comes to reading the bible and taking it to mean what it says. I wonder if he was taken...

No! And there explodes your entire theological worldview.

This incarnation and death and resurrection (i.e. the gospel) has only recently (it seems) to have become a favored argument against Calvinism and all other systems that teach that God is immutable in the Classical sense of the term. I don't understand why it hasn't always been a favored...

I need as many rounds as is necessary to scare the politicians who want to take my guns away from coming to get them.

If by “cult” you mean a theological system that redefines God, Christ, and creation outside historic Christianity while claiming biblical authority then there is no question this is cultist. It's weird mix of modalism (i.e. Oneness Pentecotalism) and Gnostgicism. When I fed it into Chat GPT...

This is NOT Christian doctrine. It is neither biblical nor is it rational. If you want to make up your own religion go ahead, just don't pretend like you're a Christian. I can't comprehend what your motives could possible be for even wanting to put on such a pretense, but I don't really care...

"Logos" is a legitimate exception to my generalized comment. I'm honestly baffled by Tyndale's translation. William Tyndale translated the New Testament directly from Greek, not from the Latin Vulgate. His work is the primary ancestor of the KJV. Tyndale used "word" and the KJV kept it. But...

Well, you can pretty much know what it meant in the first century by reading how Bible translators put it. They, like all human beings, have their biases, but generally they get the Greek correct.

The problem, in short, is that, if young Earth creationism is correct, there does not appear to have been sufficient time for the light to have traveled from the far distance objects we can see in the night sky. Put more succinctly... If an object is billions of light years away, how did the...