Search results

Certainly that's true. But is it less true without the book of Luke? If not, then why does Luke need to write a "Kingdom Gospel", which he certainly did AFTER the transition had started, when the other gospel accounts (Matthew and Mark) would have sufficed. And why doesn't he explain that the...

Maybe, but that's not the reason I'm looking for.

No, he wrote the book of Acts because he first wrote the gospel.

I think you're right to hit back a little here, but we should all question our faith on a regular basis. And if your faith was tied up in Calvinism, and you suddenly find that you're not elect from all eternity based on some decision by God before the world began, then what does faith mean, and...

Why did Paul's companion write the Gospel of Luke (which is supposedly a different gospel than Paul's)?

Was Abraham's faith belief or allegiance to a duty in each case (Paul vs James)? These are good distinctions, but allegiance to duty we usually call "faithfulness". We are saved by Christ's "faithfulness", because He was faithful to His mission to die for the sins of the world. However, He...

No.

How did the church-the Gentiles receive all in their stead? Are you saying the church owns the land of Israel?

I have 3 cylinder car. Not sure the "V" part applies.

Just finished watching your video. Nothing new there. Except that I noticed he made a "difference" out of Jesus being Lord and Christ of Israel, versus Jesus being Lord and Christ of the Gentiles. After Cornelius, I just don't see how that difference was supposed to remain.

I guess it's hard to argue with that, if works are both not evidence and evidence of faith.

That phrase, spiritually dead, is not found in the bible (except the New Living Translation, I think). In other words, it's a concept that we regularly insert into passages to help them make sense based on our understanding of how things work. But is it a correct concept? Let's see if it is...

I appreciate that, but that's why my point is important, I think. Looking at the same scripture, two people have come to opposite opinions. How can that be, if both are filled with the same Holy Spirit? The ideal goal, imo, would be to find out who is wrong. But just asserting our own view with...

Why? Did my response bother you, when you tried to give a reasoned rebuttal using scripture? If you didn't recognize it, it was the response @Nick M gave @glorydaz when she did exactly what you did.

I can only respond: "You are retarded or evil. Good bye. I am done with this trash where it doesn't matter to you what God said in his Bible. Just like the Jews that Jesus rebuked for rejecting scripture for their tradition. You are shameful."

Guilty, yes, I agree. But we still seem to die because of what Adam did. Romans 5:14 KJV — Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. I assume there were miscarriages...

In other words: "You've presented arguments that make sense and are well-supported that are in conflict with my theology, so I will leave this conversation."

And never based on what the person will do in life, at least according to Calvin and the West minster Confession. All that will be damned are damned before they they are born, and not because God knows what they will or will not do. I think Calvinism might allow for all infants to be elect...

?

<sigh>