Search results

I was saying it from your post.

If Jesus knew who would betray him, it seems to mean he knew THAT he would be betrayed. And if he knew wrongly WHO it was, even so far back, the scriptures don't seem to be accurate. But I'm willing to admit of a contingent betrayal, with a fixed crucifixion. A contingent betrayal suggests...

I don't see how Peter is saying anything different than Paul. They both are saying there's a difference between gentiles and the church.

That's not the kind of gentiles one expects to find in the church. 1 Peter 4:3 (KJV) For the time past of [our] life may suffice us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles, when we walked in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, revellings, banquetings, and abominable idolatries:

Then you admit Paul talks in terms of a future reality as if it were already here?

And you think there will be blasphemers in heaven? 2 Timothy 3:2 (KJV) For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 2 Timothy 3:5 (KJV) Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn...

You say, "no", but the immortality of the soul wouldn't depend on Jesus' bodily resurrection. Yet Paul said they would be perished--"gone forever with no hope of life."

This is the one I was thinking of. John 6:64 (KJV) But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.

And you've proven why you need me on ignore.

That’s circular. So is this:

Here’s more. John wrote to gentiles, “Gaius” in 3 John, and a previous letter was refused by a gentile, “Diotrephes”, along with the people who brought it. 3 John 1:9 (CSB) I wrote something to the church, but Diotrephes, who loves to have first place among them, does not receive our...

@musterion Here’s some: In Acts, Peter tells us that God has called a people out from the gentiles: Acts 15:14 (CSB) “Simeon has reported how God first intervened to take from the Gentiles a people for his name. Then he writes a letter to them, saying: 1 Peter 2:10 (CSB) Once you were not a...

It's not that I don't see your point--I disagree with it. What you say may have been true for a time, but it did not continue that way, as evidenced in the scriptures.

Yes, Christ's resurrection. But that means that the state they are in RIGHT NOW (when Paul wrote), was of the same stripe as perished.

Not lost forever, perhaps, but also not certain: notice the "may".

You mean like Paul does? 1 Corinthians 12:2 (KJV) Ye know that ye were Gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led. So why can't Peter mean the same thing as Paul? Like so: Ephesians 2:11 (KJV) Wherefore remember, that ye [being] in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who...

Except Jesus knew from the beginning who would betray him.

The apostles may have started base, but they changed.

Then why would that be necessary, if everyone is still alive after they die? I maintain that Paul used "perish" to indicate they were dead with no coming back--not just alive in another place.

I would think you of all people would understand the grace potential for Aaron. Of course you're right about that, but how would God do it? Might he even threaten to annihilate the whole crew and start over with someone who would be more faithful?