Search results

Then why are you doing so? "To view" or "to behold" carry exactly the same connotation as "to see", and it conveys an anticipation of the outcome, not a sense of already knowing.

You mean like we do? Ephesians 5:23-32 KJV — For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. Husbands, love your wives...

Which is in direct conflict with 1 Thessalonians 4, the way you read it. But if you recognize a third state that Paul mentions, "unclothed", that seems to be what comes between thus body, and our heavenly bodies, it sheds light on what happens when we die, and it seems to be an undesirable...

Resurrection seems to proceed judgment (i.e., standing before God). Thus, we will be within, not without, our physical bodies. This is how Paul described it: 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17 KJV — For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the...

It's because you're either not dividing rightly, or you're not judging rightly.

It's interesting that he reads the text as "in the day", then proceeds to always talk about the conflict by saying they didn't die "on the day." Why the switch in terms? Isn't it because he isn't comfortable using the phrase "in the day"? I would propose that the reason he doesn't use "in the...

If time is the "distance" between two events, and changeless means no events, then one requires the other, if not opposite faces of the same coin.

Aren't the two concepts the same thing?

I think that's a good way to say it. "Belief" would not be a work. Circumcision would be a work. Repentance (as a state of mind) would not be a work, but repentance leads to following the law, which would be a work (or a lot of works). If the works (such as loving your neighbor as yourself) are...

I'm not on X either, but I was able to watch the video.

Maybe the reason we left the topic is that the options for the topic have all been explored without any movement from any party towards the other(s). It goes back to presuppositions. If your presuppositions include the full dichotomy between two different salvation mechanisms, you support it...

To dig deeper, what does "proceeds from" mean? And is "begotten" a term that applies only to the incarnate Son, so is it an eternally-past applicable term? It informs our idea of the eternality of man. If he was made such that he could live forever, but wouldn't necessarily live forever (I...

Yes, those are good ones, too. Maybe better than my quote. It even delineates who is doing the destroying. But I still think it could include the idea that when Jesus is raised (given new life), that He, like Lazarus, was responsible for getting up and coming out if the tomb on His own power...

I don't think I'm an expert on exactly what the incarnation entailed for the second person of the Trinity, but if He really became a human being, then His death must have been much like a human's death, and not just a release of His soul back to God-ness. Here's all of the verses talking about...

For salvation? Or at all? Is Jesus the lord of someone who rejects any attempt to align his behavior to the lord's will? But James is saying "be motivated by duty and not by love"? Who is a higher authority. Simply? Then why did Paul have to keep telling people to love one another? If...

Yet I compared James to Paul, who also tells us how to behave in many instances, like here: Romans 12:16 KJV — Be of the same mind one toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own conceits. Or Romans 13:8 KJV — Owe no man any thing, but to...

Sure, if you read the concept into it in the first place, like here: But God didn't say Adam would "die immediately" (please show me if I missed it). Nor did He say Adam would die within the next 24 hours, since the phrase "in the day" does not have to mean "on the day". And if Adam indeed died...

James wasn't trying to give us a way to inspect other's fruit. He was explaining how to inspect our own. And if our own faith is not producing works, it is a dead and useless faith. What would one do about that condition? How about start controlling one's tongue or stop being partial to rich...

You're not reading the verse. let's look at it again, and later let's include the following verse for a little confirmation: [Isa 46:10 KJV] Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times [the things] that are not [yet] done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my...

My point wasn't a slam dunk for open theism by any means. My point was that if one uses Is 46:10 to say that God knows all things exhaustively, you have to acknowledge that the verse also tells HOW God knows, and that it necessarily leads to God being the author of sin. Once that verse goes away...