Search results

Saying it doesn't make it so. God calling the firmament (Hebrew: raqia - an extended surface, expanse) that He created in the midst of the waters which were introduced in verse 2, that states that the Spirit of God was hovering ABOVE the face of which, perfectly describes the crust of the earth...

"Sinners" are called that because they are slaves to sin, not because they can do nothing but sin. Likewise, we Christians are no longer sinners, because we are not slaves to sin. It doesn't mean, however, that we cannot or will not sin. Non-sequitur. Because that's what they are. ALL...

Paul was a Jew, who became the Apostle to the Gentiles, and who agreed with the Twelve that He should go to the uncircumcised, while they go to the circumcised.

Again, Neandertals were human beings.

Correct, because there was no canopy. A priori assumption that there was a canopy. Chapter, verse. Or those changes were caused by something else, and you're just assuming it was a canopy. What anomalies? Which of them cannot be explained by the HPT?

But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart” (that is, the word of faith which we preach): that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes...

Just 4 inches of water in a canopy above the earth would literally boil everything on the surface. The earth would be unlivable.

@Derf this is an excellent way of putting it, describing the dispensation of Grace.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/articles/thenatureofviolentcrimeinenglandandwales/yearendingmarch2022

Correcting your false doctrine is enough of a reason to respond. I am fully aware of that. That's part of the law. Irrelevant. So it wasn't for religious reasons? How do you know? Were you required to do so? And yet, Paul says not to circumcise (or at least not for religious...

He cannot answer. He was banned as a troll. No need to expend any more effort on his behalf.

I could resond to all of this individually, but you're so set in your beliefs that it wouldn't make a difference, so instead I will ask you a simple question. Jesus was circumcised. Were you?

A gospel went to the Jews first, and then to the Gentiles. "From faith to faith." To correct what I said above... The "Gospel of Christ" contains two gospels. The first is the dispensation of law, given to Israel. The second is the dispensation of grace through Paul to the Gentiles. Thus "to...

You know he's banned, right?

Or, He's simply not mentioning the other, because that's not what his letter to the romans, who wouldn't even know about the other one, is about. Why would he teach the Romans about the gospel for the circumcision, to the uncircumcised?

So can you answer the challenge posed to you? What is "the gospel of the cross for salvation"? Care to define it from scritpure? The problem isn't restricting one gospel to certain portions of the Bible, Tam. The problem is that you're not recognizing that there is more than one gospel...

Jesus IS God.

Whether he knew it was good for salvation or not is irrelevant. Again, the challenge to you was: It is, in fact, wrong that Peter taught that the cross was "good news." “Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and...

The Salvation of Israel was from being cut off from the promises God made. Are you asserting that Jesus, who is God, can't be in multiple places simultaneously if He wants to be? ("omnipresent") Also, Scripture is explicit: There will be both a new heaven and a new earth. Paul states that we...

Doesn't make it "the mystery" Paul talks about, that had been kept secret since the foundation of the world, but was revealed to him. Supra. Again, I point you to the fact that Jesus, multiple times, told them (revealed it to them) that he would die. That means it is NOT "the mystery kept...