Search results

There is only one Gospel in the New Testament. Just like with other doctrines, it was revealed over time in parts until the New testament was finished. But it is all the same movement of God. The law of Moses was an expression of grace from a loving Father to his people. Salvation has always...

The Greek underlying the translation of the phrase "the resurrection of the dead" is τὴν ἐξανάστασιν τὴν ἐκ νεκρῶν. The translation is good and normal.

Work OUT is an unfortunate translation of the Greek word κατεργάζεσθε. This word in other places reflects its normal meaning "to complete, accomplish or do". I don't think that "working out something that is there" is what the word or...

I am just jumping in here, but with regard to pre-KJV English and other Bibles online, check out this website: Bibles-Online.net | Ancient Bibles Online | Brought to you by GreatSite.com This is a fabulous site on which I have spent quite a bit of time.

For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love. Galatians 5:6 Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything; what counts is the new creation. Galatians 6:15 Circumcision is nothing and...

There are many people who hold to TE and also hold to the inerrancy of Scripture, the depravity of all people, and salvation by faith in Christ who died on the cross for our sins. There is no necessary conflict. TE may be wrong, but not because it is heretical.

As to the original post, I just wanted to say this. All theology is man's theology. Theology by definition is the human attempt (hopefully aided by the Holy Spirit) to understand the revelation of God in his word. That doesn't make it bad, but it should always remind us of our limitations. The...

If you believe that the gospel relates only to your initial conversion, then you have not understood the gospel. The gospel is not simply about how becomes a Christian, it relates to all of life.

That is really bizarre and unfortunate. The pastor was wrong to do that.

Good luck with this metherion. Your responses are rational, clear, and correct. Evolution may be wrong, but anyone who says that it is stupid is simply choosing not to seriously engage with it. At Bryan College in Dayton, Tenn, there is a professor of biology who is an unapologetic young-earth...

Okay then. Even though the verses I quoted do not say anything like what you are saying, I guess it doesn't matter. You have found me out. You win. We can go back to ignoring the verses I quoted. They don't ever figure into discussions on this point in systematic theologies either. I don't even...

Oh, okay. Let's ignore the verses I quoted and just go with yours. That makes things much easier. Why didn't I think of that before?

Feel free to point out that they sinned. I agree that they sinned. However, that did not keep God from saying the things that he did about their keeping the law. I agree with your points, but what do you have to say about the verses I quoted? How do you interpret them? It is not enough simply to...

They were considered to be keeping the law. You are getting now to what my point has been all along if you read my posts. The way the Bible uses the phrase "keep the commands, law" is what is important, not our theological debates. And the Bible says that people did keep the law. Now once we...

Genesis 26:4-5 Deuteronomy 30:11-14 2 Kings 18:5-6 Luke 1:6 Did what you said could not be done.

In all of these words you continue to assert that there are/were two gospels with no evidence. You did not deal with Romans 10:9-10. Peter did preach what Paul said there, that the people needed to repent and accept Christ as the messiah. Your key thing was that Paul's gospel always contains the...

The whole other picture that perspective creates is one of your own making and has zero support in the Old Testament, which says that not only was it not too difficult to keep, but that many people did.

In the verses I cited Paul said it is the gospel which he [we] preach. The verses you cite about Israel are not a difficulty for me, but I do not see how you can say that the gospel he presented in Romans 10:9-10 is not the gospel he preached. He said it was. That is enough for me.

This is unnecessary. The second coming is a complex event and I really don't see the need to see a contradiction here. If this is the best argument you have against a post-trib rapture, I assure you that my understanding is in no way disturbed. Some are taken in judgment. Others remain. Remain...

The thing is the verses you gave do not do what I asked. Do you understand that you are using the word "dispensation" in at least two different ways, both to refer to the period of time and also simply to a gift given? Why doesn't that bother you? God gave Paul commands. He gives us commands...