Recent content by Derf

Would you answer the question? Is the answer as crass as the question?

It makes sense that John wrote Revelation earlier than 90, but it would be weird to have written to churches Paul started (like Ephesus) so early in Paul's ministry--even later in Paul's ministry. But if he did, you're saying that John's two resurrections were for who, exactly? Jewish Christians...

If Rev 20 speaks of a "first resurrection" which implies a 2nd resurrection (after the 1000 year reign of Christ), but you think there is a prior resurrection spoken of by Paul (which we call the rapture), shouldn't Paul's resurrection be called the 1st, the one in Rev 20:6 the 2nd, and the...

Maybe @Ps82 said both that God is in all and all is in God.

I get them confused sometimes, but I thought panentheism says that God is in everything. What @Ps82 and @chrysostom are saying is the opposite--that everything is in God. If everything is in God, that sounds more like everything is God, which I thought was closer to pantheism.

He sounds like Thomas Sowell.

@Clete likes to go think about hard questions after he says goodbye. Don't give up on him.

Some appreciate it, not because it is true (surely you would appreciate it if it were truth), but because it makes you question your belief (which I hope you will some day appreciate, if you don't already). I don't know what that means, except possibly pantheism.. If the earth is God's...

I don't think it says that anywhere. Please cite if you can find it. Not that I think you are wrong that He was looking for repentance, and if ten (probably only 6, since Lot and family counted for 4) had repented, God would have stayed the calamity, according to His promise to Abraham. I'm not...

You may be over thinking it. If God is everywhere, which doesn't really have direct scriptural support, then He wouldn't need to go down to observe or act, concepts that are written in scripture, like related to Sodom's destruction and the confusion of languages at Babel. The whole point of...

You'll have to explain that one to me, as I don't see it in Matt 28.

If these people are not saved, but believed in Christ, were baptized and received the Holy Spirit, how could any of us trust that our salvation is enough to get us to redemption? The result of such dictrine must mean that there is something else one must do to ensure salvation, like persevere to...

We've been over that in this thread already, and have determined that the wording could work with either interpretation without doing violence to the text. So it is not useful as a prooftext for either position. Assuming that's correct, for what purpose is the circumcised Jew to keep the law of...

It could be that such a person is non-existent because of the way God works in each person toward his sanctification--that the result at the end of his life (and whatever experiences he goes through to get there) bring him to the point where he no longer desires to have anything else but what...

Agreed. Agreed. Agreed. Agreed, but would it have remained a mystery had the first plan worked? If it was planned that Gentiles would reap the benefits of the grace of Christ from the very beginning, and it seems like it was, God could have brought it to pass through either plan. Because the...