Search results

When you claim not to understand a point that no one could fail to understand then that's plenty of grounds to be called a liar. You understood the point from the very first time you read it. Everyone here knows it.

Of course they are. They weren't intended to be but, as stated, they were exactly that, which was and continues to be my point. If you want people to take you seriously then you should pay attention to the words you use so as not to SOUND like an idiot. How you say something can be every bit as...

The fact that I apprehend and believe the following.... God exists and is the Creator of all things and He is perfect, holy, and just. We, having willfully done evil things and rebelled against God, who gave us life, deserve death. Because God loves us, He provided for Himself a propitiation...

Having other nations rule over Israel was only done to punish the entire nation, not the king in particular. Some kings of Israel were so deplorable for so long that Israel stopped temple worship to the point that they forgot that the Torah even existed. (See II Kings 22).

No you didn't! You didn't even think through what you were saying at all! I guarantee that you think that I was refuting the point you made!

Yes, I did. I put the two contradicting statements in bold letters to begin with, which was plenty clear enough to begin with and then explained what I was getting at further in a later post. His point ISN'T the point! As I explained very clearly to him! The point is that, regardless of...

Your error has to do with dissecting the intellect from your spirit. God Himself is both Spirit and Reason itself. "Reason" is literally what the word "logos" means. The two are neither mutually exclusive nor at odds with one another.

(y) What's the difference? (Hint: there isn't one.) Those instances have been explained to you, without response from you except to ignore that it was done. You seriously need to read more carefully. Romans 1 is a great place to start but if you want a more complete biblical treatment of the...

This makes no sense whatsoever! Do you think that he was converted against his will? Do you think that he was converted in spite of the verdict of his mind? He saw the risen Lord that he had been persecuting and so repented. How is it that you think that was some how done in opposition to the...

What on planet Earth could you possibly be talking about?

I explained it as clear as day as did at least one other person and his response is "Nope. Don't get it." He's an idiot.

On the contrary, Gary. It's called discernment. If you were actually stupid enough not to get such a childishly simple point, you wouldn't be able to use the keyboard to type your posts. You're just being stubbornly idiotic and doing so on purpose.

You're such a fool.

No discernment can happen by anyone, spiritual or otherwise, without the use of sound reason. You cannot read I Corinthians 2:14 nor have any idea what its talking about without the use of sound reason. You cannot undermine the use of the mind without the use of the mind. You are well and truly...

Liar

YEAH! No kidding, fool! That's precisely the reason I keep saying it to everyone! MAKE AN ARGUMENT! The difference is that I don't present my position as a matter of personal opinion. I make arguments that I support with sound reason and with scripture. I do not ever blow off a substantive...

Gary, I keep trying with you and keep finding myself literally dumbfounded. No one ever said anything about you having a lazy way of understanding anything and haven't said a single syllable to you that would make anyone believe that I was even slightly alluding to dispensationalism, of all...

Why do you do this? I know you understand the point. You're lazy with the words you use. You say such openly self-contradictory thing as a person's actions demonstrate that justification does not rely on one actions because you don't think as you type. Even if the point you're trying to make is...

You should pay closer attention to the words you use.

Totally on a side note.... The two crucified on either side of Christ were not merely thieves. The King James uses the term "malefactors". The New King James uses "criminals" as do several other translations. As cruel and unjust as they were, not even the Romans crucified mere thieves.