Search results

So many? So few? You a word. He recently publicly debated Dr. James White (and on the topic of omniscience, no less), and won. I'd say that gives him some clout. You cannot explain it without it being philosophical nonsense, because it is, inherently, such.

Distraction. Focus on what is said, not the one saying it. Take the step back. If Isaiah 40-48 is talking about God being so powerful, yet completely powerless to change His own people's hearts, and Isaiah 41:21-24 is within that section of scripture, then maybe, just maybe, it's not the...

As far as I'm aware, the Garden Tomb is the only tomb that matches the layout as fits the events in Scripture, where upon entering, is an antechamber, and to the right is where the bodies are laid, with a low wall in between upon which an angel could sit, the woman turned to the right, not the...

You're still not seeing it. Take a step back. Take a few, even,

@Lon Regarding Isaiah 40-48... (particularly 41:21-24, which is what you were trying to reference...) :

Isaiah 46 only has 13 verses.

FALSE. Jesus is the Logos. The Logos (Jesus) became flesh (human) and tabernacled (or "tented") among us. In other words, He put on a fleshy tabernacle called the human body and then lived in that body among humans. The body is just flesh. It's not another person.

So on the one hand, you say God knows the past present and future simultaneously. And on the other hand you say that nothing is really a necessary part of His existence. Is His simultaneous knowledge of the past, present, and future, not a necessary part of His existence?

So man is a necessary part of His existence?

So God from eternity past knew what it was like to be a man? Or did He gain that knowledge at the incarnation?

Acts a transition book. Without it, without the transition from "Gospel" to "Pauline Epistle," from New Covenant to Dispensation of Grace, Paul's writings would seem to not have any place in the Bible. In other words, the only reason Paul's writings fit in the Bible is because of the book of...

Even if that were true, and it's not, it doesn't change the fact that there are other paradigms of belief that do not require either Calvinism's doctrines of election or for universalism to be true. In other words, what you're presenting is a false dichotomy. What the Bible teaches is that...

| V

You don't seem to have understood what I said. An argument from repitition is where you repeatedly say something as though it will convince the one you are speaking to that it is true. In other words, just because you say something repeatedly, doesn't magically make it true. You can claim...

Argument from repetition is a logical fallacy for a reason.

"Why do when?" Because now. "You can don't" I can?

Do you need me or @Sherman to reset your password on your original account?