Search results

Your first assertion (that I questioned) was this: "Paul didn't have a specific chronological understanding of the "last days." And your second: "The "end" in these prophecies refers to the final fulfillment of God's plan...."

I accept your rationale for your first assertion, but not for your second. ;)

God hates sin; does that mean He doesn't know the gospel at all? Or to put it another way, your "logic" isn't logical.

That is ridiculous because it is circular. You misread Paul badly, perhaps because you don't understand how English grammar and punctuation work. "For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people. It teaches us...". (NIV) Neither here nor in any major English translation...

God blessing and sanctifying the seventh day does not make Sabbath observance a salvation issue. Salvation is based on faith in Christ's atoning death... PERIOD. Reject that and you're damned, and no amount of Sabbath observance will save you. You make it sound like God is limited. He's not...

On what biblical basis do you make this assertion? Again, what's your biblical basis for this claim (bolded)? It appears that you have a conclusion looking for a rationale. Agreed. None of us knows "our" day or hour. However, since Hal Lindsay (and probably before), people have been claiming...

There is no need to hijack this (or any other) thread with your chirping about 1 John 5:7 or about anything else related to KJV-onlyism.

Firstly, this thread is not about Westcott and Hort; it's about one two-word phrase in a post-biblical creed. Secondly, you haven't presented any evidence that Büchsel demonstrated "gross incompetence in basic Greek" nor that he failed to read passage in context, nor that he is guilty of...

"The last days"... of what? We typically assume Paul meant "the last days of all time, of the Earth, of humanity"... but he didn't specify that. He was writing between 40-65 AD. Given that the Levitical system and much of the nation of Israel were wiped out around 70 AD, it is plausible that...

I suspect strongly that although we think things are worse today than they were in the past, in fact they aren't. Given the technology we have, we are more aware generally of happening in the world than any previous generation, and at the same time, we are ignorant of history. This combination...

You asked a question and provided the answer in the text you quoted. What else are you expecting?

The above is utter hogwash. All you do is post ridiculous misinterpretations of Scripture. What gives with you?

It's quite unfortunate that you felt it necessary to blame everything on Westcott and Hort instead of focusing on the relevant information. Instead of examining the evidence without preconceptions blinding you, you seem to assume from the outset that "unique" is incorrect because of the source...

True... though from what I read in Scripture, they did not own the land the same way members of other tribes owned the land. :)

I agree with all this. Um, no, that's not in the Bible. Tithes were used to support the Levites, who did not own farmland. They did not contribute for insurance, power, missions, stationery, etc. Because you haven't considered all that Levites did. They were the government, police force...

Yes, it can, but your stubborn refusal to reject simple explanations blinds you.

However, said XKE's are still worth a heck of a lot more than VW Beetles. ;) I would concur about the general trend though: Jaguar knew how to make cars fast; they just didn't know how to make them reliable.

Under the Sinai covenant, one did not "offer" his or her tithes; they brought them. They were compulsory. Jesus was not a farmer, so He had no crops to tithe. There is no record that any of the apostles were farmers, so they too would be exempt from bringing tithes. The command to bring tithes...

When you understand what "fulfill" means, you'll stop arguing about it. When you have paid the final payment on your mortgage, it is "fulfilled" and nothing further is owed. So too, nothing further is owed by Christians to the Law because Jesus fulfilled it. He didn't destroy or abolish it...

Your adherence to the wording of the creed over the words of Scripture is concerning, but you are free to choose your own errors. You are also free to refrain from replying.