Search results

When you’re done bleating, trace the conversation back until you know about whom my comment was made.

He has apparently put me on Ignore... as many do when I firmly rub their noses in biblical truth. ;)

There is good evidence that the "our" in this passage is not God speaking to Himself. For further reference, you may like to read Michael Heiser's The Unseen Realm.

We are created in the image of God, not the image of angels. Angels are also created beings. Further, the image of God is not our outward appearance.

Wow. You really can't read with comprehension.

Dismissing others as “nonelects” is passing judgment on them. You were an unsaved sinner once; forget that and you become arrogant, earning the disdain you receive.

If you're claiming that, in His purity, Jesus did not have genitalia, then all I can say is that lactose is not the only thing to which you're intolerant.

The text says nothing whatsoever about Adam wanting a helper. The text says nothing about a "helper" at all. "Help meet" is not "helper". God created Eve, not "they created Eve". Not at all. God had already created mankind as male and female. He simply had not formed the female yet. Such...

More rank heresy. Do you come up with this hogwash all by yourself, or do you have help?

Yes, you’re wrong. The universe wasn’t made “for the sake of procreation” (where do you get such goofy ideas?) but Adam and Eve were given the task of filling the earth by procreating.

At the risk of derailing the thread... The local radio announcer was lamenting the school shootings. She went on to talk about gun violence against abortion doctors... clearly oblivious to her own hypocrisy.

He's saying that very few of the perpetrators in school shootings were already criminals at the time. Preventing criminals from obtaining guns would not have prevented these attacks.

Jesus was a virgin because He did not engage in sexual relations with anyone. Being a virgin does not diminish a man's masculinity or humanity in the least. Consider the purpose for His brief stint on Earth; biological fatherhood was not part of it. I would comment on your understanding of the...

Wrong. There is nothing in Genesis 2 suggesting that Adam was asked to choose a helper. God brought Eve to Adam knowing fully and intending that they would, in your crass rendering, "get it on". You are the one coming up with nutty conclusions by twisting the Scriptures.

I'm glad you understand the solution to your problem.

Irrelevant, arrogant blather. Try responding to my post instead of merely reacting to it.

Inherently, dresses have nothing to do with modesty. They are a convention; nothing more. Modesty is not calling attention to oneself, whether by flamboyance, frumpiness, or flaunting one's features. Just wear what is comfortable, appropriate to the season and situation, and affordable for you.

That's rank heresy.

Not in this thread, you didn't. You quoted John 4 after some comments about the Holy Spirit, Who is not directly mentioned in John 4. Perhaps you need to back off from the certainty of your own understanding and come to the Scriptures again, though with some humility this time.

Then you should have said so. As it is, your assertion is unbiblical.