John 3:16

[praise_yeshua]

I'mnot the one calling God a worthless idol

Calvin is your worthless idol. You know.... the "little g"..... god.

I never said the One True God is worthless. Just what you've replaced him with.... You know that "breast" you suckle on called "Calvin's teat".

If you ever read Calvin, most of the time he quotes Paul, Augustine and other church fathers. Besides. Brother, you really do get unhinged on these Arm-Cal debates.....

I hate lies. Hitler quoted the Scriptures. None of what you said is evidence for anything.

 

[subllibrm]

And the soul will be eternally in heaven or hell ... kind of makes me wonder where our soul comes from in the first place. Is that developed within the womb as the life grows? Does God add it at some point? No. I don't have any thoughts on that one (shocked?).

Many Jews believe the soul is not present at conception but is added (?) at the "quickening". It was a commonly held belief among Christians as well. Not that long ago, it was common practice to not mention that you were pregnant until you felt the baby actively moving. This would have been taken as an indication that God had en-souled (?) your baby. This is among the reasons why the abortion debate was not much of an issue in the church up to and during the Roe v Wade proceedings. And it also informed what became known as the trimester concept of gestation.

Interesting. Thanks.

That is the stupidest thing I ever heard!!!

Its a lie.

I don't think so. Tim seemed very sincere when he said he found it interesting. Why would you call him a liar?

 

[praise_yeshua]

It's simple. No one is as smart as PY...

...but Boyd is 95% there.

If you beleive in open theism, which is where Arminianism eventually leads you

Nonsense. They only share certain things. Calvinism share certain things with Armininiasm.

 

[praise_yeshua]

And the soul will be eternally in heaven or hell ... kind of makes me wonder where our soul comes from in the first place. Is that developed within the womb as the life grows? Does God add it at some point? No. I don't have any thoughts on that one (shocked?).

Many Jews believe the soul is not present at conception but is added (?) at the "quickening". It was a commonly held belief among Christians as well. Not that long ago, it was common practice to not mention that you were pregnant until you felt the baby actively moving. This would have been taken as an indication that God had en-souled (?) your baby. This is among the reasons why the abortion debate was not much of an issue in the church up to and during the Roe v Wade proceedings. And it also informed what became known as the trimester concept of gestation.

Interesting. Thanks.

That is the stupidest thing I ever heard!!!

Its a lie.

I don't think so. Tim seemed very sincere when he said he found it interesting. Why would you call him a liar?

I'm calling you a liar.

 

[praise_yeshua]

And the soul will be eternally in heaven or hell ... kind of makes me wonder where our soul comes from in the first place. Is that developed within the womb as the life grows? Does God add it at some point? No. I don't have any thoughts on that one (shocked?).

Many Jews believe the soul is not present at conception but is added (?) at the "quickening". It was a commonly held belief among Christians as well. Not that long ago, it was common practice to not mention that you were pregnant until you felt the baby actively moving. This would have been taken as an indication that God had en-souled (?) your baby. This is among the reasons why the abortion debate was not much of an issue in the church up to and during the Roe v Wade proceedings. And it also informed what became known as the trimester concept of gestation.

Interesting. Thanks.

That is the stupidest thing I ever heard!!!

Its a lie.

Nobody said they believed it. Yet anyway.

I never said they did. The evidence is a lie. Its fabricated.

 

[praise_yeshua]

David is quite clear on the matter. Babies who die go to Heaven.

Where did David say that?

David said:

But now that he is dead, why should I go on fasting? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me.

Peter said of David,

Men and brothers, let me freely speak to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulcher is with us to this day. Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; He seeing this before spoke of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. This Jesus has God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.  Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he has shed forth this, which you now see and hear. For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he said himself, The Lord said to my Lord, Sit you on my right hand, Until I make your foes your footstool.

Though I lean toward children who die go to heaven, I believe David was referring to the grave and hence cannot be used as proof text.

I knew someone would say that. I didn't honestly expect it to be you.

First, the "ascended" part of the sermon of Peter is a reference to "David" not ascending to sit at the righthand of God. Its not that David didn't ascend. Stop ripping the verse from its context. David was prophetically speaking of Christ. Not himself. David did ascend when Christ lead "captivity. captive".

Second. Davids statement was one of hope. Of being joined with his child. It wasn't a statement of finality in the hopelessness of the grave.

Just what hope is there in the grave? Do you look forward to joining you child in turning to dust?

Nobody was suggesting that David claimed to be sitting on the right hand of God. David never mentioned heaven in his writings, only that his seed (Jesus) would not remain in Hades (Sheol - death/grave). Yes, David was prophetically speaking about Christ and Peter made mention of the fact that the ascension was by Jesus and not David. David remained in the tomb.

Okay. Then you agree with me?

You're using the words "is not" out of context of what Peter said. I didn't.

 

[praise_yeshua]

I'mnot the one calling God a worthless idol

Calvin is your worthless idol. You know.... the "little g"..... god.

I never said the One True God is worthless. Just what you've replaced him with.... You know that "breast" you suckle on called "Calvin's teat".

Ummm .... seriously?

And you all say I have issues. LOL

Seriously!!!

I believe in the absolute freewill of humanity. If I'm right, then why wouldn't I hate Calvinism? Its logical to hate Calvinism based on the Truth. I hate it worse than most any doctrine in existence.

I hate it because the teaching damns souls. It replaced the True Gospel with a fabricated idol were people don't control their own destiny. The product of liberal mind seeking to absolve itself of controlling their actions.

 

[praise_yeshua]

To answer the question of the soul....

The living soul is created in humanity at the moment of conception. The "living soul" is what animated Adam. Its what animates or gives life to something as small as the union of "two seeds". The absence of a living soul is death.

 

[praise_yeshua]

I'mnot the one calling God a worthless idol

Calvin is your worthless idol. You know.... the "little g"..... god.

I never said the One True God is worthless. Just what you've replaced him with.... You know that "breast" you suckle on called "Calvin's teat".

Ummm .... seriously?

And you all say I have issues. LOL

Seriously!!!

I believe in the absolute freewill of humanity. If I'm right, then why wouldn't I hate Calvinism? Its logical to hate Calvinism based on the Truth. I hate it worse than most any doctrine in existence.

I hate it because the teaching damns souls. I replaced the True Gospel with a fabricated idol were people don't control their own destiny. The product of liberal mind seeking to absolve itself of controlling their actions.

The nursing reference ....   :

Its a common expression. You may have heard it before......

Does "government teat" ring a bell?

 

[praise_yeshua]

Someone who worships a God who learns is accusing others of worshipping idols?

i know you are but what am i

 

[Smellin Coffee]

David is quite clear on the matter. Babies who die go to Heaven.

Where did David say that?

David said:

But now that he is dead, why should I go on fasting? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me.

Peter said of David,

Men and brothers, let me freely speak to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulcher is with us to this day. Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; He seeing this before spoke of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. This Jesus has God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.  Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he has shed forth this, which you now see and hear. For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he said himself, The Lord said to my Lord, Sit you on my right hand, Until I make your foes your footstool.

Though I lean toward children who die go to heaven, I believe David was referring to the grave and hence cannot be used as proof text.

I knew someone would say that. I didn't honestly expect it to be you.

First, the "ascended" part of the sermon of Peter is a reference to "David" not ascending to sit at the righthand of God. Its not that David didn't ascend. Stop ripping the verse from its context. David was prophetically speaking of Christ. Not himself. David did ascend when Christ lead "captivity. captive".

Second. Davids statement was one of hope. Of being joined with his child. It wasn't a statement of finality in the hopelessness of the grave.

Just what hope is there in the grave? Do you look forward to joining you child in turning to dust?

Nobody was suggesting that David claimed to be sitting on the right hand of God. David never mentioned heaven in his writings, only that his seed (Jesus) would not remain in Hades (Sheol - death/grave). Yes, David was prophetically speaking about Christ and Peter made mention of the fact that the ascension was by Jesus and not David. David remained in the tomb.

Okay. Then you agree with me?

You're using the words "is not" out of context of what Peter said. I didn't.

The "is not" mentioned by Peter meant that David had not ascended into heaven but remained in his tomb. This means he was still taking a dirt nap at the time of Peter's sermon. So if David never mentioned an eternal destination (heaven) upon the death of his son and said that he would be joining his son, he was referring to death, not heaven. Peter confirmed David was not in heaven but rather still buried.

Was David hopeful? Yes, in the word (promise) of God that God would raise up one of his heirs (Jesus) on an eternal throne. It is just that the lineage would not be through the baby that had perished but David's faith and hope in God continued. Similar to Abraham whose faith extended beyond the potential death of his son.

 

[praise_yeshua]

David is quite clear on the matter. Babies who die go to Heaven.

Where did David say that?

David said:

But now that he is dead, why should I go on fasting? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me.

Peter said of David,

Men and brothers, let me freely speak to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulcher is with us to this day. Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; He seeing this before spoke of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. This Jesus has God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.  Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he has shed forth this, which you now see and hear. For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he said himself, The Lord said to my Lord, Sit you on my right hand, Until I make your foes your footstool.

Though I lean toward children who die go to heaven, I believe David was referring to the grave and hence cannot be used as proof text.

I knew someone would say that. I didn't honestly expect it to be you.

First, the "ascended" part of the sermon of Peter is a reference to "David" not ascending to sit at the righthand of God. Its not that David didn't ascend. Stop ripping the verse from its context. David was prophetically speaking of Christ. Not himself. David did ascend when Christ lead "captivity. captive".

Second. Davids statement was one of hope. Of being joined with his child. It wasn't a statement of finality in the hopelessness of the grave.

Just what hope is there in the grave? Do you look forward to joining you child in turning to dust?

Nobody was suggesting that David claimed to be sitting on the right hand of God. David never mentioned heaven in his writings, only that his seed (Jesus) would not remain in Hades (Sheol - death/grave). Yes, David was prophetically speaking about Christ and Peter made mention of the fact that the ascension was by Jesus and not David. David remained in the tomb.

Okay. Then you agree with me?

You're using the words "is not" out of context of what Peter said. I didn't.

The "is not" mentioned by Peter meant that David had not ascended into heaven but remained in his tomb. This means he was still taking a dirt nap at the time of Peter's sermon. So if David never mentioned an eternal destination (heaven) upon the death of his son and said that he would be joining his son, he was referring to death, not heaven. Peter confirmed David was not in heaven but rather still buried.

Was David hopeful? Yes, in the word (promise) of God that God would raise up one of his heirs (Jesus) on an eternal throne. It is just that the lineage would not be through the baby that had perished but David's faith and hope in God continued. Similar to Abraham whose faith extended beyond the potential death of his son.

This is exactly why.... I said... what I said. You obviously didn't get that...

David's body was in the grave but he wasn't there. You took something David wrote prophetically and mishandled it terribly. David was talking about the ascension of Christ. Not his own after life.

YOU'RE applying to David's afterlife. Its not about David's afterlife. Yet you're pretending it is. Do you get it now?

Regardless. Are you planning on staying in the grave till the final resurrection? Good luck to you!!!

 

[Smellin Coffee]

David is quite clear on the matter. Babies who die go to Heaven.

Where did David say that?

David said:

But now that he is dead, why should I go on fasting? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me.

Peter said of David,

Men and brothers, let me freely speak to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulcher is with us to this day. Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; He seeing this before spoke of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. This Jesus has God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.  Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he has shed forth this, which you now see and hear. For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he said himself, The Lord said to my Lord, Sit you on my right hand, Until I make your foes your footstool.

Though I lean toward children who die go to heaven, I believe David was referring to the grave and hence cannot be used as proof text.

I knew someone would say that. I didn't honestly expect it to be you.

First, the "ascended" part of the sermon of Peter is a reference to "David" not ascending to sit at the righthand of God. Its not that David didn't ascend. Stop ripping the verse from its context. David was prophetically speaking of Christ. Not himself. David did ascend when Christ lead "captivity. captive".

Second. Davids statement was one of hope. Of being joined with his child. It wasn't a statement of finality in the hopelessness of the grave.

Just what hope is there in the grave? Do you look forward to joining you child in turning to dust?

Nobody was suggesting that David claimed to be sitting on the right hand of God. David never mentioned heaven in his writings, only that his seed (Jesus) would not remain in Hades (Sheol - death/grave). Yes, David was prophetically speaking about Christ and Peter made mention of the fact that the ascension was by Jesus and not David. David remained in the tomb.

Okay. Then you agree with me?

You're using the words "is not" out of context of what Peter said. I didn't.

The "is not" mentioned by Peter meant that David had not ascended into heaven but remained in his tomb. This means he was still taking a dirt nap at the time of Peter's sermon. So if David never mentioned an eternal destination (heaven) upon the death of his son and said that he would be joining his son, he was referring to death, not heaven. Peter confirmed David was not in heaven but rather still buried.

Was David hopeful? Yes, in the word (promise) of God that God would raise up one of his heirs (Jesus) on an eternal throne. It is just that the lineage would not be through the baby that had perished but David's faith and hope in God continued. Similar to Abraham whose faith extended beyond the potential death of his son.

This is exactly why.... I said... what I said. You obviously didn't get that...

David's body was in the grave but he wasn't there. You took something David wrote prophetically and mishandled it terribly. David was talking about the ascension of Christ. Not his own after life.

YOU'RE applying to David's afterlife. Its not about David's afterlife. Yet you're pretending it is. Do you get it now?

Regardless. Are you planning on staying in the grave till the final resurrection? Good luck to you!!!

David was there in the tomb. That is what Peter had said.

I don't know how the afterlife works. I do know that at some point I will be raised to face judgement but whether I am alive the second after I die or resurrected four thousand years after I die, I will have to give account to God.

 

[praise_yeshua]

David is quite clear on the matter. Babies who die go to Heaven.

Where did David say that?

David said:

But now that he is dead, why should I go on fasting? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me.

Peter said of David,

Men and brothers, let me freely speak to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulcher is with us to this day. Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; He seeing this before spoke of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. This Jesus has God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.  Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he has shed forth this, which you now see and hear. For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he said himself, The Lord said to my Lord, Sit you on my right hand, Until I make your foes your footstool.

Though I lean toward children who die go to heaven, I believe David was referring to the grave and hence cannot be used as proof text.

I knew someone would say that. I didn't honestly expect it to be you.

First, the "ascended" part of the sermon of Peter is a reference to "David" not ascending to sit at the righthand of God. Its not that David didn't ascend. Stop ripping the verse from its context. David was prophetically speaking of Christ. Not himself. David did ascend when Christ lead "captivity. captive".

Second. Davids statement was one of hope. Of being joined with his child. It wasn't a statement of finality in the hopelessness of the grave.

Just what hope is there in the grave? Do you look forward to joining you child in turning to dust?

Nobody was suggesting that David claimed to be sitting on the right hand of God. David never mentioned heaven in his writings, only that his seed (Jesus) would not remain in Hades (Sheol - death/grave). Yes, David was prophetically speaking about Christ and Peter made mention of the fact that the ascension was by Jesus and not David. David remained in the tomb.

Okay. Then you agree with me?

You're using the words "is not" out of context of what Peter said. I didn't.

The "is not" mentioned by Peter meant that David had not ascended into heaven but remained in his tomb. This means he was still taking a dirt nap at the time of Peter's sermon. So if David never mentioned an eternal destination (heaven) upon the death of his son and said that he would be joining his son, he was referring to death, not heaven. Peter confirmed David was not in heaven but rather still buried.

Was David hopeful? Yes, in the word (promise) of God that God would raise up one of his heirs (Jesus) on an eternal throne. It is just that the lineage would not be through the baby that had perished but David's faith and hope in God continued. Similar to Abraham whose faith extended beyond the potential death of his son.

This is exactly why.... I said... what I said. You obviously didn't get that...

David's body was in the grave but he wasn't there. You took something David wrote prophetically and mishandled it terribly. David was talking about the ascension of Christ. Not his own after life.

YOU'RE applying to David's afterlife. Its not about David's afterlife. Yet you're pretending it is. Do you get it now?

Regardless. Are you planning on staying in the grave till the final resurrection? Good luck to you!!!

David was there in the tomb. That is what Peter had said.

I don't know how the afterlife works. I do know that at some point I will be raised to face judgement but whether I am alive the second after I die or resurrected four thousand years after I die, I will have to give account to God.

Peter said that David hadn't ascended to the right hand of God. You're the one ignoring the prophecy and making it literally about David still being in the grave. Peter is saying that David hadn't ascended to the right hand of God. This doesn't mean that David isn't alive in his heavenly body. I know you don't like Paul, but how about the words of Jesus?

But that the dead are raised, even Moses showed, in the passage about the bush, where he calls the Lord the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.

The "God" of something dead isn't a very powerful God. You should take the words of Jesus to heart.

 

[subllibrm]

And the soul will be eternally in heaven or hell ... kind of makes me wonder where our soul comes from in the first place. Is that developed within the womb as the life grows? Does God add it at some point? No. I don't have any thoughts on that one (shocked?).

Many Jews believe the soul is not present at conception but is added (?) at the "quickening". It was a commonly held belief among Christians as well. Not that long ago, it was common practice to not mention that you were pregnant until you felt the baby actively moving. This would have been taken as an indication that God had en-souled (?) your baby. This is among the reasons why the abortion debate was not much of an issue in the church up to and during the Roe v Wade proceedings. And it also informed what became known as the trimester concept of gestation.

Interesting. Thanks.

That is the stupidest thing I ever heard!!!

Its a lie.

I don't think so. Tim seemed very sincere when he said he found it interesting. Why would you call him a liar?

I'm calling you a liar.

Duh.

BTW I noticed that you didn't point to anything "untrue" just leveled the accusation.

 

[rsc2a]

I believe in the absolute freewill of humanity. If I'm right, then why wouldn't I hate Calvinism? Its logical to hate Calvinism based on the Truth. I hate it worse than most any doctrine in existence.

Since you believe in "the absolute freewill of humanity", I'll be waiting on the video where you show us you can fly.

 

[subllibrm]

[youtube]s35puUhqQJc[/youtube]

 

[Ransom]

What does scripture teach?

Probably nothing as important as your feelings on the subject.

 

[praise_yeshua]

I believe in the absolute freewill of humanity. If I'm right, then why wouldn't I hate Calvinism? Its logical to hate Calvinism based on the Truth. I hate it worse than most any doctrine in existence.

Since you believe in "the absolute freewill of humanity", I'll be waiting on the video where you show us you can fly.

"Squirrel".

Time for mom to tie another pork chop around your neck. You need "something" to play with you. You certainly don't belong in an adult discussion.

 

[Smellin Coffee]

But that the dead are raised, even Moses showed, in the passage about the bush, where he calls the Lord the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.

The "God" of something dead isn't a very powerful God. You should take the words of Jesus to heart.

And Jesus said to them, ?The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage, but those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and to the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage, for they cannot die anymore, because they are equal to angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection. But that the dead are raised, even Moses showed, in the passage about the bush, where he calls the Lord the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. Now he is not God of the dead, but of the living, for all live to him.?

Topic of Jesus' discussion was the resurrection, not immediate life after death. I do not deny a resurrection so I'm not sure what your argument is.

Oh, and Paul?

For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.

Hmmm...