K
Kerry
Guest
The only thing contingent is if you have faith in the work of the cross or not. Guess what, and nothing else.
I have never said anything that stupid in my life. I agree with Cantor. God is comparable to the set of all sets, which is so incomprehensibly infinite that all the rules of logic break down.you think we can just assume the greatness of God is Lebesgue-measurable??
![]()
The principle in Jeremiah 18:7-10 is not relative to the prophecies in Daniel, which are actually reading out future events, not simply speaking judgement upon a nation.There are many examples that prove your statement false. See this article: Conditionalism: A Cornerstone of Adventist Doctrine.
I have never said anything that stupid in my life. I agree with Cantor. God is comparable to the set of all sets, which is so incomprehensibly infinite that all the rules of logic break down.
Why would His Son think it robbery to be equal with His Father?
He is not contained in the set of all sets.
The principle in Jeremiah 18:7-10 is not relative to the prophecies in Daniel, which are actually reading out future events, not simply speaking judgement upon a nation.
Please define the word used in Scripture as 'PREDESTINATION'. I need to hear what you have going on.
Sry, but Zechariah was after Daniel....The book of Daniel is a departure from "Plan A" and forecasts two possible futures, both of which depend significantly on the disobedience of Israel. "Plan A" was an entirely different possibility. There was no room for Greece to be a world power under Plan “A.” Instead, the people of God, if faithful to the covenant, would have conquered Greece. Zech 9:13 clearly tells us this, as R. Lucas paraphrases it: “The sons of Zion will be beating-up the sons of the Greeks.”
So you have no definition for yourself. You are just a mouthpiece for this organization.All I can do is point you to a Millerite website that integrates conditional principles with specific historical-grammatical exegesis. Start here: The Fundamental Beliefs of the Millerites, Circa 2014.
Sry, but Zechariah was after Daniel....
So did God go back to plan A afterwards?
Solid has a point. Zech wrote awhile after Daniel. This post didn't explain that away.The fundamental characteristics of prophecy are these:
1. All the promises and threatenings of God are alike — conditional.
2. “God does not destroy free choice by predicting real future events, rather He enhances it by predicting possible future events. God places alternative routes before His people; Possible futures are continually forecast, and God allows man to exercise his free choice by letting him choose one.”
3. “Promises come true because men make choices. They do not come true just because they are predicted” (Roger Lucas, An unpublished manuscript).
You are still not explaining how the plan changed back to plan A years later when Zechariah wrote.The fundamental characteristics of prophecy are these:
1. All the promises and threatenings of God are alike — conditional.
2. “God does not destroy free choice by predicting real future events, rather He enhances it by predicting possible future events. God places alternative routes before His people; Possible futures are continually forecast, and God allows man to exercise his free choice by letting him choose one.”
3. “Promises come true because men make choices. They do not come true just because they are predicted” (Roger Lucas, An unpublished manuscript).
Please define the word used in Scripture as 'PREDESTINATION'. I need to hear what you have going on.
You are still not explaining how the plan changed back to plan A years later when Zechariah wrote.
Abundant Biblical support of the thesis was given in the article already cited: Conditionalism: A Cornerstone of Adventist Doctrine.Just because you keep saying that all prophecies are conditional doesn't mean it's true.
Not as defined by you.
Yes.
He's not likely to answer any of your questions directly. He'll just send you on a link to his website.I appreciate your honesty. You said yes to far more of the questions than I thought you would. But I suspect we still have some major terminology definition differences.
Will you please explain the term "born again" in your own terms?
Will you please explain how GOD saved all people who are SAVED
You answered, "Not as defined by you."; to these two questions:
Do you believe in the Holy Trinity?
Do you believe that Jesus is GOD incarnate?
Why are you so VAGUE when talking about your core beliefs? And so full of words when talking about you unusual beliefs about prophecy?
For example, you almost seem to be white-washing a denial of the Holy Trinity, by saying, "Not as defined by you."; imply that you use the same terminology, but mean something totally different by the term. That is what psuedo-christian cults do, such as the Mormons. YES, we consider those who deny the Deity of Jesus Christ as all being psuedo-christian cults.
Holy Trinity = Three distinct personages within ONE GODhead, with Three distinct functions within that GODhead, YET Co-equally being that ONE GOD, the only real GOD that has ever existed.
NOW please give me your definition of the term "Holy Trinity", every bit as plain and concise as I did.
The DEITY of Jesus Christ = The Second personage within the GODhead, the Holy Trinity, who is fully GOD and fully man at the same time, co-equal as the ONE and ONLY GOD, with the Father and the Holy Spirit.
NOW please give me your definition of the term "the DEITY of Jesus Christ", every bit as plain and concise as I did.
Why are you so VAGUE when talking about your core beliefs?
NOW please give me your definition of the term "the DEITY of Jesus Christ", every bit as plain and concise as I did.