Search results

!!!

Yes, which entails being God’s enemies until/unless they repent and regain a right relationship/loving childship, whereupon they become bound for heaven again.

Christian Chat

What changed is their spiritual status of being in Eden, which is what is restored and culminates in heaven.

It may be significant that Genesis doesn’t describe the relationship of A and E with God before they exercised their God-given MFW to ignore GW.

Yes, that is what he typically does. I call it the tar-baby technique.

Not mistakenly per the three passages that were discussed. Do you have a fourth for us to consider?

Obviously I have studied GW and learned that tulip is false including the P I used to believe. Do the same!

That Jesus was God the Son means that he could sin, and that he did not sin means he is qualified to be the Lamb that atones for the sins of humanity. That is the very reason he came as Messiah!

It was NOT common but was viewed as blasphemous!

Jesus was both referencing God and revealing His Sonship.

This is a good description and the error occurs by ignoring that the Scripture cited describes human character when it rejects God.

So which parts of tulip do you think contradict Scripture?

Which parts of tulip do you disbelieve?

I replied to him in #2,531.

I try not to be judgmental of those claiming to be fellow Christians but I agree that tulipism borders on being heretical.

I support punishment of all violent crimes including throwing rocks at cars.

God’s love is for all humanity but His wrath will be experienced by those who do not satisfy His requirement for forgiveness.

Yes, such as the gospel according to tulipists.

Sounds like CC!