Search results

I think that's a much stronger reading than the Reformed interpretation that limits "world" to the elect, because it actually lets "world" retain its ordinary meaning while recognizing the historical context.😊

I think that's actually a more plausible harmonization than simply saying "God did it" on one hand and "Satan did it" on the other without explanation. If the Hiphil is emphasizing causation or provocation, then both texts can be understood as describing different aspects of the same event. In...

I don't think that's a fair criticism of my argument, because I have been careful not to assume that Christ was imputed with the sins of all sinners, or only the elect, as a premise. Exactly. My point was never that "he shall bear their iniquities" must mean Christ became personally guilty of...

What you've done is precisely what I was cautioning against. You begin with a broader theological system, then read that system back into John 3:16. The verse itself says, "God so loved the world" and "whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." Nothing in the...

Your grammatical observation is fair as far as it goes. The immediate subject of the verb is indeed "the anger of YHWH", not the divine name standing by itself. However, I don't think that changes the substance of the argument as much as you suggest. In Hebrew narrative, "the anger of YHWH"...

I appreciate the historical survey, but I don't think it actually answers the exegetical question before us. Even if I granted every point about Egyptian religion, Zoroastrian influence, Greek philosophy, Augustine, Dante, Darby, and Scofield, we would still have to ask: What did Paul mean when...

I think that interpretation runs into serious contextual problems. In Philippians 1:22-24, Paul is not contrasting a sinful lifestyle with a godly one. He is contrasting continuing to live and minister versus departing. Notice that remaining "in the flesh" is described positively: "to abide...

I don't think the appeal to σάρξ (sarx) gets you where you want to go contextually. Certainly, Paul often uses sarx to refer to fallen human nature or living according to the flesh, but in Philippians 1 the contrast is between remaining alive and ministering to the churches versus departing and...

I agree that someone is misunderstanding the texts. Where we disagree is which texts are controlling the interpretation of the others. You believe the passages describing death as sleep, unconsciousness, and inactivity settle the matter so completely that 2 Corinthians 5:8 and Philippians...

What you're doing is assuming the conclusion rather than demonstrating it. You have shown that, in your view, certain passages about death require an unconscious intermediate state. What you have not shown is that 2 Corinthians 5:8 and Philippians 1:23 cannot mean what they appear to say...

I don't think that response actually engages the argument I made. I never claimed that a particular social group could not have existed, nor did I deny the existence of the Essenes, Hellenistic Jews, or various cultural distinctions within Second Temple Judaism. The question is much narrower...

I agree that Scripture does not present poverty as inherently holy or prosperity as inherently spiritual. Deuteronomy 14:22-27 shows that God gave Israel provisions to rejoice before Him with the blessings He had given them. At the same time, that passage belongs to the Mosaic covenant and...

ooohhhh... Back to my corner😒

What Dr. Sweigart has shown is that there is at least a linguistic case for translating apostasia as "departure" rather than automatically assuming "apostasy." I think that's worth considering seriously. However, I would stop short of saying the evidence is "overwhelming." The real debate is...

A believer can be tempted in many ways yet not yield to that temptation. If they yield to it, then they are in sin. But if they don't they are not. Lumping attraction, temptation, identity, and behavior into one category only creates confusion. The real issue is not what temptation a person...

I so understand you. And have no answer to satisfy. However I offer this, be strong to the end.

A person can experience same-sex attraction without acting on it, just as a person can experience other temptations without acting on them. The real question is whether "gay" is being used to describe a temptation someone experiences or a lifestyle and identity they embrace, because those are...

The verse implies they were "not of us", to begin with.

I agree that 2 Thessalonians 2 distinguishes the Day of the Lord from the apostasia, since one precedes the other, but the real question is not whether they are different events, but whether apostasia refers to a physical departure of believers or a rebellion from the faith, and that conclusion...

"They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us." 1 John 2:19