Search results

John is writing to specific Christian communities about specific events that have happened in those communities, as he identifies the ones that have left as "antichrists" and liars. That makes them false teachers. And it still does not give a way to know for certain whether any more...

The context is John speaking about the false teachers that had left their Christian community. It was evident by their leaving that they never did have the true spirit of the community of God's people. This does not preclude others from falling away later who may not be so visibly distinct...

Matthew 7:23 that you quoted is clearly about those who never were his followers to begin with, despite their calling him "Lord, Lord." The real following of Jesus is evidenced by doing the will of the Father, as it says in Matt. 7. To use that as a means of telling who is a sheep assumes you...

Yes. He knows. We don't. I did not object to the notion that His sheep will not perish. I objected to the notion that mere humans could be sure which is which. Let's back up and look at the context of Matt. 7:23, starting with verse 21: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will...

Your insistence on referring to followers of Jesus only as sheep and not as people pre-supposes your assumption that you know who are destined to be the sheep and who are destined to be the goats. Only God knows that. We do not. So for us to label some people as sheep and some as goats right...

This still only says something about His sheep. It is no guarantee for sheep that are not his. And someone who has willingly rejected Jesus is definitely not his. Therefore this guarantee does not apply to them. I am not contradicting Jesus. I am understanding him correctly. Again, this...

They will never perish as long as they remain His sheep. It does not say that if one was once His sheep they will never perish even if they reject him. I think you misunderstand this scripture too. His sheep follow him. They do no follow a stranger. His sheep will not be snatched away...

The phrase "thy will be done" is an expression of the supplicant's desire that God's will be accomplished, as well as an acknowledgement that no matter what we do, God's will will be accomplished. That's what it means, and it does not contradict the fact the God did give Man free will. When...

If you think this justifies "once saved always saved", then you have misunderstood this passage. If you look at all of it you will see: "I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand." Jesus is promising that his protection as the good shepherd...

We have been exploring the case of an unsaved person being unable to do good works. But from what I understand, some of you are saying even the saved are unable to do good works. That would certainly contradict James 2 in the OP. And there is still the issue of free will - particularly the...

"Works of the law", like offering burnt sacrifices of rams and bulls, etc., still does not touch on the ordinary works of mercy, such as the Good Samaritan performed. From Jesus' description, it is clear that Jesus did not consider his acts of mercy to the man found beaten by robbers to be "as...

I did not write the article. It does not rest on my authority. If you have complaints about the article, take it up with Scientific American. or with the author.

A better translation is: ‘There is no one who is righteous, not even one; 11 there is no one who has understanding, there is no one who seeks God. 12 All have turned aside, together they have become worthless; there is no one who shows kindness, there is not even one.’...

This is a misunderstanding of "no one is good except the Father." Being good in that sense is different from doing good, as in doing things that are good in themselves, independent of who does them.

The context of the "dirty rags" reference is from Isaiah 64 in which Isaiah is describing the hypocrisy of the time (760—670 B.C.). It pertains to a particular historical situation, not to a general condition. The passage appeals to a time when Israelites once had a right relationship with God...

Now I have seen the most recent film by this same director, Makoto Shinkai. It is his 2020 film, Weathering with You. It did not move me as much as Your Name, which is still my all-time favorite Japanese anime, even over the classics like from Studio Ghibli. See Your Name (Kimi no Na wa)!

I never said she did. One can argue all day about whether consent implies permission, but that is an argument about semantics, not substance. So to avoid further confusion, I will just settle for "joyfully obedient" and let it go at that.

The parable doesn't say why they failed to do those good deeds. The deeds themselves seemed like the kind of thing anyone could do who chose to do them. The parable tells us exactly how the king (representing Jesus in the parable) chose to respond. He told them about the good deeds they...

If it was obedience, then it was at least very enthusiastic and willing obedience. She was clearly very happy about it.

That criteria is not the one the king mentions when the damned ask why they are being damned. There only criteria the king mentions in the parable is the good deeds they failed to do. Because Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. If Jesus is the Truth, he would have told the damned the...