|
|
USER COMMENTS BY SEEKING TRUTH |
|
|
| RECENTLY-COMMENTED SERMONS | More | Last Post | Total |
· Page 1 · Found: 4 user comments posted recently. |
|
|
3/7/14 8:20 AM |
seeking truth | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
Lurker wrote: So why do you keep trying to slide a loaded question through? Isn't the truth sufficient to stand on its own merit Lurker No not loaded, just creating thought. Sometimes that is what a question does. If you had answered #(1) then it would "disturb" ye olde Baptist Tradition. And you cannot do that can you? If you had answered #(2) Then God would have become less than omnipotent and less omniscient, I might even add less sovereign. So obviously #2 is a definite No!!Your answer must be #1. *God was right* when HE ordained the Covenant of Grace to be "everlasting." And of course it is. Christ Jesus is the Mediator of the Everlasting Covenant of Grace. He was in Abraham's day and always has been. As for the "land" - Where do the Jews live today? Incidentally the word "Unilateral" is very important to the Covenant. The unilateral nature of the Covenant is highlighted in Genesis 15:17. Thus man's "responsibilities" in the Covenant cannot break the Covenant, and never did. The 'elect' have always been in Covenant, Christ has always been the Mediator of the Covenant - And yes it has always been everlasting. "the truth (IS) sufficient to stand on its own merit" I guess we are finished with this Lurker. God Bless. |
|
|
3/5/14 4:14 PM |
seeking truth | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
John UK wrote: The new covenant made the old obsolete and finished Not true John! All the New Testament added to Scripture is written and recorded for all to see. Now can you see a whole Covenant set of precepts replacing the OT ones? No!!You are avoiding the question like the plague you and the other commentators on here. Whilst Lurker come up with some vague and obscure connections and others make fun of the whole thing. What we are left with is that "everlasting" and "seed" meant one thing to Abraham and the paedobaptists - But another completely different definition to you guys. Did Abraham think that "seed" was NOT directed at his future generations? Everlasting is always and forever whether you read it in the Hebrew or the English. You folks cannot accept that. Thus you must be convinced that when God wrote (inspirationally) the terms "everlasting" and "seed" - You must consider that He was not viewing the future as it has actually played out but in an alternative way not justifying "Everlasting" or "seed" If that is your interpretation then God, as they say, was being economic with the truth. This is not about the failure of man to conclude/complete the Covenant - But the initial covenant precepts by God. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|