"He preached the gospel and all who came to Him for healing, He healed. As our perfect example, we are to do the same."

Jesus walked on the Red Sea, was crucified, went to hell for three days, and sits on the right hand of God. Should we do the same as well and follow that perfect example?

Besides were you not concerned with what Mark 16 states not wondering off to other NT passages.

The passage state that there will be some that will cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

The passage state that there will be some that will cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

So what's your point?

Dan 9:
"24Seventy weeks are determined..."

Ha! It's amazing to me how selective the Calvinist are in their hermeneutic.

But there is something to learn from Pia's deceptive tactic. He sees the importance of submitting oneself to the immediate context. The problem is that he only will do so when it suits him. When it is not convenient to his perverted doctrine, well... best to throw it out the window.

"He now has to demonstrate this to everyone so that one day he can stand before the judgement Throne to brag of his intellectual accomplishments and how single handed he withstood those nasty Calvinists."

Now where do I begin.

One moment...

Ha! Ha! Ha! He! Hi! Hi! Hi!

Ok. I am ready now.

"As Previously mentioned, His Coming was not the Second Coming but coming in Judgement of Jerusalem."

Let me guess, and noone saw him come, right. Sounds like a different spin of the same JW heresy. According to your hermeneutic Jesus has come multiple time. In fact, every time he judges you can be considered a second (or 150th in some cases) coming.

"And yes, we are in the so-called "Millenium"."

Let me guess. Your definition of "millenium" can only be found in the F_anciful L_and of the Calvinist.

"But it was never expected to be limited to only 1,000 years. The OT prophets spoke of His ruling "Forever"."

Ha! So why be even speaking of any coming at all. Jesus reigns now. He has always reined and will always reign. Let me guess... the book of Revelation was merely a frivolous eschatological excercise.

Ha!

Surely I come quickly? I guess Jesus already came and we are in his millenium reign. Ha!

---------------------------------------
Murray wrote:

"Hence the clues to identification are nothing more than that: clues. If God had given the clear interpretation of these symbols, as you insist, why then the many and varied interpretations over the centuries??"

It's called false doctrine, ever heard of it? God's word is clear; its man's corrupted interpretation that is at fault.

According to the Scriptures their are two purposes for a sign, which is really one when you think about it.

1. For Old Covenant Jews who were under the O.T. economy of being spoken to God via phrophets.

2. When new revelation from God is being introduced.

"1Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest at any time we should let them slip. 2For if the word spoken by angels was steadfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompense of reward; 3how shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him; 4God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?"

Trust me, its not a trick question.

Your answer is quite confusing. I guess this is due to you trying to avoid an obvious contradiction.

How is it possible for God to choose one that is not able to resist HIM but yet not be considered a force?

I see no reason why you have to complicate the question.

If one is forced, it means that he does not have a choice in the matter. If one has a choice in the matter, it means that he is not forced.

It's quite simple.

(Q5) Some more semantics. I suppose their is also unconditional adoption, unconditional regeneration, unconditional redemption, etc.

(Q6) Then what you are doing is not called prayer. I am not what you would call it but it certainly has nothing to do with asking. Besides why would you seek God's will if he has predetermined you to find it?

You did better answering the final questions. Unfortunately you have refuesed to provide the chapter and verse so I probably would fail you (still regardless of getting the right answer or not) on the count of not following directions.

DB,

(1) So now you are stating that the KJV translators are unreliable. How a bunch of Calvinists could fall prey to arminian eisogesis is the mother of all mysteries.

(2) Try answering the question. I used a "How" interogative not a "what."

(3) You skipped this one.

(4) Semantics?

(5) You skipped this one

(6) You are still doing the skip.

(7) Ah. Alas. Unfortunately you answer a question with a question. You would make an excellent Calvinist.