|
|
USER COMMENTS BY DR. YAMIL LUCIANO |
|
|
Page 1 | Page 12 · Found: 391 user comments posted recently. |
| | | |
|
|
11/3/07 11:11 AM |
Dr. Yamil Luciano | | Curing Theological Diseases | | | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
Walt wrote: You are such a deceiver when you have no serious biblical arguments as a Pastor. Yes, of course. It would not be the same for you to respond to me without an adhominem. Of course, you are a flaming Calvinist, so you have earned your right in SA to do so. Unfortunately, that is not a price I am willing to pay.Walt wrote: There is nobody that can explain the doctrine of marriage and divorce in a single post. That is why excellent Sermons have addressed the subject in great detail, as well as excellent books covering these verses. Oh, yeah. I just did.... for free... But of course in the F_anciful L_and of thr C_alvinist, everything is complicated. _______________________________________Now here is the biggest irony in this debate: The Calvinist (Walt and Seaton) favor divorce which would mean that one can lose his salvation, while the full blown Arminian (Abigail and Spiritual) propose the opposite which would affirm eternal security. Am I the only one that see the irony out of all this? That's why you should stick with me folks. (wink-wink) |
|
|
11/3/07 1:04 AM |
Dr. Yamil Luciano | | Curing Theological Diseases | | | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
As usual I stand in the middle of two extremes receiving the punches from both sides.lol Walt, whatever God did with Israel it is certainly not what you are proposing. In Jeremiah 3, God asks Israel to turn back so that she can be restored. I doubt that that is the kind of reconciling divorce that you are suggesting. If Walt is saying is true, then every one of us are in danger of losing our salvation, since marriage is a picture of savation. Now here is the biggest irony in this debate: The Calvinist (Walt and Seaton) favor divorce which would mean that one can lose his salvation, while the full blown Arminian (Abigail and Spiritual) propose the opposite which would affirm eternal security. Am I the only one that see the irony out of all this? That's why you should stick with me folks. (wink-wink) |
|
|
11/1/07 2:32 PM |
Dr. Yamil Luciano | | Curing Theological Diseases | | | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
Abigail, THe verse that Michael uses does not even support his view. In fact, if you read my previous posts, it completely opposes it. Anyone with basic reading skills can discern that. "But to the married I give instructions, not I, but the Lord, that the wife SHOULD NOT LEAVE her husband...that the husband SHOULD NOT DIVORCE his wife." Since he does not have the Scripture to back him up, the only thing he has to turn to is this practical existential philosophy that states: it feels right so it must be right. Folks, doint the Lord's will IS NOT easy. That is why he asks us "to take up our cross." I am afraid that to some this simply means "take up your splinter." I rejoice with wife-for-life testimony. So sad that there are not many others rejoicing with her but trying to discourage her from doing what the Bible commands. While her life will be a testimony of the power and grace of God. All you other one's that chose divorce, have no such testimony. I guarantee that her kids will have a better chance in making it for God with such a testimony than the others that decided to take the easy rode. We like to theorize about the power of God, but very few actually choose the path of weakness so that the power of God may rest upon them. |
|
|
10/31/07 11:21 PM |
Dr. Yamil Luciano | | Curing Theological Diseases | | | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
I am sorry you feel that way Pathfinder.Like I said before, I never claim it to be easy. But I try to be consistent in my Bible interpretation. I am sorry if this offends you, but I know no other way to interpret the Scripture without having a bad conscience. I am not sure what your point is in I Corinthians 7. The point of the passage is the pro's and con's of being married. I would assume that it would speak of widow's and virgin's. It seems to me that since that you are succumbing to the logical fallacy of "I can't make sense of the obvious contradiction but I have faith that Paul believed just as I. You see. Here is my pet verse!" Newsflash: Even your pet verse completely contradicts your position. "But to the married I give instructions, not I, but the Lord, that the wife SHOULD NOT LEAVE her husband...that the husband SHOULD NOT DIVORCE his wife." I am not sure how you can justify divorce with such a clear prohibition against it. Yes, even from a passage that somehow you think supports your view. The root of false doctrine is sin. Any time one wants to justify his sin, he has to change his theology. I do not know about you, but my God can put marriages back together. I think too many seek the copout before they seek the Lord. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|