|
|
USER COMMENTS BY DR. YAMIL LUCIANO |
|
|
Page 1 | Page 8 · Found: 391 user comments posted recently. |
| | | |
|
|
11/19/07 9:25 PM |
Dr. Yamil Luciano | | Curing Theological Diseases | | | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
Nope I do not hold to that definition of death.It's just a Red Herring. Just because I oppose the Calvinist's thesis does not mean that I support the antithesis to what the definition would be. A synonym for "power" is not "ability." I think you are thinking of "authority." When the Bible states that we are dead to sin. It is not stating that we are unable to sin, but rather that sin has no authority or power over us. _______________________________________ (half an hour later) Ok DB. If you have not found it by now, odds are you will never find it. Trust me. Like I said, your definition of "death" is nothing more than a fabrication that exists only in the F_anciful L_and of the Calvinist. You do not believe that death=death. You believe death=inability. There is no dictionary in the world that supports such a definition. You insist on propagating a theological lie just for your own existential pleasure. |
|
|
11/19/07 8:49 PM |
Dr. Yamil Luciano | | Curing Theological Diseases | | | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
Discerning Believer wrote: Yamil, What abilities does a corpse have? No. Let's deal with the issue of your dishonesty. No need to try to change the subject again.Do you believe that death=inability? You are in a roll. Anymore lies. Let's see whether you will come out on the carpet. Yes or no? DB wrote: Sometimes Yamil, there are more than one topic going on at the same time and I try my best to cover them. It is not all about you Yamil there are others here as well! Well, wake up and smell the coffee. It's not always about me, but that time it was. There was no need to mention me or contents in my post if if you trully believed it was not about me. |
|
|
11/19/07 2:38 PM |
Dr. Yamil Luciano | | Curing Theological Diseases | | | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
By adding the helping verb "is" you are changing the verb from a simple declarative to "progressing."There is a big difference is stating: 1. John runs. from 2. John is running. That, my friend is the distortion that you are imposing on John 3:16. As I stated before. The present (indicative) tense simply states a fact. It makes a simple declaration. Since this particular one is placed in a dependent clause with the condition "that" then it simply stating that those who meet that condition will have eternal life. |
|
|
11/19/07 1:25 PM |
Dr. Yamil Luciano | | Curing Theological Diseases | | | | | |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
Sorry DB, but what you propose s bad grammar all the way around:1. The tense has nothing to do with who is the subject. The number does. And in this case the number agrees with the subject. 2. The present tense is ALWAYS is in the active tense. So your point is frivolous at best. If you are reffering to the opposite of passive, then you have no point at all for to channge the sentence to passive tense would only make "God" passive. "Whosoever" will still remain active. So, DB you have no point at all. The present tense exists to make a statement of fact. In this case, one has a conditional clause beginning with "that." The statement of fact is that only those who meet the condition of faith will have eternal life. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|