Recent comments

Comments found: 10167

Adam, original sin, and wrath against the Jew

Andrew → Patrick: I would assume that Jesus
Patrick → Andrew: Andrew, Your point is well
Andrew → Patrick: In the passages where Jesus
Patrick → Pete Enns: It seems to me the way Paul
Pete Enns → Andrew: Largely the syntax of v. 7.
Andrew → Pete Enns: But why is it to obvious that
Pete Enns → Andrew: I agree all of this is a side
Andrew → Pete Enns: Peter, thanks, that’s a

The Lord said to my lord...

JT → Berry: What an odd wayto look at
Berry → peter wilkinson: Peter, at some point you need
Berry → JT: Bottom line is that there is
peter wilkinson → Andrew: Andrew - Once again you hvae
Jaco → JT: JT, thanks for taking the
JT → Andrew: I would disgaree about many
Andrew → JT: Andrews narrative/historical
JT → JT: I forgot to finish it before
JT → Jaco: Its not hard to see the
Andrew → peter wilkinson: For trinitarians, there has
peter wilkinson → Andrew: The wider framework of
Jaco → Berry: You are spot-on, BerryThe
JT → Berry: Well, the accusation doesn’t
Berry → Andrew: Bravo, Andrew. Especially the
Andrew → peter wilkinson: But I am arguing that the
Jaco van Zyl → peter wilkinson: Peter,
peter wilkinson → Andrew: Thanks for your correction to

Rob Bell: What we don’t talk about when we talk about God

Ed Dingess → Andrew: I don’t think I accused you
Andrew → Ed Dingess: Come on, Ed. You are clearly
Ed Dingess → Andrew: “Why you church the people of
Ed Dingess → Andrew: You continue to place the

The narrative premise of a post-Christendom theology

Ed Dingess → Andrew: http://reformedreasons
Subscribe to Recent comments