New Posts

Michie · Saturday at 7:09 PM

concretecamper said:
We do not need to stand with Israel for the sake of it being Israel. IMO, Israel is a political construct, not a nation. The nation ceased close to 2,000 years ago.

Mat 27:25 And the whole people answering, said: His blood be upon us and upon our children.

Well that why it’s an op-ed piece. He believes it along with many evangelicals. Does not mean anyone else needs to believe it.

Ivan Hlavanda · Saturday at 6:57 PM

Aaron112 said:
The messenger of YHVH, the apostle paul, did.

Did Apostle Pal kept every single commandment of God? No. Thus he was a sinner in need of a Saviour.

Have you learnt nothing from Paul's letters?

Romans 3
“None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.” - this includes Paul

23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, - this includes Paul

Romans 7
9 I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died. 10 The very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me. 11 For sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me. 12 So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.
13 Did that which is good, then, bring death to me? By no means! It was sin, producing death in me through what is good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure. 14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin. 15 For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. 16 Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. 17 So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. 18 For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. 19 For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. 20 Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.

Soyeong · Saturday at 6:44 PM

Dan Perez said:
And ROMANS 6:14. For sin will NOT //. OV. is a DISJUNCATIVE PARTICLE. NEGATIVE , means SIN. will never rule OVER YOU. RULE

over you. are NOT //. OV is also a DISJUNCATIVE PARRICLE NEGATIVE as you are. not under THE LAW , but under GRACE !!

Paul spoke about multiple categories of law other than the Law of Moses, so it is always important to discern which law he was referring to. For example, in Romans 7-8, Paul said that the Law of God is good, that he wanted to do good, that he delighted in obeying it, and that he served it with his mind in contrast with the law of sin, which was working within his members to cause him not to do the good that he wanted to do, which was waging war against the law of his mind, which he served with his flesh, which held him captive, and which the Law of the Spirit as free us from. The Law of God leads us to do what is godly, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12) while the law of sin leads us in the opposite direction by stirring up sinful passions in order to bear fruit unto death (Romans 7:5). So verses that refer something that would be absurd for Paul to delight in doing should not be interpreted as referring to the Law of God while verses that refer to a law that is sinful, that causes sin to increase, or that hinders us from obeying the Law of God shouldbe interpreted as referring to the law of sin. For example, Paul described the law that we are not under in Romans 6:14 as being a law where sin had dominion over him and it would be absurd for Paul to delight in sin having dominion over him, but rather that is the role of the law of sin. In Roman 6:15, being under grace does not mean that we are permitted to sin, and in Romans 7:7, the Law of God is not sinful but how we know what sin is, so we are still under it. Moreover, everything else in Romans 6 speaks in favor of obedience to the Law of God and against sin.

Dan Perez said:
Also , read 2 Cor 3:13-16. a killer VERSE. !!

The bottom line is that we must obey God rather than man, so if you think that Paul should be interpreted as promoting rebellion against what God has commanded, then you should be quicker to disregard everything that he said than to disregard anything that God has commanded. In Deuteronomy 13, the way that God instructed to determine that someone is a false prophet who is not speaking for Him is if they speak against obeying His law, so it is either incorrect to interpret Paul as doing that or he was a false prophet, but either way followers of Christ should be followers of his example of obedience to the Law of God. The reality is that Paul was a servant of God who therefore never promoted rebellion against what He has commanded.

Dan Perez said:
And do. you have a verse HOW anyone can be saved by the NEW COVENANT ??

dan p

In Psalms 119:29-30, he wanted to put false ways far from him, for God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey His law, and he chose the way of faith by setting it before him, so this has always been the one and only way of salvation by grace through faith alone.

BBerean · Saturday at 6:23 PM

catlynne333 said:
Hi I am new here, I read and agree

Ditto! Shalom y'all

jonojim1337 · Saturday at 5:54 PM

You are welcome to pray for me if you feel inspired. I feel like I’m stuck in worldly matters, even though I would like to live a more spiritual, Christ-like life.

durangodawood · Saturday at 5:46 PM

Here we see religion failing to properly serve politics like its supposed to now.

In cases like this, infringement is appropriate.

Landon Caeli · Saturday at 5:09 PM

Nancy who..??

Landon Caeli · Saturday at 5:03 PM

Them Trump boys. Always up to no good...

Login to view embedded media

Reginald Taylor Jr · Saturday at 4:59 PM

November 8, 2025

1 Peter 2:24 KJV
[24] who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.

My Interpetation:
To be set free from checks and balances scales through Jesus Sacrifice on cross death 3rd day rise again from grave.

Provided - Hand of God Taking Authority over our words and minds speaking faith , living your life like God, Christians. Giving abilities to perform and performance.
Mark 1:15 KJV
'“The time has come,” he said. “The kingdom of God has come near. Repent and believe the good news!” '

To believe I'm Jesus Christ to be the truth also healing God's spoken words

Interpetation Written and Spoken by Reginald Taylor Jr

The Liturgist · Saturday at 3:41 PM

Amo2 said:
Ethics in Internet

Quotes below from link above, emphasis in quotes is mine.

It is important to note that since the time of this Papal document, the Popes have had private meetings with the owners, heads, or CEO's of all the major social media platforms. Many of which we have all witnessed exercising a great deal of censorship on their platforms. These of course only represent the censorship the public at large has noticed and therefore brought forward to be addressed.

Here we have an address from the Vatican intending to define the parameters and or narratives of communication on the internet. Which it had apparently already addressed regarding the media, and has continued to address to date regarding social media as well. Basically a call to regulate that which it has considered to deregulated. These regulations should be implemented in line with the principles of what the Vatican describes as the common good. So, who determines or defines what the common good is? Adolf Hitler’s twenty fifth point of his 25 Points of the Nazi Party was - Common Good Before Individual Good. Adolf and the Nazi’s are pretty much gone for now, so whose common good are we talking about exactly? Obviously, we are talking about the common good as defined by the Vatican and Popes. Who is the Vatican to be calling for these regulations by nations on a global scale?

It most certainly is not the voice of the people of the various nations via the representatives they have elected to convey and implement their political desires. The Vatican stands among and as another international globalist institution of unelected officials, who wish to impose their politics upon the various nations of this world with or without the consent of the people of these nations. Just like all the other international globalist institutions of unelected officials, desiring to do the same. The Vatican itself has stated and supports the implementation of the rule of certain of these international globalist institutions over all nations. All of which is to specifically bypass the will of the peoples of nations in favor of the rule of unelected elitist international globalist officials in cahoots with each other. Of which the Vatican itself is a major if not the most significant players. Being herself a monarchal leftover from the dark or middle ages, this is the form of authoritative government she most fully supports and has most often supported throughout her lengthy history. To create such a system on a global scale, would be to recreate the conditions under which the Vatican ruled with the kings of this earth for over a thousand years. Just a global version of the dark ages with the Vatican and unelected officials of international organizations ruling together over all. Rather than the dark ages version of the Vatican and unelected kings, queens, and royalty ruling together predominantly over all European nations.

Authoritative government and censorship walk hand in hand. We have already and do continue to witness attempts by globalist and or left leaning entities to censor speech that does not support and or contradicts their narratives. The most recent and appalling examples being demonstrated during the Covid-19 plandemic. As we continue to examine the topic of censorship, I intend to reveal the direct connection between the so called common good, and the same. The following post will be an article from the days of Hitler himself addressing the dangers of a supposed common good. After which we will continue to address the present Papal document under examination, followed by many other Papal documents defining “The common good”, and its connection to authoritarian government and censorship.

Are you seriously blaming the Roman Catholic Church for the censorship of certain left-leaning tech firms?

I would point out you have no evidence - not even circumstantial evidence, that the Roman church has conspired with these firms. The fact that the Pope has met with their leaders is immaterial - the Pope meets with a number of people, and different Popes have had different agendas. For example Pope Leo XIV is concerned about the dehumanizing uses of AI, as am I.

Obviously since chatGPT is about to allow users to generate erotica, which the RCC is opposed to, the Pope does not have much influence over the tech industry titans.

I really feel like this accusation, and your accusation of 120 million Roman Catholic caused fatalities in the Middle Ages, are off base in the extreme, and would like to know where you found them. Whoever is responsible for initially propagating these allegations should either bring forth real evidence or apologize to Roman Catholics everywhere, such as my pious Roman Catholic friends @chevyontheriver @Michie @Valletta @boughtwithaprice @RileyG and @Xeno.of.athens

The Liturgist · Saturday at 3:38 PM

Amo2 said:
We have direct testimony and teaching from our Lord Jesus Christ concerning the proper place of tradition in relation to the law and testimony of the word of God, that is to say holy scripture.

Mrk 7:1 Then came together unto him the Pharisees, and certain of the scribes, which came from Jerusalem. 2 And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault. 3 For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders. 4 And when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brasen vessels, and of tables. 5 Then the Pharisees and scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashen hands? 6 He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. 7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. 8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. 9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition. 10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death: 11 But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free. 12 And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother; 13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

Tradition itself is subject to the law and testimony or word of God. Whatever traditions contradict the teachings of the law and testimony of holy scripture, are to be sacrificed by the believer, rather than the other way around.

Isa 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

We know our Lord was speaking of the Pharisaical traditions, and not Holy Tradition, for this reason - St. Paul expressly enjoins us to follow Holy Tradition in 1 Corinthians 11:2, 2 Thessalonians 2:15, and in the original Greek through the use of a word that means “traditioned” in Galatians 1:8-9.

Thus the abuse of Mark 7 as a condemnation of the Apostolic Tradition is simply eisegesis. If one reads the New Testament as a coherent whole, it is clear it endorses tradition, which was acknowledged by the early Protestants such as Martin Luther, Thomas Cranmer, John Wesley and even John Calvin - who did not dispense with tradition but merely sought to use Scripture to evaluate the traditions of the Roman Catholic Church at that time.

It would probably have been better to evaluate the Roman Catholic Church relative to the Orthodox churches since everything Luther was bothered by was not an issue in the Orthodox church; indeed the first proper Protestant church, the Unitas Fratrum in Moravia, under St. Jan Hus and St. Jerome of Prague, was an attempt to restore those things the Czechs and Slovaks had enjoyed under Orthodoxy - communion in both kinds and the use of a language (church Slavonic) which they could understand, even if that language was not the vernacular (for some Europeans likewise Latin was appropriate as a comprehensible liturgical language, particularly in Southern Europe, indeed Italians can understand some bits of Latin even today, particularly in Sardinia, and other Latin words such as Gratias are plainly translated into other languages such as Spanish, and indeed the Roman Church originally adopted Latin as a vernacular language, to be more accessible to the lower classes of Rome who could not speak Greek, not having access in their adolescence to a Rhaetor, the Roman equivalent of a private high school, which was out of budget for all except Patricians, Plebs of Equestrian stature and wealthy merchants such as Marcion, the heretical shipping magnate.

christianlloydteegardin · Saturday at 2:50 PM

I find that ambient and drone music help quiet the endless loops in my head (ADHD for you) and enables me to digest Scripture more easily.

Lukaris · Saturday at 2:21 PM

Christians should carefully read John 4:21-24, Romans 11:1-36 ( especially Romans 11:21-23)and beware of the current extreme, anti Israel sentiments that are emerging. Unbelievers should read and be hopefully converted.

Israel has a lot to answer for but it has enemies who will always try to not allow it to even exist.

timothyu · Saturday at 2:17 PM

I'm happy to have lived in an age of biblical enlightenment and have witnessed what it represents, the continual defeat of good by evil and the doom to come, but knowing ultimately that HIS Will will be done, not rebellious man's or elohim's who refuse to learn from history in their selfish rampage towards destruction.

Yarddog · Saturday at 2:09 PM

Valletta said:
The more monitors the better. We don't need a repeat of Michigan. Lara Trump recruited more than 100,000 poll watchers.

Crooked Trump monitors don't make an election better

peaceful-forest · Saturday at 2:04 PM

Discussion 1 was about Eve. This discussion will be about Adam, and at times Eve, because on certain points it was impossible to not to mention her.

I won't be talking about every single thing regarding Adam that is brought up in the book (there is a lot), so I picked certain things.

Before I begin, please remember that this is posted in the Egalitarian forum. If you are interested in participating in this discussion, please read the Statement of Purpose and make sure your post doesn't violate it. There were issues/problems that came up in Discussion 1 and I do not want that to happen again. It resulted in Moderator action. Thank you.

Read Genesis 2 and 3 in your Bible. I will post a link to the NIV translation, but you are welcome to read whichever translation you prefer.

Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 2 - New International Version

Thus the heavens and the earth were completed in all their vast array. By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. Then God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that...

www.biblegateway.com

Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 3 - New International Version

The Fall - Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?” The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, ‘You must not...

www.biblegateway.com

Some points about Adam (and sometimes Eve) mentioned in "God's Word to Women":

Adam and Eve were in one body in the beginning; they were created at the same time but Adam was "formed" first, then Eve (Paragraphs 23, 24, 30)

God`s Word to Women : katherine c. bushnell : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

archive.org

God`s Word to Women : katherine c. bushnell : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

archive.org

God`s Word to Women : katherine c. bushnell : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

archive.org
With the above point in mind, Eve was taken out of Adam's "side" not "rib" (Paragraphs 38, 39, 41, 42, 43)

God`s Word to Women : katherine c. bushnell : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

archive.org

God`s Word to Women : katherine c. bushnell : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

archive.org
At one point in time, Adam was free to eat from the Tree of Life, but he chose not to (Paragraph 31)

God`s Word to Women : katherine c. bushnell : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

archive.org
Adam was given certain responsibilities concerning the Garden of Eden; Adam did not fulfill his responsibilities since Satan entered the Garden (Paragraphs 31, 36, 37, 69)

God`s Word to Women : katherine c. bushnell : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

archive.org

God`s Word to Women : katherine c. bushnell : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

archive.org

God`s Word to Women : katherine c. bushnell : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

archive.org

God`s Word to Women : katherine c. bushnell : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

archive.org
According to Bushnell and others, Adam's condition of "good" did not last; this problem led to Eve being formed and taken out of the side as a superior help (Paragraphs 31, 32, 33, 34, 35)

God`s Word to Women : katherine c. bushnell : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

archive.org

God`s Word to Women : katherine c. bushnell : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

archive.org

What did you think of these points? Agree or disagree? Not sure? Do any of these statements contradict what you have been taught?

Dan Perez · Saturday at 1:53 PM

#1. AS. // HOS. is an. ADVERB

# 2 ALSO. // KAI. is a CONJUNCATION

# 3. IN. // EN. is a PREPOSITION

# 4 ALL. // PAS. is. in the DATIVE CASE. an. in. the PLURAL

# 5. HIS EPISTLES. //. EPISTOIE. inch DATIVE CASE in the PLURAL

# 6. SPEAKING. // LALEO. in the PRESENT TENSE. , in. the ACTIVE VOICE. is a PARTICIPLE. in the NOMINATIVE CASE a SINGULAR

# 7 IN. // EN. is. a PREPOSTION

# 8 THEM // AUTOS. is a PRESONAL POSSESSETIVE PRONOUN. in. the DATIVE CASE. in. the PLURAL

# 9 OF. // PERI. is a PREPOSTION

# 10 THESE. THINGS. // LOUTON. is a DEMONSTRATIVE PROMOUN. in. the GENITE CASE in. the NEUTER in. the PLURAL

# 11. IN. //. EN. , is a PREPOSTION

#12 WHICH. // HOS. is a RELATIVE PRONOUN. in. the DATIVE CASE. in. the PLURAL

# 13 ARE. //. ESTI. in. the PRESENT TENSE in. the INDICATIVE MOOD. in. the SINGULAR

# 14 SOME THINGS // ESTI in the PRESENT TENSE in. the INDICATIVE MOOD in v the SIGNULAR

# 15. HARD TO BE UNDER STOOD. //. DYSNOSTOS. in. the NOMINATIVE CASE , in. the PLURAL in. the NEUTER

# 16 WHICH. //. HOSis a RELATIVE PRONOUN. in a NOMINATIVE CASE. in. the PLURAL. is a NEUTER

# 17. THEY. THAT. // HO. is a DEFINITE ARTICLE. is a NOMINATIVE CASE. in. the PLURAL

# 18. ARE UNLEARNED. // AMATHES. in. the NOMINATIVE CASE in. the PLURAL

# 19 AND. // KAI. is a CONJUNCATION.

# 20 UNSTABLE // ASTENKTOS

# 21. WREST. // STREBL. in. the PRESENT TENSE. in the ACTIVE VOICE in the INDICATIVE MOOD in. the PLURAL

# 22 AS. //. HOS is an ADVERB

# 23. ALSO. // KAI is a CONJUNCATION

# 24 THE //. HO. is a DEFINITE ARTICLE. in. the ACCUSATIVE CASE in. the PLURAL

# 25 OTHER // LOIPOS. in. the ACCUSATIVE CASE in. the PLURAL

# 26. SCRIPTURES. //. GRAPHE. in. the ACCUSATIVE CASE. in. the PLURAL

# 27. UNTO. //. PROSis a PREPOSTION

# 28 THEIR // AUTOS is a PERSONAL POSSESSEITIVE PRONOUN. in. the GENITIVE CASE in. th PLURAL

#29 OWN //. DIOS. is a ACCUSATIVE CASE in. the SINGULAR.

# 30 DESTRUCTION. // APOLEIA. in the ACCUSATIVE CASE in. the SINGULAR

as they. do also the rest of the SCRIPTURES

# A. This just shows that Peter was teaching THE LAW

# B And Peter did not a GRACE teacher as was Paul

# C And Peter was WARNING all that. there though that had the TRUTH and were also doing destruction to. the

rest of the. SCRIPTURES .and even. Peter sees the difference between LAW and GRACE !!
dan p

essentialsaltes · Saturday at 1:34 PM

Editing federal employees’ emails to blame Democrats for shutdown violated their First Amendment rights, judge says

A federal judge ruled Friday that the Department of Education violated the First Amendment rights of some agency employees when it sent out-of-office messages on their behalf that blamed Democrats for the government shutdown.

The ruling from US District Judge Christopher Cooper is the latest court rebuke of controversial moves by the Trump administration during what has now become the longest shutdown in US history.

Cooper permanently barred the administration from “modifying furloughed employees’ out-of-office e-mail messages to include partisan speech” for all members of the union American Federation of Government Employees.

Amo2 · Saturday at 1:07 PM

Login to view embedded media
A good video about the unreliability of radiometric dating.

2PhiloVoid · Saturday at 1:03 PM

Michie said:
Open coffin and chaplain in a Dracula cape: Church receives hate comments for "Halloween service"

A Halloween service with an open coffin, artificial fog, and a chaplain in a Dracula cape: This pleased around 50 residents of Freising – and angered many others.

But the Latin Mass is the problem

Halloween and the Catholic Church, do they somehow go together? Yes, says Freising parish vicar Michael Korell, pointing to the Catholic origins of the evening before All Saints' Day and therefore advocating for a "Halloween service" on October 31 in the Mortuary chapel at St. George's Cemetery. With plenty of artificial fog, a semi-open coffin, and a touch of spooky atmosphere.

Under the Dracula cape, Chaplain Michael Korell wore his official vestments.

Continued below.

Catholic priest holds Halloween service dressed as Dracula - video

cathcon.blogspot.com

.... That's interesting. :swoon:

I'm not sure that this form of 'seeker friendly' service really does the job or represents the appropriate awareness of sanctity. But that's just my comment in passing.

Delvianna · Saturday at 12:37 PM

Gregory Thompson said:
The book also says those who add to the words of the book will have plagues in it added to them, and those who take away from the words, the blessings will be taken away.

I'm not re-writing the bible into my own translation and then handing that out to the public... I'm trying to figure stuff out and I think you're misinterpreting that. Based on your own stance for this, because I think you're misinterpreting this verse, I could give you the same warning. See why you shouldn't do that? Going around telling everyone they'll have the 10 plagues of Egypt when they're trying to understand scripture, is going to put them off from even trying in the first place. You are literally fear-mongering to silence alternative interpretations which is seriously vile misuse of scripture.

Gregory Thompson said:
That's what the scripture verse says: Men not defiled by women.

We'll have to agree to disagree because there's symbolic queues for me to interpret this not literally.

Gregory Thompson said:
The mirror to the tribes is the disciples of the original 12 apostles.

All who believe fit under one of these.

That has nothing to do with the tribe list of Revelation though. OT sure, but not this one.

All in all, we will have to agree to disagree.

Ophiolite · Saturday at 12:35 PM

The Barbarian said:
Of course it's significant. But we have evidence of human structures earlier than that. I don't think anyone was surprised that humans would stay in a place that had all the resources they needed, or that they'd be making tools, possibly for trade. Interesting, but not a surprising find.

Environmental conditions changed dramtically over the time for which the site was occupied and tool use continued. A more reasonable expectation is that as the environment changed the population would move in order to remain in one where the conditions were ones they were familiar with. I understand such shifts are observed today and have been identified in the past. As such, describing this continuity as surprising seems a reasonable position, though I would prefer unexpected - it's less emotive.

christianlloydteegardin · Saturday at 12:32 PM

jas3 said:
Amen.
I don't see why that would be a problem, but both sides of the debate are pretty well hashed out in material you can find online. Just don't expect them to change their minds.
I found a church that still honors head covering in Orthodoxy. That's pretty far off from Plymouth Brethren, but you should know that there are other options outside of them.

For me, it's pretty clear that effectively all Christians up until 1960 or so weren't mistaken about what St. Paul meant, and that arguments about the passage being figurative or even based on an erroneous belief about hair being a reproductive organ are just modern post hoc rationalizations for a result of the feminist movement and a general loss of modesty in modern culture.

Took the words out of my mouth.

Dan Perez · Saturday at 12:29 PM

Aristarkos said:
That is what you think it says, but it doesn't. As long as you do not recognize there are different groups of believers in Scripture, you keep mixing them up which creates an unrecognizable mix. Paul speaks in his first seven letters to those — both Jews and Gentiles — who are blessed WITH Abraham in contrast to Israel who are blessed IN Abraham. These are the ones who through faith became sons of God.

Since only some of the Jews belonged to the heavenly group, Peter feared their judgment of those who were still child of God.

Aristakos

And have you ever read ACTS 28: 25-28 and EXPLAIN VERSES IN ISA 6:2

And then explain Isa. 6:5-13 AND who. is Isaiah. speaking too ??

dan p

New Posts

New Posts

Editing federal employees’ emails to blame Democrats for shutdown violated their First Amendment rights, judge says​

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page

Editing federal employees’ emails to blame Democrats for shutdown violated their First Amendment rights, judge says