Search results

i agree, IMO its still going on today, lots of talk and no actions. the first Christians didnt call themselves Christians they called themselves doers of the law.

why would one want Christ in them? what would be the point? unless there is a practical application its just words. Matthew 23:3 so do and observe whatever they tell you, but not the works they do. For they preach, but do not practice.

this sounds like a lecture i watched a while back on nano technology. you can have your brain nanoteched and it turns you brain into a super computer, you go from being a human to a transhuman. it reminds me of the things that went on in the pre flood age. all flesh was corrupted. how close are...

i agree. so what is "Christ in us"? would that not be faith in the Most High just as Jesus had Faith in the Most High, Jesus always said His works were not of Him but the one who sent Him. when Peter walked on water with Jesus but sank, Jesus didnt tell him that was something only the Christ...

i never understood why (in the NT) there are so many writings of Paul and so little from the 12 Apostles. James was the leader of the Jerusalem church and all we have from him are 2 small scriptures. if Pauls works became scripture what about the other apostles of apostles like Paul?

Jesus followed and obeyed the law. Jesus is our example. teaching others to not follow the example of Christ makes no sense to me.

where does Jesus say that? pretty sure He does not. however Jesus does warn against taking laws of man and elevating them as equal laws of the Father.

many Christians, Christians in name only, have done many shameful things in the name of the faith over the years, inquisitions, common people denied access to bibles, justification for murder, mega money churches today etc. it makes sense what he is talking about.

wasnt GW Bush (republican) the one that said on TV our Lord told him to invade Iraq. how much money did the Bush family make off that war? do men of the Lord profit from the deaths of others? hate to be the one to tell you but most all the leaders are corrupt, the label they attach to...

he was being rude and insulting. do you really think its proper to gang up on someone. the response was to you and he was jumping in to get one more shot at me.i believe your better than that. i would be happy to agree to disagree on the lost sheep and get back to the missing books, or truths...

i believe the Jews are the first to be called, i have never said different. its what Jesus says after that, the other sheep that would hear His voice. if Jesus went to other sheep it would not change the context. the Jews were still the first to get the message, its not going to reverse that...

yes because its complete nonsense to think native americans would know their own history. i understand the bible fine, i dont cherry pick and black out the passages to fit man made ideasi want to believe.

and what of Jesus and the centurion. Jesus and the Canaanite woman. were these Jews? and what of Jesus saying He had other sheep to go to, they will hear His voice. should i close my eyes and make believe these passages do not exist?

your gonna lecture me on inner meaning and then come right back on another post and tell me dont look for an inner meanings?

he wasnt agreeing with you he was speaking for you, using you to take a cheap shot.

allegory does not mean take the words of Jesus and make them into what ever you want to hear. i believe very much their are inner teachings but that by no means make the teachings on the surface void or false as you suggest.

why do you ignore the part where He says "they shall hear my voice"? why is this such a threat to you?

and again (2nd time) not one of these passages says Jesus did not go to other sheep.

historical fact? the history of the native americans is not true? we dont know our own history? i bet if native americans were white europeans no one would have a problem with it.

oz is a big boy let him speak for himself and stop trying to tag team me.