Search results

Not exactly sure what your point is, but at least part of that does not reconcile: 1 Corinthians 15:23 But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming.

If we are going to reason with one another, it will need to be one thing at a time, no long multiple issue exhortations, but concise and point by point. Explanation on one point is one thing, but rattling on with a myriad of issues is not working. Pick one.

The very essence of God is not "mystical space." Woe.

Again...I'm not going to debate against your accusations against the spiritual nature of God--God is spirit, and you mock Him and me both.

Another sample of your error: And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins, 2 in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience, 3 among whom also we all once...

I am not going to keep jousting with you while you squirm and struggle over those things you do not want to hear. But, just as a sample of your being generally wrong about it all--here above you speak contrary to Christ, who said of these times...which is in accord with what I also said...

You mock. Which was also to come. So be it.

It's hard to tell whether you are being facetious or not, so I will explain: "Those who dwell on the treadmill of unbelief waiting for what was promised to come quickly." are those who do not believe what Jesus said about His coming "quickly", which was to "shortly take place" after His...

My post was more of an explanation as to why things are the way they are, and how in spite of our abuses of authority which belongs rather to God, still He is working all things together for good for those who love Him according to His purpose, even for all generations. Blessing to you!

There are good things to consider here. But we run the risk of error by semantics. In other words, if we say that God is One, how then is it correct that we refer to "part" as "part", or even as separate "persons?" (rhetorical) What I am getting at...is that I do not consider it correct to do...

My other approach did not work to get you thinking as I had hoped...so let's try this: Your explanation here in the above post of why Jesus referred to the Holy Spirit as "Him" and "He", was that the word actually means "It." The problem and error of that--is that God is not an "It." Which...

And now I will refine my comment: This is that time.

Such freedom is by design. By exceeding our would be authority which is as much as allowed by God, we prolong the days until we come to fully realize our salvation and all the truth and goodness of God. I mean, if people acted perfectly, as God says, He would heal us and be done. But by not...

This is true, even when that love comes in the form of rebuke or even harsh correction. Case in point--the Ninevites and the word from God through Jonah.

I suspect you will get grief from the highly religious, for they love their position, even to the point of abuse. My experience, is that although all authority belongs to God, He has appointed all who are His to act according to the gifts that He has given each, according to His purpose. For...

This was to be that time, but you have not received it. So be it.

That's fine...I mean if you want to wait until time has revealed what I have been saying, so shall it be. But this was to be that time, and now you have passed it off as a denominational issue or the teachings of men--which it is not. My only teaching is from God. I'm cool with blunt.

Clowns also do rodeos, and Satan also quotes scripture. But you have spoken accurately, that what you have been saying is what you "believe" (rather than "know"). And while I am fine with being finished, I will do so by repeating, that No, I was not speaking to you opinion to opinion, I was...

That would be a true statement in a lot of cases. But in this case, I was referring to the error of not knowing that "God is a consuming fire" and spirit, and that when He refers to fire, He is more times than not speaking of that consuming fire of the Spirit. In the scriptures "fire" is very...

Ooooh, it is as you have portrayed all along :( You speak "figuratively", but when God does, you take it literally? But, no, it is not literally, but the words speak of God whom is spirit, whom is "a consuming fire." "Fire" is synonymous with "spirit." That is why I quoted the verses. In...