Search results

A tree's known by its fruit. I wouldn't consider someone who is obsessed with justifying their sin wheat.

ditto

because practising homosexuals come here and declare that sex between same sexes is not sin. Imagine what would happen if a practising adulterer came here and started declaring that adultery was not a sin. Or a thief, theft; or a murderer, murder; or an idolator, idolatry. Get the point?

The spirit of prophecy is the witness of Jesus.

I'm impressed by both of you. I will follow what you two say more closely in the future.

This whole thing hinges on what the sabbath is referring to in Leviticus 23:11. If the weekly sabbath, then Tim is right; if the first day of unleavend bread then Mungo is right. Do you want to keep arguing about something we can't know? Either explanation is good considering our current state...

Eh, my bad. He died on the 14th, would have been in the tomb the 15th, 16th and 17th, rising on the 18th (Sunday). Tim is right - Weds.

+1

No they will not be IN christ; they will be in a church. They will think and profess that they are in Christ, but their works will show that they deny him. They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate. Titus...

All in Christ will be raised in 1st resurrection. To state otherwise is to place a stumbling block before the brethren. Hebrews 11:35 can be interpreted to mean that those who held the faith did so that they might obtain the better resurrection (eternal life) instead of the worse in which they...

While I don't doubt that he wanted a precise time, I do take issue with the claim that that was the only sign he was the messiah. There were many signs for those who had eyes to see; but the 3-days-3-nights sign was the only one he was going to give to the pharisees.

No.

Dear bother, you are being stubborn and obnoxious. Time to take a break and pray and ask for a gentle cleansing.

I'm sorry I mentioned his name now. His writing doesn't agree with my interpretation, and really has nothing to do with the subject at hand. I think the point people are missing regarding my OP is that Jesus was not referring to his second coming in Matthew 26:64, but to his fulfillment of an...

Ooh, I see it now. I didn't read the verses you listed (that is always helpful). I don't think John 13:1 supports your view because all it really says is that Jesus having known beforehand that he would be crucified, loved his disciples unto the end. HOWEVER, John 18:28 is very interesting...

The problem I see with this interpretation is that the Essenes were a fringe sect. Jesus was commanded by the law to observe Passover on the evening of 14 Nisan. To have done otherwise would have put him in violation of the law, which would have been sin. The pharisees sat in the seat of Moses...

Well I don't know if full preterists need to be mocked, but they certainly need to be rebuked (or whatever) for teaching the wicked doctrine that Christ returned in 70 AD.

no, I mean why don't you instruct those who don't see. I don't see.

Why don't you demonstrate through scripture that there were two passover dinners.

The spirit of the lord tells me that he doesn't speak through you.