Search results

Well I don't think that definition covers gnosticism entirely. There is a duality involved (as you imply), but the way I understand it, gnostics eschew the material realm as evil, and cleave to more mystical ideas. It's almost as if you are doing the same in a different way by assiduously...

OK. I suspect that there's some kind of gnostic mysticism at work in your life, but at this point I am not certain. So I'll take what you have said and try to learn from it. And I'll be watching. :)

Oh it is about you my friend. You present yourself as a teacher of righteousness; and I am admonishing you before God, the host of heaven, and all men to answer my question directly.

You keep talking around the subject, but never quite have the courage to say directly what you are implying in your words. I want you say clearly and directly that you have no sin. If you do not believe this, then say that. Since you present yourself as a teacher of righteousness, that would be...

The problem with your analogy is that we are not yet in our new bodies with the new operating system in which we cannot sin. We are in our old bodies with the old O/S, and we are still able to sin. Sometimes old and new systems have to run concurrently when transitioning from the old to the new...

So the difference between 'Christ and his truth' and the 'words of Christ' "is who is doing the interpreting." OK. That makes sense.

You guys are a trip. You didn't answer my question: Am I reading your answer correctly? "Christ Jesus is ... symbolic of The Living Word of Holy Writ. Or are you saying something different?

OK. That's what I thought. I had hoped for more, but you're not the person.

Am I reading your answer correctly? "Christ Jesus is ... symbolic of The Living Word of Holy Writ. Or are you saying something different?

Really? The scriptures call Christ the word of God. Christ called himself the truth. Could you please explain how this is "wresting and instability within the Holy Scriptures". :)

No, I'm not talking about orthodox Jews. Do you even want to know the truth? Or is this just all a game so you won't have to examine your beliefs?

God's word? Can you please explain what that means? Is a mistranslation God's word, or do you believe the bible is perfect. Do you even know what the bible is? Is the Masoretic Text always right? Is the LXX never right? The apostles relied on the LXX heavily. Why are you so afraid of it? (Note...

How does this answer the question? It doesn't. It's a distraction. 2Pe_3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own...

Well I understand that's how you see it, Would you like to comment on the fact that the Israelis have identified the location of Azal that completely invalidates the fleeing-east-through-the-Mount-of-Olives-to-Azal narrative?

So are you saying that you have no sin nature?

I knew you would respond like that because that is your attitude toward all who try to get a direct answer from you. IMO that technique derives from an attitude of self-righteousness that tries to marginalize the other person as a means of appearing superior and deflect attention from the fact...

That doesn't prove anything. One could be a mistranslation. The latter is obviously based on the LXX. There are some translational discrepancies between the LXX and the Masoretic Text. Sometimes the MT is right, and the LXX wrong; sometimes vice versa.

You didn't answer my question. You implied that the "twisted meaning of words" are the words of Christ to apparently make some point. Are you able to verbalize an answer without talking obliquely?

The difference between them and me is that I do "believe on Christ Jesus as The Saviour" and very definately do "heed God's Holy Writ as Truth." The difference between you and me, apparently, is that I believe that God gives us, and expects us to use, a sound mind that is able to think...

Acts 1:9-12 only states that Christ will return in the same manner he ascended, i.e. in clouds (cf. Revelation 1:7). It says nothing about where he will return. You are simply reading a return to the Mount of Olives into the text based on the needs of the narrative. I repeat, without reading it...