Search results

Let's consider this 'asinine' (sic) historical material that links Rome to Islam: Why would "M." make only a deal with 'catholics'? "... Interestingly, Muhammad, despite having waged massacres against communities of various religions, offered his protection to Roman Catholic St. Catherine’s...

Let's consider this 'asinine' (sic) historical material that links Rome to Islam: Ibn Ishaq, The Life Of Muhammad, A Translation of Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, pages 105-107 paragraphs 152-154 - [page 105 paragraph 152] “... Wahb b. Kaisan told me that 'Ubayd said to him: Every year during the...

Let's consider this 'asinine' (sic) historical material that links Rome to Islam: The Catholic connection - Khadija d. Khuwaylid [first wife of Abu al Qasim [Muhammad / Ahmed] and [her cousin] Waraqa bin Naufal bin Asad bin 'Abdul 'Uzza [a catholic]: Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 1, Number...

Oh, I think 'asinine' is incorrect, and quite understating the reality of things. Romanism & Islamism Romanism - Must be read in the offiically recognized Latin Islamism - Must be read in the offiically recognized Arabic Romanism - Main Country is Italy, a Peninsula facing to the West...

To answer: [1] "Yes". [2] "No." The title of the thread could actually be, "JPII was wrong [period]" with or without lip service to a 'qur'an' (one of the many Uthmanic recensions).

That is blatantly incorrect, and is simply being 'asserted apriori' and proving what you wanted, and I reject such an unfounded assertion and method. Act. 7:38 KJB This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who...

No. See the previous passages, in that "the Word" was "made flesh", not the Holy Spirit, which was He which was over Mary, placing the "Seed": Joh 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and...

Indeed. One Holy Ghost/Spirit, let's read the context and not take a verse out of its context: Joh_7:39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.) The Holy Ghost is distinct...

Unitarianism, the other error, the same as the 'Trinity', as they are both the same at their root. The "Word" is not the Father. Neither is the Holy Ghost, the Father, nor the Son. Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Joh 1:2 The same was...

Those who continually whine about the false doctrine of the 'Trinity' (RC def), never address the texts that describe the Word as "God", or Jesus as "God", "JEHOVAH", etc. Instead, they continually set up a straw man and knock it down. Waste of time.

No. You misunderstood 1 Corinthians 8:6. It is an expansion of Deuteronomy 6:4. 1Co 8:6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him. Deu 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD...

John 1:1 speaks of two Persons, [1] The Word (Jesus, John 1:14,17) who is "God" (John 1:1c; Genesis 1:7), but the "Word" is not "God" (John 1:1b) the Person of the Father (Genesis 1:6). In effect, "God" (The Word, Person of the Son) was "with" "God" (The Ancient of Days; The Person of the Father).

The actual citation is: Joh_14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. Joh 14:10 ου πιστευεις οτι εγω εν τω πατρι και ο πατηρ εν εμοι εστιν τα ρηματα α...

Not true. Jesus appeared to Ananias, which Luke recorded, about Paul. Act 9:8 And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man: but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus. Act 9:9 And he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink...

That's a misunderstanding of 1 Corinthians 16:2. That is a special offering taken up for the poor, during the time of the famine (dearth, Acts 11:28), in Jerusalem (see vs 3; also Acts 11:29). Offering, and special offering, are differing than tithe, (both of which, offering and tithe...

Revelation 1:10: Some have said that "the Lord's day" is simply unique, and that if John (in Revelation 1:10) had meant "sabbath" he would have written "sabbath". This is actually presumption, based upon a false apriori, about what certain individuals themselves think the Holy Ghost/Spirit...

Revelation 1:10: The context shows that the "day" spoken of, in each texts presented is "the LORD('s)". John as a physical Jew, who was following the Messiah (Jesus), thus a Christian, was on the Isle of Patmos, for what reason? Rev 1:2 Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony...

The Lord's Day is the 7th day the Sabbath of the Lord. The "Lord's day" according to scripture, is the 7th day, the sabbath day of the Lord. Genesis 2:1-3,4 - 'the seventh day', 'God', 'day', 'the LORD God' [… God [the LORD] … day …] Exodus 16:23 - "to morrow [the seventh day] is the rest of...

You misread Paul, thus your conundrum on Colossians 2: Powerpoint (which includes Part 4, not included in video) https://archive.org/download/colossians-2vs-16/Colossians%202vs16.pptx Bonus:

I see. Suit yourself.