Search results

Again, their righteousness isn't stated as imputed on account of their faith, but because they "kept all of Gods commandments and ordinances of the lord", making them "blameless". There is no other way to comprehend what Luke wrote here. He is saying that I can be saved by following the written...

So is this what Paul was proposing here? According to Paul, praying for governments can lead to "a quiet and peaceful life". If only this actually worked out for the Christians in places like North Korea. Lots of Christians here seem to believe that God belongs to political parties, the...

Zacharia and Elizabeths righteousness isn't described as "imputed" on account of their faith like Abraham, its imputed on account of their works, for keeping the mosaic laws. This is what Luke claims, and nowhere did Luke quote God as saying anything of the kind. As far as God is concerned, the...

That doesn't mean its not inspired or unreliable. If one account is unreliable, then so are all other accounts, a little leaven, leaveneth the whole lump. It just means that our assumptions about who said what are wrong within the narrative. I have an understanding that the Bible is a collection...

How would you explain such verses with this? Does "none righteous" exclude Zacharias and Elisabeth? When it is claimed that they were both "righteous", is that God talking or this Luke talking?

You don't say? So what is her current state of being according to scripture?

:) Yep, Samuel was one of many who were "highly favored" in the sight of God. Mary was nothing special in this regard. She wasn't the first and she wasn't the last either. The catholic church has taken what it means to be favored by God to another 100 steps to mean sinless, and as far as Gods...

No one else in the Bible was favored with grace, or had unmerited favor in the eyes of God you say? , well I guess others like Noah having "grace", or being "highly favored" as one may say also by default makes them exempt from the following verses. Or not, for by claiming Mary to be without...

Does it really?

yeah, well, like what?

Pretty self-explanatory isn't it? Well, not to a catholic it seems. :)

That's what I mean by it being fulfilled in part, either way, there is no kingdom without Jesus.

True, but the kingdom wasn't happening without his sacrifice. Its been fulfilled in part because Jesus is the kingdom, and will be fulfilled in full at the appointed time. Without his sacrifice, there is no new Jerusalem for instance, or new heaven and new earth.

There is a reason why Jesus told the seventy disciples to move on from those not willing to hear the message. You don't sit there arguing with them, you shake the dust off your feet and move on in life. You did your part when you uttered the words of the gospel to them. If they tell to you buzz...

Different circumstances, different time. Jesus was spreading a message never preached before, to preach the same to a Mormon is only preaching to the choir.

Again, he felt forsaken despite him knowing full well that he was sent into this world for the sole purpose of being the sacrifice to start with. For him to even utter such a thing just sounds like a moment of doubt to me, but again, that's just how I see it. If the word felt forsaken, then you...

Some humans aren't worth having a connection with, believer or otherwise. Are we supposed to witness to someone professing themselves to be believers, or are we supposed to witness to non-believers? It shouldn't have to be explained why the former would be a complete waste of time. Despite...

Same here.

Seems like the whole discussion was a waste of time. You would have probably had a more productive discussion with atheists or unbelievers who are willing to listen. I would try that next time.

Contention reveals those approved? What scripture is that?