Search results

(continued from post #4) It cannot be emphasized enough that Paul is not presenting any of the great doctrines of the Christian faith in his letter to the Hebrews. Doctrines such as justification sanctification, imputation, glorification, etc. Nor does Paul say anything about the "mystery...

Scripture does interpret itself. Unless you're a Romanist. Then you have to have the pope and others dictate to you what you believe. Makes it easy. You don't have to study the Bible. You just study what you're told. Say what your'e told. Easy. Remember? There is nothing wrong with...

Please, spare me and others your false humility. What you're sorry for is that I called you on (Rev. 12) being Israel as you want to claim. Which is why you haven't answered when I asked in post # 165 and 166. You stepped in it by saying (Rev.12) is speaking of Israel, when the Roman church...

Oh, because I disagree with you, then I don't know how to interpret? Easy statement. Yet you offered nothing when I gave you the list of my defense in the thread of "Rome and Melchizedek". Your are the king of easy statements without substance. No, I let Scripture interpret itself. You...

What is 'it'? To which you claim I am lying about? You're the one who brought up Mary as the woman in (Rev. 12). Why? If now you say the woman was Israel also? You brought up (Rev.12) to prove the woman was Israel and not Mary. Now you are crawfishing. Remember, that big yellow line...

If your memory was fine, then why did you make your false statement that I didn't know how to interpret (Matt. 7:21-23)? Because your lying? lazy? manipulative? I will give you the benefit of the doubt for moderation sake and say it is due to your bad memory. Hard to remember one post...

No, you're not sorry. You like to use your 'linguistic gymnastics', oh, i'm sorry, your 'linguistic implications' to cover your error. Do you really think others are fooled by this? How can the woman in (Rev.12) literally represent Mary but symbolically represent Israel? In post #136 you...

Well, it shows you have a poor memory. Or, a selective poor memory. Actually all my defense was Biblical. It just didn't conform to your 'generalizations". 'selective'. Stranger

BreadOfLife Still waiting a response for my post #166. Are you saying the woman in (Rev. 12) is Israel? Stranger

You have a poor memory. Go back to the thread "Rome vs Melchizedek". Read my posts #274,277,285,293,300,336,341,347,359,374 Stranger

(continued from post #3) Before going farther I wanted to say, there are many commentaries I have used over the years concerning this subject. One I have which has been very helpful is "Failed Yet Forgiven, by Keith Lamb, "Maranatha Bible Press and Distributors" 1993. This book deals with...

So what? Are you saying you don't believe the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John? Where in Paul's letters does he indicate that he and Peter only knew Jesus from visions? Stranger

Of course. You must hear what I say about (Matt.7:21-23), because you don't know what to say. You can't provide evidence that it pertains to those who are dead. Whether these people are being judged is not the point. What judgement it is and where it takes place is. Use whatever words you...

(continued from post #1) Regrettably Paul did as James asked and placed himself under the Law. The result was chaos. That which was sought after, to show the Jews that Paul did not teach contrary to the Law, was not obtained. Instead Paul had to be rescued from a mob of Law abiding zealots...

I will go on and believe the Bible because of what it says. You have given no proof that (Matt. 7:21-23) is a judgement of the dead. You cite man made headings, 'general' and 'particular', because that is all you know. You're evidence is nauseous, so I am not surprised at your nauseaum...

Hello Mary The reformers you name were part of the Roman church before they were reformers. If they were not part of the Roman church before then they were not reformers. If they were not part of the Protestant movement then they were not reformers. In other words, the Church of England...

I.) Some background The book of Hebrews is definitely addressed to Christians. (Heb.3:1) " Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling..." (Heb. 6:4) ...and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost." (Heb. 10:19) "Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter..." Not only is...

I didn't read anything about any 'particular' or 'general' judgments. Those are man made terms, which are fine if indeed they are supported Scripturally. But yours are not. You google many verses but give no explanation. Am I supposed to be impressed? Explain why those verses you gave...

You speak of doctrine or 'false doctrine' as just a 'fun fact to know'. Then you tell me to 'take this a little more seriously'. The reason you're upset is because I take it very seriously. It's not fun. It's not games. It affects what people believe about God and Jesus Christ. It...

There hasn't been any evidence to ignore. Stranger