Search results

I've been surprised at the amount of New Testament Christians that somehow claim that the provisions of Romans 7.3 don't apply to the church...

There is an idea in Scripture also about the years that the locust has eaten...(Joel 2.25)

Bizarre...and how are local church leaders somehow content with that situation, when they are to feed the flock (Acts 20), if its members truly are a spiritual flock...?

Maybe it's true after all that whole chunks of the Bible are still unknown to some congregations... :confused:

@Butterfly FYI...

@Butterfly FYI...

@TruthBeliever FYI...

@TruthBeliever FYI...

I don't see baptismal regeneration in the Scriptures. In Ac 2.41, ppl were baptized who had already gladly received his word; they were not baptized supposedly to become believers.

The Minor Prophets are minor indeed in length, but not minor in value... :)

@TruthBeliever FYI...

@TruthBeliever FYI...

Great, encouraging advice to Timothy...

A searching but also as you say a very encouraging book! Thank-you.

My point is not ad hominem to you, Sir - even though it may be yours to me - but on account of a dispensational framework which notices that the meeting in 1 Thess. 4 is in the air, not on earth, and it clearly involves the church. The day of the LORD often mentioned in the Old Testament...

Yes; both the KJV and the Geneva Bible were based on the previous Bishops' Bible, I believe.

A classics lecturer pointed out that Greek statues of Aphrodite that Jesuits purloined for display in the Vatican in the 17th century, showed that already their tastes were ecumenical. (i.e., the problem didn't start with a couple of nuns...)

Hi; good to see you.

Topical these days, anyway, whether or not it's your personal preference. A lot of ppl get faith based/Scripture quotation tattoos, anyway; I saw a quote from the Bible Belt about just how widespread it is.

Good for you! :)