Search results

If you were at all correct, you would have to include Paul who said, "press on." But, no, it is therefore you who "goes on ahead" against and not "abiding in the teaching, the same hath both the Father and the Son."

Perhaps you don't hear so good. What is it to you if I am in Christ and He in me, and He has sent the Holy Spirit who speaks rather than me, all according to the promises of Christ? Follow Jesus.

If you find error in the spirit of God...the error is yours.

Although your intentions were not good, and unknowingly against the same word you think to defend...thank you, for presenting the foundation on which we should now be about building upon, just as it is described in Hebrews 4:12: Hebrews 4:12 "For the word of God is living and active, sharper...

My point was not unlike your own...or Paul's. That point, however, was that we are not to continue or remain mulling over the elementary principles, as some would have us do. But rather to literally "leave" them and "press on." Which is not to say that they are to be abandoned. But just as Jesus...

No, you don't have that right either. They think Peter was the Rock of ages, and that they alone carry the water of the gospel of Truth, through a succession of men of flesh.

Yet another melting like wax in the light of Truth. Thanks for showing yourself!

If you don't see it, you don't see it.

One more nail.

All I did was point out the irony...and I didn't even give you a hard time for not quoting the scripture. ...if you are correct...praise be to God!

It has barely been a day since you accused me of erroneously speaking for God. Now it is okay for you to speak for God and decide just how His word will not return void? You have no credibility to say such a thing.

Indeed! There are many misunderstandings about being "in Christ" and still having our own identity, and just when our old identity is finished and our new identity is complete. This was elaborated somewhat by Paul in his use of the term, "those who are alive and remain." But first, it is...

You misunderstand. To "be perfect, or be silent", are commandments for these times: From Christ in the transition from the ways of the first Adam, the flesh, and the law, and from the apostle Paul His apostle by the Spirit, and the ways of the Last Adam (a life-giving spirit). And this I said...

To say such, is to deny that any are "in Christ" whom is perfect, or "born again of the spirit of God" whom is perfect, or that any "have passed from death to life", according to the promises of God. Be therefore perfect, or be silent.

That is a cop out. You have read hundreds of my posts proclaiming the spirit of God.

You are making this personal, while all your facts are in error. You as much as call God dead having not fulfilled His promise of sending some as prophets, while accrediting yourself with Holy Spirit knowledge to the contrary, which you show yourself not to possess. If you actually knew the...

I know His voice.

The point of contention here, it that there is absolutely no precedence for using quotation marks, chapter and verse, as a disqualifying criticism against other followers of Christ...except by the church in contemporary times. On the contrary, there is every precedence for not using them...

No, it means that the context of God is often not the context of men, and vise versa. In other words, if we were discussing something in the context of men's actions among each other, then the context is what is common among men. But the moment the matter becomes a matter of God's dealings with...

No, it means that the scriptures right along with all language, has intentionally been confounded by God to insure that it is only revealed by His means and choosing, whether by prophet, or by the Holy Spirit directly. As for quoting scripture...no, that would just be the way you quote it as...