Search results

My point was the same as His - exactly. So, if you want to say No, that is up to you. If you do not see the correlation...that much is up to God. But if you are taking notes, we can review them on the other side where the truth will be undisputed.

No, but just looking at your exclaim...perhaps you should have that looked at. Jesus is both the First and the Last. There is no other. What was bestowed upon Mary was exactly that which came upon the prophets of old, which were not born again of the spirit of God, but were endowed with power...

This I have answered from the start: He speaks of both the old and the new covenants. Which I went beyond to bring us up to speed with the present time, explaining that the covenants encompass, "First the natural, then the spiritual."

I did not exclude Jesus from "all", but only from those who sin. As I said, He was born into sin, but sinned not.

Sorry, I am not following the "i" and "you."

Not really. The born again have met Christ and have been changed. They are indeed His witnesses.

God has already answered that, saying both, that "all have fallen short", and also that Jesus "did not sin." Because we are told that "there is on One begotten of God", that would make Jesus the One exception. As for Mary, if Jesus was the Last, meaning the last of those who died under the old...

Did I not just tell you that "I don't operate in opinions or interpretations?" If you think that I have said something that is opinion or interpretation, then bring it up specifically, and ask and I can explain. But the answer is, No, it's not.

I just answered the Fundamental post. But let me know if the two still are clear. As for you being of the house of Israel...that is not what Christ referred to, but rather to the old covenant, which you are not under. So, linage is one thing, but covenant is another: the one is of the flesh...

Aah, gotcha. Yes, that would be the case with those who "believe", but not with those who "know." Which I do not say to appear to be smug, but rather show the distinction between those who rely on faith, as opposed to those who rely on their own understanding, as oppose to those whom have heard...

I did not say that He sinned and fell short of the glory of God. (Wow, I said that without the use of bold letters.) On the contrary, I said Jesus was born of a woman who was born after the fallen line of Adam and Eve - He was born into sin, but committed no sin. Thus, His sacrifice was...

You are jumping around. I did dispute and showed you your fault, things that have been added and misinterpreted and taught by men. But, no, I will not go back. As for your question of the "condemnation of souls", where did you get this, and what of it do you ask?

Yes, Christ was sent to, and spoke to the house of Israel (the light of the world). He was cleaning house, and equipping His disciples to be a more true light unto the gentiles.

The description for both? Yes, when we walk in the light we are no longer deceived.

Not pasted as you have stated, but rather that all things "were" before the foundation of the world, and this is the manifest revelation of what "is" outside the realm of time, in God. But as for the resurrection, it comes to "each in his own order" (each in his own time). Therefore, if we speak...

I am not going to go back and show you the scriptures and print them in red for you. You preach another gospel, which is not of God. In the end, there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

I don't operate in opinions or interpretations. If this were a contest of such things you would have as much say as anyone, but it's not.

You manipulated a parable given by Christ...that's Antichrist. You tried to trick me. You didn't succeed.

I did.

Okay...no wonder we are at odds. You do not know the truth and need a lesson: All who are born of women are born of the fallen nature of Adam and Eve...even Jesus. If He were not, His death would have been no sacrifice.