Search results

No, I'm just messing with you - which you totally deserve. See post #1028.

See post #1028.

"Who" have we been talking about?

Hahahaha... that would also make it a cop-out too!

You seem to be stuttering, forgetting that you already commented on this post. But you have given a greater indication of what it is you are not understanding about what I said. So I will explain that part which pertains to the Catholic church, as you have asked: You made bold the part that...

I spoke in plain and simple English. What part are you needing an explanation for?

I do not speak for or against the labels which you seem unable to depart from. But on the contrary, Christians have not abandoned the shadows, but press on out of darkness. But these shadows, you did not even see as darkness. For if you did, you would not continue to embrace and dwell in them...

Indeed. I was referring to the robe of righteousness which comes in the judgement, which if we can receive it, is not future, but "finished."

Jesus had come for the house of Israel, and spoke specifically to Israel, before the cross. Paul on the other hand was commissioned by Jesus to minister to the gentiles, that being after the cross. Thus, Jesus' words were to those who were under the law and had waited upon the promise of...

That was for Israel (that was then, this is now). Do you not know that these are the times of the gentiles, the church age, that those things were a shadow of things to come, which now are? Apparently not, and that is the problem.

I can imagine that the saying came as some sort of reference to what was commonly understood as having no need of explanation. But I do believe it has morphed into something more like a [rare] form of simple logic.

...Oh r-e-a-l-l-y....

Th The only actual hierarchy is the Head over the entire body. All else is no more than interdependence, and our need for each of our divers members. But the moment we begin to say, "Certainly the neck is above the hand, and the hand above the foot", then we are not walking in unity, nor even...

A couple of examples of "liberal bullying" would be the use of guilt, personal attacks, or projecting ones own faults on the other party in order to appear to have the upper hand.

Since I have already answered your question twice, it begs the question: What do you really want to know? Perhaps you could be more clear and less belligerent.

I think I am beginning to despise the whole bullying thing as it has been used recently. It seems to have become a tool for liberal political correctness or something - can't quite put my finger on it. Do I like bullying? No. Would I stand against it? Yes. Do I think we have a version of it...

Let me help you with that (again): Yesterday at 3:05 PM#944

"That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." James speaks of the one and Paul speaks of the other, but you are mixing the two. Of course the facts do not agree - they should not, nor do they.

Okay...so, they're different. But it is obvious you don't know why, nor even that it is the providence of God that His word not return void in spite of that difference. Don't you want to know why?

That is all appreciated and a comfort...but it does not shed any light on the word as revealed in spirit. That is all a consolation and a put-off until "someday." But what is a timeline of events without "today" (you will be with me in paradise. Today is the day of salvation), or "I am coming...