Search results

Your still ignoring Context and the tradition. If I celebrate the lords supper with beer and cookies. Its not the lords supper If I celebrate the passover and the feast of UNLEAVENED BREAD with Leavened BREAD. Its not the passover or the feast of Unleavened bread

Ok, Yeah it is. Is that why you did it?

No I believe what Jesus and paul said. He who believes is not condemned, shall not be condemned, and will never die and live forever. James is not written to you all. You all do not teach licentiousness. Your problem is legalism. You need to study paul

Sorry maam. Anyone who teaches that something must be done in order to be saved, maintain salvation, or keep salvation Teaches salvation by works. Other than the jews. The Roman Catholic Church has the most works required for eternal salvation.

In other words. You can’t refute what I said. My answer is the ONLY obvious answer my friend. Otherwise. It makes no sense what Jesus said. The fact they went to stone him for blasphemy also supports my case. Moving on

Noipe I did not say that, I said you should listen to paul because he can help you. James can not. Because you do not have the issue that James was dealing with. Nice attempt to slander there by only giving part of what I said with no context. Well I guess I am anti alot of denomination...

I am always open to new ideas.. its how we learn :)

1st verse ;)

to be legalistic means one has to fulfill a set of legal terms in order to be released from prison. In the jewish case, It was follwoing the law in order to be saved in our case. It would be following a set of rules whatever they may be, to be released from the penalty of sin (saved).

The law also required perfection. Meaning no sin. We can;t keep the law. So I guess we water down the law by saying its ok as long as we get baptized, take the eucharist and do penance?? I find it amazing in all legalistic gospels. no matter what church it is, They water down the law. and put...

1. Saying I am should have meaning. It means nothing if it just means he is here now 2. He did not just say I AM. He actually said Before abraham was (in the greek the word ginomao - to become to take place to be formed, to be born to be created) I WAS (in the greek Ego Eimi - interestingly...

Not by works period. If it is of by works. then we are trying to earn salvation, It is not a gift. And we will all fail. Because you can nto do enough works to make up for one sin. let alone all the sins you have ever committed. The penalty of sin is death, Not obaying the law or obaying the...

Jesus said before abraham was, He always existed. How can that be if he was created 2000 years ago.. You have not given me any answer. Your illogical question does not compute. I was not before abraham was, even though God knew me before.. so it does nto work that way. Gods omniscience...

I have never really thought of it. I believe it was passover week. I have heard thursday and friday. Ths issue is the 3 days and night. and risen Sunday morning.

This is true But in the upper room. he was celebrating the feast of unleavened bread and passover with his disciples That MUST be taken in context. In doing so . he had to obey the rules. If he brought leavened bread to a Passover mean and unleavened bread feast. He was not celebrating either...

How could jesus be created, yet existed before abraham was born?

Nope You made assumptions I only went with what the word said. It said they prepared the feast of unleavened bread and Passover meal. So in context. I MUST look to the OT to see how that was to be set up. If it does not FIT the OT requirement, Then it was NOT a Passover or unleavened bread...

it does not mean they did They were celebrating the feast of unleavened bread. If any leavan was in the room. people would have questioned it.. THEY understood it to be the Passover meal.

lol When Jesus was in the upper room, celebrating the fiest of unleavened bread. They were still under the Old covenant. we are talking about that supper. Not the sacrifice of almighty.

Well I have done neither so. Instead you wish to falsly accuse me. I would back off now. If your church was built by Christ, it would teach what Christ did. And they would at least resemble the NT church as found in acts and the epistles. I do not see that. in fact most churches I have been...