The sin of unbelief

[StanJ]

Yes agreed. Peter saw miracles, walked on water and knew Jesus was greater then any other man in history...but yet had NO faith in Jesus being Lord until it was revealed to him.

Then you obviously DON'T understand what Peter said when he confessed who Jesus was.

 

[lforrest]

There are indeed different Jesus', which Paul did warn about, but the gospels are one and the same, so I'm not quite getting what you're saying here?

Who are these demented founders you are referring to?

There are different so called gospels. Like any believable lie they contain elements of truth, but they are not gospel truths. Galatians 1:6-9 2 Corinthians 11:4
Since the gospel is so Jesus centered, you might say each different Jesus equates to a different gospel, or vice versa.

Some examples include:
Mormonism, which rejects grace and puts limitations of the saving blood of Jesus. Founder Joseph Smith dabbled in the occult and carried with him a Jupiter talisman. Look up the story of how he died if your not aware of it.
Jehovah's Witnesses: Again there is rejection of grace, and also resurrection of Jesus. Founder Charles Taze Russell studied Pyramidology.

 

[StanJ]

There are different so called gospels. Like any believable lie they contain elements of truth, but they are not gospel truths. Galatians 1:6-9 2 Corinthians 11:4
Since the gospel is so Jesus centered, you might say each different Jesus equates to a different gospel, or vice versa.

Some examples include:
Mormonism, which rejects grace and puts limitations of the saving blood of Jesus. Founder Joseph Smith dabbled in the occult and carried with him a Jupiter talisman. Look up the story of how he died if your not aware of it.
Jehovah's Witnesses: Again there is rejection of grace, and also resurrection of Jesus. Founder Charles Taze Russell studied Pyramidology.

Oh, yes, THOSE gospels, like the Book of Mormon and the NWT Bible....OK, got it.

 

[lforrest]

In the context I think the gospel is supposed to be this: 1 Corinthians 15

 

[StanJ]

In the context I think the gospel is supposed to be this: 1 Corinthians 15

As a synopsis, I agree.

 

[KingJ]

It would be your job to clarify it and make the connection. What is confusing is your lack of addressing Acts 19 in the context it is rendered. Paul makes no comment about them actually being saved, he simply asks if they received the Holy Spirit when they did get saved. Therefore Paul confirms that receiving the Holy Spirit and salvation are two separate events.

Is the Holy Spirit not part of the tinity? We receive the fullness of the Godhead when we accept Jesus Col 2:19.

I have already adressed Acts 19. But will just add that Paul was teaching them what we know. They did not know the Holy Spirit. Baptism is for symbolic reasons. It is like saying water baptism is when we are saved.

As the Bible never contradicts itself I see no reason for you to say it needs to be read with something Paul wrote in order to be properly understood. Do you believe John cannot be properly understood without reading Pauline letters? The context is in the individual scriptures. They don't provide context for other scriptures, unless of course they are dealing with the same thing which in this case they are not.
Whoever means whoever. John does not indicate that only those who God is giving salvic faith to, are saved. Trying to make this connection is simply not exegetical. John 3:18 is definitely not saying the same as John 14:6 except maybe only in your mind. Do you not believe the apostles were saved before they received the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost? Do you also not believe that the believers Peter spoke to in Acts 10, were not saved before they received the in filling of the Holy Spirit?

We can use any verse in the entire bible for context 2 Tim 3:16. James 2:19 works well as a stand alone verse and could not be clearer.

So you're saying that Jesus was wrong when he told the woman in Luke 7:50 that her faith had saved her?

Stan, my argument is with faith alone. Those espousing that faith alone pleases God. The lady in Luke 7 did more then ''just believe''. She anointed Jesus's feet with expensive perfume (putting Him first in her life), she did not cease kissing His feet (repentance) and she put oil on His head (respect). She knew there was something special about Him. She had hope. He turned her hope into reality when He said ''your sins are forgiven''.

The devils believe Jesus is God Matt 8:31. They would not anoint His head with oil.

You need to read all of Romans 10 and not just pick one particular verse and eisegete about it. Focus on verses 9 to 11.

You don't read behind the lines enough. Saying the words Jesus is Lord is only significant because of the all the meaning attached to it. Jesus taught to turn the left cheek, by saying ''Jesus is Lord'' you are agreeing with that. It is also a public confession. Showing God you are able to make a stand for Him. Very significant because the world crucified Him. Saying the words 'Jesus is Lord' is mental agreement and public confession with all Jesus stood for and taught.

Believing in the heart, well that I would believe is only possible if the Holy Spirit reveals Jesus to you. As 1 Cor 12:3 tells us. Which takes place after He judges our hearts and minds Jer 17:10. Do you believe Jer 17:10 is irrelevant to this discussion?

Now please try understand that if we only said the words ''Jesus is Lord'' for the sake of saying them....likewise if we believe that we believe Jesus is Lord without a revelation from above...it is all about as relevant as a belief and confession in Santa Claus. Empty faith, empty words. To think God doesnt see through that is madness. I cannot believe this is in essence what you two are espousing.

I mean for crying out aloud, just read the first line of the OP. '''they did not inherit the promised land because they did not believe God...'' :blink:.

I pray that God will spare our kids from positive thinking heresy killing mainstream Christiainity.

 

[StanJ]

Is the Holy Spirit not part of the tinity? We receive the fullness of the Godhead when we accept Jesus Col 2:19.

No, Jesus had the Godhead...we receive Jesus as our saviour and the Holy Spirit is baptizes us with power.

I have already adressed Acts 19. But will just add that Paul was teaching them what we know. They did not know the Holy Spirit. Baptism is for symbolic reasons. It is like saying water baptism is when we are saved.

You addressed it in error, and there is nothing symbolic about the baptism of the Holy Spirit. It is what Jesus commanded the apostles to wait for and we do the same. It is what Paul laid hands on those disciples in Acts 19 for and they received the Holy Spirit with power and spoke in tongues. It is what the believers in Acts 10 also experienced as Peter was preaching to them, and they received the Holy Spirit with power and spoke in tongues. You could ignore the fact that your own peril.

We can use any verse in the entire bible for context 2 Tim 3:16. James 2:19 works well as a stand alone verse and could not be clearer.

That's not what 2nd Timothy 3:16 says and if you think that and you don't really understand context or basic biblical hermeneutics.

Stan, my argument is with faith alone. Those espousing that faith alone pleases God. The lady in Luke 7 did more then ''just believe''. She anointed Jesus's feet with expensive perfume (putting Him first in her life), she did not cease kissing His feet (repentance) and she put oil on His head (respect). She knew there was something special about Him. She had hope. He turned her hope into reality when He said ''your sins are forgiven''.
The devils believe Jesus is God Matt 8:31. They would not anoint His head with oil.

So you are telling me that Jesus was wrong when he said your faith has saved you? Are you trying to assert that works is part of faith and that's how one is saved? That's not what Jesus taught and that's not what Paul teaches in Romans 10. The issue here is faith not belief. I'm sure you know the difference.

You don't read behind the lines enough. Saying the words Jesus is Lord is only significant because of the all the meaning attached to the act. I mean you would have to know something of Jesus before you said that surely. So if you knew that Jesus taught to turn the left cheek for example, by saying ''Jesus is Lord'' you would be agreeing with that. Which is good. God respects that. Then saying the words is also like a public confession. Showing God you are able to make a stand for Him. Very significant because the world crucified Jesus.

That's right I don't read behind the lines I actually read the lines. There's no hidden meaning there. You'd be well served to read the lines yourself and pay attention to what Paul is actually saying and not use your own personal point of view to interpret the lines for you.

Believing in the heart, well that I would believe is only possible if the Holy Spirit reveals Jesus to you. As 1 Cor 12:3 tells us. Which takes place after He judges our hearts and minds Jer 17:10. Do you believe Jer 17:10 is irrelevant to this discussion?

Don't equivocate about what belief means. If you don't understand what Paul said in Rom 10:9-11, then ask or study it. No I don't believe that Jer 17:10 is relevant in this discussion on this subject. Again you seem to have a problem with understanding context in relation to where it is found. I can't really help you with that you have to learn it on your own.

Now please try understand that if we only said the words ''Jesus is Lord'' for the sake of saying them....likewise if we believe that we believe Jesus is Lord without a revelation from above...it is all about as relevant as a belief and confession in Santa Claus.

Then in essence you really don't understand what Jesus meant by "no man can come to me except the father draws him"? Apparently you also don't understand with Paul wrote in Romans 1 about how we can know God through his own creation? It doesn't take a special revelation from God about who Jesus is because the Bible already tells us who he is and it also tells us that we can know that he is the Messiah just from what is written. You'll find that in John 20 verse 31. As far as Santa Claus is concerned Paul already addressed that in 1st Corinthians 13 when he said, "When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me."

 

[KingJ]

Then you obviously DON'T understand what Peter said when he confessed who Jesus was.

His confession after God revealed Him to him?

 

[KingJ]

No, Jesus had the Godhead...we receive Jesus as our saviour and the Holy Spirit is baptizes us with power.

So we have no power until we are baptised into the Holy Spirit? You sure about that? I don't think you have thought this through.

You addressed it in error, and there is nothing symbolic about the baptism of the Holy Spirit. It is what Jesus commanded the apostles to wait for and we do the same. It is what Paul laid hands on those disciples in Acts 19 for and they received the Holy Spirit with power and spoke in tongues. It is what the believers in Acts 10 also experienced as Peter was preaching to them, and they received the Holy Spirit with power and spoke in tongues. You could ignore the fact that your own peril.

Baptising, laying hands on helps us to be aware of the fact that we have the Holy Spirit. It is what happened there with the disciples. This is not evidence of when we receive Him. Paul is asking the Holy Spirit to reveal Himself to them. That is all that is happening. Are you saved when you are baptised in water? Yes or No?

That's not what 2nd Timothy 3:16 says and if you think that and you don't really understand context or basic biblical hermeneutics.

Lets not even talk about hermeneutics here. There is no bigger hermeneutic fail then the faith for prosperity and healing message.

As for James 2:19 have you read from vs 18?

But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.” Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds. 19 You believe that there is one God. Good! (placing a ''good''' here is sarcasm) Even the demons believe that—and shudder.

So you are telling me that Jesus was wrong when he said your faith has saved you? Are you trying to assert that works is part of faith and that's how one is saved? That's not what Jesus taught and that's not what Paul teaches in Romans 10. The issue here is faith not belief. I'm sure you know the difference

Not wrong, but lets not be dumb and miss that there was more to it / things that took place before He said that.

I think you do need to share your definition of faith here. Could help avoid senseless discussion.

That's right I don't read behind the lines I actually read the lines. There's no hidden meaning there. You'd be well served to read the lines yourself and pay attention to what Paul is actually saying and not use your own personal point of view to interpret the lines for you.

We must do both. If we take scripture literally only, we could think we must kill everyone. Lev 20:10 Stone adulterers. Matt 5:28 Everyone is an adulterer.

Don't equivocate about what belief means. If you don't understand what Paul said in Rom 10:9-11, then ask or study it. No I don't believe that Jer 17:10 is relevant in this discussion on this subject. Again you seem to have a problem with understanding context in relation to where it is found. I can't really help you with that you have to learn it on your own.

I am pretty sure I have it right. Jer 17:10 could not be more relevant. It qualifies John 3:16. Do you really not see that?

John 3:16 '''believe''

Jer 17:10 ''God judges heart and mind''

Hence John 3:16 + Jer 17:10 = You can't fool God as you can others by just ''believing''.

Again you seem to have a problem with understanding context in relation to where it is found. I can't really help you with that you have to learn it on your own.

You can't apply this to all verses. Really Stan....? Many are fine stand alone verses. Jer 17:10 says God judges heart and mind. You want to tell me it only applies in certain contexts? -_-

1. Then in essence you really don't understand what Jesus meant by "no man can come to me except the father draws him"? 2. Apparently you also don't understand with Paul wrote in Romans 1 about how we can know God through his own creation? 3. It doesn't take a special revelation from God about who Jesus is because the Bible already tells us who he is and it also tells us that we can know that he is the Messiah just from what is written. You'll find that in John 20 verse 31. As far as Santa Claus is concerned Paul already addressed that in 1st Corinthians 13 when he said, "When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me..

1. Thankfully we have the rest of scripture to tell us who exactly He does draw. Like Matt 16:24 and Psalm 51:17. So we don't ever need a Calvinistic interpretation of verses like that.

2. Actually I grasp that perfectly. As I have said in two prior posts here. All have faith in God. All have faith in God being great. Not all have faith in God being good. Not all have faith in Jesus being Lord.

3. Matt 16:16-17. If Peter could not know this without a revelation from God, what makes you think we can? Also you are yet again not dealing with 1 Cor 12:3. '''Nobody'' can call Jesus Lord without the Holy Spirit. Nobody means nobody.

 

[lforrest]

Let's say water baptism and the eucharistic are symbolic of something spiritual. Can we be condemned for failing to do something symbolic?

 

[mjrhealth]

As the Bible never contradicts itself

Than what are you all arrguing about??

 

[StanJ]

His confession after God revealed Him to him?

Yes, HIS confession, He believed God because as Jesus said, only God can draw us to His son. We don't operate in a vacuum KJ. Judas didn't, and he received the same chance to believe. Its all about culpability. If one is not given the same revelation, then one cannot be judged the same way. 1 John 4:13-15

 

[H. Richard]

By not including James 2:19 (devils believe, believing is not a big deal), 1 Cor 12:3 (you can only believe Jesus is Lord if you have the Holy Spirit) and Jer 17:10 (Jesus only comes in after your heart and mind is judged), Rom 12:9 (what God wants is not the ability to believe the impossible is possible / real, rather for us to hate what is evil and cling to what is good) you are teaching nothing more then a half truth. IE Heretical teaching. It sounds right but is terribly terribly wrong.

John 3:16 (whosever believe in Him will be saved) somes up what you believe, but we cannot teach it in isolation to the rest of scripture. Your ability to believe that you believe does not trump you hating what is evil and clinging to what is good / repenting. Our part (James 4:8) is to repent sincerely. God does the rest.

You are adding to scripture, defying common sense and making a mockery of the cross. Jesus died for all and those that love Him, find Him. Not those who can believe they believe without doubt.

God's people doubt and waver because they are entertaining sinful thoughts. They are becoming double minded. Sin upsets the balance in our head. Not our self mustered positive mental state /ability to believe we believe without doubting. That has more in common with Hinduism and brainwashing children to believe in Santa Claus and the tooth fairy.

I have heard this argument before. The saying that a person can not have faith in faith. Some carry it to extremes

No where in anything I have written have I said faith in faith. That is the straw man others build. The words faith, belief, trust, confidence must have a qualifier after them in order to mean anything. -- as for me I have faith IN, belief IN, trust IN, Confidence IN the promise of the cross that was given to Paul. Jesus gave Paul a message (gospel) of God's grace that is in effect during this age of the Gentiles.

Enough said, twist it as you will.

I am award that the religious want to apply everything written in the Bible to us in this age. I am not that stupid. From Abraham to the cross God dealt with the Jews ONLY with minor exceptions. The 4 gospels are written to show how Jesus fulfilled every prophesy about Him. ----- The book of Acts is a transitional book from law to grace.

The religious really want to shove Jame's faith plus works down our throats when the vey book they are quoting out of says the book was written to the Jews, Gentiles not included in the greeting James 1:1--- They obviously only want to pick the ones that put us under their thumb

 

[StanJ]

So we have no power until we are baptised into the Holy Spirit? You sure about that? I don't think you have thought this through.

Faith in God's word works best when we don't try to THINK IT THROUGH. Faith is our evidence, not works.

Baptising, laying hands on helps us to be aware of the fact that we have the Holy Spirit. It is what happened there with the disciples. This is not evidence of when we receive Him. Paul is asking the Holy Spirit to reveal Himself to them. That is all that is happening. Are you saved when you are baptised in water? Yes or No?

Come on KJ, you're really reaching here. v6 says; "When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied.

Lets not even talk about hermeneutics here. There is no bigger hermeneutic fail then the faith for prosperity and healing message.

Sorry, but sound hermeneutics ALWAYS apply, and this is just a strawman on your part. The issue here is NOT the prosperity or healing gospel, as you frame it.

As for James 2:19 have you read from vs 18?
But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.” Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds. 19 You believe that there is one God. Good! (placing a ''good''' here is sarcasm) Even the demons believe that—and shudder.

ANOTHER strawman KJ.....James refers to a WALK of faith, NOT salvic faith. Your attempts to always take texts OUT of context are quite disappointing given your apparent knowledge of scripture.

Not wrong, but lets not be dumb and miss that there was more to it / things that took place before He said that.

Your desire to ADD more to it than it actually states is called eisegesis KJ, and I'm sure you are aware of that. Do you not believe Jesus was more than competent to say what He meant to say. His word does NOT require your editorializing.

I think you do need to share your definition of faith here. Could help avoid senseless discussion.

Heb 11

We must do both. If we take scripture literally only, we could think we must kill everyone. Lev 20:10 Stone adulterers. Matt 5:28 Everyone is an adulterer.

You're the one continually using out of context OT scripture to try and support NC theology. As you can see, it does NOT work. Two totally different covenants.

I am pretty sure I have it right. Jer 17:10 could not be more relevant. It qualifies John 3:16. Do you really not see that?

It's not a matter of YOU being sure, it's a matter of you EXEGETING it, which you haven't and can't.

You can't apply this to all verses. Really Stan....? Many are fine stand alone verses. Jer 17:10 says God judges heart and mind. You want to tell me it only applies in certain contexts?

It apllies to itselF KJ. It is NOT required to read John 3:16, unless one is trying to guide the latters meaning, as you obviously are.

1. Thankfully we have the rest of scripture to tell us who exactly He does draw. Like Matt 16:24 and Psalm 51:17. So we don't ever need a Calvinistic interpretation of verses like that.
2. Actually I grasp that perfectly. As I have said in two prior posts here. All have faith in God. All have faith in God being great. Not all have faith in God being good. Not all have faith in Jesus being Lord.
3. Matt 16:16-17. If Peter could not know this without a revelation from God, what makes you think we can? Also you are yet again not dealing with 1 Cor 12:3. '''Nobody'' can call Jesus Lord without the Holy Spirit. Nobody means nobody.

These are all suppositions KJ, and have NO basis in sound exegetics. Inspired scripture does NOT require additional wording or clarification unless one is trying to direct it to an eisegetical conclusion.

 

[OzSpen]

Let's say water baptism and the eucharistic are symbolic of something spiritual. Can we be condemned for failing to do something symbolic?

Only if these are symbolic commands from God that we are disobeying.

However, I regard the Lord's Supper as an opportunity for remembrance of Jesus' death, based on 1 Cor 11:23-26(ESV):

For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” 25 In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.

Oz

 

[KingJ]

1. I have heard this argument before. The saying that a person can not have faith in faith. Some carry it to extremes

No where in anything I have written have I said faith in faith. That is the straw man others build. The words faith, belief, trust, confidence must have a qualifier after them in order to mean anything. -- as for me I have faith IN, belief IN, trust IN, Confidence IN the promise of the cross that was given to Paul. Jesus gave Paul a message (gospel) of God's grace that is in effect during this age of the Gentiles.


2. I am award that the religious want to apply everything written in the Bible to us in this age. I am not that stupid. From Abraham to the cross God dealt with the Jews ONLY with minor exceptions. The 4 gospels are written to show how Jesus fulfilled every prophesy about Him. ----- The book of Acts is a transitional book from law to grace.

1. I am only jumping on you because you are espousing faith in faith. Re-read the first line of your OP. Anyway, if you are not, then I owe you an apology. But then you really need to learn to better explain your belief in belief. Leaving the door open on this with all the heresy of today around it...is exactly what the devil would want.

2. I can't agree. God dealt with all mankind always. No minor exceptions, ever. He just dealt more harshly with the Jews. Well kind of if you consider the harsh promises of the law were always counter balanced with sweet promises. Any man who hates sin, gets God's attention. This has been true from Adam to now. Every man can do this as every man has a working brain. Hence Jesus needed to die for all mankind.

 

[FHII]

Point 1. I gotta stand with H.richard in this. I read the OP, and it says their unbelief. In context I saw it to mean they didn't trust God. I am familiar with the story, so I got what H. Richard was saying and it wasn't "faith in faith". I suppose if you haven't read the account, you might be confused. But that isn't really H.Richard's fault.

Point 2. I absolutely believe God's hand was in every nation and civilization. But the OT is the account of mainly the Hebrews. Why, it is the account of the Royal line and whom God called his chosen people. Minor exceptions are there. Ruth for example. Nubuchanezzer. God at one time even gave couagement to the philistines! Why, David even fought on their side!

But overall... I agree with H.Richard onthis one too.

 

[KingJ]

Faith in God's word works best when we don't try to THINK IT THROUGH. Faith is our evidence, not works.

Faith alone is never evidence of anything. You need to read Matt 7:22 (you can be unsaved and the name of Jesus can still have power to do a miracle) and then contrast it with James 1:27. As scripture says '''show faith by my works'' James 2:18.

Come on KJ, you're really reaching here. v6 says; "When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied.

Note there was no obstruction to the Holy Spirit coming on them. He was able to 'come on them'. Because they were saved. My wife is able to french kiss me with no obstuction in her mind because we are married ;). The Holy Spirit's presence jumps on me everytime I go to the front of my church for prayer.

Sorry, but sound hermeneutics ALWAYS apply, and this is just a strawman on your part. The issue here is NOT the prosperity or healing gospel, as you frame it.

It is not a strawman. Faith in faith is the building blocks of the healing and prosperity message. I take it you believe that? If you say no, I will re-read all your posts here giving you the complete benefit of the doubt.

ANOTHER strawman KJ.....James refers to a WALK of faith, NOT salvic faith. Your attempts to always take texts OUT of context are quite disappointing given your apparent knowledge of scripture.

James 2:18-19 works just fine as stand alone verses. There are verses that need context and then there are those that don't. If we say ''context'' is needed with verses like James 2:18-19 it is absolutely scary to think how we could manipulate scripture. It is almost as bad as Calvinists saying 'context' on Acts 10:34 and John 3:16. Or.... God is not good 'Psalm 136:1' because the context is David hoping God is good for his forgiveness.... :blink:. The devils believe....good....= the devils believe, big deal = the devils believe, whippy doo. No context really needed.

Your desire to ADD more to it than it actually states is called eisegesis KJ, and I'm sure you are aware of that. Do you not believe Jesus was more than competent to say what He meant to say. His word does NOT require your editorializing.

You really think I don't know what eisegesis means?

Accept that you wrong on this. The lady did wash, kiss and put perfume on His feet and anoint His head with oil. You are teaching a half truth if you exclude that.

Heb 11

I want you to give your definition. Heb 11 is read by most with prejudice as faith in faith.

You're the one continually using out of context OT scripture to try and support NC theology. As you can see, it does NOT work. Two totally different covenants.

You have applied brains to grasp two different covenants. Why not that saying ''Jesus is Lord'' is more then just English speech skills...?

It's not a matter of YOU being sure, it's a matter of you EXEGETING it, which you haven't and can't.

I am dying to hear you exegete Jer 17:10 and explain its irrelevance to us accepting Him....

These are all suppositions KJ, and have NO basis in sound exegetics. Inspired scripture does NOT require additional wording or clarification unless one is trying to direct it to an eisegetical conclusion.

You always know better. I am just dying to hear these deeper insights that only you know. Because all I am hearing is '''faith in pie in the sky'' is evidence of Christianity opcorn:.

 

[StanJ]

Faith alone is never evidence of anything. You need to read Matt 7:22 (you can be unsaved and the name of Jesus can still have power to do a miracle) and then contrast it with James 1:27. As scripture says '''show faith by my works'' James 2:18.

Actually it is evidence of EVERYTHING, just as Heb 11 tells us, and Rom 5:1, and Eph 2:8-9. James is NOT talking about salvic faith.

Note there was no obstruction to the Holy Spirit coming on them. He was able to 'come on them'. Because they were saved. My wife is able to french kiss me with no obstuction in her mind because we are married ;). The Holy Spirit's presence jumps on me everytime I go to the front of my church for prayer.

NOT the point, but thanks for confirming my point, that they are two SEPARATE issues. Feeling the presence of the Holy Spirit and HAVING the Holy Spirit are also not the same.

It is not a strawman. Faith in faith is the building blocks of the healing and prosperity message. I take it you believe that? If you say no, I will re-read all your posts here giving you the complete benefit of the doubt.

Yes it is, because its not the topic here and your assertions show you know nothing about it. 'faith in faith' is your catch phrase, I have faith in God. Lets not confuse the two.

James 2:18-19 works just fine as stand alone verses. There are verses that need context and then there are those that don't. If we say ''context'' is needed with verses like James 2:18-19 it is absolutely scary to think how we could manipulate scripture. It is almost as bad as Calvinists saying 'context' on Acts 10:34 and John 3:16. Or.... God is not good 'Psalm 136:1' because the context is David hoping God is good for his forgiveness.... :blink:. The devils believe....good....= the devils believe, big deal = the devils believe, whippy doo. No context really needed.

How convenient for YOU, but grammatical and theological rules apply to ALL of the Bible, despite your reticence. BTW, why do you keep bringing up Calvinism? As far as this last part, I echo your sentiments; big deal, whippy do. :blink:

You really think I don't know what eisegesis means?

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, as you do it so often.

Accept that you wrong on this. The lady did wash, kiss and put perfume on His feet and anoint His head with oil. You are teaching a half truth if you exclude that.

I'm not teaching anything, I'm simply quoting Jesus. You're the one adding to the words with qualifications. Jesus said; “Your faith has saved you; go in peace.” Do you know what the period is used for? THE END.

I want you to give your definition. Heb 11 is read by most with prejudice as faith in faith.

MY definition IS Heb 11. Your catch phrase is yours, not anyone else here, at least that I have seen, so the prejudice would be yours alone.

You have applied brains to grasp two different covenants. Why not that saying ''Jesus is Lord'' is more then just English speech skills...?

This may have sounded good in your head, but it sure didn't translate coherently to your actual post.

I am dying to hear you exegete Jer 17:10 and explain its irrelevance to us accepting Him....

You indeed are, but that will probably happen before I do what is NOT required. YOU brought it up.

You always know better. I am just dying to hear these deeper insights that only you know.

When you accept this, you and I will probably have much more productive exchanges. I can guarantee that smart elecky / facetious remarks will engender reciprocal comments. :)

 

[FHII]

How can anyone say that Matthew 7:22 is saying we must keep the law? Jesus is blasting the Pharisees who kept the law better than anyone! Your righteousness must EXCEED that of the Pharisees! Yet, these folks want to go back to that which the Pharisees did! But they think they can do it better! BLAAAAHAHA!