post

What spirit do you imagine dwelt in Jesus? look at the context you think is missing and falsely accuse me of "twisting" "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you who do not believe.” (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.) And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.” (John 6:63-65) He is talking about the Spirit, and the life of the Spirit, and He says His words are spirit. But you say this has nothing to do with the Spirit. He is talking about who believes and who does not believe -- which He knew from the beginning, regardless of individual 'agency' to 'choose' to believe. He directly refutes the idea that anyone can choose to believe without being enabled by the Father to do so. You are defending Pelagianism, an historical heresy. I have scripture, I have the Spirit, I have the words of Jesus Christ Himself, and I have every church council since 300 AD condemning what you say. You have: your opinion. There is the truth. Jesus Himself said it. If you refuse to believe Him, out of your vanity, why should you believe me? So i will no longer speak to you about it. Don't bother replying.

who told you that Christ was raised a different God? Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever. (Hebrews 13:8) He forgave sin on the basis of mercy and faith while He walked in the flesh, and He still does. He chose His disciples, they did not choose Him, and nothing has changed. No one understood Him unless it was given to them by God to do so then, and nothing has changed. please stop introducing Pelagianism without any support whatsoever. Pelagianism has been roundly condemned by the Church for 1,500 years, but for whatever reason (('great falling away' anyone?)) it is the most prevalent and pervasive theological stance among so-called believers today. "thanks"

In visions of God he took me to the land of Israel and set me on a very high mountain, on whose south side were some buildings that looked like a city. (Ezekiel 40:2) And he carried me away in the Spirit to a mountain great and high, and showed me the Holy City, Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God. (Revelation 21:10) Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. (Matthew 4:8) ---------------------------------------------------------------- You who bring good news to Zion, go up on a high mountain. You who bring good news to Jerusalem, lift up your voice with a shout, lift it up, do not be afraid; say to the towns of Judah, "Here is your God!" (Isaiah 40:9) go up on a high mountain! shout to the whole earth, "Jesus is Lord! the Son of God made flesh! who died for the sins of man, and rose the third day!" these are not about the shape of the earth at all. and the proclamation is not to go up on this mountain, and shout "the earth is flat!"

well this is my view.

Seriously, this is not needed. I don't want to remove you from this thread, but if you can't stick to the issues at hand - then you leave me no choice. what, George, has shiloh bewitched you? did he tell you this is all about him? it's not. it never has been. he doesn't understand what i am saying at all. it's about the issue at hand, which doesn't happen to be shiloh. ((though the way he reacted, he's made my point apply to him just as well)) lifting up the Son of God is exactly what is needed. it is exactly what is missing when a person makes his thousandth thread about flat earth. or his thousandth thread about evolution. or his thousandth thread about republicans and democrats. or his thousandth thread about . . whatever. ((or his thousandth complaint about some totally mis-perceived slight)) it is exactly the issue at hand. this should be 'doctrinal questions' section, right? right doctrine lifts up Christ. not some crackpot theory of the shape of the earth that the Church has never endorsed. 'flat earth' is not a doctrinal question, and it does not lift up the Son of God. would you think a thread about flying saucers or dinosaurs at the center of the earth belongs in 'doctrinal issues' ? but this thread is pretty obviously not about Christ at all, not about doctrine at all, not about Matthew 4:8 at all. it's just another angle Oakwood thought of to try to argue the earth is flat again. how is it that we define 'idols' these days? "things that take the place of God in our lives" or something, right?

what does a person abandon when they turn virtually every thread they participate in into a 'flat earth' argument? what does a person abandon when they turn virtually every thread they participate in into an 'evolution' argument? what does a person abandon when they turn virtually every thread they participate in into a 'KJV Bible' argument? what does a person abandon when they turn virtually every thread they participate in into a 'liberals' argument? what does a person abandon when they think virtually every post another person makes is a personal attack on them? what is the basic fallacy and dead-giveaway of 'Hebrew Roots' fanatics? isn't it that preaching Torah at all times, they neglect and ignore the gospel of Christ? isn't the issue with so much of this that people call themselves 'christian' and then talk so little of Christ? that they do not lift up the Son of God? we must lift up the Son of God. that is what we were chosen for, if we are in Him. for His glory -- and to glorify Him. who will hear the gospel of His life and death and resurrection, of who He is and what He has done, if we never talk about Him?

lifting up the Son of God is not needed?!? what??

why don't you stop thinking about yourself, and try to see if you can come up with an answer to those questions? good grief dude, i'm not talking about you at all. but you think it is always about you. all i did was ask some questions. this is why you never understand what i say.

why don't you stop thinking about shiloh, think about Jesus Christ instead, and try thinking about what i asked, and see if you understand what the answers to those questions are?

why don't you think about what i asked, and see if you can't come up with a consistent answer? possibly one that lifts up the Son of God?

why don't you stop thinking about shiloh, and try thinking about what i asked, and see if you understand what the answer to those questions are?

it's not even a response to you; i just happened to quote you. i asked a series of questions. why don't you try coming up with answers for them?

you never seem to comprehend what i say at all, and i don't think it's because i am not being clear

no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father. (John 6:65) the vain, Pelagian idea of free-will conversion, destroyed. in a single passage, by Christ's own words. ((thank God!!))

what do you have to abandon in order to turn virtually every thread you participate in into a 'flat earth' argument? what do you have to abandon in order to turn virtually every thread you participate in into an 'evolution' argument? what do you have to abandon in order to turn virtually every thread you participate in into a 'KJV Bible' argument? what do you have to abandon in order to turn virtually every thread you participate in into a 'liberals' argument? what is the basic fallacy and dead-giveaway of 'Hebrew Roots' fanatics? isn't it that preaching Torah at all times, they neglect and ignore the gospel of Christ?