Results 41 - 55 of 55
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: goodnewsminister Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
41 | Can a toddler go to heaven? | Rom 3:23 | goodnewsminister | 88551 | ||
Here is what Sister Linda has taken her time to share with us from the Bible about this question: Children do not go to heaven. The only people invited to a heavenly resurrection are those who are "called, chosen and faithful" footstep followers of our Lord Jesus. The rest of the world will have an earthly resurrection. This includes all miscarried, aborted and stillborn babies. I had a miscarriage many years ago and so this question was a big one for me. The best scripture is Job 3:11-19. Here Job is asking why he was not a miscarriage (a hidden untimely birth...as infants which never saw light), if he had he would have lain with the dead kings and counsellors, princes, etc. in the grave. Here, in the grave, the wicked cease from troubling, the weary are at rest, the prisoner, the servant is free from his master (Ecc 9:4-6, 10). Here they are all waiting for the promised resurrection, the time when Jesus said (John 5:25-29), all that are in their graves. Those that have done good here are the Ancient Worthies , these are those listed in Hebrews 11. The word "damnation" here remember means "judgement" which is from the Greek word, "krises", which has a meaning of a trial and a decision. This is the rest of the world, raised from the dead, taught the Truth and then they choose obedience equals life, or disobedience equals death, the Second Death (Jer 31:29-30). Well, that's kind of in a nutshell, hope is helps! Lord bless, Sr Linda The Good News Minister |
||||||
42 | Prove all things hold fast to the good.. | 1 Cor 15:1 | goodnewsminister | 85505 | ||
"Do You Believe the True Gospel?" Chapter 1 — A Message About the Messenger? Your eternity depends on your willingness to understand and believe the true Gospel! Yet the Apostle Paul warned the Christians of his day, "For if he who comes preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or if you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a DIFFERENT GOSPEL which you have not accepted; you may well put up with it!" (2 Corinthians 11:4). Frankly, millions of sincere men and women have put up with a false gospel. They have been deceived all right-far too easily deceived. Why? Because too many have failed to obey God's command to "prove all things" (1 Thessalonians 5:21, KJV). Jesus Christ said, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel" (Mark 1:15). Have you believed the same Gospel, which Jesus preached? You need to be sure! There are many, many "gospels" being preached in the world today! Have you ever heard something like this? "Just give your heart to the Lord. Jesus was born in the manger as the Christ, the Son of God, to save as many souls in this age as would accept Him into their hearts. When He grew up, He went around performing miracles and forgiving people. He kept God's harsh law for all of us before finally being nailed to the cross along with that old law. He rose from the dead on the third day and appeared to many witnesses. Then He returned to heaven and began to set up His Kingdom in the hearts of men. He'll forgive your sins and come into your heart-just as you are-if you'll only accept Him. Jesus saves! Just believe on Him, and you'll be saved-born again. And, when you die, you'll go to be with Him in heaven-forever!" But is that really the Gospel Jesus taught? If you have accepted, without question, the almost unanimous voice of mainstream Christianity in this regard, you probably think that it is. Yet consider what Mark Twain wrote: "In religion and politics, people's beliefs and convictions are in almost every case gotten at second-hand, and without examination, from authorities who have not themselves examined the questions at issue but have taken them at second-hand from other non-examiners, whose opinions about them were not worth a brass farthing" [Mark Twain's Autobiography, 1959]. Do you really know what constitutes the genuine Gospel that Jesus and His Apostles preached? Or have you made a careless assumption, following the crowd as Mark Twain noted, taking your beliefs from second-hand suppositions? Probably you were taught the mainstream understanding of "the Gospel" while growing up. Or maybe you learned it from the barrage of religious publications and broadcasts that exist in our modern world. In any case, you have, more than likely, not seen the need to question your beliefs. After all, most professing Christian authorities are in agreement here. Surely, they must be right. Or are they? In His famous Olivet Prophecy, Jesus Christ warned, "Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many" (Matthew 24:4-5, KJV). Many modern versions place quotations around "I am Christ," assuming that Christ was talking about individuals who would claim to actually be Christ themselves. However, there have not been "MANY" such people in recent centuries that have been taken seriously, much less deceived the "MANY." Another interpretation some have offered is that Jesus was referring to false "Savior" figures like Hitler and Mussolini. But this is really taking liberties with the text. Remember, Christ said, "Many shall come IN MY NAME." A clearer rendering of what Jesus meant would be: "Take care that no one leads you astray. Indeed, many will appear, making use of My name, saying that I am Christ, yet deceiving many." What an astounding warning! Christ was foretelling that MANY false preachers would talk about Him and that they would proclaim that He is the Christ, the expected Messiah. Yet even after acknowledging Jesus' Messiahship, the deceivers are prophesied to seduce the unwary from a correct understanding of Jesus' genuine Gospel! How about you? Might they have deceived you too? Do not make careless assumptions! Find out-prove-what is true. Then you will really know and nobody will be able to fool you! Amen, Brother Meredith, Amen! Taken from Dr. Meredith's booklet, "Do you believe the True Gospel?" at the following URL: http://www.lcg.org/files/booklets/btg/default.htm |
||||||
43 | Prove all things hold fast to the good.. | 1 Cor 15:1 | goodnewsminister | 86025 | ||
My friend, You are mistaken. I am NOT a Jehovah's Witness and nor do I preach their gospel, which limits the love of God much as does your own form of the 'gospel', the only difference between JW's and Churchianity- all the other nominal churches such as Baptist, Methodists, etc...is that they- like you- use FEAR to gain converts. Most churches use FEAR of eternal torment to gain converts, and they use FEAR of eternal DEATH as their way of coverting people, both of which produce tare-Christians, or false Christians, as they serve God out of FEAR and not out of LOVE for Him. I have NOT been using the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures either, but primarly the Amplified Bible- as it brings out the full meaning hidden in the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures. May the Lord bless you today and always is my prayer for you. Christian Love, The Good News Minister |
||||||
44 | Prove all things hold fast to the good.. | 1 Cor 15:1 | goodnewsminister | 86028 | ||
No, I do not subscribe to all of his teachings, although he was faithful to the Gospel of the Kingdom, the same Gospel that Jesus preached and hence, in this, he was correct. I do not fault him for this stand. Where he did err was his insistance upon keeping all the old laws and celebration of the Old Testament, but he still had more truth than most of the churches today who teach a false gospel of 'Truth Jesus and be saved', this is NOT the Gospel that Paul preached, nor Peter nor Jesus or any of the others. Peace I leave with you, His peace. In Him, The Good News Minister |
||||||
45 | Prove all things hold fast to the good.. | 1 Cor 15:1 | goodnewsminister | 86121 | ||
It's not a bad thing, but the Fear of God is the reverential fear, not the morbid fear of death or hellfire, for the Scriptures say that 'God hath not given us a Spirit of fear, but of a sound mind' and the fear of the Lord is the respect, honor and love of God, not fear in the worldly sense of the word. The Bible says that 'fear hath torment' and it is not God's desire to torment us mentally, nor physically. God bless, Good News Minister |
||||||
46 | Prove all things hold fast to the good.. | 1 Cor 15:1 | goodnewsminister | 86246 | ||
Dear John Reformed, I thank you for your concern and for your kind, Christian comments. I truly LOVE all of you dear, precious people on this board, this is why I came here to proclaim the GOOD NEWS, in stark contrast to the BAD NEWS that many of you have been taught to believe by your churches. Let's proceed with an examination of your post. You start off saying,"The "good news" of the gospel begins with the bad news that mankind, apart from faith in Christ is doomed to hellfire!" Yes, in your very next breath, you quote a verse that is diametrically opposed to the point your just made, let us READ WHAT IT SAYS, Matt 10:28 "Do not fear those who kill the body but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." Yes, fear Him, God, Who IS ABLE, to DESTROY [not preserve alive, but to utterly destroy] BOTH soul [hum? I thought it was IMMORTAL? Guess not!] and body in HELL! Yes, God is ABLE to DO what you have been misTaught namely, He CAN and WILL DESTORY, not preserve alive, BOTH soul and body in HELL! The Greek word used here is Gehenna, the Jews to whom our Lord was speaking knew where this place was, as it was a reference to the Valley of Hinnom just outside of Jerusalem's walls where the dead carcasses of condemn criminals and the trash of the city was thrown and to which fire and brimstone were added to keep the flames burning and whatever the fire did not DESTROY, the maggot ate for food. They well knew that this represented UTTER and EVERLASTING DESTRUCTION, as the one's thrown there were UNFIT for a memorial tomb, symbolic of their not being worthy of a burial tomb because they were thought to be unworthy of a resurrection. Another verse that you quote brings up another subject: "I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION" - Precisely correct! Yes, this very verse that you quote shows us that "...He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires." Yes, our loving God has mercy on those Whom He chooses to have mercy, and He HARDENS those whom he chooses to harden, for his Name sake! However, you're belief in a place of eternal torment, where people who do not KNOW GOD and/or reject His Son go to spend all of eternity when perhaps it was God HIMSELF who harden their hearts so that they WOULD NOT SEE! So you're beliefs blaspheme the very GOD you proclaim to worship by saying that HE HARDENS those whom He chooses just so HE can roast them in HELLFIRE for all eternity through NO FAULT of their own! Such is the SUM of blasphemy! Such fowl doctrine comes from only ONE PLACE, ONE SOURCE, ONE PERSONAGE, namely, Satan the Devil, the 'god of this world', 'who hath blinded the MINDS of them which believe NOT' lest the glorious gospel about Christ should shine unto them. Such is the sum of Calvinism, the damnable heresy of John Calvin the Reformer. Yes, such doctrines does not line up with other Scriptures that state that," 2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. Yes, our God desires that ALL come to repentence and faith in His dear Son, and that NONE should perish. I think you have not been able to comprehend 'election' and 'free grace', as there is a difference and the Bible does have the answer on how these exist harmoniously together. We worship not a demon-god, but the God of all Creation! Praise be to His Name! The GOOD NEWS MINISTER! |
||||||
47 | Prove all things hold fast to the good.. | 1 Cor 15:1 | goodnewsminister | 86465 | ||
Dear John, I understand and I appreciate your expressions of Christian love and concern for me. I have truly enjoyed our discussions together. Peace I leave you, His peace. In Him awaiting the Coming Kingdom, The GOOD NEWS MINISTER |
||||||
48 | Prove all things hold fast to the good.. | 1 Cor 15:1 | goodnewsminister | 86467 | ||
Dear John, I understand and I appreciate your expressions of Christian love and concern for me. I have truly enjoyed our discussions together. Peace I leave you, His peace. In Him awaiting the Coming Kingdom, The GOOD NEWS MINISTER |
||||||
49 | In John 3:16 what does begotten mean? | Gal 4:4 | goodnewsminister | 85413 | ||
Matthew 16:13-16 The description “son of God” is not used exclusively of Jesus in Scripture. Luke’s genealogy calls Adam “the son of God” (Luke 3:38). Genesis 6:2 associates “the sons of God” with angels entrusted with mankind’s welfare prior to their illicit conjugation with women. Angels are also referred to as “the sons of God” (Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7). God calls his regathered people Israel his sons and daughters in Isaiah 43:3-7. “We have one Father, God,” cried the Jewish audience in John 8:41 in response to Jesus’ accusations. Prospective members of the church, “those who receive him (Jesus),” are called “sons of God” (see John 1:12; Romans 8:14,19; Philippians 2:15; 1 John 3:1,2). Is there a difference in the term applied to Jesus? Yes, there is. Not Adam, not the angels, not the nation of Israel, and not even the prospective church can claim the special relationship Jesus has with our heavenly Father. Jesus alone is the “beginning of the creation of God” (Revelation 3:14), and he alone reflects the characteristics of God to such an extent that knowing him was tantamount to personally knowing God (John 10:30). Nowhere is this special relationship better expressed than in what may arguably be the most widely quoted verse in the Bible: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten (Greek: monogenes) son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16). Strong’s Concordance defines monogenes (#3439) as “only-born, i.e., sole; or only (begotten child).” It says the word is a compound word made up of mono, meaning sole or single, and ginomai, meaning to cause to be, or to cause to become. Liddell and Scott’s Lexicon suggests the primary meaning of the word monogenes as “only member of a kin or kind.” It gives a secondary definition as “unique.” Kittel’s Theological dictionary adds that the term monogenes implies not just “only begotten” but also conveys a special relationship. The New International Version of the Bible translates monogenes not as “only begotten” but as “one and only (Son).” This is an attempt to emphasize the unique relationship suggested by Liddell and Scott. However, this translation does not differentiate enough between Jesus and others mentioned as sons of God. If we understand the term “only begotten son” properly, we will understand the insight Peter was granted. When he responded to Jesus’ question in our theme text, Jesus told him: “Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven” (Matthew 16:17). |
||||||
50 | is december 25th the day christ was born | Gal 4:4 | goodnewsminister | 85429 | ||
Our Lord was born in October or late September 2 B.C. or B.C.E., not on December 25th... Thus, it is again proven that Jesus' birth was about one year and three months before our common era, A.D. 1; for, his ministry ending when he was thirty-three and a half years old, April 3rd, A.D. 33, the date of his birth may be readily found by measuring backward to a date thirty-three and a half years prior to April 3rd, A.D. 33. Thirty-two years and three months before April A.D. 33 would be January 3rd, A.D. 1, and one year and three months further back would bring us to October 3rd, B.C. 2, as the date of our Lord's birth at Bethlehem. The difference between lunar time, used by the Jews, and solar time, now in common use, would be a few days, so that we could not be certain that the exact day might not be in September about the 27th, but October 1st, B.C. 2, is about correct. Nine months back of that date would bring us to about Christmas time, B.C. 3, as the date at which our Lord laid aside the glory which he had with the Father before the world was [made] and the taking of or changing to human nature began. It seems probable that this was the origin of the celebration of December 25th as Christmas Day. Some writers on Church history claim, even, that Christmas Day was originally celebrated as the date of the annunciation by Gabriel to the virgin Mary. (Luke 1:26) Certain it is that a midwinter date does not well agree with the declaration of Scripture, that at the time of our Lord's birth the shepherds were in the fields with their flocks. |
||||||
51 | is december 25th the day christ was born | Gal 4:4 | goodnewsminister | 87721 | ||
THE DATE OF OUR LORD'S BIRTH In the sixth century the Church began to reckon time from the birth of our Lord, and fixed the date A.D. as it now stands; namely, 536 years after the first year of Cyrus, king of Persia. Whether they placed it correctly or not does not affect the chronology as just given, which shows that the six thousand years from the creation of Adam ended with A.D. 1872; because it is eighteen hundred and seventy-two years since the year designated A.D., and the first year of Cyrus was five hundred and thirty-six years before that year (A.D.), whether it was the year of our Lord's birth or not. The year A.D. was fixed upon as early as the sixth century by Dionysius Exiguus, and other scholars of that period, though it did not come into general use until two centuries later. We cannot, perhaps, explain this better than by the time-worn illustration of a line with a star upon it--thus: B.C._____________________-____________________A.D. Let the line represent the six thousand years of earth's history from the creation of Adam to 1873 A.D.; and let the star represent the turning point between B.C. and A.D. To move that point either way would not alter the length of the entire period, though it would alter the names of the years. To move the A.D. point backward one year would make the B.C. period one year less, and the A.D. period one year more, but the sum of the B.C. and A.D. years would still be the same; for the amount taken from the one is always an addition to the other. Nevertheless, let us briefly examine the date of our Lord's birth, as it will be found useful in our subsequent studies. It has become customary among scholars to concede that our commonly accepted A.D. is incorrect to the amount of four years--that our Lord was born four years previous to the year designated A.D., that is, in the year B.C. 4. And this theory has been followed by the publishers of the common version of the Bible. We cannot agree that B.C. 4 was the true date of our Lord's birth. On the contrary, we find that he was born only one year and three months before our common era, A.D., namely, in October of B.C. 2. The general reason with most of those who claim that A.D. should have been placed four years earlier to correctly mark the Savior's birth, is a desire to harmonize it with certain statements of the Jewish historian Josephus, relative to the length of the reign of Herod the Great. According to one of his statements, it would appear that Herod died three years before the year reckoned A.D. If this were true,it would certainly prove that our Lord was born in the year B.C. 4; for it was this Herod, that issued the decree for the slaying of the babes of Bethlehem, from whom the infant Jesus was delivered. (Matt. 2:14-16) But is this statement of Josephus reliable? Is it true that Herod died four years before the year A.D.? No, we answer: Josephus alone is not sufficient authority for such a decision, as he is known and admitted to be inaccurate in his record of dates. [Part 1, to be continued] |
||||||
52 | is december 25th the day christ was born | Gal 4:4 | goodnewsminister | 87722 | ||
We now proceed to offer the Scriptural evidence relating to this subject, which more nearly agrees with the common era, and shows that our Lord's birth occurred only one year and three months prior to January, A.D. 1. It is as follows: Our Lord's ministry lasted three and a half years. The sixty-nine symbolic weeks of years (Dan. 9:24-27) reached to his baptism and anointing as Messiah, and there the last or seventieth week (seven years) of Israel's favor began. He was cut off [in death] in the middle of that seventieth week-- three and a half years from the beginning of his ministry. He was crucified, we know, at the time of the Passover, about April 1st, whatever the year. The three and a half years of his ministry, which ended in April, must consequently have begun about October, whatever the year. And October of some year must have been the true month of his birth, because he delayed not to begin his ministry as soon as he was thirty, and could not, according to the Law (under which he was born and which he obeyed), begin before he was thirty. As we read, "Now when Jesus began to be about thirty years of age he cometh" etc. John the Baptist was six months older than our Lord (Luke 1:26,36), hence he was of age (thirty years, according to the Law--Num. 4:3; Luke 3:23, etc.) and began to preach six months before our Lord became of age and began his ministry. The date of the beginning of John's ministry is clearly stated to have been the "fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar," the third emperor of Rome. (Luke 3:1) This is a clearly fixed date of which there can be no reasonable doubt. Tiberius became emperor at the death of Augustus Caesar, in the year of Rome 767, which was the year A.D. 14. But those misled by the inaccurate statements of Josephus relative to Herod, and who place the birth of Jesus at B.C. 4, in order to harmonize with him, run across a difficulty in this clearly stated date given by Luke, and endeavor to make it also harmonize with their B.C. 4 theory. To accomplish this end they make the claim that Tiberius began to exercise authority some three or four years before Augustus died, and before he was fully constituted emperor. They claim that possibly his rule might have been reckoned from that date. But such suppositions will be found baseless, by any who will investigate the matter on the pages of history. It is true that Tiberius was exalted to a very important position by Augustus, but it was not four years before Augustus' death, as their theory would demand, but ten years before, in A.D. 4. But the power then conferred upon him was only such as had been enjoyed by others before his day. It was in no sense of the word imperial power, and in no sense of the word can his "reign" be said to have begun there: he was only the heir-apparent. Even in the most exaggerated use of language, his "reign" could not be said to have commenced before Augustus' death and his own investiture in office at the hands of the Roman Senate, A.D. 14. History says, "The Emperor, whose declining age needed an associate, adopted Tiberius A.D. 4, renewing his tribunian power." Article TIBERIUS, Rees' Cyclopedia. "He [Augustus] determined accordingly to devolve upon him [Tiberius] a share in the government....This formal investiture placed him on the same footing as that enjoyed by the veteran Agrippa during his later years, and there can be no doubt that it was universally regarded as an introduction to the first place in the empire....The programme for the succession was significantly shadowed out: Tiberius had been ordered to assume his place at the head of the Senate, the people, and the army....The adoption, which took place at the same time, is dated June 27 (A.U.C. 757)--A.D. 4." Merivale's History of the Romans (Appleton's), Vol. IV, pp. 220,221 Thus there is conclusive proof that the first year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar was not three or four years before Augustus died; and that the honors referred to as conferred during Augustus' reign were conferred ten, and not four, years before Augustus' death, and then were in no sense imperial honors. [to be continued...] |
||||||
53 | is december 25th the day christ was born | Gal 4:4 | goodnewsminister | 87724 | ||
We may, therefore, consider the date of Luke 3:1 not merely the only one furnished in the New Testament, but an unequivocal one. There can be no doubt about it in the minds of any who have investigated it. Tiberius began to reign in A.D. 14. The fifteenth year of his reign, would therefore be the year A.D. 29, in which year, Luke states (3:1-3), John began his ministry. Since our Lord's thirtieth birthday and the beginning of his ministry were in October, and since John's birthday and the beginning of his ministry were just six months earlier, it follows that John began his ministry in the spring, about April first--just as soon as he was of age; for God's plans are always carried out on exact time. So, then, John was thirty years old in A.D. 29, about April first, consequently he was born B.C. 2, about April first. And Jesus' birth, six months later, must have been B.C. 2, about October first. Again, there is clear, strong evidence that Jesus was crucified on Friday, April 3rd, A.D. 33. The fact that his crucifixion occurred at the close of the fourteenth day of the month Nisan, and that this date rarely falls on Friday, but did so in the year A.D. 33, substantiates that date so thoroughly [B61] that even Usher, who adopted B.C. 4 as the date of Jesus' birth was forced to admit that his crucifixion was A.D. 33. Compare Usher's dates in the margin of the common version Bible at Luke 2:21 and Matt. 2:1 with those at Matthew 27 and Luke 23. The date of the crucifixion being A.D. 33, it follows that if Jesus had been born B.C. 4, he would have been 36 years old when he died; and his ministry from his thirtieth to his thirty-sixth year would have been six years. But it is clear that our Lord's ministry was three and a half years only. And this generally conceded fact is proved by Daniel's prophecy concerning Messiah's cutting off in the middle of the seventieth week of Israel's favor. Thus, it is again proven that Jesus' birth was about one year and three months before our common era, A.D. 1; for, his ministry ending when he was thirty-three and a half years old, April 3rd, A.D. 33, the date of his birth may be readily found by measuring backward to a date thirty-three and a half years prior to April 3rd, A.D. 33. Thirty-two years and three months before April A.D. 33 would be January 3rd, A.D. 1, and one year and three months further back would bring us to October 3rd, B.C. 2, as the date of our Lord's birth at Bethlehem. The difference between lunar time, used by the Jews, and solar time, now in common use, would be a few days, so that we could not be certain that the exact day might not be in September about the 27th, but October 1st, B.C. 2, is about correct. Nine months back of that date would bring us to about Christmas time, B.C. 3, as the date at which our Lord laid aside the glory which he had with the Father before the world was [made] and the taking of or changing to human nature began. It seems probable that this was the origin of the celebration of December 25th as Christmas Day. Some writers on Church history claim, even, that Christmas Day was originally celebrated as the date of the annunciation by Gabriel to the virgin Mary. (Luke 1:26) Certain it is that a midwinter date does not well agree with the declaration of Scripture, that at the time of our Lord's birth the shepherds were in the fields with their flocks. "Lift up your heads, desponding pilgrims; Give to the winds your needless fears; He who has died on Calvary's mountain Soon is to reign a thousand years. "A thousand years! earth's coming glory-- 'Tis the glad day so long foretold: 'Tis the bright morn of Zion's glory, Prophets foresaw in times of old. "Tell the whole world these blessed tidings; Speak of the time of rest that nears; Tell the oppressed of every nation, Jubilee lasts a thousand years. "What if the clouds do for a moment Hide the blue sky where morn appears? Soon the glad sun of promise given Rises to shine a thousand years." --Bonar I hope this answers your question, my friend, and may it be to His glory and not mine or yours or anyone elses! In Him, The Good News Minister! goodnewsminister@yahoo.com |
||||||
54 | Why did Jesus come at that time? | Gal 4:4 | goodnewsminister | 87727 | ||
To fulfill Daniel's prophecy in Daniel 9:23-27. God bless, The Good News Minister! |
||||||
55 | Are churches preaching cheap grace? | Rev 18:4 | goodnewsminister | 85426 | ||
In my opinion of the subject, yes, many of them are. They are NOT standing up for righteousness and Truth, but for heresy and disallusionment of all of God's people! They are not proclaiming the Good News, rather they proclaim another gospel, which neither Jesus nor the Apostles taught and thus mislead people. However, you're walk with God is yours and I make no judgement on which church you wish to attend, as my wife and son and I attend none of them, we choose to obey the declaration of Revelation 18:4, that is to,"Come out of her MY PEOPLE...and be NOT partakers of her sins!" | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 ] |