Results 1 - 20 of 34
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: David24597 Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | What is progeny? | Bible general Archive 3 | David24597 | 159923 | ||
Hi Mark, I may be able to help here. Several years back I did many, many hours of research into this subject, cross referencing and double checking over and over again. Bare with me. This may be a pretty long post. Sorry about that. 1) You asked: "If the 'sons of God' were the sons of Seth, and the 'daughters of men' were the daughters of Cain, then why would their children be any different than any others?" and "But when did a believer marrying a non-believer cause their children to be born 'giants', or whatever else the 'nephilim' were?" First off, how do you know that everybody from Adam to Noah were not "giants". The text in Gen. 6 does not state that only those descended from the "sons of God" and the "daughters of men" were giants. Examine Gen. 6:4 - "There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare [children] to them, the same [became] mighty men which [were] of old, men of renown." The way this verse is worded seems to indicate giants already existed when the sons of God took wives from the daughters of men. The hebrew words "n@phiyl" and "n@phil" which refer to what is called "nephilim" simply translate as "giants". Another point here is that all these died in the great flood. Where is there any Biblical evidence that the "sons of God" and the "daughters of men" again had children after the flood? You are aware of course of the "nephilim" that were living in the promised land when Moses led the children of Isreal there over 1,000 years after the flood? Num. 13:33 "the children of Anak". The descendents of Anak (the "Anakims") existed up to the time of King David. Here are some Biblical references to them: Deut. 1:28, 2:10-11 and 20-21, Deut. 3:11 and 9:2, Josh. 11:21-22, 12:4 and 13:12, 15:14, Judg. 1:20, II Sam. 21:16-22 and I Chron. 20:4-8. A close examination of these verses also show that Goliath was one of the descendants of the Anakims (i.e. Nephilim). To kinda sum this up giants existed before the sons of God married the daughters of men and they also existed after the great flood up to the time of King David. This would lead me to believe that the human race has actually degenerated since the flood with short statures as well as shorter life spans (Study the decreased life spans after the flood in Gen. 11:10-32). I know that the saved will need to take the time to "grow up" to the full height (Mal. 4:2). 2) You're other question - "But meanwhile, the whole world, with the exception of Noah's family, was judged wicked, and was destroyed from the earth. Did this 'Godly line' remain Godly through nine generations, only to become completely and entirely corrupt in the tenth generation? Is there any scriptural basis to support that?" Tracing a direct line of Adam's descendents down to Noah you will find that Noah and his 3 sons were the only direct decendents of Adam left alive on the earth when the flood came. Noah's father, Lamech, died 4, 5 or 6 years before the flood at the age of 777, almost 100 years younger than his father Methuselah who died at the age of 969, 1 or 2 years before the flood. which would coincide with Isa. 57:1 - "The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth [it] to heart: and merciful men [are] taken away, none considering that the righteous is taken away from the evil [to come]." All of Noah's ancesters were dead when the flood came with the exception of Enoch (Methuselah's father) who has never died but was translated, alive, from the earth at the age of 365 (Gen. 5:23-24 and Heb. 11:5). Noah himself was 600 years old when the flood came. |
||||||
2 | What is progeny? | Bible general Archive 3 | David24597 | 159943 | ||
Mark, Aren't all of God's people given the power to become the "sons of God"? John 1:12, Rom. 8:14 and 19, Phil. 2:15 and I John 3:1-2. Those that followed God from Adam to Noah were the "sons of God" by contrast those that didnt follow God but followed their own hearts were "sons of man" their women would be "daughters of man". As for God's people taking wives from unbelievers, it has happened a lot in the Bible. The history of the Jews is full of it from the time of Moses to the days of Ezra and Nehemiah - Num. chapter 25, Neh. 13:23-30. By taken wives from the wicked the descendents of Adam (for the most part) adopted the lifestyles of the wicked. This led to the great wickedness God found in the earth resulting in the great flood. Such things have happened over and over again in the Bible. It even caused the division of the Jewish nation bacause Solomon had taken so many wives of the pagan nations and allowed them to cause him to worship idols. I forget the exact text for that but I know is there. |
||||||
3 | Whats the major reson for sunday worship | Bible general Archive 3 | David24597 | 159948 | ||
Actually Ebrain that's not quite true. The book of Acts alone records over 80 different seventh-day Sabbaths kept by the early Christians: Kept by Paul - 13:14, 17:2 Kept by the early Christians - 13:42 and 44, 16:13 Seventy eight different Sabbaths kept by Paul and the early Christians - 18:4 and 11 |
||||||
4 | Whats the major reson for sunday worship | Bible general Archive 3 | David24597 | 159949 | ||
Samkoshy, What Biblical references do you have that specifically commands God's people to keep Sunday as the Sabbath |
||||||
5 | Whats the major reson for sunday worship | Bible general Archive 3 | David24597 | 159953 | ||
Livingtree, The word translated as "rest" in Hebrews 4:9 (There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God) is "sabbatismos" and specifically refers to the seveth day of the week. The day of the week God rested from creating the world. |
||||||
6 | What is progeny? | Bible general Archive 3 | David24597 | 159960 | ||
One other thing you might want to consider Mark is that God created every living thing to only be able to mate with it's own species. The words "after his kind" and "after their kind" which occur frequently in Gen. 1 is from the Hebrew word "miyn" which means "kind, sometimes a species (usually of animals) Groups of living organisms belong in the same created 'kind' if they have descended from the same ancestral gene pool. This does not preclude new species because this represents a partitioning of the original gene pool. Information is lost or conserved not gained. A new species could arise when a population is isolated and inbreeding occurs. By this definition a new species is not a new 'kind' but a further partitioning of an existing 'kind'". It no more possible for an angel or demon to breed with a human than it is for a dog to breed with a cat. |
||||||
7 | Whats the major reson for sunday worship | Bible general Archive 3 | David24597 | 159961 | ||
Where is the specifc Biblical command to keep Sunday? If the Sabbath day was changed would not Jesus have said something about it? (Heb. 4:8) | ||||||
8 | Whats the major reson for sunday worship | Bible general Archive 3 | David24597 | 159971 | ||
Some of you may be interested in these historical records taken from the teachings of several Christian denominations: Note the following quotes from the Catholic Church: "Question: Have you any other way of proving that the church has power to institute festivals of precept? "Answer: Had she not such power she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her: she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday the seventh day, a change for which there is no Scriptural authority." A Doctrinal Catechism, by Rev. Stephen Keenan, page 174. "Question: What day was the Sabbath? "Answer: Saturday "Question: Who changed it? "Answer: The Catholic Church." From Rev. Dr. Butler’s Catechism, Revised, Page 57. "It was the Catholic Church which, ...has transformed this rest to the Sunday in remembrance of the resurrection of our Lord. Thus the observance of Sunday by the Protestants is an homage they pay, in spite of themselves, to the authority of the [Catholic] Church." Plain Talk About the Protestants of Today, by Msgr. Segur, Page 213. The first Sunday law ever made was that issued by the Emperor Constantine, March 7, A.D. 321, which reads as follows: "Let all judges and town people, and the occupation of all trades rest on the venerable day of the sun; but let those who are situated in the country, freely and at full liberty, attend to the business of agriculture; because it often happens that no other day is so fit for sowing corn and planting vines; lest the critical moment being let slip men should lose the commodities granted by heaven." Corpus Juris Civilis Cod.: lib. 3, tit.12,3 In A.D. 364 the council of Laodicea forbade the observance of the seventh-day Sabbath: "Sabbath, Change of, Action of Council of Laodicea on A.D. 364 – Christians shall not Judaize and be idle on Saturday [Sabbath, original] but shall work on that day; but the Lord’s day they shall especially honor, and, as being Christians, shall, if possible, do no work on that day. If, however, they are found Judaizing, they shall be shut out from Christ." A History of the Councils of the Church: from the Original Documents, Rt. Rev. Charles Joseph Hefele, D.D., Bishop of Rottenburg, book 6, sec. 93, canon 29 (Vol. II, page 316). Edinburgh: T and T Clark, 1896. What do Protestants say?: Baptist: "There was and is a commandment to keep holy the Sabbath Day, but that Sabbath Day was not Sunday. It will be said, however, and with some show of triumph, that the Sabbath was transferred from the seventh to the first day of the week, with all its duties, privileges, and sanctions. Earnestly desiring information on this subject, which I have studied for many years, I ask, Where can the record of such a transaction be found? Not in the New Testament, absolutely not. There is no Scriptural evidence of the change of the Sabbath institution from the seventh to the first day of the week... "Of course, I quite well know that Sunday did come into use in early Christian history as a religious day, as we learn from the Christian Fathers and other sources. But what a pity that it comes branded with the mark of paganism, and christened with the name of the sun god, when adopted and sanctioned by the papal apostasy, and bequeathed as a sacred legacy to Protestantism!" Dr. Edward T. Hiscox author of The Baptist Manual, in a paper read before a New York Ministers' Conference held in Nov. 13, 1893. Lutheran: "They [the Catholics] allege the Sabbath changed into Sunday, the Lord's Day, contrary to the Decalogue, as it appears; neither is there any example more boasted of than the changing of the Sabbath Day. Great, say they, is the power and authority of the church, since it dispensed with one of the Ten Commandments." Auxsburg Confession, art. XXVIII. |
||||||
9 | Whats the major reson for sunday worship | Bible general Archive 3 | David24597 | 159972 | ||
Methodist: "It is true there is no positive command for infant baptism, nor is there any against it, as there should have been if Christ intended to abridge the rights of Jewish parents under the Abrahamic covenant. Nor is there any for keeping holy the first day of the week or for family devotion, or for women to receive the Lord’s Supper. The reasons are obvious; there was no controversy in either case that called for it." Theological Compend., Rev. Amos Binney, pp. 180,181. New York: Methodist Book Concern, 1902. Christian: "I do not believe that the Lord's day came in the room of the Jewish Sabbath, or that the Sabbath was changed from the seventh to the first day, for this plain reason, that where there is no testimony, there can be no faith. Now there is no testimony in all the oracles of heaven that the Sabbath was changed, or that the Lord’s day came in the room of it...There is no divine testimony that the Sabbath was changed, or that the Lord's day came in the room of it; therefore there can be no divine faith that the Sabbath was changed or that the Lord's day came in the room of it." Alexander Campbell (Candidus), in Washington (Pa.) Reporter, Oct. 8, 1821. Congregationalist: "It is quite clear that, however rigidly or devoutly we may spend Sunday, we are not keeping the Sabbath... The Sabbath was founded on a specific, divine command. We can plead no such command for the observance of Sunday... There is not a single sentence in the New Testament to suggest that we incur any penalty by violating the supposed sanctity of Sunday." The Ten Commandments, R.W. Dale, D.D. (Congregationalist), pp. 106, 107. London: Hodder and Stoughton. Presbyterian: "The moral law doth ever bind all, as well justified persons as others, to the obedience thereof, and that not only in regard of the matter contained in it, but also in respect of the authority of God the Creator who gave it. Neither doth Christ in the gospel any way dissolve, but much strengthen, this obligation." From the Constitution of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. Church of England: "There is no word, no hint, in the New Testament about abstaining from work on Sunday... The observance of Ash Wednesday or Lent stands on exactly the same footing as the observance of Sunday... Into the rest of Sunday no divine law enters." The Ten Commandments, Canon Eyton (Church of England). London: Trubner. |
||||||
10 | What is progeny? | Bible general Archive 3 | David24597 | 159975 | ||
Mark, I would think unclean spirits are fallen angels. Both are recorded in several places in the New Testament as having possesed people. | ||||||
11 | Whats the major reson for sunday worship | Bible general Archive 3 | David24597 | 159978 | ||
Doc, If Acts 20:7 is proof that Sunday should be kept as a day of rest then Acts 2:46 is proof that every single day of the week should be kept as a holy Sabbath day of rest. Also remember in Bible times a day was a 24 hr. period beginning at sunset and ending 24 hrs. later at sunset. This meeting in Acts 20:7 was at night and continued until midnight (Saturday night) and Paul began his journey "on the morrow" (Sunday morning). I Cor. 16:1 and 2 was simply a request to have their offerings ready for him for when he arrived and is not a command to keep Sunday as a Sabbath day. Where does the Bible say the "Lord's Day" in Rev. 1:10 is Sunday? Would it not be the day Jesus says He is Lord of? Matt. 12:8 Thanks for adding this "You also left out this quote from the Augsburg Confession (1530), 'Of this kind is the observance of the Lord's Day, Easter, Pentecost, and like holy-days and rites. For those who judge that by the authority of the Church the observance of the Lord's Day instead of the Sabbath-day was ordained as a thing necessary, do greatly err. Scripture has abrogated the Sabbath-day; for it teaches that, since the Gospel has been revealed, all the ceremonies of Moses can be omitted. And yet, because it was necessary to appoint a certain day, that the people might know when they ought to come together, it appears that the Church designated the Lord's Day for this purpose; and this day seems to have been chosen all the more for this additional reason, that men might have an example of Christian liberty, and might know that the keeping neither of the Sabbath nor of any other day is necessary.' You have just confirmed what I was saying that the Church, itself claims they have changed the Sabbath day from Saturday to Sunday. Also remember the seventh day Sabbath as not part of the laws of Moses. It was first instituted in Gen. 2:1-3 many, many years before Moses was even born. The 10 commandment law is not part of the "laws of ordinances" that were nailed to Jesus' cross. |
||||||
12 | Whats the major reson for sunday worship | Bible general Archive 3 | David24597 | 160086 | ||
Searcher, Let's examine some things you have said here: 1) "The New Testament never commands Christians to observe the Sabbath." What of the text in Heb. chapter 4. the "rest" refered to here is the Sabbath day. We are commanded to labor to enter into that rest. In verse 9 the Greek word is "sabbatismos" the seventh-day sabbath. And - "The apostle Paul warned the Gentiles about many different sins in his epistles, but breaking the Sabbath was never one of them." Verse 11 says "Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief." What better command do you need or what more of a warning not to break the sabbath? The penalty is to fall into unbelief which it seems has happened here. 2) "We believe the Old Testament regulations governing Sabbath observances are ceremonial, not moral, aspects of the law. As such, they are no longer in force." Why would 9 of the 10 commandments be considered the moral law while the 4th is not? - "In Colossians 2:16-17, Paul explicitly refers to the Sabbath as a shadow of Christ, which is no longer binding since the substance (Christ) has come. It is quite clear in those verses that the weekly Sabbath is in view. The phrase "a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day" refers to the annual, monthly, and weekly holy days of the Jewish calendar (cf. 1 Chronicles 23:31; 2 Chronicles 2:4; 31:3; Ezekiel 45:17; Hosea 2:11). If Paul were referring to special ceremonial dates of rest in that passage, why would he have used the word "Sabbath?" He had already mentioned the ceremonial dates when he spoke of festivals and new moons." Special holy days during the Jewish festivals were also called sabbath days of rest. They were kept IN ADDITION TO the seventh day sabbath (Lev. 23:37-39 note verse 39 a sabbath on the 1st day and a sabbath on the eighth day). These were the "ceremonial sabbaths" mentioned here in Col. 2 and Gal. 4. not the seventh day sabbath of the 4th commandment. 3) "In our only glimpse of an early church worship service in the New Testament, the church met on the first day of the week (Acts 20:7)." Please compare Acts 20:7 with Acts 2:46 and explain how Acts 20:7 is proof to keep Sunday (aside from the fact that this meeting in Acts 20:7 took place on Saturday night). 4) "Nowhere in the Old Testament are the Gentile nations commanded to observe the Sabbath or condemned for failing to do so. That is certainly strange if Sabbath observance were meant to be an eternal moral principle." What of the very 4th commandment itself? The Gentiles that had joined the Jews in faith were called the "stranger" and the "son of the stranger" (II Sam. 1:13). Read Ex. 20:10, 23:12, Lev. 18:26. 19:34, 24:22, Num. 15:16 and 29-30, Deut. 5:14 to see even Gentiles kept the Sabbath in the Old Testament. Gentiles that had joined to the Jews even kept the Mosaic laws of the time too (Num. 9:14, 15:14, Deut. 31:12). God even honored the prayers of the "strangers" that came to worship Him in Jerusalem (I Kings 8:41-43 and II Chron. 6:32-33). But I'm starting to stray a little from the main subject. 5) "There is no evidence in the Bible of anyone keeping the Sabbath before the time of Moses, nor are there any commands in the Bible to keep the Sabbath before the giving of the law at Mt. Sinai." What of Ex. 16:22-30? This happened before they reached Mt. Sinai showing the 4th commandment had been kept before the Law was given there. 6) "When the Apostles met at the Jerusalem council (Acts 15), they did not impose Sabbath keeping on the Gentile believers." There was no need to. The Gentiles came anyway and at times even requested Paul to come preach to them on the Sabbath (Acts 18:4 and 11 and Acts. 13:42-44). Pesonally I think you need to stop picking and chosing scriptures that seem to support your personal beliefs while rejecting or redefining those texts that very clearly show you are wrong. |
||||||
13 | Whats the major reson for sunday worship | Bible general Archive 3 | David24597 | 160089 | ||
Sorry my bad. this was in answer to Kalos not Searcher :( | ||||||
14 | are we to observe all feast days? | Zech 14:16 | David24597 | 159670 | ||
Many of the Old Testament ordinances were done away with when Jesus was crucified - Col. 2:14. Those mentioned in Eze. chapters 40 though 48 are part of what we call the old Mosaic or Levitical laws (see Eze. 43:18 and 44:5). Heb. chapter 9 is a good reference to this. The saved christian is not obligated to keep these Levitical laws and would in fact be denying the saving blood of Jesus if he/she were to sacrifice lambs or goats for forgiveness of sins. The Passover, Yum Kippor and many of the Old Testament feast days required such sacrifices. Also Jer. 31:36 could be a reference to the end of the Jewish Dispensation once the old ordinances have been done away with at the cross of Jesus |
||||||
15 | Does sin prove one is not a believer? | 1 Cor 6:9 | David24597 | 157824 | ||
One more thought here. (There should be an "edit" button - anyway I'll post one more thing). Rom. 3:25 specifies it is the sins of the past that are forgiven. Sins in the future dont exist yet. Once a sin is committed it should be repented of. Then it is a "past" sin and can be forgiven. True repentance also means to stop sinning that particular sin. Not from fear of punishment but because you are truly sorry for doing it. Sins continually comitted (even if you ask God to forgive you) will not be forgiven until you stop doing that sin. "We are saved by grace..." That grace reaches us through faith. "We are saved by grace through faith..." Yet faith without works is dead. Our faith is made perfect through our works, and by our works is our faith shown to others (James chapter 2). |
||||||
16 | Does sin prove one is not a believer? | 1 Cor 6:9 | David24597 | 157839 | ||
Hi BradK Simple question: Can something that does not exist be forgiven? Do sins in the future even exist yet? All sins that exist can be forgiven (with the exception of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost. But that's another subject anyway). Sins in the future have not been commited yet therefore do not exist yet. The text in Col 2:13 "all trespasses", i.e. "all sins", are obviously all sins in existence. These can be none other than sins of the past. The true believer (born again saved or whatever you want to call it) must remain obedient to remain saved. Consider the entire chapter of Rom 6 below. Pay attention to the parts I have capitalized. Rom. 6:1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? Rom 6:2 God forbid. HOW SHALL WE, THAT ARE DEAD TO SIN, LIVE ANY LONGER THEREIN? Rom 6:3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Rom 6:4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so WE ALSO SHOULD WALK IN NEWNESS OF LIFE. Rom 6:5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: Rom 6:6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. Rom 6:7 For he that is dead is freed from sin. Rom 6:8 Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: Rom 6:9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. Rom 6:10 For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. Rom 6:11 Likewise RECKON YE ALSO YOURSELVES TO BE DEAD INDEED UNTO SIN, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. Rom 6:12 LET NOT SIN THEREFORE REIGN IN YOUR MORTAL BODY, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof. Rom 6:13 Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God. Rom 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. Rom 6:15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid. Rom 6:16 KNOW YE NOT, THAT TO WHOM YE YIELD YOURSELVES SERVANTS TO OBEY, HIS SERVANTS YE ARE TO WHOM YE OBEY; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? Rom 6:17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Rom 6:18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness. Rom 6:19 I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness. Rom 6:20 For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness. Rom 6:21 What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death. Rom 6:22 But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life. Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. You said "Are we then saved by grace but kept by works? You are advocating conditional forgiveness my friend, if I understand you correctly:-)" Do you know how many times the word "If" is in the Bible? 1,420 times in the KJV Are you saying that you can continue in (or renew) disobedience to God and still be saved? Don't even the saved have a free will? Can they not choose? |
||||||
17 | Does sin prove one is not a believer? | 1 Cor 6:9 | David24597 | 157840 | ||
1 John 2:24 "If that which you have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, ye shall also continue in the Son, and in the Father." That word "continue" seems to me to denote a perpetual growth towards perfection just from the way the text is worded if nothing else. Are we not commanded to grow into all righteousness? Ps. 92:12. Mal. 4:2. Eph. 4:15. 1 Peter 2:2. 2 Peter 3:18 |
||||||
18 | Does sin prove one is not a believer? | 1 Cor 6:9 | David24597 | 157841 | ||
I would have to agree with Doc. The only difference between a believer and non-believer is the saving grace through the blood of Jesus. Even a non-believer can take steps to better himself but without the saving grace of God it is of no use. God does in fact show us where we fall short (sometimes through chastening us) in the hopes that we will grow out of it. That choice of growth is ours | ||||||
19 | Does sin prove one is not a believer? | 1 Cor 6:9 | David24597 | 157894 | ||
Mark 3:28 Lev. 16:21, 30, 34 Ps. 25:18 Ps. 51:9 Isa. 38:17 Ezek. 18:21 Micah 7:19 1 Pet. 4:8 1 John 1:9 Matt. 12:31 Are you saying sins that dont even exist can be forgiven? Jesus died to forgive something that doesnt exist? Jesus died on the cross to make it possible for His people to become saved. Sins are not fogiven until they are confessed and forsaken. Jesus death on the cross did not grant forgiveness from sins that 1- hadnt been committed yet and 2- havent been repented of yet. In order for any sin to be forgiven it has to have been done first then repented of. Dont misunderstand me, Im not saying you should commit a sin just so you can confess it and gain repentance. There is no excuse for commiting any sins. They should be avoided at all costs. If we should slip and sin though, we have the option of repenting. If we dont repent than we obviously are not saved. |
||||||
20 | Does sin prove one is not a believer? | 1 Cor 6:9 | David24597 | 157911 | ||
What difinitive evidence do you have from scripture alone that states the saved can not fall again into a state of being "unsaved" (for lack of a better word). Where is the scriptural proof that plainly states that once saved you are always saved and can never fall from grace again? Please refrain from quotes from other humans or human supposition. I'm asking for scripture references only and not vague references that require redefinition to prove your theories. |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 ] Next > Last [2] >> |