Results 81 - 100 of 275
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Tamara Brewington Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
81 | Divorced Do Christians Get Remarried? | 1 Cor 6:9 | Tamara Brewington | 205400 | ||
Dear Doc, I am laughing so hard and my face is so cracked up I can barely type which is why it is taking me so long to reply to you my dear good man... Yeah, oh meo mio, hats, marriage, critical commentators, fumbling attemtps at good exegesis, virtual blow outs, figurative run ins, suppossed views, Bible Study (!), soul sleep, preterism, oh meo mio. Movie "Big Trouble in little Chinatown" - when an eight foot giant slaps the back of your favorite head against the bar room wall and asks you if have paid your dues, you look that eight foot giant in the eye and say, "have I paid my dues, have I paid my dues, yes sir, the check is in the mail!" - Jesus paid the whole thing! Here is one for you Doc; II Timothy 4:2 preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great diligence and instrution. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires, and will turn away their ears from the truth and will trun aside to myths. Hope your Sunday has been a blessed day, mine has, God's Day To You, Tamara |
||||||
82 | Divorced Do Christians Get Remarried? | 1 Cor 6:9 | Tamara Brewington | 205397 | ||
Dear WOWS, I was making a point my good saint in answer to another one; namely this, where someone else said that Mathew had been an eye witness and that his account may have held more weight, or something to that effect, I said that (in light of that statement) Mark was written earlier - my point was not to place one scripture over another but to point out that we shouldn't do that and that each may have features which would make them, possibly to some commentators (notice I did not say to me) be more reliable accounts. For the reasons stated above some commentators (again, not me) hold one or another account of the same thing as closer to what may actually have happened. This is called critical commentary, part of an historical research to determine what actually occured. A valid reconstruction of events of the passages or surrounding events of the passages. This is not an attempt to disparage scriptures, to say that one or the other may be seen by a commentator, who is much better trained at looking at the subject at hand to determine the things I just mentioned. No one was holding scripture above another when it is all God's Word. That is not the case. This is purely about Bible Study, not preferences. God's Day To You, Tamara |
||||||
83 | Divorced Do Christians Get Remarried? | 1 Cor 6:9 | Tamara Brewington | 205395 | ||
Dear Jeff, This verse down there applies to me and not to you my good man, I cannot answer this post, I have promised another dear brother to cease and desist, if you would like, look up my profile and email and I would be willing to continue studying together with you, even though we see this differently. If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. Hope your Sunday has been blessed, mine has great service today, really great... God's Day To You, Tamara |
||||||
84 | Divorced Do Christians Get Remarried? | 1 Cor 6:9 | Tamara Brewington | 205393 | ||
Dear John, I realize that others have different views than mine. You decided you did not want to be discussing it anymore because you said we were in disagreemnt. I stopped discussing it with you in grace. Others wished to discuss it. I am not here to refute folks John. When will you understand me? I have made a concerted effort since the dreaded issue to respect when an individual wants to drop a subject between myself and them. I am going to say this unitl everyone is tired of hearing it; I am here because I am interested in dividing scripture! I am not interested in pushing my view on anyone, I am not interested in my view, or your view or anyone esles. What I am interested in is dividing scripture by exegesis, and to do it with respect for others and in LOVE, to get at the intended meaning of the original author to his audience, period. I answer post by addressing scriptural issues that are posted to me and try to see how their observations fit the scriptures that they address, or present. I am not here to change anyone's view, that is not why I answer anyone back. I respect good intentions, and I love wise counsel along with the next Christian I have been willing to except rebuke and exhortation and let it run down my proverbial beard. I have apologized to people in here who never had the grace as you have, and as others have, to actually forgive me that I would know of it. What I have observed is that my division of scripture is being taken as if I stand in judgment of others, as if the division of scripture that I present is a view I have taken towards what others should do, go do, etc. You mistake my intentions totally, most people here have repeatedly... I am interested in how application is derived from a body of scriptures on a topic, not so I could go admonish folks, or say, HEY EVERYBODY GO DO THIS, THIS IS RIGHT YOU ARE WRONG! This is not about what I believe in my heart as a Christian, this is about studying with others who may see things differently then me, Halellujah for differences in the body of Christ! I have done my best to understand what every body else looks at things like in terms of how I have replied. Now it is time for every one else to stop and try seeing it from my point of view, not the sbuject matter, but my intentions in continuing to answer exegetically about the scriptures being discussed. I am very tired of trying to study with people who have mis judge my motives. I love you John as a dear brother and from the first issue between us I have been trying to get along, not just with you, but with everyone. I have a question, not so much for you John, but for everyone; Are you really interested in studying the Bible together to the extent that we are here to dialogue and edify one another because we are willing to engage in that Bible study? If so, where is the understanding of not another's view, but of another's reason for being in here? Next question; why is the continuation of dialogue to get to what a body of scriptures through study together, or a scripture means one is seen as pushing one's view? Please think about this. By His Infinite And Eternal Grace, Tamara |
||||||
85 | Divorced Do Christians Get Remarried? | 1 Cor 6:9 | Tamara Brewington | 205362 | ||
Dear Jeff, No my dear not on a crusade here at all, myabe I should just stop answering everyone who decides to post me with what I really am considering about the texts in mind here... No slight to anyone intended. If I have offended you let me know please... My aim is ever to divide the passages, not to point fingers at people, that is not what we are here for. If the grammar, or historical evidence does not support one's interpretation, why is addressing the grammar and history seen as pointing fingers? I am not here for that. Where in the text in I Cor. 7 does it say you are anything more than unbound, as in divorced? Where does it say you are free to remarry? Show me please, how the grammar allows for "when we take this in context"... Please show me how I have taken the group of verses that speak about being divorced, and about being unbound, and about Jesus speaking of God's original intention that the two are one flesh, and about God hating divorce, and about they are married until one of them is dead - and then show me how the counsel of scripture is saying on the whole that one is free to remarry? I agree with that folks who came to the Lord having gotten into an adulteress situation and how we can't expect them to separate... Now that there saved they are forgiven and should not be expected to separate. My questions were all centered around those that have been saved and then choose to remarry, entering into adultery because they feel that since somone wronged them they can move on, stay in the new relationship, ask for forgiveness about it and expect to find themselves in heaven. I can see we do not agree about this part of the issue, would you like me to stop? I will... Or would you like to examine the scriptures some more? Which is all I have been doing about this issue since answering posts, not disagreeing with folks, examining scriptures like we are suppossed to be doing... But if I have all knowledge but have not love, I am as a clanging cymbol... You said; "Every one takes this verse to mean..." Really? And you, perhaps, have some special insight and every one else is wrong? Please, I don't claim special insight, perhaps I should not have said everyone, and that might have been better? I am talking about the grammar there, please. Where does it say that being unbound, or loosed means you are free to remarry? Would you like to base your answer on Mathew 19? That is where some people would like to stand; that it means if one sins against you you can remarry... You said; Free to us, but at great cost. While we are not free to judge another's salvation, we can safely assume that a person who continues in a willful lifestyle of gross sin against God may not be saved at all, we can't rewrite the Scriptures to say what they don't say. I am not trying to rewirte scripture - I agree with you here about everything you are saying... We don't judge another's salvation - I keep trying to see how one can continue in sin and still be saved. This is something you have hit on here yourself. Please consider that I see the same thing, if a person is doing this they may not be saved. The counsel of scripture in the New Testament does absolutely teach that there is no sin that cannot be forgiven except one, blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. It also teaches that if you continue willfully in sin and just never turn around and stop, you may not be saved at all; I,II,III John, Hebrews 6, Mathew 7:21-23. There is wheat and there is chaff; it is not up to me to say who is and is not, I never claim to do so. I am here to try to divide these scripture please. Let me know if you need me to stop, and I will consider not answering anyone's elses concerns either... Have Blessed Sunday, Tamara |
||||||
86 | Divorced Do Christians Get Remarried? | 1 Cor 6:9 | Tamara Brewington | 205355 | ||
Dear Dan, Very interesting indeed, did you see brother Tim Moran's last post to me about the meaning of the words commits adultery in the Mark passage? He is right, and how about this, Mark's account is the eldest account and may actually be considered to be more accurate by some commentators. I though it was interesting to rediscover that in Mark is actually says that who ever divorces his wife makes her an adulteress, having nothing to do with that she committed adultery. The reason for this is that there was no such thing as your father taking you back, your father arranged to have you remarried at the earliest possbible convenience and that made you an adulteress, which is what Jesus meant. Some of these issues are not reconcileable in the usual way do to the grammatical constructions from one account to another. Reconciling these accounts is not so simple as reconciling say, the tomb accounts. No one said there was a conflict, a difference maybe, not a conflict. While it is true that if we confess He is faithful to forgive, consider that you cannot remain in the sin and keep walking in it just because you were forgiven. I said it before, I will say it again; if this were a case of fornication and someone said, I repent, but kept right on living in it, would you think they were going to heaven? I don't think so, and I bet you don't either, but when it comes to adultery, depending on who is doing the exegesis someone gets a free pass. What no one except Tim Moran has been able to do, for lack of skill is to do a grammatical and an historical criticism of these passages thoroughly to see exactly what the Greek was saying, not a word study, that is not enough, the tenses, the finite minutia of Greek, and a real thorough histocial study to determine exactly what the author's intended the texts to mean. That stuff is not able to be seen by looking up every word in Greek, more is involved. For instance did you know that the word porneia can refer to a number of things according to, not how we see the word listed in the Strong's but according to how the word was used in the first century? The word inicates immorality many kinds; a woman being seen with another man in public, a man improperly touching a woman - on her face - her arm with a caress, as fornication by penetration, as adultery by penetration, as temple worship idol sex between homosexuals or lesbians or bewtween heterosexuals, as masturbation, as sexual fondeling another, need I go on? When we look at the grammar for Mark and see that it says whoever divorces his wife makes her an adulteress, we also can see that it makes him an aduterer, without qualification of cause. When we look at the grammar in Mathew we discover that the verse in question is clausal; whoever divorces his wife except for immorality, is the first clause; and marries another woman commits adultery is a second clause - the exegetical commentators say that the first clause states clearly the ability to get a divorce for immorality, but that the second clause depends on the first clause in a cause for getting a divorce by says absolutely nothing about the right to remarry. In I Corinthians 7:15 we have a big problem with the modern translation of a Greek transiliteration into English. Every one takes this verse to mean if the unbeliever leaves then you are free to remarry. The text says no such thing, it says that if they leave and are an unbeliever then the believer is not bound to reamain married, no where in the that text does it say you are free to get remarried, but people read that into it even though the English grammar, the Greek grammar does not support that. In fact Paul comments on the state of marriage and on what grounds one can remarry at the end of the passage in verse 39 saying a wife is bound to her husband as long as she lives, what it does not say is, but if one of them commits adultery you are free to remarry, you are certainly free to divorce in such a case, but not to remarry... There is no way to get that out of it without reading it into the text. Going to get those books that brother Tim Moran suggested in a post back there somewhere... God's Day To You, Tamara |
||||||
87 | Divorced Do Christians Get Remarried? | 1 Cor 6:9 | Tamara Brewington | 205339 | ||
Dear Pastor Moran, Yeah, I have heard this before, that she becomes an adulteress when her husband divorces her in Mark... People don't get the historical contexts and the grammatical contexts that drive these passages at all, they think in terms of now and what these transilterated words and passages mean in the now, not what they meant then. I have also in the past, due to circumstances had to explore the meaning of porneia, and porne the related word, in order to determine what constitutes such a thing. I had two pastors and three ministers do exegesis on this whole issue of Mathew 19, Mark 9, I Corinthians 7 and being unbound and in what way, what consituted porneia in the first century, and the use of grammar in all three passages. I settled for I Corinthians 7:11 after much much counseling and plan to err on the side of complete and utter caution and plan to remain in that state until the day I die, unless someone repents and then reconciliation could be possible. I find it interesting that if it were fornication and not stopping but saying, I repent that I entered into it would be completely unacceptable, but having committed adultery by remarrying and repenting and continuing in it for expedience sake is considered passe. I wonder what dear Apostle Paul would think? I wonder what dear Jesus would think? I think I would wonder hard before saying okay, I understand it is too late, go on ahead and stay in it. It is never too late to walk away from sin of any kind, just pick up and say I am done, cut it, suffer the consequences of walking away from sin, any sin. In the end only one Pastor, mine was against me getting divorced based on the exegesis. I had every reason according to the others exegesis to cut it and be free and remarry one day. That is why I was surprised to hear him say in Bible study the other day about the same thing John said after his exegesis many years ago. He holds the same view, if two Christians are now together, having gotten married, there is no reason why God would not forgive a past sin. Yeah, I think I will make the effort to purchase these two books for real Pastor Moran... Yours in Christ, Tamara |
||||||
88 | Divorced Do Christians Get Remarried? | 1 Cor 6:9 | Tamara Brewington | 205337 | ||
Dear Jim, Let me help you out here a bit, because I do understand what John was saying, which he said very simply and to the point... The sctipture would come from either Romans 7:2 where the widow is free to remarry since her husband has died, or I Corinthians 7:39 where the wife is free to remarry if her husband is dead. Please note the original thing that John was saying clearly; However, if that spouse does not repent, (i.e. keeps on doing what they are doing, without intent to change.) then you may divorce (According to our Lord) and remarry if you chose, to a one that has not been married, or widowed, or is not divorced for the wrong reason. Look closely at this one little part right here that John said, all I did was to add the commas like he said to do and it makes perfect sense; remarry if you chose, to a one that has not been married, or widowed, or is not divorced for the wrong reason. John says remarry if you chose, to the following types of folks, those that have never been married, or a widow, or one who is not divorced for the wrong reason. The first two can be found in I Corinthians 7, and the last in Mathew 19 according to John's reasoning here. Hope this clears it up, I think John got tired of talking about it all a while ago guys, let's lay this thing to rest. Okay? okay... God's Day To You, Tamara |
||||||
89 | Jesus Powers Diminished As A Human? | John 1:14 | Tamara Brewington | 205335 | ||
Thanks Doc, I had got an answer that dove tails with this one today in school from my pastor... I wanted a second opinion from in here, glad you caught this one and gave me excellent posts, now I know what that faulty theory is called. Another very nice professor was teaching about the hyostatic nature of Christ and was saying that Jesus diminished His powers of being God to take on humanity and took on the Holy Spirit to do the works of God as the Christ. My pastor taught me today before class about the Doctrine of the Impecability of Christ and said that what I had been taught was incorrect because it is in direct contradiciton to this very important doctrine which would disallow for the posibility that Jesus as fully human could ever have the ability to choose to sin, while choosing not to, but indeed had the inability to sin, even though tempted to sin, and having the inability to sin, did not sin. The ability to choose to sin implies that there is a possibility that Jesus as fully God and fully human could have stopped being God, or could have diminished characteristicis of being God, and been able to actually sin as a choice. But Jesus as God was always incapable of sinning as He is God, even though he put on the flesh. Jesus may choose not to use His powers in full capacity, but He may never have the possbility of committing sin, or He is not God. This is what I was looking for Doc, the content of all three posts, fits the context of my questions on this subject. Thank you very much, good to hear from you after so long, Much Christian love to you my brother in Christ, Tam Tam |
||||||
90 | Divorced Do Christians Get Remarried? | 1 Cor 6:9 | Tamara Brewington | 205325 | ||
Dear Pastor Moran, I appreciate the recommendation of the two books by Dr. Spiros Zodhiates, when I can I will order them. It is the exegesis of this that is of supreme interest to me and in the interests of brotherly love I am willing drop any subject at any time based on my experience in here if that pursual of further exegesis offends a brother or a sister. At least I have grown that much since joining this forum. I love conversing and studying with the saints who love to pursue exegesis, it drives the true meaning of the texts and hopefully these two books will endeavor to do just that, that is why and it is the only reason why I am in this Forum, to get at the meaning of the texts, for this I live. But to do so without love is loss to me... It becomes interesting as observation kicks in which types of concepts get kicked around in here and on what basis... Over a hundred posts on one subject lately... Not much of it very exegetically driven. I am no genious, nor am I what they would call a good exigete. I am a work in progress, I world at it and sometimes I am way off, and sometimes I am very alone in my endeavor. We are all from different backgrounds and come from different places and have different intrepretive lenses on, mine are not better, just different than some others. Thank you for your continued patience with my blundering efforts at exegesis Pastor Moran, and at good conduct, you have been more than gracious when I was on the wrong track at times and you kept on encouraging my blundering efforts to get at the root and the truth of a thing. But hey that is what Pastors are suppossed to do, right? Keep on being the Barnabas that you are, full of the Holy Spirit. Thank you, By God's Grace, Tamara |
||||||
91 | Divorced Do Christians Get Remarried? | 1 Cor 6:9 | Tamara Brewington | 205323 | ||
Dear John, I am letting this go out of respect for you and in love too... This was not about a disagreement or a not disagreement as far as what I intended to be doing with you John, in pursuing it. This was about that inquisitive mind we discussed before seeing something that did not line up with the whole counsel of scripture about sin John. I was not trying to push my view, if we disagree and that is what you can see about this, I respect that, and I do most sincerely apologize to you John, my brother in Christ. I don't come in here to address disagreements, only to look at what all the counsel of scripture when put together is driving the exegesis to dictate how a passage or scripture should be interpreted. I know for a fact that you agree that exegesis drives what the interpretation is going to be, not how we look at things, and not our views. So I will agree with you and say we disagree, and I will respect you and not push my views on you. And I will not do anything to make you feel disrespected John. I will lay aside my motives and my views about what I have done in pursuing this and see it your way in terms of how it appears to you, okay John? xoxoxox :):):):):):) By His Eternal And Indispensable Grace, Tam |
||||||
92 | Divorced Do Christians Get Remarried? | 1 Cor 6:9 | Tamara Brewington | 205317 | ||
Dear John, I am not trying to belabor this overly much dear heart, but something keeps niggling at my heart and my brain... It is the concept of being called to suffer in order to obey Christ as having first place before personal discomfort, "but if you burn, marry". I am thinking abuot another verse, "God will not test/tempt (which ever translation) you beyond what you are able, but will make a way out (usually, but not always a spiritualy one). Here is a concept to consider; if someone were a fornicator and then repented of their sin, but did not come out of that relationship would we still be saying that they are going to heaven? According to I Corinthians, I do not think so... Why then do we make this big allowance for Christians who remarry after divorce saying it is too late to change it, someone committed adultery on them (the text in Mark makes no such claim about adultery being the cause of the divorce that subsequently remarrying means it is adultery, only that marrying a divorced person constitutes adultery). And no, I do not think God want us to allow His child to be bound up and in mental pain and heart ache, but we are called to suffer Christ in order to obey Him when things don't go our way. What do you think? God Bless, Tam |
||||||
93 | Is Jesus the same God as God, or a God? | John 1:1 | Tamara Brewington | 205313 | ||
Dear Colt45, Something is missing here in your understanding of all of what the word Logos means... It does mean what you say, but it also means something more important from the Strong's concordance; it means the Divine Expression, that is the Divine Expression of God Himself. This is why the other posts which were given to you from Colossians is important... You said in your second post; God, however you want to define him was born as a human being Jesus the Christ. The Creator/God the Father/YHWH put his mind his thoughts into a human being. This is the objection to your point up there; God did not put His mind His thoughts into Jesus Christ the human. Christ who is also fully God along with the Father, and who according to John 1:1,2 was there in the beginning with God and was also God, put His own God nature, Jesus put His own thoughts and mind into the body of a human by His own free choice as part of the Father's plan. Where it says in Colossians 1:16 that Jesus created all things, the universe, the authorities in heaven, and all things have been created by Him and for Him and through Him, that means He is equal with God the Father, they share the same powers the same abilities. But important to remember is that Jesus and the Father and the Holy Spirit are three distinct separate persons who each have their own thoughts, or mind, as in the Holy Spirit searches the mind of God to know what the will of God is, but all of them together are one being. Therefore it is not possible that God gave Jesus Christ the human God's thoughts, whether you are saying God the Father or Jesus the God, as God giving Jesus Christ the human His thoughts the concept is incorrect. God did not infuse a human with His thoughts, God incarnated Himself, put flesh on God as a covering. Hear this saying and understand; God put on humanity and humanity put on the divine. God did not infuse humanity with His thoughts, He put on human flesh on top of being God, that is why the Bible says that Jesus is God in the flesh among men. Jesus as God never stepped down from being God for even one moment of time, He never diminished His powers as God, He chose not to operate His powers fully as God in the flesh. This is called the Doctrine of the Impeccability of Christ. You may have meant something a little different from what you wrote when you said that the creator became a human being etc, and that His mind His thoughts became Christ. Christ means Messiah and Jesus as a member of the sovereign God head, the trinity, who has always existed from eternity past into eternity future was always going to become the Christ on earth. The Messiah was always going to be Jesus from eternity past to eternity future, there is no point in time, in eternity at which Jesus became the Christ, He has always been the Christ. Do you see now how Jesus who is the Logos, which also by the way meant to the Greeks all knowledge in the whole universe, and also which also means the cause, is the Divine Expression of God in the flesh? This is why John says in John 1:14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth. This is what is meant by the Divine Expression, which is actually the first meaning given in the Strong's for the word Logos. God's Day To You, Tamara |
||||||
94 | Mistaken View Or False Doctrine? | Eph 1:13 | Tamara Brewington | 205296 | ||
Dear John! Good one! But I thought false doctrine is taught by false prophets and don't they go to hell automatically!? Like I said, no harm was meant by anyone who may or may not have answere the question. I gotta watch that folks may be answering without using my language, sorry John. God's Grace Tamara |
||||||
95 | Mistaken View Or False Doctrine? | Eph 1:13 | Tamara Brewington | 205294 | ||
ohh poop, I am having trouble my computer is going to crash real soon.... I will try againg before going to school, or lying down again. |
||||||
96 | Mistaken View Or False Doctrine? | Eph 1:13 | Tamara Brewington | 205287 | ||
Dear John, I dropped you a personal email to edify you, my dear brother in Christ. God's Day To You, Tamara |
||||||
97 | Mistaken View Or False Doctrine? | Eph 1:13 | Tamara Brewington | 205286 | ||
Dear Cheri, I have insomnia, it is usesless to lay in bed taking medication that does not work, so I get up and study to while away the time before going back to bed for more torture. I actually have class tomorrow morning, but am too restless for the bed that is why I am up. I already agreed with this point of view, the truth if you will, but was more interested in whether or not anyone in here considers it to be false doctrine or merely a mistaken belief. Thank you for answering, I was afraid that once every one saw it was suppossedly answered that they wouldn't bother, which is why I stopped posting altogether. My real question never gets addressed and the whole thing gets lost in the shuffle. No one intends me any harm, they just answer the part that interests them, or that sticks out to them as being important and skip the actual question right over, which I clearly state every time. Like I said, no one means to be short, or any harm, every one here is sincere, I truly believe that or we would not be in here trying to divide the word of God. So I will pose the question again for you; Based on what I said in the original post, are Jesus plus concepts to be considered merely mistaken views about the process of salvation, or are they false doctrines? God's Day To You, Tamara |
||||||
98 | Divorced Do Christians Get Remarried? | 1 Cor 6:9 | Tamara Brewington | 205283 | ||
Dear John, Help me out here a bit John, one scripture by Jesus says whoever divorces his wife except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery. The other scripture says whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her - this verse does not say anything about adultery in the equation, it simply says if you divorce and marry another you commit adultery. Here is another problem with the view that there is nothing you can do about a past faux pas and just move on; I Corinthians 7:39 A wife is bound to her husband as long as her husband lives; but if her husband is dead she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord. Second problem with this view that it is okay move on; I Corinthians 6:9 Adulterers will not inherit the kingdom of God. And Hebrews 6:4-6 Those who have fallen away, that is who keep right on going in sin, have no more means of renewal to repentance since they crucify the Lord again. What do you think my good fellow? God's Day, Tam |
||||||
99 | Is God opens doors no man closes in bibl | Rev 3:20 | Tamara Brewington | 205274 | ||
Dear Lookin, I am blushing my dear... Tamara |
||||||
100 | The subtlety of false teaching | Titus 3:10 | Tamara Brewington | 205240 | ||
Dear humbledbyhisgrace, I heartily agree, but there is a real threat to those who need to come to faith out of overt ant-Biblical and ant-God teachings and get saved. That there is a greater danger to the church from subtle teachings that pulls away from faith than from overt teachings is true too. There is a lot of that going around and always has been. Glad you posted this, God's day to you, Tamara |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [14] >> |