William S. Sutherland wrote: Why do so many of you get off ...
Mr. Sutherland, I don't know what you mean by "get off" but I remember what that expression was defined as in my former life and I just confirmed what it typically means to the world and I do not find it to be an appropriate and Christlike expression. I assure you, I for one, do not "get off" on these discussions. In charity I will presume you meant something else but I'm not certain what and will encourage more care in your language.
I will say that much of what I currently believe is a result of disputation of hearing arguments, making arguments, testing these arguments etc. and most of this disputation has occurred on internet forums. Further, much of what I believe is a result of listening to sermons on SermonAudio and participating on one of the last forums that allows for freedom of speech.
This may not be a synagogue but I do find many devout persons on this site. The free exchange of ideas and the sharpening of iron is a worthy cause.
Acts 17:17 - Therefore disputed he in the synagogue with the Jews, and with the devout persons, and in the market daily with them that met with him.
Christopher000 wrote: I would be willing to bet that they would not court marshall a Muslim for sharing his/her faith.
Please note the gentleman leading this mess...his name is not Mikey Mohammed nor is it Mikey Ahmed nor is it Mikey bin Laden. Also note, the group he endorsed, the SPLC, is neither led nor funded by Muslims. In short, it is not Muslims that are leading the charge to eliminate religious liberty in the United States.
Christopher000 wrote: ... Before responding to Elise, I was reading this thread over and over to understand. I could give many examples, but I'll use the gays...the gays who go to church and the gays who preach. They believe in Christ and what He did, though they feel He loves them irregardless of their lifestyle choice. Will they, as one example, go to Heaven upon death? Or, am I misunderstanding? Thanks.
If at any point in a sodomites existence, if he received the blood of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, then that individual is saved eternally regardless of what he does or does not do. In that he is eternally saved, he has a loving father who will never disown his child.
However, just as a righteous earthly father, our heavenly father will chasten disobedient children and judgment begins first with the house of God. An unrepentant sodomite will not receive a well done though good and faithful servant now enter into the joy of the Lord and will not be part of the first resurrection. Yet, he will live again at the second resurrection because of the blood of Jesus Christ.
1¬†Corinthians 3:15 - If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.
jpw wrote: Rufus -- the beheadings already happening, have been happening, will happen. currently happening under the scourge of globalist prinicipalities and powers, and of which the american church must repent. that description to me looks accurately like the history of the church, and current reality of the church. of course, we tend to diminish and ignore those beheadings... (because they happen not to us but to those we are "helping")
I do not disagree much with anything you said. The point of me citing that passage was to present the thousand years. Those that will suffer faithfully will live and reign in that thousand year kingdom, the rest of the dead will not live again until the thousand years is up. There are two resurrections being described, blessed and holy are those that are part of the first resurrection and they will reign a literal thousand years. This is the kingdom of God.
SteveR: can we assume you are in the camp where ALL Saints rule during the millennium?
Rufus: If you define Saints as set apart holy ones, yes all Saints will rule during the millenium. However, if you define every believer as a Saint then no, not all believers will reign in the kingdom. The profitable ones will, the unprofitable will not.
S: or are you in the camp where just the living 'caught up' Saints rule and you feel confident that you will be alive to the rapture? R: I have full assurance in my eternal salvation for Jesus Christ finished that work. I have no assurance of reigning in the kingdom for I have not yet finished my course.
jpw wrote: ... nope, don't see the number 1000 anywhere. ...
Revelation 20:4 - And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
Revelation 20:5 - But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
Revelation 20:6 - Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
MS wrote: Zac from Birmingham, You will find this type of Armenian,dispensational,doesn't matter how you live taught in the majority of so called evangelical churches in this country....
Oh it matters how one lives but it matters for the prize not the gift.
The grace (gift) of God is unmerited favor, no work can you do to get it and no work you must do to keep it. It's by the works of Jesus Christ that we might be saved eternally, not our own works.
To receive the prize one must run the race by faith+works. Win and one will be rewarded positively with a thousand year reign, lose and one will be rewarded negatively with a thousand years of something else.
Zac wrote: Then the majority are going to perdition and the Lake of Fire, because fornicators do not inherit the Kingdom of God (1 Cor 6:9).
Eternal salvation is not be deeds but by belief. Those that believe in the shed blood of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins will be saved eternally regardless of their works. Those who believe not will be damned to the Lake of Fire.
The Kingdom of God in 1 Cor 6:9 is the 1,0000 year millennial reign of Christ. This inheritance is by faith+deeds. Unrepentant fornicators will not inherit this kingdom, though they be saved eternally by faith.
theWayPA wrote: ... Y'shua would have been the Hebrew way to say Jesus, and just as we don't need the words "Trinity" and "Abortion" in the Scriptures to know what God says about them (try THOSE in your KJV-query), so we don't need an English transliteration of Hebrew to know historical what Jesus would sound like to those who would have been familiar. BTW, one could cite countless sources of Hebrew concordances and dictionaries derived from the Masoretic text to prove YHWH.
I thank you for the conversation Way and will now intend to move on to other things. I suspect we are at an impasse on this topic and will be on others as well. I stand on the Holy Bible in the English language. This is my sword of defense and offense. From what I gather of your testimony you stand on Hebrew dictionaries and concordances and we will thus rarely see eye to eye on significant matters. Be well. Grace and peace to ya.
Thank you for your advice. I do not however, need the original languages. God promised to preserve his Word and when I hold my Holy Bible in my hands, I have the word of God in my hands. This Holy Bible is sufficient for all matters of faith and practice and every word is pure. If he wanted to be known as Yahweh, Y'shua et al, he would have included this in his word. Instead, he says his name is Jehovah or Jesus among other precious names.
Further, when Moses broke the tablets the Israelites were not instructed to try to piece together those broken bits to figure out what God said. Instead, they were to read and believe from what God recreated and preserved.
Finally, this Yahweh business is from Pagan Babylon and is a construct of Kabbalists. As I consider Kabbalists to be witches, I do not follow them, nor their doctrines. If you're game, I would pose the same question I posed to my friend TheWayPA. If I tell you a name of God is Jehovah, I can tell you what foundation I base that on and precisely where you can turn to. If you say his name is Yahweh what source would you cite for this? What book may I put in my hands that declares this?
Worldly Counsel: "People need to practice safe sex, like always," Christianson said. "Anyone beginning a new relationship should get tested along with their partner. The way gonorrhea works, not everyone knows they have it. And with this new strain it's even more important than ever to find out."
Godly Counsel: 1¬†Corinthians 6:18 - Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.
W: 1) What is your exegetically... R: I am going to choose the anti-intellectual route on this one.
W:And if it is not a sin to be Jewish... R: I don't really know what you are asking here. I will say I was a gentile and now I am a Christian. You say you were a Jew and now you are a Jew.
W: 2) What do you mean about "my TV... R: It has to do with the cute list I made and how I can provide similar cute lists for the other branches of media that program people to believe the way they do.
W: 3) Would you renounce anything written in the post of Cezar? R: There is a body of people that say they are Jews and are not and this people does like to slither into other cultures and destroy them. If this is what he was referring to(and I suspect he was), I would say amen. This group of people is heavy on sexual perversion which is why this article lacks anything resembling a surprise.
Contrarily, there is a remnant of Jews that are not about blaspheming Jesus Christ, are peace-makers and I suspect are the type of folks that will have to flee in Matthew 24 and will gather around Jesus to fulfill Zechariah 13:6.
Now, my only question for you is, will you direct me to the source you use which claims Y'shua or Yahweh as a name of God?
Way:...Is it a sin to be Jewish? Rufus: No. It is a sin to proselytize your blood over your faith though.
W:If it is,... take it up with the Jewish Messiah, Jesus. R: Jesus did not emphasize his ancestry but zealously preached against the Jews and their customs. Praise the Lord he is the door for both Jews and Gentiles to become Christians.
W:...where it says that the Gospel is the power of God for the JEW AND THE GREEK! ... R:The gospel is the power of God for the Jew and the Greek to become Christians. Are you a Christian or are you a Jew? Choose you this day.
W: YHWH is Savior R: Yahweh is a false god. Jehovah, Jah, Jesus, these are the names of the true and living God.
W: ...name is Jesus/Y'shua, which means "salvation." R: His name is Jesus which means Jehovah is Saviour. Will you direct me to the source you use which claims Y'shua as a name of God?
W:Well, I hate to say it but anti-semitism is alive today,... R: Considering how often you say it, I do not believe that you hate to say it. Someone says something you do not like you oft yell "Anti-Semitism", or "Holocaust". I am long removed from your TV and movies, the guilt trip has no power over me any longer.
W:...terrible hermeneutics... R: I do not serve your Yahweh nor your Hermes.
theWayPA wrote: Wow, I guess its in our genes, huh? Your misquoting of Scripture along with your asinine sweeping generalizations about an entire ethnic groups hardly bear a reason to respond. THIS Jew does not support gay "marriage;" THIS Jew believes in the JEWISH Messiah Jesus; THIS Jew doesn't want to destroy other people's cultures. Any other anti-semitic libel you want to throw against us while your at it? ...
There are three types of people... Jew, Gentile and Church of God.
1 Corinthians 10:32 - Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles,nor to the church of God:
You,at the least, give an uncertain sound when you emphasize having Abraham as your father. Saul was a Pharisaical Jew and then became Paul, a Christian. I encourage you to do likewise.
Lastly, Jehovah is Saviour and his name is Jesus.
Acts 15:26 - Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.
SteveR wrote: Revelation 17 says 7 Mountains not hills The correct translation confirms MOUNTAINS not hills (KJV)Revelation 17:9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth. Look it up in the AV, or better yet the Received Text and you will find the correct translation for 'oros' is mountains
In the Bible there are verses such as the following that show "hills" as what we think of to be "mountains".
Genesis 7:19 - And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.
If you are not convinced, where do you believe the city of 7 hills to be if not Rome?
Cleft of the Rock wrote: "Dave Hunt states, "Finally, the angel reveals that the woman ‚Äėis that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth‚Äô (verse 18). Is there such a city? Yes, and again only one: Vatican City."¬† "This is a joke. Vatican City has no power over other nations; it certainly does not reign over them. In fact, the Vatican‚Äôs very existence has been threatened in the past two centuries by Italian nationalism." Tiny Vatican City comprises just 0.03% of the land mass in colossal Rome. Vatican City, consising of 13 buildings, sets on a minor hill about 200 ft tall.
Aventine Hill Caelian Hill Capitoline Hill Esquiline Hill Palatine Hill Quirinal Hill Viminal Hil