[continued from previous message]   
      
   >covenant and the peoples reaction to God, then studied the comments in the NT   
   >with regard to the Old covenant as well as the purposes of Christ on earth   
   >you might have gleaned a wee bit of insight into the reasons why the Law   
   >Covenant was given in the first place and why there was a newer and better   
   >covenant. A covenant not of Law.   
      
   Saying "you had to have read" the Bible is not an answer to my   
   question of whose fault was it that the old covenant failed.   
      
   >> > > Why wouldn't God have anticipated this and tried the new covenant to   
   begin   
   >> > > with?   
   >> >   
   >> > You said you read the bible and know it better than most christians yet   
   you   
   >> > ask a question like that?   
   >>   
   >> What's wrong with the question?   
   >   
   >The question brings to mind the fact that you established yourself and   
   >knowing the Bible better than most, yet you ask a question that you should   
   >have known if you were as capable as you declare yourself to be.   
      
   Nor is saying "you should know" an answer to my question either.   
      
   >> > > > > > Jhn 16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for   
   you   
   >> > > > > > that I go   
   >> > > > > > away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you;   
   but   
   >> > > > > > if I depart, I will send him unto you.   
   >> > > > >   
   >> > > > > What's the difference between needing a comforter after Jesus left,   
   >> > > > > and needing a comforter *before Jesus allegedly* came to earth to   
   >> > > > > begin with?   
   >> > > >   
   >> > > > Jesus was the comforter while he was active in his ministry. He   
   promised   
   >> > > > that we filled with the Holy Spirit could do greater things that he   
   did. Satan   
   >> > > > has done his best to dumb down the churches.   
   >> > >   
   >> > > That doesn't explain why a comforter couldn't be sent to humanity   
   >> > > before Jesus' supposed incarnation.   
   >> >   
   >> > Jesus was not incarnated.   
   >>   
   >> From   
   >>   
   >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarnation_(Christianity)   
   >>   
   >> "In Christian theology, the incarnation is the belief that the   
   >> pre-existent divine person of Jesus Christ, God the Son, the second   
   >> person of the Trinity, and the Logos (Koine Greek for 'word'), was   
   >> "made flesh"[1] by being conceived through the power of the Holy   
   >> Spirit in the womb of a woman, the Virgin Mary,[2] who is also known   
   >> as the Theotokos (Greek for "God-bearer" or "Mother of God"). The   
   >> doctrine of the incarnation then entails that Jesus was at the same   
   >> time both fully God and fully human.[3]"   
   >   
   >Neither of those words are in the scriptures. Yet in the greek there was a   
   >word that meant or described what you think of as incarnation, since the   
   >Greek gods used it in their wars with one another, as well as for other   
   >purposes.   
      
   Neither of which two words?  Furthermore, "And the word became flesh"   
   is a description of incarnation.  Or is it your belief that Jesus did   
   not become flesh like the Bible says?   
      
   >Had God the Father thought that word to be legit regarding the birth of   
   >Christ he would have used it. But it is not to be found. So then, what does   
   >the Bible say about it? EH?   
      
   First you say it's two words, now you say it's one word.  You really   
   need to clarify your position, here.   
      
   >> > > > > > Jhn 16:8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin,   
   and of   
   >> > > > > > righteousness, and of judgment:   
   >> > > > >   
   >> > > > > What do you suppose this means? I mean, I can use the NIV to get a   
   >> > > > > good sense of what's being said here, but can you with your KJV tell   
   >> > > > > us what it means to "reprove the world of sin"?   
   >> > > >   
   >> > > > By the Holy Spirit who leads the believer into all truth.   
   >> > >   
   >> > > No, that is not what it means. You should get a modern translation   
   >> > > and maybe then you'll understand what it's saying.   
   >> >   
   >> > I live it, you reject it.   
   >>   
   >> Here is what it means:   
   >>   
   >> John 16:8, NIV   
   >>   
   >> 8 When he comes, he will prove the world to be in the wrong about sin   
   >> and righteousness and judgment:   
   >   
   >That reads word for word what I quoted above. I quoted two scriptures that   
   >were in context, which you preferred to isolate from one another.   
      
   No, here is what you quoted :   
      
   Jhn 16:8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of   
    righteousness, and of judgment:   
      
   And here is what I quoted:   
      
   8 When he comes, he will prove the world to be in the wrong about sin   
    and righteousness and judgment:   
      
   Do you see the difference?   
      
   >> > > > > > righteousness, and of judgment:   
   >> > > > >   
      
   >Here is a continuation of that context.   
   >   
   >Jhn 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you   
   >into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall   
   >hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.   
   >   
   >Guiding into truth is also what Jesus Christ did.   
      
   That doesn't tell us much, given what Christians already believe about   
   Jesus.   
      
   >But sadly you could not even understand what was meant in the first place   
   >when I quoted the two scriptures to you in answer to your question.   
      
   I understood it quite well when I used the NIV.  Even you weren't able   
   to understand what the KJV was talking about.   
      
   >> > > > > > > > > > > > > *he denigrates women by saying God is more like a   
   man than a   
   >> > > > > > > > > > > > > woman   
   >> > > > > > > > > > > >   
   >> > > > > > > > > > > > Then you could also make that point from the Bible in   
   the book of   
   >> > > > > > > > > > > > Genesis.   
   >> > > > > > > > > > > > Within the first three chapters. Why? Because God   
   made man in His   
   >> > > > > > > > > > > > Image.   
   >> > > > > > > > > > > > The   
   >> > > > > > > > > > > > woman he cloned from Adam, for Adams sake, Eve was   
   made bone of   
   >> > > > > > > > > > > > his   
   >> > > > > > > > > > > > bone,   
   >> > > > > > > > > > > > flesh of his flesh. Separate.   
   >> > > > > > > > > > >   
   >> > > > > > > > > > > If Eve had been a clone of Adam, Eve would've been a   
   male.   
   >> > > > > > > > > > > Furthermore, there's nothing wrong with being separate.   
   There *is*   
   >> > > > > > > > > > > something wrong with being inferior, which is how Gabe   
   refers to   
   >> > > > > > > > > > > feminine attributes.   
   >> > > > > > > > > >   
   >> > > > > > > > > > Adam was cloned for a purpose and with a purpose. To   
   procreate, and   
   >> > > > > > > > > > a   
   >> > > > > > > > > > helpmate.   
   >> > > > > > > > > > I didn’t personally see him denigrate women or call them   
   >> > > > > > > > > > inferior. I   
   >> > > > > > > > > > am   
   >> > > > > > > > > > curious as to what part of the video that was in.   
   >> > > > > > > > >   
   >> > > > > > > > > At about 11:00 minutes in he says, "He's not feminine; he's   
   not soft;   
   >> > > > > > > > > he's not even nice. Sid, he doesn't play games -- he's a   
   man. He   
   >> > > > > > > > > means what he says."   
   >> > > > > > > >   
   >> > > > > > > > I have told my kids when they were young that Jesus was buff.   
   After   
   >> > > > > > > > all,   
   >> > > > > > > > he   
   >> > > > > > > > grew up as a carpenter.   
   >> > > > > > > > He overturned the tables of money changers, etc. in the   
   temple of His   
   >> > > > > > > > Father.   
   >> > > > > > > > Yes, he means what he says, he is no wimp, and it will be Him   
   who   
   >> > > > > > > > judges   
   >> > > > > > > > all   
   >> > > > > > > > men.   
   >> > > > > > >   
   >> > > > > > > Sounds like an interesting fantasy world you've got there, but   
   it has   
   >> > > > > > > nothing to do with Jesus not having any feminine attributes.   
   >> > > > > >   
   >> > > > > > What are feminine attributes? Love? Man have that, Nurturing? Men   
   have   
   >> > > > > > that.   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)