XPost: alt.christnet.christianlife, alt.messianic, alt.religion.   
   hristian.east-orthodox   
   From: none@none.net   
      
   On 6/8/2019 7:30 AM, duckgumbo32@cox.net wrote:   
   > On Fri, 7 Jun 2019 18:20:43 -0500, Surrender the Name wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 6/6/2019 6:25 AM, duckgumbo32@cox.net wrote:   
   >>> On Tue, 4 Jun 2019 12:42:27 -0500, Surrender the Name    
   wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> On 6/4/2019 6:14 AM, duckgumbo32@cox.net wrote:   
   >>>>> On Mon, 03 Jun 2019 12:01:01 -0700, Robert wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> On Jun 3, 2019, Surrender the Name wrote   
   >>>>>> (in article ):   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> On 6/3/2019 7:40 AM, duckgumbo32@cox.net wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> On Sun, 02 Jun 2019 10:48:02 -0700, Robert wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> On Jun 2, 2019, Steve Hayes wrote   
   >>>>>>>>> (in article):   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 31 May 2019 23:31:36 -0700, Robert wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> On May 31, 2019, Steve Hayes wrote   
   >>>>>>>>>>> (in article):   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 30 May 2019 11:58:15 -0700, Robert wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> I just listened to this yesterday, it is totally awesome. He   
   teaches   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> from   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> Bible on how God dealt with sin and the human race from Adam   
   until now.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> This should open the eyes of understanding for many whose   
   religion puts   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> them   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> under the law of God. It tied up a few loose ends for me, and it   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> seemed to   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> fly by in 15 minutes, although the entire teaching is 50 minutes   
   long.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> I don't do podcasts and videos as they waste too much bandwidth,   
   but   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> that's not a problem because I do have a Bible so I can see how   
   sin is   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> defined biblically without listening to man-made definitions from   
   some   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> electronic voice.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> So if you want to know how sin is defined biblically, see:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of   
   God;   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that   
   is in   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Christ Jesus:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Sin is missing the mark, like an arrow that falls short of the   
   target.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> And what is the target?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> The target is the glory of God.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> And what is the remedy for sin?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> God picks us up from where we have fallen short, and puts us back   
   on   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> track.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> And the track is Orthodoxy, the straight (orthos) path to glory   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> (doxa).   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Glory to God!   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Were you aware then that we are not under the Mosaic Law? That sin   
   is not   
   >>>>>>>>>>> imputed to the account of a believer in Jesus Christ. That in the   
   >>>>>>>>>>> beginning   
   >>>>>>>>>>> sin was not imputed to man from Adam up until the time of Moses?   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Oh dear, another legalist!   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Tiptoe through the TULIPs.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Please clarify, I cannot see how this is being a legalist. '   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Everybody knew you wouldn't understand.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> As an example,   
   >>>>>>>>> would you call someone who believes and holds true the statement of   
   Jesus   
   >>>>>>>>> that, “you must be born again” and that this has to be satisfied   
   in   
   >>>>>>>>> order   
   >>>>>>>>> to be saved, that it is being a legalist?   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Yet you've make it clear that you reject water baptism. You see, liar   
   boy,   
   >>>>>>>> it's all your way or the highway regarding the Word of God.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Hebrews 11:6   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> the dukester   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> He has you kill filed. Your insults fall upon the ears of   
   >>>>>>> the deaf, which is a good thing. You will no longer incite   
   >>>>>>> his anger. There are others he can learn the truth from   
   >>>>>>> that do not abuse those they teach.   
   >>>   
   >>>>>> Duke also knowingly lies about me and my position with Christ.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> You have no position with Jessu Christ.   
   >>>   
   >>>> He doesn't see your posts.   
   >>>   
   >>> I know. This is the 5th time he's kill filed me.   
   >>>   
   >>> The learning curve is applied to those that robert foolishly misled.   
   >>>   
   >>>> Truly, you are not Jesus and not   
   >>>> in the position to know absolutely. Consider that Paul teaches   
   >>>> that Gentiles are not under the laws as they stand but are to   
   >>>> abstain from fornication and meat sacrificed to idols.   
   >>>   
   >>> Gentiles are those that have their own (g)od, like the Greeks with Zeus,   
   the   
   >>> pagans, etc.   
   >>>   
   >>>> Now you cannot have it both ways duke; either Paul was wrong   
   >>>> or YOU are wrong.   
   >>>   
   >>> I don't in any way oppose Paul. It's in understanding.   
   >>   
   >> Understanding Act, or what?   
   >   
   > Understanding anything in scripture. Contrary to the protestant way of   
   > following single verses, further definition and support can/may be found all   
   > over scripture.   
   >   
   > For instance, robert professes his faith walk (his Heb 11:6). Yet he never   
   read   
   > far enough to know that Heb 11:39-40 says the OT people were never fulfilled.   
   > More truth is found in James 2:26 that "faith without deeds is dead faith".   
   >   
   > So if he's Jewish, he unsatisfied, and if Christian, he doesn't understand   
   > deeds. Mat 25:31-46.   
   >   
   > Hebrews 8:7 New International Version (NIV)   
   > 7 For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place   
   would   
   > have been sought for another.   
      
      
    But as you had spoken to me in another post; God does not make   
    mistakes, and that means that the old covenant was perfect.   
      
    Do we then lay this at the feet of men?   
      
      
      
   >   
   >>>> If Pauls gospel is truly of God then you are following the pathway   
   >>>> lain out for the Jews by Jesus.   
   >>>   
   >>> Paul doesn't have a Gospel. Paul was the first Jew conversion and sent   
   out to   
   >>> the expanding Church to teach them as Jesus taught him. He is known as the   
   >>> great Apostle.   
   >>>   
   >>>> If on the other hand Pauls gospel is not of God then you are correct.   
   >>>> It *CANNOT* be both...   
   >>>   
   >>> Paul's message is definitely of God   
   >   
   > But an Epistle, not a gospel.   
   >   
   > the dukester   
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   
|