Jacobite

Den Haag, Netherlands

#1322 Feb 6, 2012
Brother Lee Love wrote:
<quoted text>Again, according to the letter of the law, they were.
No, they were not. They were plucking rather than reaping the whole harvest, which by the time they did had already happened prior to that. This is why I showed you the law concening this in Leviticus 19:9-10.
That's because Paul didn't teach certain aspects of the law. He was a preacher unto the Gentiles.
And Paul knew the Gentiles would hear the Word every Sabbath. He didn't push all the 613 laws at once, unlike the pharisees. Circumcision is given to Israel as a law for ever. Not to the Gentiles. If, however a Gentile wishes to circumcise
he cleaves to the House of Jacob, rather than cleaving to YHWH, which (for Gentiles) doesn't require circumcision.
The heathen are justified by faith in Messiah, and again they would learn about the law in the Sabbath.
People, today, believe he taught that the law was done away with, entirely and erroneously.
Agreed. They have sided with the ones who accused Paul. On top of that, they have also embraced the pagan doctrine of Rome, which has decided the Holy Day of rest is no longer to be observed on the 7th day, but on the first day of the week.They have also proclaimed Peter to be the first bishop of Rome when Peter was never in Rome. Paul was the one who started the church in Rome, not Peter. And, according to Catholic archives, the Italian brand of Christianity started to gradually "divorce" itself from the Torah abiding Christians, who are the true Christians according to the Bible. Paul is letting us know in Romans 11 that the Gentiles had probably sought to replace Israel's service of YHWH with theirs and it is not at all surprising that they got rid of Paul, consideing the fact that he confronted them in Romans 11.
James explained that our fulfilling of the first and great commandment is by keeping the second. If we keep the first, we'll keep the second. And if we keep the second, we keep the first.
The two go hand in hand, Brother. To love the Father, is to do His will.
Jacobite

Den Haag, Netherlands

#1323 Feb 6, 2012
Brother Lee Love wrote:
<quoted text> don't appreciate how you speak on the commandments so generally. Never did I ever even insinuate that the laws prohibiting adultery, murder, dishonoring our parents, lying, and covetousness, weren't to be kept.
No, and again I never assumed you were. You did say that it is lawful to work on the Sabbath, when this is clearly not the case. That's Roman Catholicism.
We rarely read what the apostles taught to the people, so your assertion is speculative. Secondly, the early church met more in people's houses than they did in synagogues, so again, your assertions are speculative.
We can read the Bible and tell what the apostles taught the people. They preached the Kingdom of YHWH. It's all throughout the NT. I agree, the apostles did indeed go over to people's houses to preach the gospel. This however doesn't prove the Sabbath is no longer to be kept.
What our anointed Savior said was, "Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness," and "Honour thy father and thy mother (Luke 18:20)." He said nothing about the Sabbath, whatsoever. He focused on the commandments that fulfill charity and love toward one another.
Messiah didn't need to name all the 10 commandments as it was common knowledge in those days to keep the Sabbath.
He showed them how to observe the Sabbath as oppose to the scibes and pharisees who did evrything accordint ot the letter. Hence, Messiah explained it to them in Luke 6:1-9
Don't make me accuse you of fibbing, Brother. You rejected the scriptures I quoted.
I'm not rejecting anything. I simply disagree with you concerning the keeping of the Sabbath and your idea on how the law was fulfilled by the Messiah.
Sacrifices only fulfill atonement and reconciliation, and the death penalty. More was fulfilled, though.
The Messiah fulfilled all the laws, meaning He kept each and every last one of them. Otherwise, it would be impossible for Him to become the Holy Lamb. His Blood was the fulfillment of the new covenant that was also prophesied.

Do you care to explain Acts 18:18, 21:17-26 and why Paul is doing what is precribed in Numbers 6:13-21? Also, how does this fit in with your claims concerning the fulfillment of the law and or the sacrifices?

I noticed you haven't answered my previous question concerning Daniel 7:25. Who do you think is the he referring to?
Native

Lancaster, PA

#1324 Feb 6, 2012
Daniel 7:25
referring to the antichrist?

Daniel 7:25
Amplified Bible (AMP)

25And he shall speak words against the Most High [God] and shall wear out the saints of the Most High and think to change the time [of sacred feasts and holy days] and the law; and the saints shall be given into his hand for a time, two times, and half a time [three and one-half years].

“Become Love!”

Since: Jan 09

Nowhere/Now here

#1325 Feb 6, 2012
Jacobite wrote:
The old covenant law stipulated certain sacrifices to be offered up in regards to the Sabbath as is shown in Numbers 28:9-10. In my previous posts I have given an explanation as to why the Levitical priesthood is replaced by the Priesthood of Messiah as is clearly being conveyed in Hebrews 9, which I'm sure you'll understand. So, the precepts concerning the Sabbath (and the high Sabbaths), namely the sacrifices and oblations, have been replaced by the Blood of the Messiah. Other than that these laws are still to be observed at their appointed times. There's not one single scripture where the Messiah, or one of the disciples, or one of the apostles taught we no longer have to keep the Sabbath or the High Sabbaths or any other law for that matter.
From the very first verse, Hebrews 4:1 reveals, "Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it." As you can see, the author isn't referring to any rest that's approaching at the end of the week, or in any ensuing month. Keyword: Entering. Hebrews 4:3 says, "For we which have believed do enter into rest," and this is reminiscent of what our anointed Savior had offered us when he said, "Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest (Matt 11:28)." Now, Hebrews 4:8-9 says, "For if Joshua had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day. There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God." This proves that the day of rest, even in ancient times, was a foreshadow of the rest we would receive in and by our anointed Savior, because the rest with Joshua still contained ordinances and precepts. Hebrews 4:10 says, "For he that is entered into his rest," or accepted the rest from our anointed Savior, then "he also hath ceased from his own works," or ceased from the ordinances and precepts attached to the Sabbaths, "as God did from his."
Jacobite wrote:
Can you explain why Timotheus was circumcised by Paul?
Yes. Acts 16:3 explains, "..because of the Jews which were in those quarters: for they knew all that [Timotheus'] father was a Greek." Had it not been for the fact that the Jews would have refused audience with them, circumcision would have been unnecessary. Paul did explain that, for the sake of preaching the gospel, "..unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law (1Cor 9:20)." But, when we read of Titus, Galatians 2:3 says, "But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised." So, we see, that for Timotheus, it became necessary, to gain audience with the Jews, but for Titus, it was not.
Jacobite wrote:
No one can enter into the Kingdom, just because of circumcision. If you noticed the circumcision of the heart is not a NT concept either.
Romans 2:29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
Jacobite wrote:
Also, Paul was being falsely accused for teaching that Israelites no longer needed to circumcise, when he was directing this particular teaching to the Gentiles.
And that was his defense. He didn't teach Israelites not to circumcise their children. He didn't teach Israelites, bottom line. He taught Gentiles. But, this was the controversy that we read about at Acts 15. The conclusion of this argument was this: Acts 15:24, 29 Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment..That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well. Compare 1Cor 7:18.

“Become Love!”

Since: Jan 09

Nowhere/Now here

#1326 Feb 6, 2012
Jacobite wrote:
YHWH hallowed the 7th day since the eginning of creation and to keep the Sabbath from polluting it, is part of the 10 commandments. Just because Israel despised the Sabbaths of YHWH, doesn't mean it's justified to no longer observe the Sabbath.
That doesn't make any sense, Brother, because Israel also took for granted their only means of remission and reconciliation. But, the most High sent our anointed Savior to fulfill sacrifice, prohibiting us from fulfilling the ordinances and precepts ourselves. It makes no sense to think that He did this for one, but not the other.
Jacobite wrote:
Nor did Messiah or any of His followers taught this.
There seems to be some things you overlook, Brother.
And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.- Daniel 7:25
Who is this he spoken of in Daniel 7:25, Brother? Do you notice what is being prophesied about him, who
thinks to change times and laws?
I believe this "beast" represents the Roman Empire, which later became the so-called "'Holy' Roman Empire."
Jacobite wrote:
Also, look up the word "times" in Daniel 7:25, Strong's H2166 - z&#277;man (Aramaic).
1. appointed period , 2. epochs, 4.a time, b times
Look at the next verse.
These are the feasts of the LORD, even holy convocations, which ye shall proclaim in their seasons.
- Leviticus 23:4 (KJV)
Let it be known that the KJV is not always as accurate as other translations. My Dutch bible in Daniel 7:25 says feastdays instead of times. There many other translations that say the same thing and prove that the KJV is not the most accurate translation out there. But, the fact remains this is prophecy.
I'm aware. That's why I prefer the "original" texts that are provided us. I believe the authors were inspired, not the translators.
Jacobite

Leiderdorp, Netherlands

#1327 Feb 6, 2012
Brother Lee Love wrote:
<quoted text>From the very first verse, Hebrews 4:1 reveals, "Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it." As you can see, the author isn't referring to any rest that's approaching at the end of the week, or in any ensuing month. Keyword: Entering. Hebrews 4:3 says, "For we which have believed do enter into rest," and this is reminiscent of what our anointed Savior had offered us when he said, "Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest (Matt 11:28)."
The Book of Hebrrews is directed to the Hebrews. Just because the author isn't specifically pointing to a rest at the end of the week or of the month, doesn't prove that the rest means we no longer have to keep the Sabbath. That's s an assumption on your end. As you read the 3rd chapter of Hebrews, it becomes evident that the rest is referring to the everlasting Kingdom. In other words if you believe in the Messiah and you heed the commandments, you might enter into the Kingdom. Do you even comprehend the phrase "ye that labour and are heavy laden"? Compare this to Luke 16:22-31
Now, Hebrews 4:8-9 says, "For if Joshua had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day. There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God." This proves that the day of rest, even in ancient times, was a foreshadow of the rest we would receive in and by our anointed Savior, because the rest with Joshua still contained ordinances and precepts. Hebrews 4:10 says, "For he that is entered into his rest," or accepted the rest from our anointed Savior, then "he also hath ceased from his own works," or ceased from the ordinances and precepts attached to the Sabbaths, "as God did from his."
The rest spoken of is indeed a foreshadow of things to come. But, it can only be obtained by faith in Messiah and by keeping His commandments. This doesn't mean the Sabbath is null and void, which doctrine is not even practical..
The Sabbath is the part of the ten. Joshua was the one leading Israel to the Promised Land. The ones that transgressed the commandments died in the wilderness, which included those who did not want to keep the Sabbath, but did as they please. With just a little bit of understanding you'll see that the phrase "he also hath ceased from his own works," is synonymous with a host of other scriptures. For example: Romans 6:1-15. Now compare

Isaiah 58:13 If thou turn away thy foot from the sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day; and call the sabbath a delight, the holy of the LORD, honourable; and shalt honour him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words:.

The lesson being taught in Hebrews, among other things, is to cease from sinning as did the old man, but to be Christ-like by doing the will of the Father in order that we may enter into that rest, which is everlasting life.
Yes. Acts 16:3 explains, "..because of the Jews which were in those quarters: for they knew all that [Timotheus'] father was a Greek." Had it not been for the fact that the Jews would have refused audience with them, circumcision would have been unnecessary. Paul did explain that, for the sake of preaching the gospel, "..unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law (1Cor 9:20)." But, when we read of Titus, Galatians 2:3 says, "But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised." So, we see, that for Timotheus, it became necessary, to gain audience with the Jews, but for Titus, it was not.
Agreed. Notice how Titus didn't become a Jew, but Timotheus did. Furhermore, Paul in 1 Corinthians 9:20 is referring to himself not Timotheus or Titus.

What is your understanding concerning Hebrews 13:23?
Jacobite

Leiderdorp, Netherlands

#1328 Feb 6, 2012
Brother Lee Love wrote:
<quoted text>Romans 2:29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
Exactly.You and I both know how that there are many people who tend to glorify their DNA rather than to show forth the conduct of how to be a servant of YHWH.
And that was his defense. He didn't teach Israelites not to circumcise their children. He didn't teach Israelites, bottom line. He taught Gentiles. But, this was the controversy that we read about at Acts 15. The conclusion of this argument was this: Acts 15:24, 29 Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment..That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well. Compare 1Cor 7:18.
Brother, Paul did teach Israelites. Acts 9:15. Paul never taught Israelites to not circumcise, I agree. This shows how the Jews back then had solely put their faith in the letter of the Torah as a mean to appear righteous before YHWH.
This is also what they used in an attempt to falsely accuse Paul of teaching Israelites things contrary to Torah.
That doesn't make any sense, Brother, because Israel also took for granted their only means of remission and reconciliation. But, the most High sent our anointed Savior to fulfill sacrifice, prohibiting us from fulfilling the ordinances and precepts ourselves. It makes no sense to think that He did this for one, but not the other.
It makes all the sense in the world, Brother. This thing isn't about Israel. It's about the Father and obeying Him by walking according to His laws, statutes and commandments. YHWH hallowed the 7th and it's an ordinance that is to be kept throughout all generations for ever. Even in the Kingdom.
Messiah redeemed all of Adam's descendants from under the death sentence. Anyone who doesn't accept Messiah is doomed for the 2nd death.
I believe this "beast" represents the Roman Empire, which later became the so-called "'Holy' Roman Empire."
<quoted text>I'm aware. That's why I prefer the "original" texts that are provided us. I believe the authors were inspired, not the translators.
Yes, I believe that too. And, I believe she is still around.
tktt777

Bristow, VA

#1329 Feb 8, 2012
Apostolic Man wrote:
Im confused on this topic because i have learned that the real Israelites were possibly black but is their any proof to back this up, i have heard very undeniable evidence but i don't want to be quick to jump to conclusions and fall in the catagorie of what Revelation 2: 9 says...
"I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty,(but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan."
Who are the real Hebrews?
Note: This is not a racist post, its sad that some take the writings of others out of context.
Yes we can know the true descendants of Jacob also called Israel they are identfied by reading the curses that the God said would befall them for not obeying His laws , statutes and commandments. Read Deuteronomy chapter 28 with a open mind and see if you can locate a group of people that have and are experiencing the curses written there, giving specific attention to Deuteronmy 28:68

“Become Love!”

Since: Jan 09

Nowhere/Now here

#1330 Feb 8, 2012
JACOBITE.

I'm not ignoring you, but I refuse to post while frustrated. Also, our posts have become a chore, as we have to post up to 3 to 4 posts to answer our questions. I will return to answer you, though.
tktt777 wrote:
Yes we can know the true descendants of Jacob also called Israel they are identfied by reading the curses that the God said would befall them for not obeying His laws , statutes and commandments. Read Deuteronomy chapter 28 with a open mind and see if you can locate a group of people that have and are experiencing the curses written there, giving specific attention to Deuteronmy 28:68
Do you happen to believe that Judah (Negroes), Benjamin (Jamaicans), and Levi (Haitians), are the only tribes affected by Deuteronomy 28:68? Do you realize that the curses of Deuteronomy 28 are pronounced to all the tribes of Israel and not just the aforementioned? Can you provide irrefutable evidence proving that all the tribes experienced the same fate? Which "group" would you prefer people locate?
Philadelphos

Charleston, SC

#1331 Feb 9, 2012
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty; with whom, if he come shortly, I will see you.

Here, the author was declaring how that Timothy was released from prison, and that once Timothy returned, then the author would visit, bringing Timothy with him.

Another reference using this same phrase, "set at liberty," to indicate the same understanding...

Acts 26:32 Then said Agrippa unto Festus, This man might have been set at liberty, if he had not appealed unto Caesar.
yisshyah

Normandy, TN

#1332 Feb 10, 2012
Who are the real Hebrews? if you are truly and sincerely interested in who the real hebrew israelites are checkout yahspeople.com hebrewisraelites.org

yah=LORD,GOD,SURNAMES
yahoshua=joshua
yahoshua=jesus christ
hebrew=jew

yah is our strength and salvation yahoshua is the messiyah and the only path to salvation is thru yahoshua

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#1333 Feb 27, 2012
I think Jehovah God has the final say on this arguments...
On the last day the true Israelites will be revealed...

“Become Love!”

Since: Jan 09

Nowhere/Now here

#1334 Feb 28, 2012
The "real" Israelites matter not.

The only Israelites that will matter are those elected, to become joint-heirs with our anointed Savior.

Only 144,000 will represent the nation of Israel.

The rest will be a part of the Israel of "God."

Whether or not we come to know we're Israelites matters not.

I am Ben'ahmethuel ha'Capheriah,
son of Yahuwdah,
son of Yisra'el,
son of Yitschaq,
son of 'Abraham,
son of Shem,
son of Noach,
son of Adam,
son of Yahoweh.

If I choose not to depart from iniquity, I am son of Satan, regardless.

Since: Feb 12

Location hidden

#1335 May 16, 2012
Isn't it just terrible what the Israelis are doing to these poor Palestinians.

They have been at this for 4000 years now.

How much longer are they going to keep this up.

Why not go after the Iranians and finish these bastards off...once and for all.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#1336 May 18, 2012
Brother Lee Love wrote:
The "real" Israelites matter not.
The only Israelites that will matter are those elected, to become joint-heirs with our anointed Savior.
Only 144,000 will represent the nation of Israel.
The rest will be a part of the Israel of "God."
Whether or not we come to know we're Israelites matters not.
I am Ben'ahmethuel ha'Capheriah,
son of Yahuwdah,
son of Yisra'el,
son of Yitschaq,
son of 'Abraham,
son of Shem,
son of Noach,
son of Adam,
son of Yahoweh.
If I choose not to depart from iniquity, I am son of Satan, regardless.
You are still saying the same thing...
God almighty knows those ones he is going to choose...
We all need to pray for that and do his will...

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#1337 Sep 12, 2012
Charles Idemi wrote:
I think Jehovah God has the final say on this arguments...
On the last day the true Israelites will be revealed...
13Sep12.....

Stop the bullSchidt.

.....GOD has No chosen people.

Ps:.....ALL peoples are equal unto the Eyes of GOD.

Forever and Ever
BobLoblah
suppersinner

Pie Town, NM

#1338 Sep 14, 2012
Apostolic Man wrote:
Im confused on this topic because i have learned that the real Israelites were possibly black but is their any proof to back this up, i have heard very undeniable evidence but i don't want to be quick to jump to conclusions and fall in the catagorie of what Revelation 2: 9 says...
"I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty,(but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan."
Who are the real Hebrews?
Note: This is not a racist post, its sad that some take the writings of others out of context.
THE FIRST Israelites WERE A SPECIAL RACE OF PEOPLE GOD KEPT SEPERATE FOR THE SPECIFIC REASON of being the linage of where God the Son would eventualy come from,, they were the people who kept this promise of this very special savior from sin.. you can check out this out in the bible both in the new testament and old testament . very importantly while God did keep this special race seperate untill his Son was Born . we dont know what these first isralites looked like no where in the bible does it say their skin tone or racial features of this pure jewish race of people..
it is naturaly assumed though they were darker skinned people do to the inviroment they lived in.. if they were more norse in apperance they would have been very uncomfortable in such a hot desert inviroment there was no modern air conditioning in those days .the viking who appeared in history much later on who were norse -----were from much cooler climates .
creationism beleives in being able to adapt and change to inviroments it however does not believe in evolution
it beleives in the proven scientific law of atrophy..
suppersinner

Pie Town, NM

#1339 Sep 14, 2012
evolution thinks if you put a frog in a mason jar feed it keep it healthy in a billion years or so youl have a handsome prince .. the scientific law of atrophy states if you put a frog in a mason jar and feed it and keep it as healthy as you can eventualy you will have a dead and stinky frog ..
try it at home see who right the theory or scientific fact?
suppersinner

Pie Town, NM

#1340 Sep 14, 2012
no frog no problem! try it on your husband
lock him in the car in the garage slide some beer and salomi every now and then and see what happens to him . see if he evolves in to something better
perhaps a house cleaning machine ..i bet you though he will just get Stinker..

“Become Love!”

Since: Jan 09

Nowhere/Now here

#1341 Sep 14, 2012
suppersinner wrote:
THE FIRST Israelites WERE A SPECIAL RACE OF PEOPLE GOD KEPT SEPERATE FOR THE SPECIFIC REASON of being the linage of where God the Son would eventualy come from,, they were the people who kept this promise of this very special savior from sin.. you can check out this out in the bible both in the new testament and old testament . very importantly while God did keep this special race seperate untill his Son was Born . we dont know what these first isralites looked like no where in the bible does it say their skin tone or racial features of this pure jewish race of people..
it is naturaly assumed though they were darker skinned people do to the inviroment they lived in.. if they were more norse in apperance they would have been very uncomfortable in such a hot desert inviroment there was no modern air conditioning in those days .the viking who appeared in history much later on who were norse -----were from much cooler climates .
creationism beleives in being able to adapt and change to inviroments it however does not believe in evolution
it beleives in the proven scientific law of atrophy..
On the contrary....

There are quite a few verses in the bible that more than suggest that the Isrealites were, indeed, dark-skinned.

1. During Jacob's funeral procession, the Isrealites (Shemites/Semitic) were erroneaously identified as Egyptians by the Canaanites. NOTE: Egyptians are Hamites, and Ham is considered the progenitor of the dark races; Cushites/Ethiopians (Babylonians) are also Hamites, as well as the Canaanites.

2. Nazarites visage (appearance) blacker (Heb. "chashak") than coal.

3. Job's skin black (Heb. "shachar").

NOTE: Both Hebrew terms and definitions are similar to those used at Song of Solomon 1:5-6. The root of those used at SoS 1:5-6 are identical to the term used at Job 30:30.

I'll agree that Revelation 1:14-15 and Daniel 9:7 are the worst examples to prove that out anointed Savior, or even the Israelites, are dark-skinned, as both are visions with spiritual interpretations and not literal, but that doesn't prove that our anointed Savior, or the Israelites, are NOT dark-skinned. There are numerous examples in the bible that not only suggest such a thing, but prove it. The examples I provided are only but a few. In the meantime, and as I said previously, the nation of Israel are represented by 144,000 only. Other than the elect, there's neither Jew nor Greek, white nor black, dark nor light. There's only righteous and wicked.

...and as far as environment is concerned, use that same argument with the so-called "Eskimos" that've lived in the northern hemisphere for who-knows-how-long?! They're STILL dark-skinned!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Christian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Would Jesus have attended a Gay Wedding? 6 min dollarsbill 547
The Heathen's Home Page (Jun '13) 7 min GodSmacked 5,417
The post count of Dollarsbill 7 min dollarsbill 1,512
Believers are not to judge non-believers. (Dec '11) 8 min dollarsbill 63
Christians aren't being lights of the world 9 min dollarsbill 68
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 10 min dollarsbill 3,667
Before The Big Bang 11 min blacklagoon 3,949
Nearly all Christians are Frauds 13 min truthandcommonsense 82
More from around the web