<quoted text> Hey Scott, I understand what you're relating. This is what I was referencing: <quoted text> So,according to the text who would we know 'by their fruit'? 'False prophets' They would come in 'sheep's clothing'(intent disguised)but are 'ravenous wolves'(predators). Do they come to reconcile , or divide? To bring comfort, or fear? Show love for the brethren , or contempt? Just my anecdotal take ,and more could be added but one 'gets the picture' I believe. You take care and have a good night:)
Yesterday as I read about people and their fruits...I kept thinking...
Matthew 7:18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit.
I think most would consider the other guy's fruit as the source of the fruit flies that were swarming about.
In your opinion...
Do you think that there should have been another verse or two...
Harvest your fruit before it becomes over ripe and falls to the ground.
For once it has fallen and left unattended becomes as the fruit that fell from the bad tree.
They both will attract the fruit fly.
On as side not...we all know how pesty and how difficult it is to get rid of those annoying little buggers!
Oh well...I started out to be serious but my mind just wouldn't go there.:-)
Jesus: "Do not be afraid of what you are about to suffer. I tell you, THE DEVIL will put some of you in prison to test you, and you will suffer persecution for ten days. Be faithful, even to the point of death, and I will give you the crown of life." Rev 2:10
1. The Devil - Okay, going to make a extremely long story short... concerning Gnosticism... the last thing I remember typing was that they believe that the Christian's God is the "demiurge", evil angel or the devil. That is, the God of the Old Testament.
A. Gnostics believe that the demiurge,(That is, God) was created and they believe that he is the lowest god with a whole bunch of gods and goddesses above him. They believe that place in which those higher gods dwell in is called "The Pleroma". Okay, real quickly... this is how the main story goes but it morphed this way and that over the milleniums:
(1) They believe that God was created by a goddess above Him called the lower-sophia. But before this, Lower Sophia was trying to get a hold of the Highest-ordered God who is known as The Unknown God (heard that before in Acts on Mars Hill?). Well, she couldn't get a hold of Him so out of anger (sometimes legend says curiousity) she created the demiurge but saw that it was a monster that she created (this is gnostic thought btw). So she was supposedly terrified of this monster and flung the demiurge (God) to the darkest and furtherest corners. Then as the gnostic myth goes, she put a barrier between her and the demiurge and that is why Jehovah thinks that He is the only God because He cannot see anything above Him. There's a whole heck of a lot more to this but in gnostic thought, Jesus and the demiurge (God) are supposedly enemies and Jesus came to save mankind FROM God. That only some men have the divine spark and these men who have that are supposedly those gnostics that believe all this. They believe that the Christian and Jewish God is only playing and torturing mankind.
B. Now probaly some "enlightened one" or "knower" (gnostic) will post and say that I don't know what I'm talking about to inject misinformation to keep you from the truth and that sort of thing could happen. But this is part of the main crux of christian gnosticism. Later on it divided into many different gnostic sects who had a slightly different spin on things. Most, except for one strict, ascetic gnostic sect (that I saw) believe that our God is the demiurge or devil. And one of the sects, the Nicolatians is most likely where the OSAS concept originated before it ever got to Calvin over a thousand years later. The Nicolatians, like most of the other gnostics, also believed in dualism... that is, that divine spark in them was good but since the demiurge created everything physical and everything physical was evil... then their bodies were also made of evil and it was okay to commit illicit, evil acts with the body since it was already evil.
So anyways, some key words you ought to research: Bythos, Pleroma, Aeons, Demiurge, Archons, lower-sophia, higher-sophia for those interested. Now some will also say that gnostics don't exist today but they do just like gnostic bibles exist today.
Anyways, gnosticism isn't of God and is more akin to witchcraft and platoism more than Christianity although they use some Christian concepts in their gnostic thought and writings. Some say that even Revelation is gnostic and that Paul himself was a gnostic. Actually, Apostle John and Apostle Paul had a very difficult time with their heresies and that is why they wrote their letters the way they did.
Mornin Catcher; You know fellow sometimes takes a bigger man to walk away than to play.
So big deal he bowed out,Every think God put in in his head and opened his eyes as to the web being spun.You have forgotten others also watched the baiting of the hook too.What a lasting impress that might have left for the watchers.
For what good purpose would someone try to destroy skom.Matter not how pathetic or pitiful he come across what matter was he bowed out and choose his own way to walk not following others and sir for that God shall bless skom.
Now you gotten lil whispers two cents worth and that is the end of it all period.
You're emasculating "Skom" - making him appear weak. Here it is in his own words:
Skombolis wrote: "HL and I have never so much as had a cross word and given her "little brother/big brother" relationship with IANS it is clear she is simply running to his defense. I don't think she has considered how weak she is making him look to be that she feels it is necessary."
<quoted text> Yesterday as I read about people and their fruits...I kept thinking... Matthew 7:18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. I think most would consider the other guy's fruit as the source of the fruit flies that were swarming about. In your opinion... Do you think that there should have been another verse or two... Harvest your fruit before it becomes over ripe and falls to the ground. For once it has fallen and left unattended becomes as the fruit that fell from the bad tree. They both will attract the fruit fly. On as side not...we all know how pesty and how difficult it is to get rid of those annoying little buggers! Oh well...I started out to be serious but my mind just wouldn't go there.:-)
Morning. Hey,I'd like to dedicate this song to your horney little avatar friend. Enjoy!!:
Romans 4:14-16 For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect: Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression. Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all __________ First, let me remind you of Paul's use of general terms in his letters. This is one of those times. As we can see, the term "law" was used three times. And we can easily misinterpret this to mean the whole law. But, to understand if Paul was referring to the whole law or not, we need not look any further than the subject matter prior to the above verses. Beginning at verse 9, we can see that Paul began discussing the law of circumcision. And it's the law of circumcision that Paul was referring to when he used the general term "law" in verses 14 through 16. According to the law, only those circumcised on the eighth day could enter into the covenant of sacrifice. But, as Paul pointed out, the promises to Abraham were made to him even before he, himself, was circumcised. Therefore, the most High made a way to circumvent the law, by having the law of circumcision fulfilled in and by His son. By this circumvention, the Gentiles could also enter into the covenant of sacrifice without being circumcised. And this way, the Gentiles could also became heirs of what Christ's blood accomplished, just like those that were under the law of circumcision before then. And to note, according to the law, even if a stranger was circumcised, they still weren't allowed to enter the covenant of sacrifice. I might be wrong, but if memory serves me correctly, Exodus 29 and Leviticus 22 explains this prohibition. Now, as to this circumvention, this is why Paul wrote, "Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression." When we read the original stipulations of the law of circumcision, the most High said, "And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant." Now, this might not be known, but to be "cut off," in this sense, means "to be destroyed." And this is the wrath Paul was referring to. But, when he wrote, just after this, "..for where no law is, there is no transgression," this is the circumvention I'm referring to. As the law of circumcision was fulfilled in and by our anointed Savior, this opened a passageway for all people. So, now, even if a person wasn't circumcised, they could still enter into the new covenant of sacrifice because, all in all, the literal letter of the stipulation became null and void. If we can remember, the penalty of death was also fulfilled in and by our anointed Savior. But, now, all that was necessary was faith in what was accomplished on the cross. And in this sense, our faith is placed on the fact that through the shed blood of our anointed Savior, that all peoples, nations, tongues, and what-have-you, can enter into a covenant with the most High without being circumcised. To circumcise our sons would prove a lack of faith in this, in other words. And this is why Paul warned, "For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law." The "whole law," here includes animal sacrifice, all the precepts of the Sabbaths, the curses of the law, and pretty much all that's instructed under the authority of the Levitical, ceremonial laws. In conclusion, Paul wasn't referring to the whole law in verses 14 through 16 of Romans 4. Paul was referring only to the law of circumcision. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Interesting. That makes sense. I don't agree with Paul's and your reasoning to get there but it makes sense.
I'd like to add that if anyone chooses to circumcise their son, or even themselves, for any reason other than to enter into a covenant with the most High, then go right ahead. Circumcision, within itself, is not sin, nor does it prove any lack of faith. Circumcision would only prove we lack faith if we choose to circumcise our sons, or ourselves, in order to enter into a covenant with the most High, as if the fact that the practice was fulfilled in His son isn't actually true. Again, thank you for your time and consideration.
I agree. It is the difference between having a backyard barbeque and making an offering to Ba'El.
<quoted text> So like I first suspected, it was about IANS. I knew you would finally pick one of my posts to him HL, you are one of the few posters on Topix in far more conflicts that I and you regularly use sexuality and vulgarity as your tools to insult people. I am sorry you all seem to feel IANS needs protecting this badly but i won't humor your post and its transparent motivations Out of fairness to IANS it is not like I see him ask and I think many of you in the group are the same. You need each other constantly propping each other up and using a gang mentality to attack people. It shows mental weakness to me.
<quoted text> That is silly LeLe Drew is not my foe But once again he refused to answer most of what I asked him He won't tell me what of any teachings of Jesus Christ he feels still apply today and he won't tell me what it is he can observe in others to know they are saved Yet he has no problem telling people who believe all of Christ's teachings apply today that they need God to open their eyes and to claim he knows who is a real Christian If someone is going to make such statements the ought to have the decency to at least answer someone and show them what in the Bible they are basing that on. I know some people like the freedom to just go around and tell people they are blind or of the devil or are not a real Christian but what good comes from that? And every time I have tried to ease back and get into a respectful exchange even though comments like that bother me he has shown time and time again he simply will refuse to answer yet year after year keeps telling people they are blind and need God to open their eyes I think there is something wrong with that But again, just plain silly to think I am a foe of Drew or that it upsets me he doesn't condemn someone. I have never condemned anyone in my life so why would it bother me he hasn't? we don't have the right to. Just like i don't think we have the right to claim we know who is saved I think what bothers many OSAS supporters is they know people refuse to interpret scripture so all they have left is the red herring and to try to make it about someone's character.
I wasn't referring to you in general. It amazes me thst every time Drew posts, there are people who come down on him pretty hard.
I see in him a spirit of Love and one that wants ALL to succeed. I do believe his knowledge and intellect intimidates some here, and that is the reason they feel they must discredit him. (human nature and all..)
I know I have been put in the category of the OSAS posters.. I think there is a problem when labeling people.. I do not believe once we are "saved" we can go on and commit all kinds of wrongs against human kind.. I do not believe those who believe OSAS are saying this either.. it's, for me, once God is in your heart, He isn't ever leaving.. I believe we can take that to the bank. So, the people who want to waste their (everyone's) time condeming other peeps to hell,well, I believe that's just a waste of time..and, a shameful way to represent Christ.
And, btw Skom,:) if you want to talk about being silly, how about you taking on that challenge of keeping quiet for ten days..lol. Wow! Was happy you saw the light there.
Keep on keeping on ,my friend.. :) I read all your posts and am thankful you are here!
<quoted text>Who are Atheists? The truth is, every man has been given a measure of faith. Where they "choose" to put that faith is ultimately up to them. Faith can be strengthened in whatever area they choose which means they will have doubts in other areas. That is why people find worth or value in something ---> (worth+ship = worship)... Obviously you worship, I mean, find your worth in atheism or agnosticism.
uh oh...you in trouble now!
Not long ago I made a similar statement...we all believe in something even if it is just in mankind.
I was corrected really quickly that was not the case.
You know...I will just let Karl handle it from here.
I however agree with your statement...IMO we all put our faith into something...even if that something is ourselves. I don't know that I would call it "worship" in all cases as we use that term normally but without belief...what is there?
Just cold hard facts? Maybe that is okay for some...I wouldn't know how "not believing in anything" feels.
I once asked a friend who is atheist how it felt to believe in only yourself...he couldn't answer...he hadn't ever looked at it that way.
When I feel the wind kiss on my face I am reminded of those gifts of grace
Some never feel the wind on their face They are busy trying to win an obscure race.
That is my thoughts as the wind kisses my face. ajc
<quoted text>The 49ers have nothing to be ashamed of. They're a superb team. But that 109 yard kickoff return is what doomed 'em.
Just think,take away that ridiculous 109 yard kick-off return at the start of the third quarter,and that deliberate safety by the Ravens in the last seconds of the game,and the 49ers would have been leading 29-27. I didn't keep up with pro football this year,but from what I saw last night,I still think the 49ers were the better team...especially after the lights came back on.
<quoted text> I haven't seen one since my mother stopped collecting them in the sixties. She also collected Blue Chip stamps and Viceroy (cigarette) coupons. I used to tease her that she could redeem them for an iron lung.
My mother collected S&H stamps and Top Value ones. It is how she got us Christmas every year. If they didn't have it at the redemption center...we didn't get it. There were times we got some strange gifts!
Our dish towels and "crystal" came from the flour and the oatmeal. Dang I wish they would still do that.
Have you noticed...Cracker Jacks no longer puts good stuff in their boxes...just junk?
<quoted text> .... In fact I said this, "Only when we are reborn and given a new life through the Holy Spirit by faith in Jesus are our sins forgiven."
I understand that is what you believe. However, that is an interpretation based on select sections of the Bible. There are many, many other interpretations. Those that believe other interpretations are as convinced that their's is "Truth".
The problem is none of you can prove any of it. If you could there would never be an arguement about it.
I believe what I do about the Bible, God and Jesus and am willing to learn more ....even if I discover that my prior beliefs were in error. THAT is IMHO the problem with most of you.
"These things I believe, I believe with all my heart. However when met with overwhelming evidence to the contrary I will abandon those beliefs in an instant."
Tell me when this thread is updated:(Registration is not required)