What Your Church Won't Tell You by Da...

“Become Love!”

Since: Jan 09

Nowhere/Now here

#30790 Apr 3, 2013
CORRECTION: And yet, according to recent statistics, almost 1-BILLION (not million) people, globally, suffer from hunger and malnutrition. So much for bread and fish, huh?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#30791 Apr 4, 2013
Brother Lee Love wrote:
<quoted text>Actually, it does. I explained this once before. And I pray you understand that even though all that's written, that we call "The Holy Bible," shares one case-binding, the Holy Bible, itself, is a collection of 66 separate literary works written over a period of 1,500 to 1,600 years-- by 36+ authors! As I believe, the fact that we even have a method that many derogatorily call "circular reasoning" is most impressive considering.
<quoted text>English: fulfill
Greek transliteration: pleroo
Definition: to make full, to complete, to accomplish
<quoted text>Actually and as I explained, Israel attributed righteousness to temple offerings such as sacrifices and oblations rather than actual righteous thoughts, actions, reactions, and speech. And if they did observe the moral law, they were more than satisfied observing the literal letter of the law, either neglecting, or totally misunderstanding, the spiritual aspects of it. In other words, they would refrain from committing the literal act of adultery, but they were excessively inflamed with lust toward their neighbor's wives. And it was for this very reason that our anointed Savior focused, more than anything else, on the spiritual aspects of the moral law.
<quoted text>Not exactly. As Father is the proprietor of the first, old covenant, Father is the proprietor of the second, new covenant, too. In the case of sacrifice, the blood of animals was required to establish the old covenant. The blood of our anointed Savior was required to establish the new. And this is why our anointed Savior declared, "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me (John 14:6)." Clearly, what our anointed Savior accomplished was not to draw us to him, but to Father, as said by him.
<quoted text>Not entirely.

Luke 24:24
And [Yahowshua] said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in...
1) the law of Moses, and
2) in the prophets, and
3) in the psalms, concerning me.
<quoted text>Not exactly. There are, to date, no less than 44 prophecies that were fulfilled by our anointed Savior. And accordingly, there are 18 prophecies that are impossible for him to have orchestrated, regardless.
Agree.

The Gospel text says something to the effect that Moses gave them that law....

If Jesus disregards any part of the Law of Moses, then he disregards The Law of Moses as being from God.

In the Gospels, Jesus also claims to change nothing of the law. Even one dot or dash of the Scribes pen.

There is only one logical conclusion that Jesus is referring too the Ten Commandments, therefore, the fact that he preaches on adultery within the Law of Moses proves my point does it not?

Fulfill as used by Jesus meant making the Law whole again by disregarding all the man made stuff which caused the Law to be nothing more than a burden.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#30792 Apr 4, 2013
I also accept fulfill as a prophetic claim. OTOH manipulating the events to fulfill Scripture means that prophesy is literally unproven. If I were to predict that I will crash my car into a tree on a particular day and do so, was that prophetic or did I purposely do it? In the Gospels, Jesus states that he must fulfill what is written.

“Become Love!”

Since: Jan 09

Nowhere/Now here

#30793 Apr 4, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
Agree.

The Gospel text says something to the effect that Moses gave them that law....

If Jesus disregards any part of the Law of Moses, then he disregards The Law of Moses as being from God.

In the Gospels, Jesus also claims to change nothing of the law. Even one dot or dash of the Scribes pen.

There is only one logical conclusion that Jesus is referring too the Ten Commandments, therefore, the fact that he preaches on adultery within the Law of Moses proves my point does it not?

Fulfill as used by Jesus meant making the Law whole again by disregarding all the man made stuff which caused the Law to be nothing more than a burden.
Your's is a common misconception. Consider the following, please and if you will.
__________

Matthew 19:16-19
And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said,

(Exodus 20:13) Thou shalt do no murder,

(Exodus 20:14) Thou shalt not commit adultery,

(Exodus 20:15) Thou shalt not steal,

(Exodus 20:16) Thou shalt not bear false witness,

(Exodus 20:12) Honour thy father and thy mother: and,

(Leviticus 19:18) Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
__________

Matthew 22:36-40
Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
Jesus said unto him,

(Deuteronomy 6:5) Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

This is the first and great commandment.
And the second is like unto it,

(Leviticus 19:18) Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
__________

I doubt you missed it, but notice that with what was taught by our anointed Savior during both accounts, he included precepts that aren't in what we call the "Ten Commandments." This proves, if anything, that the moral law is not confined to just the commandments of Exodus 20. Those at Exodus 20 are the precepts in which all the moral law derives.
WasteWater wrote:
I also accept fulfill as a prophetic claim.
And it is, as I've shown you. It was prophesied that certain laws would become fulfilled in and by our anointed Savior. And they were. If they weren't, then circumcision would still be a most necessary requirement in order to enter into "God's" covenant of blood. If they weren't, then we'd still be subject to the penalty of death as prescribed in the law given to Moses.
WasteWater wrote:
OTOH manipulating the events to fulfill Scripture means that prophesy is literally unproven. If I were to predict that I will crash my car into a tree on a particular day and do so, was that prophetic or did I purposely do it? In the Gospels, Jesus states that he must fulfill what is written.
The difference is that you made the prediction, yourself. It wasn't foretold thousands of years prior.

And if you were given every imagined description detailing your accident, including how much and how long you'll suffer before you died, could you continue?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#30794 Apr 4, 2013
Brother Lee Love wrote:
<quoted text>Your's is a common misconception. Consider the following, please and if you will.
__________
Matthew 19:16-19
And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said,
(Exodus 20:13) Thou shalt do no murder,
(Exodus 20:14) Thou shalt not commit adultery,
(Exodus 20:15) Thou shalt not steal,
(Exodus 20:16) Thou shalt not bear false witness,
(Exodus 20:12) Honour thy father and thy mother: and,
(Leviticus 19:18) Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
__________
Matthew 22:36-40
Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
Jesus said unto him,
(Deuteronomy 6:5) Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
This is the first and great commandment.
And the second is like unto it,
(Leviticus 19:18) Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
__________
I doubt you missed it, but notice that with what was taught by our anointed Savior during both accounts, he included precepts that aren't in what we call the "Ten Commandments." This proves, if anything, that the moral law is not confined to just the commandments of Exodus 20. Those at Exodus 20 are the precepts in which all the moral law derives.
<quoted text>And it is, as I've shown you. It was prophesied that certain laws would become fulfilled in and by our anointed Savior. And they were. If they weren't, then circumcision would still be a most necessary requirement in order to enter into "God's" covenant of blood. If they weren't, then we'd still be subject to the penalty of death as prescribed in the law given to Moses.
<quoted text>The difference is that you made the prediction, yourself. It wasn't foretold thousands of years prior.
And if you were given every imagined description detailing your accident, including how much and how long you'll suffer before you died, could you continue?
So you have proven that some parts of the Law of Moses was preached by Jesus but other parts ignored.

Matthew 15:8 “‘These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
9 They worship me in vain;
their teachings are merely human rules.’[c]”
10 Jesus called the crowd to him and said,“Listen and understand. 11 What goes into someone’s mouth does not defile them, but what comes out of their mouth, that is what defiles them.”

Yet in Luke Jesus says 16:16 “The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John. Since that time, the good news of the kingdom of God is being preached, and everyone is forcing their way into it. 17 It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law.

So what was the Law of the Prophets? Is Jesus a liar?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#30795 Apr 4, 2013
Brother Lee Love wrote:
<quoted text>Your's is a common misconception. Consider the following, please and if you will.
__________
Matthew 19:16-19
And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said,
(Exodus 20:13) Thou shalt do no murder,
(Exodus 20:14) Thou shalt not commit adultery,
(Exodus 20:15) Thou shalt not steal,
(Exodus 20:16) Thou shalt not bear false witness,
(Exodus 20:12) Honour thy father and thy mother: and,
(Leviticus 19:18) Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
__________
Matthew 22:36-40
Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
Jesus said unto him,
(Deuteronomy 6:5) Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
This is the first and great commandment.
And the second is like unto it,
(Leviticus 19:18) Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
__________
I doubt you missed it, but notice that with what was taught by our anointed Savior during both accounts, he included precepts that aren't in what we call the "Ten Commandments." This proves, if anything, that the moral law is not confined to just the commandments of Exodus 20. Those at Exodus 20 are the precepts in which all the moral law derives.
<quoted text>And it is, as I've shown you. It was prophesied that certain laws would become fulfilled in and by our anointed Savior. And they were. If they weren't, then circumcision would still be a most necessary requirement in order to enter into "God's" covenant of blood. If they weren't, then we'd still be subject to the penalty of death as prescribed in the law given to Moses.
<quoted text>The difference is that you made the prediction, yourself. It wasn't foretold thousands of years prior.
And if you were given every imagined description detailing your accident, including how much and how long you'll suffer before you died, could you continue?
The time differential makes no difference. Jesus did everything he could to make sure he would fulfill what had been written. Jesus could have done otherwise and what was written would not have come to pass. This hardly meets a strict definition of prophesy.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#30796 Apr 4, 2013
*taps the monitor*

Gary, are you in there? You remind me of another guy who was on Topix a couple of yrs ago - during the days/weeks/months before 5-21-2011 came and went. Probably a Campbellite. He was always making ramblings he knows what is going on, but all of a sudden, BAMMM!!- he disappears off the forums never to be heard from again, until you showed up.

Hmmmmm....I wonder.....

:o)

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#30797 Apr 4, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
The time differential makes no difference. Jesus did everything he could to make sure he would fulfill what had been written. Jesus could have done otherwise and what was written would not have come to pass. This hardly meets a strict definition of prophesy.
They do like to make it sound glamorous.

In truth - it was actually a very simple way of teaching - showing others that the Spirit transcends, and in some way, can come back to this plane of existence we are in.

But as for prophecy? Nope. Reading something and then doing what it says is not fulfilling, but just doing. Anyone can do it.

“Become Love!”

Since: Jan 09

Nowhere/Now here

#30799 Apr 4, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
So you have proven that some parts of the Law of Moses was preached by Jesus but other parts ignored.
And how, if you don't mind my asking, did I prove that?!

John 21:25 says, "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen."

We read of what our anointed Savior was most concerned with, that being the spiritual famine.
WasteWater wrote:
Matthew 15:8 “‘These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
9 They worship me in vain;
their teachings are merely human rules.’[c]”
10 Jesus called the crowd to him and said,“Listen and understand. 11 What goes into someone’s mouth does not defile them, but what comes out of their mouth, that is what defiles them.”
The above is strictly in regards to eating without washing hands, as this was the subject-matter. What this was not about was our anointed Savior teaching anyone to disregard the dietary law. Mark 7:2 says, "And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault."
WasteWater wrote:
Yet in Luke Jesus says 16:16 “The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John. Since that time, the good news of the kingdom of God is being preached, and everyone is forcing their way into it. 17 It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law.

So what was the Law of the Prophets? Is Jesus a liar?
I'm sorry, but I don't understand your question. Nevertheless...

What our anointed Savior was saying was that up until John, Israel was subject to the law and the writings of the prophets by the teachings of men that understood neither, the law, or the prophecies. But, now, the intention and desired result of the Torah and Tanakh were finally being explained to Israel, fully.
WasteWater wrote:
The time differential makes no difference. Jesus did everything he could to make sure he would fulfill what had been written. Jesus could have done otherwise and what was written would not have come to pass. This hardly meets a strict definition of prophesy.
We're starting to go in circles now. I've already stated that there are, to date, no less than 44 prophecies that were fulfilled by our anointed Savior. And of these 44, there are 18 prophecies that are virtually impossible for him to have orchestrated, himself. Now, you can believe what you want with the 28 that he could have fulfilled by means of personal manipulation, but it'll make no difference regarding the other 18.

“Become Love!”

Since: Jan 09

Nowhere/Now here

#30800 Apr 4, 2013
CORRECTION: Now, you can believe what you want with the 26 that he could have fulfilled by means of personal manipulation, but it'll make no difference regarding the other 18.

“Become Love!”

Since: Jan 09

Nowhere/Now here

#30802 Apr 4, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
They do like to make it sound glamorous.
What "they" would you be associating me with?
NASL wrote:
In truth - it was actually a very simple way of teaching - showing others that the Spirit transcends, and in some way, can come back to this plane of existence we are in. But as for prophecy? Nope. Reading something and then doing what it says is not fulfilling, but just doing. Anyone can do it.
Which is why I mentioned the 18 prophecies that could not have been fulfilled by our anointed Savior, himself, by manipulation.

And technically, a person can fulfill a prophecy simply by performing it unto completion. A prediction, though, is another issue altogether.

“Become Love!”

Since: Jan 09

Nowhere/Now here

#30803 Apr 4, 2013
NASL wrote:
`
And technically, a person can fulfill a prophecy simply by performing it unto completion. A prediction, though, is another issue altogether.

In the case of our anointed Savior, it was never about fulfilling just one, or a few, prophecies. It was about fulfilling all the prophecies that involved Mashiyach.

“Become Love!”

Since: Jan 09

Nowhere/Now here

#30804 Apr 4, 2013
Dr Shrink wrote:
i
That's as far as I read up to when I lost interest.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#30805 Apr 4, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
They do like to make it sound glamorous.
In truth - it was actually a very simple way of teaching - showing others that the Spirit transcends, and in some way, can come back to this plane of existence we are in.
But as for prophecy? Nope. Reading something and then doing what it says is not fulfilling, but just doing. Anyone can do it.
I agree. I believe Jesus was showing a way or path to spiritual enlightenment.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#30806 Apr 4, 2013
Brother Lee Love wrote:
<quoted text>And technically, a person can fulfill a prophecy simply by performing it unto completion. A prediction, though, is another issue altogether.
In the case of our anointed Savior, it was never about fulfilling just one, or a few, prophecies. It was about fulfilling all the prophecies that involved Mashiyach.
Many people disagree and say he failed in doing so. I am not really interested one way or the other. IMHO he was on an entirely different mission.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#30807 Apr 4, 2013
Brother Lee Love wrote:
<quoted text>And how, if you don't mind my asking, did I prove that?!
John 21:25 says, "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen."
We read of what our anointed Savior was most concerned with, that being the spiritual famine.
<quoted text>The above is strictly in regards to eating without washing hands, as this was the subject-matter. What this was not about was our anointed Savior teaching anyone to disregard the dietary law. Mark 7:2 says, "And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault."
<quoted text>I'm sorry, but I don't understand your question. Nevertheless...
What our anointed Savior was saying was that up until John, Israel was subject to the law and the writings of the prophets by the teachings of men that understood neither, the law, or the prophecies. But, now, the intention and desired result of the Torah and Tanakh were finally being explained to Israel, fully.
<quoted text>We're starting to go in circles now. I've already stated that there are, to date, no less than 44 prophecies that were fulfilled by our anointed Savior. And of these 44, there are 18 prophecies that are virtually impossible for him to have orchestrated, himself. Now, you can believe what you want with the 28 that he could have fulfilled by means of personal manipulation, but it'll make no difference regarding the other 18.
I disagree. Jesus was saying that many things had been written into the Law which were simply there to serve the leaders. Such laws were burdensome and had nothing to do with the real Law of the Prophets which was eternal, everlasting and never changing. To say that a new covenant was established negating such laws is making Jesus a liar. I doubt Jesus lied. Therefore I must reject the notion of a new covenant and go with more logical choice that certain Law and Statutes in the Law of Moses had nothing to do with the Law Jesus spoke of as never changing and everlasting.

Hell Sucks

“THE HEAT IS ON”

Since: Apr 12

Satan IS in "The Church"

#30808 Apr 5, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
*taps the monitor*
Gary, are you in there? You remind me of another guy who was on Topix a couple of yrs ago - during the days/weeks/months before 5-21-2011 came and went. Probably a Campbellite. He was always making ramblings he knows what is going on, but all of a sudden, BAMMM!!- he disappears off the forums never to be heard from again, until you showed up.
Hmmmmm....I wonder.....
:o)
Who are you referring to that disappeared off the forums? I'm disappointed Gary is not continuing to post too. I was hoping to get to have exchanges once again.

;*:*;

“Become Love!”

Since: Jan 09

Nowhere/Now here

#30809 Apr 5, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
Many people disagree and say he failed in doing so. I am not really interested one way or the other. IMHO he was on an entirely different mission.
True, many say that. But, there are two main reasons as to why they believe he failed.

The first is because the priesthood didn't believe they needed a Messiah for atonement and reconciliation. Again, they believed they were already in good-standings with Father, because they had the sacrifices and oblations that they erroneously believed was their righteousness. By the time of our anointed Savior's ministry, the priesthood believed that they were already prepared to accept the promised kingdom and this was a main concern. They believed that above all things, their being descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, guaranteed them admittance. This is why they were repeatedly warned of their attitude toward these matters. And this brings us to the second issue.

Because the priesthood believed they were already prepared for the promised kingdom, they expected their Messiah to return to put into subjection all the nations, especially the Roman Empire. The priesthood expected a warrior-king, like David was, mainly because the prophecies declared that their Messiah would come to sit on David's throne. They erroneously applied the prophecies to David himself and not the authority given him. So, when our anointed Savior came and taught peace and humility, they rejected him. The last thing they wanted to hear was a Messiah instructing them to turn the other cheek and to love their enemies.
WasteWater wrote:
I disagree. Jesus was saying that many things had been written into the Law which were simply there to serve the leaders. Such laws were burdensome and had nothing to do with the real Law of the Prophets which was eternal, everlasting and never changing.
I agree, but not entirely.

Remember, you stated that I had proved that our anointed Savior taught on some laws, but ignored others. Then, you quoted the portion where he taught that it's not that which enters into man that defiles man, but that which comes out. In my experiences, people usually quote that particular teaching in an attempt to prove that our anointed Savior destroyed the dietary law, but this is furthest from the truth. I attempted to prove to you that the issue was not in regards to eating unclean animals, but eating with unwashen hands, as it's written. Other than that, I do agree, because eating with unwashen hands, considered by the priesthood an act that causes one to become defiled, was a tradition. And our anointed Savior did oppose the traditions. As you said, these traditions were not only burdensome, but considered even greater than the actual law to a degree and by the priesthood. And why? Well, like you stated, they served the priesthood. The more so-called "laws" included that deemed men "defiled" meant more sacrifices, oblations, and offerings, to the temple and synagogues.
WasteWater wrote:
To say that a new covenant was established negating such laws is making Jesus a liar. I doubt Jesus lied. Therefore I must reject the notion of a new covenant and go with more logical choice that certain Law and Statutes in the Law of Moses had nothing to do with the Law Jesus spoke of as never changing and everlasting.
You're disregarding the stipulations of the first covenant, or any covenant for that matter, my friend. Covenants are always between two (or more) parties. And for the covenant to remain valid, both parties must fulfill the requirements. Well, in the case of the first, Israel (repeatedly) broke the new covenant while grossly taking for granted the grace clause. Because of this, the first became void. In this, a new covenant was made with the same desired results, but with somewhat different requirements. This, our anointed Savior did not do on his own.

Jeremiah 31:31
..Yahoweh.. will make a new covenant with.. Israel, and with.. Judah.

“Become Love!”

Since: Jan 09

Nowhere/Now here

#30811 Apr 5, 2013
CORRECTION: You're disregarding the stipulations of the first covenant, or any covenant for that matter, my friend. Covenants are always between two (or more) parties. And for the covenant to remain valid, both parties must fulfill the requirements. Well, in the case of the first, Israel (repeatedly) broke the FIRST (not new) covenant while grossly taking for granted the grace clause. Because of this, the first became void. In this, a new covenant was made with the same desired results, but with somewhat different requirements. This, our anointed Savior did not do on his own.

Jeremiah 31:31-32
Behold, the days come, saith Yahoweh, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith Yahoweh.

Again, Israel took for granted the laws of sacrifice, oblations, and offerings. It was warned, "Hath Yahoweh as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of Yahoweh? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams."

After considering these things, consider the following, too, please and if you will.

Reading the history of Israel, we don't read a history of glory and honor but briefly. Israel was delivered from Egyptian captivity and brought to inhabit the land that was promised to Abraham. They were told to annihilate all the indwelling nations because of 1) the gross wickedness of these nations and 2) so as not to be tempted to turn from Father afterward. They didn't. They made covenants with some of them. This, later on, proved disastrous! Early on in the history of Israel, Judges 2:8-10 tells us this; "And Joshua the son of Nun, the servant of Yahoweh, died, being an hundred and ten years old. And they buried him in the border of his inheritance in Timnathheres, in the mount of Ephraim, on the north side of the hill Gaash. And also all that generation were gathered unto their fathers: and there arose another generation after them, which knew not Yahoweh, nor yet the works which he had done for Israel." Well, needless to say, but the time came when the northern tribes were taken into captivity by the Assyrians because they repeatedly broke the covenant with Father. The majority were never to be seen, or heard of, again! Regarding the southern tribes, though, they were first conquered by the Babylonians and carried away into captivity. By the great mercies of Father, they were released and allowed to return to Israel, by the Medo-Persian Empire. What must not be forgotten, too, is that throughout Israel's history, they were always at war with the neighboring nations (that they failed to annihilate), except for a short period of time under Solomon. And Israel was almost always subject to another nation, paying tribute, so forth and so on. But, then, in comes the Macedonian/Greek/Roman Empires. Now, Israel was enslaved again, but IN ISRAEL! And this was all because Israel repeatedly broke the covenant with Father. But, Father is merciful. Therefore, a new covenant was made. And our anointed Savior serves only as a mediator of the new covenant. Not the proprietor.

“Become Love!”

Since: Jan 09

Nowhere/Now here

#30812 Apr 5, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
I agree. I believe Jesus was showing a way or path to spiritual enlightenment.
If anyone in this thread has even implied anything different, let me know, please.

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
God is REAL - Miracles Happen! (Jun '11) 3 min andet1987 6,231
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 5 min Aura Mytha 110,398
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 13 min uIDIOTRACEMAKEWOR... 110
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 22 min Devil number 666 982,101
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 1 hr President Don J T... 675,754
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 1 hr Posrane huje 184,757
I know there are ladies here who love married men 2 hr Kojak3141 1
More from around the web