Gary

Buffalo, NY

#32543 Aug 2, 2013
Hi New:

DO YOU THINK GOD COULD NOT CONTROL WHAT WENT INTO HIS WORD WHAT WE CALL THE BIBLE TODAY?

This is the question you have to ask your self.

God warned in the last book of the Bible around 95 AD to 98 AD God warned us in the very last page in Rev. 22:18-19 not to add anything in the word after this. New, I believe God said what He meant and I just leave it there if you do like this then you have every right to feel what you want. I cannot prove this New because the whole of the Bible is based on faith. How do you explain Rev. 22:18-19 can you go into some detail? Thank you. Gary
Gary wrote:
Hi Waste:
The [ALL] scripture is in the 66 books of what makes up the Bible. As I said before there are many more books beside Thomas the Catholic church has added theirs to the mix but they are not in harmony with the rest of the 66 books in the Bible this is how we can know it is not God breathed. I am sure there maybe as many as 50 other books and parchments that they have found but it is not part of the Bible. I have read some of the books in the Catholic Bible. Thank you. Gary
<quoted text>
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#32544 Aug 2, 2013
Gary wrote:
Hi Saban:
I asked you if you could first answer these points step by step before you go into other areas of the word of God.
You see Saban when one gets sprinkled or dunked into water in a church or wherever and the baptize this person this act in it's self cannot save one because it is a work than man does you just do not see this yes we get baptized as a picture it is never takes the place of God's salvation we do this not to show people now I am saved because I have done this act because the fact is, most people who get water baptized never become saved, I see most people who were water baptized have no interest at all in the Bible the reason being, only the word and the Spirit can save one. John 3:1-8, 4:23,
Now how can I go further with you Saban if you cannot answer those verses below in the light of the whole Bible?
It is truly sad and I mean this to see people believing and thinking they became saved by an act of water baptism this was never meant to save one it is a picture it is not the substance of salvation it cannot be because we are saved by grace through faith Saban I have repeated this over and over so I think it be wise for you just to do word studies on the word [baptize][baptism] and compare spiritual things with spiritual, 1 Cor. 2. What your doing is comparing a literal act to salvation. Thank you. Gary
<quoted text>
You just responded to me by responding to your own post. I'll be interested to see as I read through the updated posts to see if you answer the many questions I've asked in my posts to you.

Basically all you've given me here is your opinion.
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#32545 Aug 2, 2013
Gary wrote:
Hi Saban:
Your question: "So you don't think Nicodemus understood after Jesus explained it to Him?
Saban, where does it state that Nicodemus understood what Jesus meant in John 3 where? The proof is on you to show me because I have shown you from the word he had no clue what Jesus meant because Jesus must open ones understanding by His word and His Spirit read, Luke 24:15-47. Here these desciples did not understand Jesus even when He gave them the word on a seven mile walk on the road called Emmaus after Jesus shared them the scriptures and the Psalms then, He Jesus decided to open their understanding
" Then opened He their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures." Luke 24:45
Saban, this is how God saves one He has to clean us He has to wash us, He has to open our understanding, we do not take this work of salvation that only God can do no way! God alone must take all the action in ones salvation you want to add what you do to complete your so called salvation it will NOT WASH. Thank you. Gary
<quoted text>
Just out of curiosity, were the subjects in the faith chapter of Hebrews just passive bystanders?

Or, was their faith justified by their works?

You completely missed the point -probably intentionally - that I made about Nicodemus as compared to a child that wouldn't even understand the the being born speech, much less the being born again speech.
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#32546 Aug 2, 2013
Gary,

Wow! That's it???

I'll bet I can go back through and find 15 questions I've asked in the past few days that have gone completely unanswered by you, Gary.

Your continuous editorial doesn't answer those serious questions.

You should be sad I say if you can't manage to improve your answers.

Since: Aug 11

Santa Cruz, CA

#32547 Aug 2, 2013
Dr shrink wrote:
<quoted text>
Hammadi Library and G.Thoams are and were never Scripture of 66 books Bible
gays only included this roman gospel of filth to fit their own immoral agenda
wipe up your a... with this gospel after sex with second gay
It is one of the Gnostic Gospels. Nothing filthy about it. Your mind is filthy.

Since: Aug 11

Santa Cruz, CA

#32548 Aug 2, 2013
Dr shrink wrote:
<quoted text>
Hammadi Library and G.Thoams are and were never Scripture of 66 books Bible
gays only included this roman gospel of filth to fit their own immoral agenda
wipe up your a... with this gospel after sex with second gay
Taking Paul's word at the time he wrote that letter, nothing in the New Testament is Scripture. Paul's letter precedes all the Gospels. Paul would only be referring too Hebrew Scripture.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#32549 Aug 2, 2013
Gary wrote:
Hi New:
DO YOU THINK GOD COULD NOT CONTROL WHAT WENT INTO HIS WORD WHAT WE CALL THE BIBLE TODAY?
This is the question you have to ask your self.
Thank you. Gary
<quoted text>
Okay, sure I can GUESS if he would or not.

I don't think your "God" wrote any of the Bible. It was written by men.

I also don't think fallible men ("fall short of God") have the ability to define any god. Especially those people trying to define something written 1800+ years ago, and then arrogantly thinking that they can "divide the Word" appropriately.

When one limits "God", as you seem to do, I can understand the dismay you see. If you let it fester it will destroy you. If you let it pass and look for the astonishment within the dismay [Spirit], you will find the light and be released from a man-made religion.

But one must now look outside the "only inspired books" to seek the real truth. The confines of religion is more of a burden than a righteous path.

Since: Aug 11

Santa Cruz, CA

#32550 Aug 2, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>

But one must now look outside the "only inspired books" to seek the real truth. The confines of religion is more of a burden than a righteous path.
According to the Gospel, Jesus said the same thing.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#32551 Aug 2, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
According to the Gospel, Jesus said the same thing.
:p)

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#32552 Aug 3, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Taking Paul's word at the time he wrote that letter, nothing in the New Testament is Scripture. Paul's letter precedes all the Gospels. Paul would only be referring too Hebrew Scripture.
It shows that you have really read and studied the New Testament well.

In the beginning, it was all Paul and his own preaching. There was no gospel at all till he died.

That is why all the gospels and teachings of the Church stand condemned and cursed under Paul's own Galatians Clause 1:8, which says:

"But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under Godís curse!"

Looks like the Church fathers never read his letter to Galatians.

Actually, Paul should have been the one to write a gospel first, if he had really been appointed by Jesus on the dirt track to Damascus.

It is strange to see that he does not talk anything about Jesus' teachings.

Thanks for a good and a sharp post.

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#32553 Aug 3, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
It shows that you have really read and studied the New Testament well.
In the beginning, it was all Paul and his own preaching. There was no gospel at all till he died.
That is why all the gospels and teachings of the Church stand condemned and cursed under Paul's own Galatians Clause 1:8, which says:
"But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under Godís curse!"
Looks like the Church fathers never read his letter to Galatians.
Actually, Paul should have been the one to write a gospel first, if he had really been appointed by Jesus on the dirt track to Damascus.
It is strange to see that he does not talk anything about Jesus' teachings.
Thanks for a good and a sharp post.
I'm not sure where, but I had read a similar theory in a book and the author speculated on the order of these texts and when they were written. It went 'something' like this:
1 - "Paul's" letter (not Pastorals)
2 - Mark
3 - I don't remember
4 - Matt/Luke

....or something like that. And why I am remembering it, is because it sounded like your post or possibly the same book. He basically posits that "Paul" may actually have started the dialog, based upon his vision.

If one compares that vision to some of the non-canonical "Apocalypse" (of "John"), "John" has a completely different one.

Which leads one to question, why are visions considered "truth" and "required belief"?

Interesting.

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#32554 Aug 3, 2013
New Age Spiritual Leader wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not sure where, but I had read a similar theory in a book and the author speculated on the order of these texts and when they were written. It went 'something' like this:

1 - "Paul's" letter (not Pastorals)
2 - Mark
3 - I don't remember
4 - Matt/Luke

....or something like that. And why I am remembering it, is because it sounded like your post or possibly the same book. He basically posits that "Paul" may actually have started the dialog, based upon his vision.

If one compares that vision to some of the non-canonical "Apocalypse" (of "John"), "John" has a completely different one.

Which leads one to question, why are visions considered "truth" and "required belief"?

Interesting.
Thanks.

I have written a lot about Paul on forums but that was not me. However, the views are quite close, as I share the same feelings.

Interesting and a great question Indeed.

If one really reads the books of the New Testament, one would notice that Jesus himself saw no vision and did not talk about any vision.

Visions were mostly seen by the prophets of the distant past, as we read in the Jewish Holy Scriptures and their copy, known as the Old Testament.

Personally, I believe Paul came out of the blue and filled the vacuum left by Jesus and his disciples. His own testimony cannot be trusted because there has to be another to testify for him. There is no one.

I find 2 Corinthians 12:9 very interesting. One can see Paul making it up.

Same goes for John. Also, many Johns wrote John, a fact which even the Church cannot deny.

Revelation, if it were truly written by John, appears to be the dialogue,(the right word you used) based upon wild visions of a sad and utterly dejected man, who could not bear to see Jesus rejected and the mission unsuccessful. That is why Revelation is full of wrath, anger and vengeance. It does not show the same Jesus, who one sees through the gospels.

You must have noticed Peter's vision, when he saw a sheet full of all kinds of animals, being lowered from heaven. Was it to make all animals lawful to eat? No. It was simply the vision of a very hungry man.
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#32555 Aug 3, 2013
Gary wrote:
Hi Saban:
Saban when one gets sprinkled or dunked into water in a church or wherever and the baptize this person this act in it's self cannot save one because it is a work than man does you just do not see this yes we get baptized as a picture it is never takes the place of God's salvation we do this not to show people now I am saved because I have done this act because the fact is, most people who get water baptized never become saved, I see most people who were water baptized have no interest at all in the Bible the reason being, only the word and the Spirit can save one. John 3:1-8, 4:23,
It is truly sad and I mean this to see people believing and thinking they became saved by an act of water baptism this was never meant to save one it is a picture it is not the substance of salvation it cannot be because we are saved by grace through faith Saban I have repeated this over and over so I think it be wise for you just to do word studies on the word [baptize][baptism] and compare spiritual things with spiritual, 1 Cor. 2. What your doing is comparing a literal act to salvation. Thank you. Gary
<quoted text>
Yes, we are saved by grace through faith. Correct!

You close your Bible and place your head in the sand at that moment. Further study into the scriptures and you'll find verses such as James 2:24.

James 2:24
Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

There's no contradiction here except in your mind. The heroes of the faith we read about in Hebrews 11 were justified by their works! If not for their works we wouldn't be reading about them today! But they couldn't be saved by their works alone...

We have NO WAY of being saved without Jesus Christ and His sacrifice - hence we are saved by grace! The gift of mercy and grace he extends is to all mankind, but one must have faith that Jesus is the son of God (this confession is the rock upon which His church is built) in order for the grace to be applied.

Matt. 16
15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Additionally, as we read in James 2:24, faith is active. Faith is obedient. Faith does. Faith follows.

Jesus said we must "go", "teach", "baptizing", "observe all I have commanded you". But you Gary, like the angel of light we're warned about, tell us in such a nice way that we do not have to do these things to be saved.

In your teaching you are stopping short of fulfilling the Bible's teaching. You are taking scriptures out of context and your having to ignore other scriptures (James 2:24, Acts 2:38) and Bible stories (Philip and the Eunuch) in order to sell your message.

I was "saved by grace through faith". My faith led me to obedience just as the Eunuch's did when he was taught Jesus. I could've been baptized everyday of my life for the wrong reasons and I would've just been getting wet. But, I was baptized for the remission of my sins (Acts 2:38) and the blood of Christ, his grace, covers me.

Anyone can be baptized for the remission of sins and anyone can baptize you whether they are a believer or not - it doesn't matter. What matters is what happens to you spiritually during baptism.

That is "obeying the gospel" - it is simple.(2 Thess. 1:8)

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#32556 Aug 3, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks.
I have written a lot about Paul on forums but that was not me. However, the views are quite close, as I share the same feelings.
Interesting and a great question Indeed.
If one really reads the books of the New Testament, one would notice that Jesus himself saw no vision and did not talk about any vision.
Visions were mostly seen by the prophets of the distant past, as we read in the Jewish Holy Scriptures and their copy, known as the Old Testament.
Personally, I believe Paul came out of the blue and filled the vacuum left by Jesus and his disciples. His own testimony cannot be trusted because there has to be another to testify for him. There is no one.
I find 2 Corinthians 12:9 very interesting. One can see Paul making it up.
Same goes for John. Also, many Johns wrote John, a fact which even the Church cannot deny.
Revelation, if it were truly written by John, appears to be the dialogue,(the right word you used) based upon wild visions of a sad and utterly dejected man, who could not bear to see Jesus rejected and the mission unsuccessful. That is why Revelation is full of wrath, anger and vengeance. It does not show the same Jesus, who one sees through the gospels.
You must have noticed Peter's vision, when he saw a sheet full of all kinds of animals, being lowered from heaven. Was it to make all animals lawful to eat? No. It was simply the vision of a very hungry man.
I understand what you are talking about.

FYI - This may be the book I read.....but I am not totally sure.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B008SMFB0G
Jesus: One Hundred Years Before Christ
by Alvar Ellegard

"2 Corinthians 12:9"
- the promotion of "Self" - to bear your own 'crosses', own them, overcome them, and don't put them upon another.

Is one completely honest enough to make this change? To many, it is quite hard. But if one takes the time to ponder upon it, they will find it to be very easy and "astonished" at the "supposed dismay". There was never any "dismay" - but only of one's own making.

:o)

Cheers!
Gary

Buffalo, NY

#32557 Aug 3, 2013
Hi Saban:

I fully understand you think this is my opinion even when I shared many verses for you to read in that post you said concerning me here below it [was just my opinion]

Saban, the fact is, anyone can read below what you just said and your totally lacking any scripture that would support this the reason being is, you do not show one verse proof for your proof text. You see the fact is, this is your opinion and that is the sad fact Saban, you cannot come to grips with. This is why I asked you to read Luke 24 to see just how God opens up ones understanding.

Saban, anyone can look back and if you ask me as I said before one or two questions I will try to answer them. However, when I ask you it is totally different here. You see Saban to have a good dialog it must be two sided.

Saban, your church so drilled into your head from your churches teaching that one must be water dunked to be saved and when I show you verse after verse and in the Greek rendering that the word [baptize] means to [wash] or cleanse in those verses I have shared with you. However, you want to look at the literal water to save you it will NOT WASH!

SABAN, THIS IS WHY I WAS HOPING YOU WOULD HAVE SEARCHED LUKE 24 OUT AND IF YOU DID YOU WOULD SEE IN OTHER PLACES WHEN REFERRING TO [REMISSION FOR SINS] IT DOES NOT ALWAYS HAVE THE WORD [BAPTISM THERE]

Example:

"And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem" Luke 24:47

Saban, if water baptism was a requirement for salvation then why did not the Lord say this when He was speaking those words?

SABAN, YOU SEE YOUR CHURCHES TEACHING IS SO HOOKED ON WATER DUNKING TO GET ONE SAVED THEY CANNOT SEE ANYTHING ELSE BECAUSE THEY DO NOT SEE WE MUST COMPARE SPIRITUAL THINGS WITH SPIRITUAL, 1 COR. 2:13

"Which things also we speak not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Spirit teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual."

Now what your church is doing sad to say is comparing man's wisdom against the Holy Spirit wisdom they will fall every time this is why they can only look at the literal water and not the washing of water by the word, Eph. 5:26. The spiritual meaning for baptism is [to wash to make clean] and Saban, I have already gave you example after example the woman at the well Jesus said, I will give you LIVING WATER, was this literal water? No! When Jesus washed Peter's feet Jesus said, if I DO NOT WASH YOU THEN YOU WILL NOT BE CLEAN. Saban, this was a picture God must wash us was Jesus talking about literal water? Who was it that must do the washing? Was he dunked in water? Saban, I have asked you these questions and many more just to go silent this is a sad fact because your not open yet.

Many people really do not know this but they put their churches teaching over God's word this is just a fact, this is why there are so many different kinds of denominations out there and we know they cannot all be right when the fact is, most all are wrong because they put there creeds over what God says sad to say.

So Saban, everything I share with you all those verses must be filtered through first your churches teaching you cannot think on your own out side the churches teaching no matter how much biblical proof one shows to them when I do, all you call me is from Satan, false prophet and so on this is normal when one is not open to truth. Now you compare what you said below and with what I just shared the verses and such there is a HUGE difference here and you do not see it. Please read Luke 24 the whole chapter. Thank you. Gary
Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
You just responded to me by responding to your own post. I'll be interested to see as I read through the updated posts to see if you answer the many questions I've asked in my posts to you.
Basically all you've given me here is your opinion.
Gary

Buffalo, NY

#32558 Aug 3, 2013
Hi Saban:

The sad fact is, when you said [this is just my opinion] I gave you many verses to check out I HAVE SHARED MANY WITH YOU IN THAT POST. HOWEVER, SABAN, THE SAD FACT IS, YOU HAVE NOT SHARED ONE VERSE NO NOT ONE HERE BELOW!

Saban, I asked you to check out the whole chapter of Luke 24 did you? Again, silent sad to say. Now if you did you would have seen many times when Jesus speaks about [remission for sins] He does not always uses the word baptism there so we know that literal water cannot save it is the washing of the water by the word, Eph. 5:26. Now if you would have read Luke 24:47, Saban, you would see this fact in what Jesus said Himself.

"And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem"

Where is there any literal water dunking here Saban? No mention of water baptism here at all.

The word [baptism] as I said means to [wash or cleanse] I gave you those verses at the woman at the well, was this literal water Jesus was speaking of when He said, I will give you LIVING WATER. Saban, was this baptisim by water? No!

I asked you what about Peter when Jesus gave us a wonderful picture that He alone must WASH US this was a picture a spiritual meaning behind this and this is why I told you we compare spiritual things with spiritual, 1 Cor. 2:13. Did Jesus dunk Peter or as you would say one has to be immersed into water is this what Jesus did? Who did the washing was it Jesus or was it man? Saban, none of these questions could you really answer by the word of God it was just your opinion sad to say and when I share out of love for you and for the truth sake all you do is call me from Satan, a false prophet and so on. Saban, I fully understand why it is because you have no answer and everything for you first must be filtered by your churches teaching. There are hundreds of denominations do they all have the truth? No, most do not because they put their creeds above the word of God. This is why I come with the word of God. I was hoping you would read Luke 24 to see just how God opens ones understanding it is through His word and His Spirit. Thank you. Gary. 1 John 3:13-15.
Saban fan wrote:
<quoted text>
You just responded to me by responding to your own post. I'll be interested to see as I read through the updated posts to see if you answer the many questions I've asked in my posts to you.
Basically all you've given me here is your opinion.
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#32559 Aug 3, 2013
Gary wrote:
Hi Saban:
I fully understand you think this is my opinion even when I shared many verses for you to read in that post you said concerning me here below it [was just my opinion]
Saban, the fact is, anyone can read below what you just said and your totally lacking any scripture that would support this the reason being is, you do not show one verse proof for your proof text. You see the fact is, this is your opinion and that is the sad fact Saban, you cannot come to grips with. This is why I asked you to read Luke 24 to see just how God opens up ones understanding.
Saban, anyone can look back and if you ask me as I said before one or two questions I will try to answer them. However, when I ask you it is totally different here. You see Saban to have a good dialog it must be two sided.
Saban, your church so drilled into your head from your churches teaching that one must be water dunked to be saved and when I show you verse after verse and in the Greek rendering that the word [baptize] means to [wash] or cleanse in those verses I have shared with you. However, you want to look at the literal water to save you it will NOT WASH!
SABAN, THIS IS WHY I WAS HOPING YOU WOULD HAVE SEARCHED LUKE 24 OUT AND IF YOU DID YOU WOULD SEE IN OTHER PLACES WHEN REFERRING TO [REMISSION FOR SINS] IT DOES NOT ALWAYS HAVE THE WORD [BAPTISM THERE]
Example:
"And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem" Luke 24:47
Saban, if water baptism was a requirement for salvation then why did not the Lord say this when He was speaking those words?
SABAN, YOU SEE YOUR CHURCHES TEACHING IS SO HOOKED ON WATER DUNKING TO GET ONE SAVED THEY CANNOT SEE ANYTHING ELSE BECAUSE THEY DO NOT SEE WE MUST COMPARE SPIRITUAL THINGS WITH SPIRITUAL, 1 COR. 2:13
"Which things also we speak not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Spirit teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual."
Now what your church is doing sad to say is comparing man's wisdom against the Holy Spirit wisdom they will fall every time this is why they can only look at the literal water and not the washing of water by the word, Eph. 5:26. The spiritual meaning for baptism is [to wash to make clean] and Saban,
So Saban, everything I share with you all those verses must be filtered through first your churches teaching you cannot think on your own out side the churches teaching no matter how much biblical proof one shows to them when I do, all you call me is from Satan, false prophet and so on this is normal when one is not open to truth. Now you compare what you said below and with what I just shared the verses and such there is a HUGE difference here and you do not see it. Please read Luke 24 the whole chapter. Thank you. Gary
<quoted text>
I read Luke 24. FYI Christ's church did not yet exist at that time. Therefore, during a time it did not exist any reference to the entrance into the church would be prophesy. Correct? There's the answer to the question you asked in this post. Peter was given the keys to the Kingdom, and He announced such in Acts 2.

When we "rightly divide" scripture it's not so confusing, Gary.

I've shown you the 1st Century Greek meaning of baptizo was immersion.

I've asked one or two questions of you in several posts that have been ignored. I think I answered about 8 charges you made yesterday in one of your posts!!! If only you did actually ask one to two questions each!!! LOL

I am beyond disgusted in your continual barrage about your believing I think there's something special about the water when I've corrected you on that point probably 10 times. It is dishonest for you to continue to place me in that box I don't fit within. The exact same can be said in your continual use of "your church". It's shameful, Gary.
Speaking of verses vs. opinions, in my post previous to this one, I posted verses that contradict you.
Gary

Buffalo, NY

#32560 Aug 3, 2013
Hi Saba:

I am sorry but we are not playing dodge ball here. I asked you before if you have one or two questions I will be glad to answer them Lord willing.

However, all that your doing is reflecting my points and answers and questions I gave you. Now Saban, you may not liked my answers and I understand because it goes against your churches teaching and I fully understand everything must be first filtered through your church to get the OK.

The fact is, in your post you never asked me just one question here below this was your chance and you did not take advantage of this because you know you do not like the biblical answer to your questions Saban and I fully understand this because your trusting more in your church than in the word sad, so sad to say this but it is the fact.

Now SABAN, WHAT IS YOUR QUESTION PLEASE JUST ONE NOT 15 AT THE SAME TIME I TOLD YOU BEFORE JUST ONE AND AT THE MOST TWO QUESTIONS SO I CAN GO INTO BIBLICAL DETAIL TO ANSWER THEM, NOT WHAT I THINK NO WAY! NOT MY OPINION NO WAY! JUST THE WORD OF GOD.

Saban, have you read Luke 24 yet? Did you see how God opens one understanding? Can you share with us here? Just from the word please. Thank you. Gary 3:13-15.
Saban fan wrote:
Gary,
Wow! That's it???
I'll bet I can go back through and find 15 questions I've asked in the past few days that have gone completely unanswered by you, Gary.
Your continuous editorial doesn't answer those serious questions.
You should be sad I say if you can't manage to improve your answers.

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#32561 Aug 3, 2013
Dr shrink wrote:
<quoted text>
you are f...simple Liar,like all those churches and their spiritual thiefs
you never deal of sold drugs to me-also your insults is simple cyber slander accusing others without of any clue?ALOS YOU ARE JUST SIMPLE LOW IQ primitive scumbag
sur Jesus is God of vengance against murders,adulters church Liars, etc,,,
for the sake and security and love of His children
JESUS WRATH FALL DOWN ON THE HEADS OF ALL BASTARDS OF DEVIL TABLE
what you think you idiot?you will perfomr sex with man and Jesus will seat on your a..... to make deeper your d...in gay colon?
YOU CALL THIS LOVE?
SON?AT FIRST LEARN TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS WRONG AND WHAT IS WICKED, TEACH YOURSELVES AND OWN FAMILY,
and get away from any advices to me,
I DESPISE CHURCH LEADERS, SPIRITUAL PRIEST LIARS,CYBER STUPID MANIACS TO BE MY ADVISORS ,TEACHERS, OR SPIRITUAL QUIDANCE
try to save your own a....instead worry about others
f....you and your church full of spiritual pig mire and viomits
Doc! You have really gone senile.

Jesus is God? Who told you that?

Did Jesus make any of the FOLLOWING silly and absurd statements himself?

I am the son of God.

I am God in flesh or I am God in person?

I am God-Incarnate.

I am the Father.

I am God.

No, he did not say any of that.
Saban fan

Decatur, AL

#32562 Aug 3, 2013
Gary wrote:
Hi Saban:
The sad fact is, when you said [this is just my opinion] I gave you many verses to check out I HAVE SHARED MANY WITH YOU IN THAT POST. HOWEVER, SABAN, THE SAD FACT IS, YOU HAVE NOT SHARED ONE VERSE NO NOT ONE HERE BELOW!
Saban, I asked you to check out the whole chapter of Luke 24 did you? Again, silent sad to say. Now if you did you would have seen many times when Jesus speaks about [remission for sins] He does not always uses the word baptism there so we know that literal water cannot save it is the washing of the water by the word, Eph. 5:26. Now if you would have read Luke 24:47, Saban, you would see this fact in what Jesus said Himself.
"And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem"
Where is there any literal water dunking here Saban? No mention of water baptism here at all.
The word [baptism] as I said means to [wash or cleanse] I gave you those verses at the woman at the well, was this literal water Jesus was speaking of when He said, I will give you LIVING WATER. Saban, was this baptisim by water? No!
I asked you what about Peter when Jesus gave us a wonderful picture that He alone must WASH US this was a picture a spiritual meaning behind this and this is why I told you we compare spiritual things with spiritual, 1 Cor. 2:13. Did Jesus dunk Peter or as you would say one has to be immersed into water is this what Jesus did? Who did the washing was it Jesus or was it man? Saban, none of these questions could you really answer by the word of God it was just your opinion sad to say and when I share out of love for you and for the truth sake all you do is call me from Satan, a false prophet and so on. Saban, I fully understand why it is because you have no answer and everything for you first must be filtered by your churches teaching. There are hundreds of denominations do they all have the truth? No, most do not because they put their creeds above the word of God. This is why I come with the word of God. I was hoping you would read Luke 24 to see just how God opens ones understanding it is through His word and His Spirit. Thank you. Gary. 1 John 3:13-15.
<quoted text>
No, I thought it was just interesting that you responded to me by responding to your own post. I couldn't think of any verses that needed to be mentioned for that. It was just interesting to me that you would do something so strange.

The church and the entrance therein was not in existence during the times being reported in Luke 24. That should be enough to answer your questions, right? You must rightly divide the word, Gary. If you don't understand yet where I'm going, baptism into Christ for remission of sins did not yet exist.

Following the instructions of 2 Tim. 2:15, will keep you from making shameful comments...

"Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."

Oops, it says worker...

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
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 13 min guest 559,324
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 16 min pusherman_ 774,923
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 54 min WildWeirdWillie 175,596
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 1 hr Epiphany2 604,955
Moses never existed 1 hr KiMare 744
Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 1 hr Rat jeez loaded 119,644
Why do Mexicans try to be white so bad? (Mar '09) 2 hr nomoreillegal 625
Why Iím no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 2 hr Barnsweb 441,764
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 4 hr Aura Mytha 265,082
More from around the web