Romans 8:1-2, is conditional
- Thread starter know1
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Nope, that's not what I'm saying, but there was the received text that they used and accepted which we know as the Textus Receptus from Antioch. The Textus Receptus (received text) from which the King James Bible came can be traced clear back to Antioch, Syria, where the disciples were first called Christians and where Paul and Barnabas taught the word of God for a whole year (Acts 11:26). The other "bibles" do not come from Antioch. They come from Alexandria, Egypt, and from Rome. These texts were known by the early remnant to have been corrupted.
Why did the early churches of the 2nd and 3rd centuries and all the Protestant Reformers of the 15th, 16th and 17th centuries choose Textus Receptus in preference to the Minority Text? The answer is because:
- Textus Receptus is based on the vast majority (90%) of the 5000+ Greek manuscripts in existence. That is why it is also called the Majority Text.
- Textus Receptus is not mutilated with deletions, additions and amendments, as is the Minority Text.
- Textus Receptus agrees with the earliest versions of the Bible: Peshitta (AD150) Old Latin Vulgate (AD157), the Italic Bible (AD157) etc. These Bibles were produced some 200 years before the minority Egyptian codices favoured by the Roman Church.
- Textus Receptus agrees with the vast majority of the 86,000+ citations from scripture by the early church fathers.
- Textus Receptus is untainted with Egyptian philosophy and unbelief.
- Textus Receptus strongly upholds the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith: the creation account in Genesis, the divinity of Jesus Christ, the virgin birth, his miracles, his bodily resurrection and literal return.
- Textus Receptus was - and still is - the enemy of the Roman Church. This is an important fact to bear in mind.
No, praise God, I am not in either camp. The weak and weaselly try or have to fit in with others to be accepted.
And yes, I separated them because of the "and" in between the sin and death.
We all sin, but we don't lose our salvation just because we sinned, we do however lose some protections from curses though.
The bible is ladened with example and warnings of the consequences of sin.
If we walk in the Spirit we will not fulfill the lusts of the flesh, but the righteousness of the law.
When the born again Christians sins, they come under the condemnation of the curses of the law. That is why many Christians get sick and why some die.
BUT, when we repent and confess our sins, God is faithful to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us of ALL unrighteousness, then restoring us to fellowship with the Father.
At that time, we can ask or claim our healing, and the word of God does it. Most just don't know it was done because they didn't feel anything or any better.
So yes, I firmly believe there is a curse of the law of sin, and a curse of the law of death that we are redeemed from, WHEN we walk in the Spirit.
And yes, I also believe a mature Christian can lose their salvation, but not a baby Christian.
I think the death spoken of is a spiritual death, like the second one, as in eternal separation from God.
And yes, I separated them because of the "and" in between the sin and death.
We all sin, but we don't lose our salvation just because we sinned, we do however lose some protections from curses though.
The bible is ladened with example and warnings of the consequences of sin.
If we walk in the Spirit we will not fulfill the lusts of the flesh, but the righteousness of the law.
When the born again Christians sins, they come under the condemnation of the curses of the law. That is why many Christians get sick and why some die.
BUT, when we repent and confess our sins, God is faithful to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us of ALL unrighteousness, then restoring us to fellowship with the Father.
At that time, we can ask or claim our healing, and the word of God does it. Most just don't know it was done because they didn't feel anything or any better.
So yes, I firmly believe there is a curse of the law of sin, and a curse of the law of death that we are redeemed from, WHEN we walk in the Spirit.
And yes, I also believe a mature Christian can lose their salvation, but not a baby Christian.
I think the death spoken of is a spiritual death, like the second one, as in eternal separation from God.
"I have said in the past to those who do not have the faith for healing that they should seek the best the natural has to offer, because it is very unlikely that God would heal them."
As you can see in the post you replied to, I already said in that post, if you don't have the necessary faith, to seek medical help.
If you weren't so bent in making belittling sarcastic remarks toward me, you might have seen that.
Even if I don't have the faith for something, I have learned to do the same.
Yes, I have resorted to small things at times, because I know, if I don't have the faith for something, it's not going to happen. And I know when I have faith for something and when I don't.
That goes the same for my family.
I am not the idiot you make me out to be. Far from it.
BUT, when I do have the faith for healing, I get it, without fail.
That's God, faithful to perform His word.
As you can see in the post you replied to, I already said in that post, if you don't have the necessary faith, to seek medical help.
If you weren't so bent in making belittling sarcastic remarks toward me, you might have seen that.
Even if I don't have the faith for something, I have learned to do the same.
Yes, I have resorted to small things at times, because I know, if I don't have the faith for something, it's not going to happen. And I know when I have faith for something and when I don't.
That goes the same for my family.
I am not the idiot you make me out to be. Far from it.
BUT, when I do have the faith for healing, I get it, without fail.
That's God, faithful to perform His word.
Yeah everybody is headed to hell that does not use the KJV Bible 
Why don't you go cuddle up with Jack Chick and leave us alone...
Why don't you go cuddle up with Jack Chick and leave us alone...
Nor did I know that I was advocating the KJB. I thought I was talking about the received text.
Can we just stick to the subject of the thread, please?
There is not a single MS of Textus Receptus before the 6th century. It quite obviously results from gathering together the various earlier readings.
The churches of 2nd and 3rd century did not use textus receptus. That is wishful thinking. It did not agree with quotations from the early fathers
The Peshita & Vulgate were about 400 ad.!!!!!!!
you live in cloud cuckoo land
The churches of 2nd and 3rd century did not use textus receptus. That is wishful thinking. It did not agree with quotations from the early fathers
The Peshita & Vulgate were about 400 ad.!!!!!!!
you live in cloud cuckoo land
Last edited:
You should know by now that I wasn't looking for any teaching, but your interpretation of it.
The reason why I point that out is because it defies what you said.
By not responding to my request, you willingly reject the truth of God's word. It is because you know what I said makes sense, and you just don't want to admit it.
So would you care to tell me what 1 Cor 11 is talking about, if it's not about condemnation of the born again believers who ate and drank unworthily?
The reason why I point that out is because it defies what you said.
By not responding to my request, you willingly reject the truth of God's word. It is because you know what I said makes sense, and you just don't want to admit it.
So would you care to tell me what 1 Cor 11 is talking about, if it's not about condemnation of the born again believers who ate and drank unworthily?
E
Actually I do not accept any of them, They all have mistakes
You do know what the word Assume means do you not? You should not assume such things.
I test all of them out, Making sure they align with the message,, The message is one message which will never contradict. If any thing contradicts. it is most likely because of an error in the copied text. or the manuscript used.
You do know what the word Assume means do you not? You should not assume such things.
I test all of them out, Making sure they align with the message,, The message is one message which will never contradict. If any thing contradicts. it is most likely because of an error in the copied text. or the manuscript used.