Search results

Where are your morals and sense of justice? Don't you believe in standing up for what is right? Or only defending your Sabbatarian buddies. Regardless of their bad behavior. I counted five or six instances of clear abuse. You call it "Censoring". And then you call the abuser a "gentleman"...

That's what I call Sabbatarianism. Is there a significant difference? I should say Saturday (seventh day) Sabbatarianism, to be more specific. I am already very familiar with SDAs and COG (Armstrongism). Are there related denominations to Hebrew Roots? Readers should informed about these...

That's good. Also, there is a list of sins in the passage just before the Fruit of the Spirit. Sabbath-breaking is not on the list. However, "hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions" is on the list. This could be the very definition of Sabbatarianism...

If you were really concerned about thread interruption, we wouldn't be having this discussion. See?

I was raised in a Christian home. I was taught right and wrong before I could read. And I remember my conscience informing me at a young age. Do you still believe the law is the standard?

If you stare at my palm you can see your future. (spooky) lol

Where do you think the captives spirits were that Jesus preached to? (the realm of the dead) The term "realm of the dead" is used 29 times in the Bible. It even comes up in Acts chapter 2. Twice actually.

Right. So that happened in the realm of the dead, in the afterlife. What is to say that that could not happen again? But in some cases on an individual basis.

Right. But it's a curious thing when gentiles are told we are no longer under the law. Because we were never under the law in the first place. I think Paul means "we" collectively, both Jews and gentiles. Do you see it that way?

You seem to be inferring that we were all under the law?

What exactly are you defending here? The right to abusive posting?

That's a cheap shot. I was calling you on your bad behavior. Do you consider that ridicule? (and insult?)

Jesus didn't preach "an eye for an eye". Is that what you were referring to? Not sure how you got off on a different subject here. This isn't a political thread.

What did you find humorous in my post? Here it is again. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ An eye for an eye, then? Two wrongs never make a right. You need to do what is right. If Grandpa is doing that to you, then it is wrong as well. I guess I haven't seen it. You both need to be...

An eye for an eye, then? Two wrongs never make a right. You need to do what is right. If Grandpa is doing that to you, then it is wrong as well. I guess I haven't seen it. You both need to be civil. Right? This is an opportunity to be the better man.

At this present time, to be saved in the here and now, yes "People need to accept the Atonement of the Lord Jesus Christ to be saved". In the past, before the gospel was presented, that's another question. And I would add, that in the same way, God may have his own at the present time that...

If I need help, I'll try to remember not to ask you. (waste of time)

I don't know. Haven't really studied it, or given it much thought. Now answer my question. As promised.

Is that really necessary? Inferring that Grandpa is not following the Christ of the Bible. What was that, five or six in one post? Nice work. What was that you were saying about love and the law? Remind me. Thanks.

Is that really necessary? That's four, or five.