Posted on 09/02/2011 9:07:47 AM PDT by marshmallow
This is an example of why we think that you so unintentially funny.
>>Historically speaking, a generation is approximately 20 years. Your own post confirms that Mark was right.
Very good, sir. Well played.>>
So you think a generation in the Bible is only 20 years also? ROFL See post 729 and get back to me.
People can still sin even after they receive grace.
I don’t see anywhere that grace is equivalent to sinlessness. On the contrary, grace can only be bestowed on those who don’t deserve it, we sinners. A sinless person does not need grace.
The paradox is that if Mary was conceived without sin, then she didn’t need a savior because she never sinned. She could have been our savior and Jesus would not have been necessary.
Since you’ve expressed your desire to not engage any more, that will be all I have to say to you on the matter.
I did not give an opinion at all. I posted from Genesis. I did not make any statements at all. I would prefer that those who make these sweeping general statements (especially after being corrected) prove them. If they are sola or solo Scriptura, let them prove it with Scripture. My beliefs are openly posted.
Eve was deceived. She was the weaker vessel being a woman. It was Adam's responsibility to protect her and he didn't. Therefore the blame is his.
So if you are driving a car and get into an accident, it is your husband's fault?
If you want a good laugh read their Dispensational threads posted about every week. They are howlers and reveal the intellectual and spiritual bankruptcy inherent in their thought processes. Is it Gog or Megog? The thoughts presented in these replacement threads are an indictment of their alleged unity to true Christianity.
I quote scripture and you quote genealogy? Let me repeat.
Matthew 1:17 Therefore all the generations from Abraham down to David are 14 generations; and from David down to the Babylonian captivity are 14 generations; and from the Babylonian captivity down to the anointed, are 14 generations.
Matthew is using the Psalm 90 definitions of Generation in order to tell a specific chronological time story. The first interval of that story is strictly historical, the interval from Abraham to David.
Using 70 as the length of a generation, the interval implied by Matthew is 14 * 70 = 980 years. Do some study on your own and stop listening to others. The math proves the 70 year generation.
Nothing to do with theology. You came up with a list of years of publication for each NT book. I asked where you got them from.
The question still stands. Why did you not attribute where you got those dates from, and how do you know that they are facts, as you emphasized?
I will answer if you are reticent. You pulled them from a 'Christian' website unattributed. You posted them as if they had the full backing of God Almighty. You presented no proof or evidence and now you are attacking me by accusing you of personal attacks?
Is your entire belief system, not to mention your theology, that weak that you have to make pronouncements without proof and go after those who question these statements made in this fashion rather than confront the weakness of your position?
Don't give up your day job. There is a difference between lifespan and a generation. I am having a barbecue today in which four generations will sit together at the same table. Believe me, my mother-in-law is not 320 years old.
I just never knew that sin came through Eve according to the RCC. This is new to me. Thank you for the info. BTW I do not agree FWIW. Have a Nice Labor day remainder as well. :)
Only if you consider proof texting snippets of Scripture set in an Islamic pudding mould Christianity. Besides, Judaizers were condemned back as far as Acts.
Islam has nothing to do with the Abrahamic Covenant. Ishmael was born to Abram not to Abraham. (look it up in the WORD)
That is the word. The WORD is Jesus. Anyhow, saying that Abram is not Abraham is like saying that Simon is not Peter.
And also as usual, you have presented snippets which seem different than they are supposed to be from the words of our Lord. Let us see the passage in context:
Mark 12: * 28One of the scribes,i when he came forward and heard them disputing and saw how well he had answered them, asked him, “Which is the first of all the commandments?” 29Jesus replied, “The first is this: ‘Hear, O Israel! The Lord our God is Lord alone! 30You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength.’j 31The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”k 32The scribe said to him, “Well said, teacher. You are right in saying, ‘He is One and there is no other than he.’ 33And ‘to love him with all your heart, with all your understanding, with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself’ is worth more than all burnt offerings and sacrifices.”l
Your snippet would seem to say that we should preclude the Trinity.
In order to remove Biblical Ignorance about the renaming Clearly the creator of the universe, Descendants of Abraham? YHvH does not think so, He repudiates them ! YHvH states that Isaac is Abraham's only son See Genesis 22:2 22:12 22:16 & Hebrews 11:17 The Name of Elohim is YHvH; He says so ! The Name of His Son is Yah'shua ( YHvH is my Salvation ) It is clear from the lips of Yah'shua via Peter Perhaps you are unaware that the King James translators You seem to have an un-christion attitude towards Calvinism.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
It in no way resembles Islam.
This demonstrates a blazing ignorance
about both Calvinism and Islam.
of Abram to Abraham and Sarai to Sarah.
When YHvH blessed then He added the Heh sound to their
names as it is the breath of Elohim.
YHvH does not choose Ishmael !
by the pen of Mark that there is only ONE Elohim,
and His NAME is YHvH. Yah'shua is YHvH's salvation.
replaced the word YHvH (the NAME Of G-d) with LORD over 7000 times.
Okay. Post 729 indicates that the poster is an idiot. He mixes up the span of a generation and the lifespan of an individual.
I'll try to remember, but you might want to do yourself a service in that respect. Watch the threads to see where a Pauline snippet is thrown back at a Gospel quote. There should be enough out there for you to understand our point.
I know God told Adam not to eat. Did God tell Eve or did Adam tell Eve ?
I love your tag line but more fitting here is the real belief of many of these anti-Catholics who post:
For God so loved the world He sent a book.
What are you talking about? Trot out some dates and prove your statement. Implications? Don't make me laugh.
Matthew is using the Psalm 90 definitions of Generation in order to tell a specific chronological time story. The first interval of that story is strictly historical, the interval from Abraham to David.
Okay, trot out the Psalm 90 definition of a generation. Let's have it.
Those words to Joseph were for his understanding. Mary already knew and said yes to God regardless of the consequences to herself.
Anyhow, that does not invalidate what I said nor change what happened and why it happened. Mary was in need of a Savior and Jesus was that Savior. The church has never taught any thing other than that Truth.
That is a lovely and sweet thought
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
but is does not seem to be supported by scripture.
I enjoy cross examining ilk of your persuasion to expose the fallacies dripping from their testimony. Unsubstantiated heresay, bereft of factual validity is all you have But Jesus and we Christians still love even your type.
Perhaps it is time for you and your associates to repent to the Lord and ask for forgiveness.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.