Posted on 03/30/2002 7:53:37 PM PST by malakhi
Like I said, God made one way and you've made for yourselves another. His way is still the only one that works - ie believing and confessing. Your way makes you a member of your philosophical club.. great if you like that sort of thing.. I'd rather be part of those that follow scripture for what it says rather than for what the carnal mind can make it say. God didn't create multiple ways or multiple fashions to be born again, he made and stated one and only one. One method, one mediator, one path. Not many methods, many mediators and many paths. The latter is the Catholic notion.
Becky
Gee, I've been posting lots of Scripture references. Did you miss those?
You keep telling me I'm angry. I'm fine. But thanx for your concern. Nobody is mocking scripture but you guys. Noah's flood? Fact or fiction? Can you answer?
I believe that the flood happened. I would like to study the matter much, much more, going back to the early writings. I do know that my former belief that the Genesis relationships described were only father-son, something that was described as such by several Protestants I know as a literal genealogy, is not correct and research of the early works bore that out. So I tend to do research on the matter, in any event, as the later versions of Scripture have really strayed somewhat.
Gee, that's what I've been doing. To me, it's plain what John 6 is saying, as it is the rest of Scripture.
What does the scripture say? Believe and confess. Period. Both are required - not just one and we'll think about the other. Scripture says both must be done. When one does both, one is born again and no longer has need of coming to be born again. Thus one doesn't get born again so they can go be born again. A baby doesn't exit it's mother's body so that it can exit it's mother's body later. The physical truth is reflective of the spiritual truth. Yet you want to sell the notion of many paths and beg reason when scripture says something you don't like and beg the same reason when it seems to say something you like and doesn't. Begging reason, if there's one way to salvation and a second seems to be proffered, is it restating the first or creating a second though we know there is only one because God doesn't contradict himself. To believe you, we must believe God does contradict himself, which therefore also makes God a liar - the which blasphemy, I'll not have any part of. Thus, let God be true every man a liar - that includes you.
#1. Jesus does say that those who eat and drink him will have eternal life. So we know that this is not our life here on earth, but rather a life after we are "raised up on the last day."
#2. When he speaks of eating His flesh He is using very visceral words and is adamant that His flesh is real food and His blood is real drink. It is for that reason that I take Him literally.
#3. When I live forever it will not be just a spiritual life. I don't know about you, Reggie has said otherwise already, but I believe we will have new bodies -- just like Jesus did. Jesus ate fish and bread after He was resurrected. I expect to live forever in a glorified body, incorruptible. But I will not just be a spirit.
SD
In other words, you want it both ways. Scripture says Adam was Flesh but the second Adam was Spirit. Jesus didn't come to save the flesh, he came to save the spirit. Or does your Bible not say that flesh and blood shall in no wise inherit the kingdom of Heaven. Mine does. Jesus came to accomplish Spiritual things - not physical. Jesus came to deny the flesh - not to fulfill it. How is it you cannot even discern this.
What does the scripture say? Believe and confess. Period. Both are required - not just one and we'll think about the other. Scripture says both must be done. When one does both, one is born again and no longer has need of coming to be born again. Thus one doesn't get born again so they can go be born again. A baby doesn't exit it's mother's body so that it can exit it's mother's body later. The physical truth is reflective of the spiritual truth. Yet you want to sell the notion of many paths and beg reason when scripture says something you don't like and beg the same reason when it seems to say something you like and doesn't. Begging reason, if there's one way to salvation and a second seems to be proffered, is it restating the first or creating a second though we know there is only one because God doesn't contradict himself. To believe you, we must believe God does contradict himself, which therefore also makes God a liar - the which blasphemy, I'll not have any part of. Thus, let God be true every man a liar - that includes you.
Wow, Havoc, you really do misrepresent Catholics, while shucking the parts of Scripture that do not suit you. I am truly sad to see this and you are seeming to play folly with the written word.
I don't know what you just said.
Yep. Did you see him make an exception. His Body was put to death and was raised again. But his flesh profited nothing. It was His spirit that profited in all He did. His flesh merely paid the price that allowed the spiritual profit. Can you not discern the difference in these things. Are you Christian or are you a philosopher who thinks he knows something wise?
Gee I read most of them and your interpretation makes no sense.
LOL. I wish you well...
I guess we just cannot discuss the matters at hand. I wish we could, but in any event, I wish you well.
I'm serious. Could you try again? I wanna know what you were trying to say.
I was saying I believe in the Flood. I was also saying that I would want to study the early works of Scripture to get closer to what the early writers said about the Flood.
I said the reason I wanted to do that studying of the early works of Scripture in relation to the Flood is because of error introduced into modern Bibles. Previously I took the genealogies described in Genesis 5 and 11 as exact and only father-son relationships, as some modern Bibles imply and many Protestants believe. They are not exact and do not include only father-son relationships.
Errors of geneology in which mordern Bibles?
They confirm its usefulness as a story. They certainly do seem to indicate that the story is historical truth.
SD
Yep. Did you see him make an exception
Oh Steven. Isn't this exactly what you guys were telling me it didn't mean? Does this mean Havoc is not guided by the Spirit?
SD
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.