ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 2 of 3
< 12 3 >
Patteeu Memorial Political Forum>The Book of Revelation - Talk 22 - You will reign in the Millennial Kingdom with...
Chiefshrink 05:08 PM 07-21-2021
Christ. After the 7 year tribulation, Christ returns along with his saints(us in our glorified bodies) to set up His millennial kingdom here on earth for a 1000yrs. Because there are Jews and Gentiles who do make it through the 7yr period but are not saved(therefore do not have glorified bodies) thus the potential for sin is still there. We(the saints) who returned with Christ in our glorified bodies will not have the capacity or capability to sin any longer and Christ will give us all different types of judging responsibilities when sin is committed by these unbelievers. Because Christ lives in us from a purified Holy Spirit perspective now with our sin virus eradicated from us, we as the judges will always make the correct decisions. There still will be the opportunity for those unbelievers to be saved during this 1000yr period.

For the first time since the Garden of Eden, earth will be peaceful and bountiful for all and the difference being that any type of sin will be truly dealt with in a very swift and justified manner by Christ who now rules with an Iron Rod. It still will be very hard to believe that even though Christ is here in the flesh proving not only does He exist but He is King of Kings and Lord of ALL and is THE ONLY GOD to be WORSHIPPED, there will still be those who still DO NOT BELIEVE.

After this 1000yr period on earth, the Battle of Armageddon will take place where Satan and his angels will temporarily be loosed from Hell and followers(unbelievers on earth at that time) will be unsuccessful in an attempt to defeat Christ. And in a very swift fashion Christ will throw them into the lake of fire for all eternity by their choosing to reject Him. Once this occurs then earth is destroyed and a new heaven and new earth appear with the pristine Kingdom of God to be inhabited for all eternity with Jesus.:-)


Yes and Amen

7/19/2021 JEFF SCHWARZENTRAUB ROMANS 20

We discuss four events from Revelation that will certainly take place, even though we have been waiting for a long time. Three of the four of these events thrill our heart, while one of them causes us to soberly pause and consider the importance of the Gospel. All of the events highlight the glory of God and His eternal power as the Sovereign of the universe. Considering the truths of Revelation 20 are imperative for clear understanding of what will take place.

https://bravechurch.online/sermon/yes-and-amen
[Reply]
Chiefshrink 09:23 AM 07-22-2021
Is there proof for the inspiration of the Bible?

ANSWER

Here are some evidences that the Bible is inspired (God-breathed), as declared in 2 Timothy 3:16:

1) Fulfilled prophecy. God spoke to men telling them of things He would bring about in the future. Some of them have already occurred. Others have not. For example, the Old Testament contains more than 300 prophecies concerning Jesus Christ’s first coming. There is no doubt that these are prophecies from God because of manuscripts dated from before the birth of Christ. These were not written after the fact but beforehand.

2) The unity of Scripture. The Bible was written by approximately 40 human authors over a period of approximately 1,600 years. These men were quite diverse. Moses, was a political leader; Joshua, a military leader; David, a shepherd; Solomon, a king; Amos, a herdsman and fruit picker; Daniel, a prime minister; Matthew, a tax collector; Luke, a medical doctor; Paul, a rabbi; and Peter, a fisherman; among others. The Bible was also written under a variety of circumstances. It was written on 3 different continents, Europe, Asia, and Africa. Yet, the great themes of Scripture are maintained in all the writings. The Bible does not contradict itself. There is no way, apart from God the Holy Spirit supervising the writing of the Bible, that this could have been accomplished.

Contrast this with the Islamic Qur’an. It was compiled by one individual, Zaid bin Thabit, under the guidance of Mohammed’s father-in-law, Abu-Bekr. Then, in A.D. 650, a group of Arab scholars produced a unified version and destroyed all variant copies to preserve the unity of the Qur’an. The Bible was unified from the time of its writing. The Qur’an had unity forced upon it by human editors.

3) The Bible presents its heroes truthfully with all of their faults and weaknesses. It does not glorify men as other religions do their heroes. Reading the Bible, one realizes that the people it describes have problems and do wrong just as we do. What made the heroes of the Bible great was that they trusted in God. One example is David, who is described as “a man after God’s own heart” (1 Samuel 13:14). Yet, David committed adultery (2 Samuel 11:1-5) and murder (2 Samuel 11:14-26). This information could have easily been omitted from Scripture, but the God of truth included it.

4) Archaeological findings support the history recorded in Scripture. Though many unbelievers throughout history have tried to find archaeological evidence to disprove what is recorded in the Bible, they have failed. It is easy to say that Scripture is untrue. Proving it to be untrue is another matter. In fact, it has not been done. In the past, every time the Bible contradicted a current “scientific” theory, the Bible was proven later to be true and the scientific theory wrong. A good example is Isaiah 40:22. All the while that science declared the earth to be flat, the Bible stated that God “sits on the circle [sphere] of the earth.”

The Bible’s claims of being from God should not be understood as circular reasoning. The testimony of reliable witnesses—particularly Jesus, but also Moses, Joshua, David, Daniel, and Nehemiah in the Old Testament, and John and Paul in the New Testament—affirms the authority and verbal inspiration of the Holy Scriptures. Consider the following passages: Exodus 14:1; 20:1; Leviticus 4:1; Numbers 4:1;Deuteronomy 4:2; 32:48; Isaiah 1:10, 24; Jeremiah 1:11; Jeremiah 11:1–3; Ezekiel 1:3; 1 Corinthians 14:37; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; 2 Peter 1:16–21; 1 John 4:6.

Also of interest are the writings of Titus Flavius Josephus, a Jewish historian who wrote during the first century A.D. Josephus records some events which coincide with Scripture. Considering the evidence given, we wholeheartedly accept the Bible as being from God (2 Timothy 3:16).
[Reply]
ChiTown 09:25 AM 07-22-2021
Saving CPDC Souls.......one post at a time.
[Reply]
Chiefshrink 09:25 AM 07-22-2021
Why can’t all Christians agree on one Bible?

ANSWER

There are many different versions of the Bible—with new translations coming out all the time, it seems—and sometimes it’s hard for Christians to agree on which one is best to use. Different churches recommend different translations, and many church-goers simply go with the version being preached in the pulpit. The good news is that Christians don’t have to agree on one translation of the Bible.

First, because of language barriers, it’s impossible for all Christians worldwide to agree on one Bible. If we all agreed that the KJV (for example) is the one true Bible, then what are Christians to read who speak Spanish or French? There’s no such thing as King James Russian or King James Papiamento. Non-English translations have to be made, and there’s nothing more “inspired” about a translation in English than a translation in, say, Urdu.

But if we limit our consideration to English translations, Christians still don’t have to agree on one Bible. There are several reasons why various Bible translations are good and even necessary:

1) Language changes over time, and words and spellings become obsolete. Christians in the 21st century do not have to agree with the spelling of the 14th century. For example, consider John 3:16 in the first English translation ever made, John Wyclif’s 14th-century version:

“For God louede so the world, that he yaf his 'oon bigetun sone, that ech man that bileueth in him perische not, but haue euerlastynge lijf.”

And here is the same verse in the KJV of 1611:

“For God so loued ţe world, that he gaue his only begotten Sonne: that whosoeuer beleeueth in him, should not perish, but haue euerlasting life.”

Obviously, these translations (which were necessary in their time) needed to be replaced with translations that reflected contemporary spelling.

2) Christians don’t have to agree on one version of the Bible because only the original autographs of Scripture were inspired. The words that Joshua wrote in the Book of the Law of God (Joshua 24:26) were inspired by God. Every translation of those words since that time has involved a measure of human interpretation—that’s the nature of translating. For example, the Hebrew word Joshua wrote concerning false gods was nekar in Joshua 24:23. That inspired word can be translated into English as “strange,” “foreign,” or “alien,” or the gods in question can simply be called “idols.” It’s up to the translator, but the basic meaning does not change. The English translation is not what’s inspired anyway, as most Christians would agree.

3) Christians don’t have to agree on one version of the Bible because such agreement would tend to foster autocracy and absolutism. Having different translations prevents any one group or church from saying, “Only our translation is holy. We are the only ones who have God’s Word.” This is in fact what happened during the Middle Ages. The Roman Catholic Church (and later the Anglican) held in their grasp all the copies of the Bible (in Latin, which most people could not read), and they forbade anyone else from making a copy or reading it for themselves. Bibles in the vernacular were illegal. Fortunately, the Reformation changed all that: Luther made a German translation, and Tyndale an English translation, and the rest, as they say, is history.

4) Christians shouldn’t have to agree on one version of the Bible because having different translations allows more people access to God’s Word. Various versions of the Bible are written at various reading levels. The KJV, for example, is about a 12th-grade reading level. The NKJV is about a 7th-grade reading level. The NCV has a 3rd-grade reading level. The ERV (Easy-to-Read Version) is better for people just learning English. John 3:16 in the ERV is, “Yes, God loved the world so much that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him would not be lost but have eternal life.” If all Christians agreed on the NIV Bible, for example, anyone at a reading level lower than junior-high would have difficulty reading God’s Word.

It’s important to know that not every translation is equally faithful to the original text: some take a more literal approach, and some take a more dynamic approach. But all good translations of the Bible do their best to stay true to the original Greek and Hebrew texts and accurately communicate the Word of God.

In the final analysis, agreement on one particular translation is not all that crucial. Most of the differences are quite minor. Mark 3:5, for example, reads like this in four popular translations:

“He looked around at them in anger and, deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts . . .” (NIV).

“And he looked around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart . . .” (ESV).

“And when he had looked round about on them with anger, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts . . .” (KJV).

“After looking around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart . . .” (NASB).

The wording is different, but they all mention Jesus’ look, His anger, His distress/grief, and the people’s stubborn/hard hearts. What is the value in promoting one of these translations to the exclusion of all the others?

The differences among the good translations are not differences in doctrine. Whether we’re reading the KJV, the NIV, the NAS, the ESV, or the ERV, Jesus is still the Lord and one-and-only Savior, and salvation still comes by grace through faith.
[Reply]
Chiefshrink 09:28 AM 07-22-2021
What is the Catholic Bible?

ANSWER

Many Christians are surprised to learn that the Catholic Bible is different from the Bible used by Protestants. While all 66 books found in Protestant Bibles are also found in the Catholic Bible, the Catholic Bible also contains other books, and additions to books. The Catholic Bible contains a total of 73 books, 46 in the Old Testament (Protestant Bibles have 39) and 27 in the New Testament (the same as Protestant Bibles).

The additional books in the Catholic Bible are known as the deuterocanonicals/Apocrypha. They are Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), and Baruch. The Catholic Bible also includes additions to the books of Esther and Daniel. Should the Apocrypha be included in the Bible? There was significant debate in the early Christian church, with a majority of the early church fathers rejecting the idea that the Apocrypha belonged in the Bible.

However, under tremendous pressure from Rome, Jerome, the translator of the Latin Vulgate, included the Apocrypha, despite Jerome’s insistence that the Apocrypha did not belong in the Bible. The Latin Vulgate became the dominant and officially sanctioned Catholic Bible, and remained that way for around 1200 years. Thus, the Apocrypha became a part of the Catholic Bible.

The Apocrypha was not formally/officially made a part of the Catholic Bible, though, until the Council of Trent, in response to the Protestant Reformation. The early Protestant Reformers, in agreement with Judaism, determined that the Apocrypha did not belong in the Bible, and therefore removed the Apocrypha from Protestant Bibles.

The most popular English translations of the Catholic Bible today are the New American Bible, the New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition, and the New Jerusalem Bible. Aside from the inclusion of the Apocrypha, each of these Bible translations is reasonably good and accurate in how it renders the biblical text into English.

In summary, the Catholic Bible is the version of the Bible promoted by the Roman Catholic Church and used by the majority of the world’s Catholics. Aside from the inclusion of the Apocrypha, the Catholic Bible is identical to Protestant Bibles in terms of the canon (the books belonging in the Bible).
[Reply]
Chiefshrink 09:29 AM 07-22-2021
What are the apocryphal gospels?

ANSWER

The word apocrypha is from the Greek word for “obscure” or “hidden.” The apocryphal gospels are so named since they were not prominent in the early church.

Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are known as the canonical gospels because they were recognized by the early church as being accurate, authoritative, and inspired accounts of the life and teachings of Jesus. However, in addition to these four works, there were a great number of other works that purported to record other words and deeds of Jesus. These works are not authoritative or inspired and sometimes not even accurate records of the life and teachings of Jesus.

Many of the apocryphal gospels were considered by the early church to be useful but not inspired. In the years since, more works such as the Gnostic gospels have come to light, which the early church would have considered heretical. Currently, the term apocryphal gospel applies to any non-canonical early work that purports to record the life and teaching of Jesus. Neither Roman Catholics nor Eastern Orthodox nor Protestants accept any of the apocryphal gospels as authoritative or inspired. However, modern scholarship (such as applied in the Jesus Seminar) generally accepts these “gospels” as accurate records needed to give us a full picture of the life and teachings of Jesus.

Some of the apocryphal gospels are lost to us but are mentioned in other early Christian writings and would have been considered helpful though not inspired. These works include the Gospel of Andrew, the Gospel of Bartholomew, the Gospel of Barnabas, and Memoirs of the Apostles.

Some of the apocryphal gospels are the work of heretical groups that attempted to co-opt the teachings of Jesus for their own purposes. Among these works are the Gospel of Marcion, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Judas, the Gospel of Mary, the Gospel of Philip, and the Gospel of Truth. The Gospel of Thomas is probably the best-known because it was popularized by Princeton University Professor of Religion Elaine Pagels in her 2004 best-seller Beyond Belief: The Secret Gospel of Thomas.

Some of the apocryphal gospels, like the Gospel of Peter, are just bizarre. In this work, we encounter an actual talking cross.

The Secret Gospel of Mark has only recently come to light and suggests that Jesus may have had a homosexual relationship with Mark. Further investigation suggests that this find was a hoax perpetrated by Morton Smith, the man who claimed to have discovered it. However, modern critical scholarship uncritically accepted it as genuine for a time.

Because of the wide variety of teaching in these apocryphal gospels, some scholars prefer to speak of “early Christianities,” implying that there was never a single, unified, accurate, authoritative teaching about Jesus but that each group collected partial truth to suit their own needs. The group that we now call orthodox was the group that eventually gained prominence; thus, the gospels that they preferred (the canonical gospels) were accepted as authoritative while the others were suppressed. This is essentially the premise behind Dan Brown’s novel The DaVinci Code. Such theories contradict the fact that the early church received “the faith that was once for all entrusted to God’s holy people” (Jude 1:3).

On further investigation, we find that the apocryphal gospels that present some of the most divergent views on who Jesus was and what He taught were written much later than the canonical gospels. There is no evidence for the views they present in other writings of the early church. Scholars who put all the gospels on equal footing tend to be hypercritical of the canonical gospels and overly accommodating to the apocryphal gospels.

The extant apocryphal gospels are all readily available online for whoever wants to read them. For a scholarly evangelical analysis of the apocryphal gospels, we recommend Fabricating Jesus: How Modern Scholarship Distorts the Gospels by Craig Evans, and for a more popular-level explanation we recommend Chapter 1 of The Case for the Real Jesus by Lee Strobel.
[Reply]
Chiefshrink 09:31 AM 07-22-2021
What is the Jesus Seminar?

ANSWER

The "Jesus Seminar" was begun by New Testament "scholar" Robert Funk in the 1970s. It was Funk’s desire to rediscover the "historical Jesus" that was hidden, he believed, behind almost 2,000 years of Christian traditions, myths, and legends. The Jesus Seminar was created to examine the biblical gospels and other early Christian literature to discover who Jesus truly was and what He truly said. The Jesus Seminar was (and still is) comprised almost entirely of individuals who deny the inspiration, authority, and inerrancy of the Bible. The agenda of the Jesus Seminar is not to discover who the historical Jesus was. Rather, the purpose of the Jesus Seminar is to attack what the Bible clearly says about who Jesus is and what He taught.

The crowning publication of the Jesus Seminar is a work that goes through the four biblical gospels and the gospel of Thomas and proceeds to determine what Jesus truly said and taught. It divides Jesus’ words from the gospels into categories based on how likely it is that Jesus truly said them. Words in red indicate words that Jesus most likely said. Words in pink represent words that Jesus possibly said. Words in gray indicate words that Jesus likely did not say, but are close to what He might have said. Words in black represent words that Jesus definitely did not say. It is interesting to note that in this work from the Jesus Seminar there are more words in black than in red, pink, and gray combined. Almost the entire gospel of John is in black. It is also interesting that the gospel of Thomas is given a significantly higher percentage of red and pink words than the biblical gospels. It is absolutely ridiculous, even offensive, to think that a group of "scholars" today can more accurately determine what Jesus did and did not say than the authors of the gospels, who wrote in the same century in which Jesus lived, taught, died, and was resurrected.

The "scholars" of the Jesus Seminar do not believe in the deity of Christ, the resurrection of Christ, the miracles of Christ, or the substitutionary atonement death of Christ. Perhaps most significantly, they deny that the Holy Spirit is the author of all Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16-17), having moved the minds and hands of all the writers (2 Peter 1:20-21). Since the Jesus Seminar does not believe these Christian doctrines, they relegate anything that Jesus says in support of them as "black." Essentially, the agenda of the Jesus Seminar is, "I do not believe Jesus is God, so I am going to remove anything that records Jesus saying or teaching that He is God from the gospels." The claim that the purpose of the Jesus Seminar is to "discover the historical Jesus" is false and misleading. The true purpose of the Jesus Seminar is to promote the Jesus that the Jesus Seminar believes in instead of the Jesus of the Bible.
[Reply]
Chiefshrink 09:32 AM 07-22-2021
What is the Synoptic Problem?

ANSWER

When the first three Gospels—Matthew, Mark, and Luke—are compared, it is unmistakable that the accounts are very similar to one another in content and expression. As a result, Matthew, Mark, and Luke are referred to as the “Synoptic Gospels.” The word synoptic basically means “to see together with a common view.” The similarities among the Synoptic Gospels have led some to wonder if the Gospel authors had a common source, another written account of Christ’s birth, life, ministry, death, and resurrection from which they obtained the material for their Gospels. The question of how to explain the similarities and differences among the Synoptic Gospels is called the Synoptic Problem.

Some argue that Matthew, Mark, and Luke are so similar that they must have used each other’s Gospels or another common source. This supposed “source” has been given the title “Q” from the German word quelle, which means “source.” Is there any evidence for a “Q” document? No, there is not. No portion or fragment of a “Q” document has ever been discovered. None of the early church fathers ever mentioned a Gospel “source” in their writings. “Q” is the invention of liberal “scholars” who deny the inspiration of the Bible. They believe the Bible to be nothing more than a work of literature, subject to the same criticism given to other works of literature. Again, there is no evidence whatsoever for a “Q” document—biblically, theologically, or historically.

If Matthew, Mark, and Luke did not use a “Q” document, why are their Gospels so similar? There are several possible explanations. It is possible that, whichever Gospel was written first (possibly Mark, although the church fathers reported that Matthew was written first), the other Gospel writers had access to it. There is absolutely no problem with the idea that Matthew and/or Luke copied some text from Mark’s Gospel and used it in their Gospels. Perhaps Luke had access to Mark and Matthew and used texts from both of them in his own Gospel. Luke 1:1–4 tells us, “Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.”

Ultimately, the Synoptic “Problem” is not as big a problem as some try to make it out to be. The explanation as to why the Synoptic Gospels are so similar is that they are all inspired by the same Holy Spirit and are all written by people who witnessed or were told about the same events. The Gospel of Matthew was written by Matthew the apostle, one of the twelve who followed Jesus and were commissioned by Him. The Gospel of Mark was written by John Mark, a close associate of the apostle Peter, another one of the twelve. The Gospel of Luke was written by Luke, a close associate of the apostle Paul. Why would we not expect their accounts to be very similar to one another? Each of the Gospels is ultimately inspired by the Holy Spirit (2 Timothy 3:16–17; 2 Peter 1:20–21). Therefore, we should expect coherence and unity.
[Reply]
Chiefshrink 09:34 AM 07-22-2021
What is the harmony of the Gospels?

ANSWER

The "harmony" of the Gospels is the agreement of the four biblical Gospels. The four New Testament Gospels are like the singers in a four-part choir. They each have their distinct parts to sing, yet the parts combine to make a beautiful composition. Each of the four Gospels gives testimony of Jesus from a slightly different perspective, but they all tell the same story. Thus, they are all in harmony with one another. There are also books that align the Gospel accounts chronologically which are called harmonies of the Gospels, and some Bibles have a reference section doing the same thing that is referred to as a harmony of the Gospels.

Matthew, Mark, and Luke are called the "synoptic" gospels, because they give a synopsis of most of the same events from the life of Jesus. John stands on its own, filling in gaps that the others leave out. Each one of these Gospels was written for a different audience and emphasizes different things about Jesus. The Gospel of Matthew was written primarily for the Jews and emphasized how Jesus fulfilled the prophecies of a kingly Messiah. Mark was written primarily for Roman or Gentile Christians, so it includes few Old Testament prophecies and explains many Jewish words and customs. Jesus is portrayed in Mark as the Divine Servant. Luke was also written primarily for Gentile believers, as it also explains Jewish customs and uses Greek names. Luke set out to write an orderly narrative of the life of Jesus and presented Jesus as the Son of Man, emphasizing His full humanity. John’s Gospel emphasizes Jesus as the Son of God and includes more of Jesus’ revelations about Himself than any of the other Gospels. It also gives a much more detailed picture of the events during Jesus’ last days.

Some people have attempted to discredit the Bible by pointing out the inconsistencies in the Gospel narratives. They point out differences in the order in which the events are presented or minor details within those events. When the four accounts are placed side by side, we see that they do not all follow the same strict chronology. Much of the narrative in the Gospels is arranged in a topical order, where an event brings to mind a similar thought. This is the way most of us carry on conversations every day. The differences in minor details like the angels at Christ’s tomb (Matthew 28:5; Mark 16:5; Luke 24:4; John 20:12) are also answered by allowing the text to speak. The differences are complementary, not contradictory. New information is added, but it does not take away from the veracity of the old information.

Like the rest of Scripture, the four Gospels are a beautiful testimony of God’s revelation to man. Imagine a tax collector (Matthew), an untrained Jewish lad with a history as a quitter (Mark), a Roman doctor (Luke), and a Jewish fisherman (John) all writing harmonious testimonies about the events in the life of Jesus. There is no way, without the intervention of God, that they could have written these amazingly accurate accounts (2 Timothy 3:16). The historical references, the prophetic references, and the personal details all work together to compose one very detailed, very accurate picture of Jesus—the Messiah, the King, the Servant, and the Son of God.
[Reply]
Chiefshrink 09:37 AM 07-22-2021
Originally Posted by Dunerdr:
:-)
Hope this helps. I realize this is a manure load of info but I am sure you would have other questions as well that I have attempted to anticipate and answer.:-)
[Reply]
Chiefshrink 10:26 AM 07-22-2021
Originally Posted by ChiTown:
Saving CPDC Souls.......one post at a time.
:-):-):-):-)
[Reply]
lawrenceRaider 12:13 PM 07-22-2021
Man, you love the copy and paste. Do you ever actually think for yourself?
[Reply]
Chiefshrink 12:42 PM 07-22-2021
Originally Posted by lawrenceRaider:
Man, you love the copy and paste. Do you ever actually think for yourself?
If you read my initial post to Dunedr you would see why I do it this way. No worries LR, I do think for myself I just do it more efficiently for everybody's best interest.:-)

Besides, you know more about the Bible than anybody, correct? These are your words to me in a past thread.:-)
[Reply]
Mecca 01:12 PM 07-22-2021
Holy walls of text Batman.
[Reply]
lawrenceRaider 01:15 PM 07-22-2021
Originally Posted by Chiefshrink:
If you read my initial post to Dunedr you would see why I do it this way. No worries LR, I do think for myself I just do it more efficiently for everybody's best interest.:-)

Besides, you know more about the Bible than anybody, correct? These are your words to me in a past thread.:-)
Based on your posting I guarantee I've read the bible more than you have.

Everything you post is someone else's thoughts. Everything.

The bible is a divinely inspired scripture. To get out of it what you need, you have to actually read it and ask for revelation.
[Reply]
Chiefshrink 05:48 PM 07-22-2021
Originally Posted by lawrenceRaider:
Based on your posting I guarantee I've read the bible more than you have.

Everything you post is someone else's thoughts. Everything.

The bible is a divinely inspired scripture. To get out of it what you need, you have to actually read it and ask for revelation.
I would love to hear your testimony about how you came to Christ and made Jesus your personal Lord and Savior.
[Reply]
Dunerdr 07-23-2021, 12:49 AM
This message has been deleted by Dunerdr.
Page 2 of 3
< 12 3 >
Up