Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Jesus: Why I believe He was a failure.
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 151 of 427 (542505)
01-10-2010 11:37 AM


PD writes:
The forever was contingent upon behavior. Since David's descendants didn't behave they lost the promise. That prophecy/promise ended. Contract broken.
When a contract is broken the consequences then apply, we don't go back and change the nature of the contract.
All corroborating messianic prophecies relative to Israel factor in the fact that they will fail, be severely punished and scattered globally, but that God will never allow them to be totally forsaken. There will remain a contingent which he will refine for the messianic kingdom nation.
Just one of the many prophecies I could cite, for example is Ezekiel 33 and 34. The early chapters of Ezekiel are full of wrath and judgement proclamations from Jehovah to rebellious Israel. They are summarized in 33 and some of 34. Then in 34 we read the following: (ASV)
34:11 For thus saith the Lord Jehovah: Behold, I myself, even I, will search for my sheep, and will seek them out.
34:12 As a shepherd seeketh out his flock in the day that he is among his sheep that are scattered abroad, so will I seek out my sheep; and I will deliver them out of all places whither they have been scattered in the cloudy and dark day.
34:13 And I will bring them out from the peoples, and gather them from the countries, and will bring them into their own land; and I will feed them upon the mountains of Israel, by the watercourses, and in all the inhabited places of the country.
34:14 I will feed them with good pasture; and upon the mountains of the height of Israel shall their fold be: there shall they lie down in a good fold; and on fat pasture shall they feed upon the mountains of Israel.
34:15 I myself will be the shepherd of my sheep, and I will cause them to lie down, saith the Lord Jehovah.
34:16 I will seek that which was lost, and will bring back that which was driven away, and will bind up that which was broken, and will strengthen that which was sick: but the fat and the strong I will destroy; I will feed them in justice.
34:23 And I will set up one shepherd over them, and he shall feed them, even my servant David; he shall feed them, and he shall be their shepherd.
34:24 And I, Jehovah, will be their God, and my servant David prince among them; I, Jehovah, have spoken it.
34:25 And I will make with them a covenant of peace, and will cause evil beasts to cease out of the land; and they shall dwell securely in the wilderness, and sleep in the woods.
34:26 And I will make them and the places round about my hill a blessing; and I will cause the shower to come down in its season; there shall be showers of blessing.
34:27 And the tree of the field shall yield its fruit, and the earth shall yield its increase, and they shall be secure in their land; and they shall know that I am Jehovah, when I have broken the bars of their yoke, and have delivered them out of the hand of those that made bondmen of them.
34:28 And they shall no more be a prey to the nations, neither shall the beasts of the earth devour them; but they shall dwell securely, and none shall make them afraid.
34:29 And I will raise up unto them a plantation for renown, and they shall be no more consumed with famine in the land, neither bear the shame of the nations any more.
34:30 And they shall know that I, Jehovah, their God am with them, and that they, the house of Israel, are my people, saith the Lord Jehovah.
34:31 And ye my sheep, the sheep of my pasture, are men, and I am your God, saith the Lord Jehovah.
PD, this is just one of numerous corroborating messianic prophecies that emphatically assure Israel that there will always be a contingent which will comprise the end time messianic kingdom. This also corroborates with the Abrahamic Covenant which was reaffirmed to his son Isaac and grandson Jacob.
PD writes:
The Book of Kings was supposedly written after the destruction of the temple. The writer already knew David's line wouldn't reign forever and that the temple wouldn't last forever; but the writer didn't change the contract to a heavenly one.
The Books of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles were all written after the fact while in exile if not after.
The Jews didn't need a messiah until after they had lost their kingdom and were exiled and oppressed.
The promise made to David in the Book of Samuel has nothing to do with the messiah and is not a messianic prophecy.
Even if you wanted to carry the promise forward, Peg already rendered the genealogies useless. One is through the wrong son and the second is through a cursed line. Even the promise from Israel concerning Judah doesn't fit the bill.
There you go, PD supporting by Brian's MO of isolating what supports your and Brian's mindsed and ignoring the dozens of specific messianic prophecies which soundly refute your postion.
PD writes:
The text does not support the idea of a heavenly throne instead of an earthly one.
PD, are you paying attention to the affirmed facts refferenced? Scripture emphatically states that messianic throne and messianic kingdom will be earthly in Jerusalem and on the Temple Mount.
Edited by Buzsaw, : Remove Admin notations. I was typing not knowing Admin fixed the error.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

Replies to this message:
 Message 155 by purpledawn, posted 01-10-2010 1:09 PM Buzsaw has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 152 of 427 (542509)
01-10-2010 12:28 PM
Reply to: Message 150 by Dawn Bertot
01-10-2010 11:03 AM


Re: Why Change Meaning?
quote:
While I , Buzzsaw and Peg do not agree on all the details in such matters, we all agree that God and inspiration is in charge of these matters and that a spiritual kingdom of some sort is contemplated in the entirity of passages. Now watch, the idiocy which disregards this fact, while arguing from a positon and a book repleat with such supernatural matters, trying at the sametime to make a position for the text to make it fit a stricly human theory, is simply ludicrous beyond belief.
You keep saying things like this, but it is hard to see how anybody is ignoring that fact - with the possible exception of the three of you. Perhaps you would like to explain what you mean.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-10-2010 11:03 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 154 by Buzsaw, posted 01-10-2010 12:58 PM PaulK has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 153 of 427 (542514)
01-10-2010 12:52 PM
Reply to: Message 150 by Dawn Bertot
01-10-2010 11:03 AM


Re: Why Change Meaning?
Sorry, forgot to swap ID.
My statement that "The text does not support the idea of a heavenly throne instead of an earthly one." wasn't a general statement concerning the entire Bible. It was referring specifically to 2 Samuel 7:13, which was being discussed. Show me how that text clearly speaks of a heavenly throne. Show me the words.
quote:
Secondly, the text more than supports a spiritual kingdom, eternal in character and nature. If one can look at a simple passage and understand it in the context of God and eternal purposes, example, I challenged Brian to demonstrate how in Isa 9:6-7, these statements could be refering to ANY MAN.
"Mighty God", "The everlasting father", etc, etc. At a glance any Jew would have understood this to mean God, it should be obvious that it is refering to God, specifically in the nature of Christ. Only a blind eye and humanistic nonsense would ignore such evidence.
I've made no comments in this thread concerning Isa 9:6-7 and I don't see that it has been brought up in this thread or what that has to do with what I was discussing.
In the Septuagint it is translated:
Isaiah 9:6 For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is called the Messenger of great counsel: for I will bring peace upon the princes, and health to him. 7 His government shall be great, and of his peace there is no end: it shall be upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to establish it, and to support it with judgment and with righteousness, from henceforth and forever. The seal of the Lord of hosts shall perform this.
quote:
But here is the point you are missing, while they were punished god made certain PERPETUAL PROMISES to and about them, which were ofcourse eternal and physical in nature
I'm discussing a very specific promise concerning David's line; not promises in general. In Message 131 I showed that the forever is based on behavior.
If a new promise was made and the Messiah is to be from the line of Solomon, Jesus still doesn't fit. He isn't from the bloodline of Solomon as I showed in Message 129. The adoption theory doesn't change that problem.

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-10-2010 11:03 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 157 by Buzsaw, posted 01-10-2010 1:36 PM purpledawn has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 154 of 427 (542516)
01-10-2010 12:58 PM
Reply to: Message 152 by PaulK
01-10-2010 12:28 PM


Re: Why Change Meaning?
PaulK writes:
You keep saying things like this, but it is hard to see how anybody is ignoring that fact - with the possible exception of the three of you. Perhaps you would like to explain what you mean.
Hi Paulk. The three of us are not ignoring that fact. The prophesied kingdom of God on earth, i.e. the messianic kingdom, i.e. the earthly setup is, nevertheless a spiritual kingdom.
The Lord's Prayer, in fact, enforces my point:
Thy kingdom come; thy will be done on earth as it is in Heaven.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by PaulK, posted 01-10-2010 12:28 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 156 by PaulK, posted 01-10-2010 1:11 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 155 of 427 (542518)
01-10-2010 1:09 PM
Reply to: Message 151 by Buzsaw
01-10-2010 11:37 AM


Earthly Throne
Ezekiel is a new promise. What does that have to do Solomon?
quote:
PD, are you paying attention to the affirmed facts refferenced? Scripture emphatically states that messianic throne and messianic kingdom will be earthly in Jerusalem and on the Temple Mount.
That's what I said. The text does not support the idea of a heavenly throne instead of an earthly one.
Edited by purpledawn, : No reason given.
Edited by purpledawn, : No reason given.

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by Buzsaw, posted 01-10-2010 11:37 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 158 by Buzsaw, posted 01-10-2010 2:07 PM purpledawn has replied
 Message 163 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-10-2010 2:49 PM purpledawn has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 156 of 427 (542519)
01-10-2010 1:11 PM
Reply to: Message 154 by Buzsaw
01-10-2010 12:58 PM


Re: Why Change Meaning?
quote:
Hi Paulk. The three of us are not ignoring that fact. The prophesied kingdom of God on earth, i.e. the messianic kingdom, i.e. the earthly setup is, nevertheless a spiritual kingdom.
I cannot think of anyone else who might be ignoring that fact. After all your personal beliefs aren't even relevant to the arguments put forward by Brian or Purpledawn or myself.
However, it does seem to me that the three of you are trying to argue that the text doesn't mean what it says - which you should not be doing, if you truly believed it to be inspired.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by Buzsaw, posted 01-10-2010 12:58 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 157 of 427 (542525)
01-10-2010 1:36 PM
Reply to: Message 153 by purpledawn
01-10-2010 12:52 PM


Re: Why Change Meaning?
PD writes:
If a new promise was made and the Messiah is to be from the line of Solomon, Jesus still doesn't fit. He isn't from the bloodline of Solomon as I showed in Message 129. The adoption theory doesn't change that problem.
Hi PD. Why don't you factor in all of the corroborating fulfillments relative to Jesus, such as the suffering one of Isaiah 53 -57, cited prophecy concerning his riding in Jerusalem on the foal of an ass and many more in determination on the geneologies?
Sound reasons have been aired relative to the so called adoption legitimacy. He was indeed not adopted nor needed he be, as implied in text.. You need to consider the uniqueness of this birth, having an earthly father, i.e. the son of man, yet conceived by God's Holy Spirit, i.e. son of God. The Jews, in fact, refer to him as the son of the carpenter, Joseph, Joseph's other children as his brothers and sisters. Earlier, when a child, they refer to his parents as Joseph and Mary.
Matthew 13:55 (ASV)
Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joseph, and Simon, and Judas? 13:56And his sisters, are they not all with us?

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by purpledawn, posted 01-10-2010 12:52 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 160 by purpledawn, posted 01-10-2010 2:19 PM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 161 by Iblis, posted 01-10-2010 2:21 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 158 of 427 (542528)
01-10-2010 2:07 PM
Reply to: Message 155 by purpledawn
01-10-2010 1:09 PM


Re: Earthly Throne
PD writes:
Ezekiel is a new promise. What does that have to do Solomon?
It has everything to do with Jehovah's promise to David and Solomon that the throne of Israel would be established forever. We know that Solomon's throne perse would not be a forever throne. Ezekiel and other prophets clarify, if you bother to corroborate and harmonize the pertinent scriptures as I and others have done. You and Brian simply choose to ignore the word forever relative to the promise to Solomon. You should have enough sense to know that Solomon would not live forever and that so many other prophecies, including Jesus himself, emphatically declare that before the throne of the messianic kingdom would happen, Solomon's temporal temple, including his temporal throne would indeed be destroyed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PD writes:
Buzsaw writes:
PD, are you paying attention to the affirmed facts refferenced? Scripture emphatically states that messianic throne and messianic kingdom will be earthly in Jerusalem and on the Temple Mount.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's what I said. The text does not support the idea of a heavenly throne instead of an earthly one.
That's not what I understood you to say, PD. You did not reference the messianic throne which was to be the eternal throne from the line of David. The messianic throne does not reference Solomon's temporal throne. It references the forever throne on earth that Jehovah promised to David and Solomon, Solomon;'s temporal throne being the imminent contemporaneous one which was to be commissioned by David and built by Solomon.
Did you read carefully, all of the pertinent points posted in my message, PD?

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by purpledawn, posted 01-10-2010 1:09 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 159 by PaulK, posted 01-10-2010 2:16 PM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 162 by purpledawn, posted 01-10-2010 2:38 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 159 of 427 (542529)
01-10-2010 2:16 PM
Reply to: Message 158 by Buzsaw
01-10-2010 2:07 PM


Solomon's Temple
quote:
...many other prophecies, including Jesus himself, emphatically declare that before the throne of the messianic kingdom would happen, Solomon's temporal temple, including his temporal throne would indeed be destroyed.
Did you really mean to say that Jesus prophesied the destruction of Solomon's Temple ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by Buzsaw, posted 01-10-2010 2:07 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 160 of 427 (542530)
01-10-2010 2:19 PM
Reply to: Message 157 by Buzsaw
01-10-2010 1:36 PM


Re: Why Change Meaning?
quote:
Hi PD. Why don't you factor in all of the corroborating fulfillments relative to Jesus, such as the suffering one of Isaiah 53 -57, cited prophecy concerning his riding in Jerusalem on the foal of an ass and many more in determination on the geneologies?
Because I was discussing a specific issue with Peg concerning adoption, so my comments were centered on that issue. See Message 125.
Jesus doesn't fit Isaiah 53 either, which has been discussed on this forum ad nauseam.
As for Zechariah, there is more to the prophecy than riding a donkey. Riding a donkey doesn't make one a king. I don't see that the rest of the prophecy fits Jesus either. Jesus didn't rule a kingdom.
Edited by purpledawn, : No reason given.

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by Buzsaw, posted 01-10-2010 1:36 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Iblis
Member (Idle past 3895 days)
Posts: 663
Joined: 11-17-2005


Message 161 of 427 (542531)
01-10-2010 2:21 PM
Reply to: Message 157 by Buzsaw
01-10-2010 1:36 PM


Re: Why Change Meaning?
You need to consider the uniqueness of this birth, having an earthly father, i.e. the son of man, yet conceived by God's Holy Spirit, i.e. son of God.
Does this mean his Y chromosome was that of Joseph? I wanted to ask about that when Son Goku was arguing, but what it would have come down to, would have been, was his X chromosome even that of Mary? Ie, if his body was a special creation in her womb, can we even infer that he shares genetic material with either of his earthly parents?
Is it possible that his genetic make-up was exactly that of a son of David, without regarding to lineage at all? God had such a genetic configuration available for this purpose, which had been allowed to come into being and then taken away before it could receive any use other than as an object lesson to David, namely that of his first conception with Bathsheba.
On the other hand, is it not possible that he could have been the earthly child of Joseph and Mary in a normal genetic sense, and still also be the incarnate God? This makes sense out of the whole virgin / maiden argument, without requiring text torture. Mary hadn't known a man when the angel spoke to her, and had no intention of knowing one, having dedicated her life to God. Her betrothal to Joseph was a technicality, to which most Temple attendants submitted as a safeguard against temptation. She would have been released from it once she graduated from novice to full sister.
But instead God had a plan for her, that didn't correspond to her original idea of what it meant to be his Bride. He needed her to be his Mother. Isn't this a good picture of how God uses us? We submit to him, thinking that that means giving up this or that. Once we submit though, he instead gives us the other thing. Mysterious ways indeeed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by Buzsaw, posted 01-10-2010 1:36 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 162 of 427 (542532)
01-10-2010 2:38 PM
Reply to: Message 158 by Buzsaw
01-10-2010 2:07 PM


Re: Earthly Throne
quote:
You should have enough sense to know that Solomon would not live forever and that so many other prophecies, including Jesus himself, emphatically declare that before the throne of the messianic kingdom would happen, Solomon's temporal temple, including his temporal throne would indeed be destroyed.
Those we have been discussing with know which verse we are referring to and understand that the reference to Solomon's forever refers to his descendants, so we don't have to say descendants each time when referring to Solomon. Please read the previous discussion before attacking my common sense.
Jesus still isn't a descendant of Solomon and the promise made to David was made void due to the disobedience of Solomon's descendants. So if the new promise requires that the messiah be of the bloodline of Solomon, then Jesus still doesn't fit.
quote:
That's not what I understood you to say, PD. You did not reference the messianic throne which was to be the eternal throne from the line of David. The messianic throne does not reference Solomon's temporal throne. It references the forever throne on earth that Jehovah promised to David and Solomon, Solomon;'s temporal throne being the imminent contemporaneous one which was to be commissioned by David and built by Solomon.
I have no idea what you're talking about, which is probably because you don't seem to be addressing the same thing I am. My comments refer to 2 Samuel 7 and the genealogies in the NT. The text in 2 Samuel 7 does not refer to a heavenly throne. If you disagree, then show how the words refer to a heavenly throne.

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by Buzsaw, posted 01-10-2010 2:07 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 163 of 427 (542534)
01-10-2010 2:49 PM
Reply to: Message 155 by purpledawn
01-10-2010 1:09 PM


Re: Earthly Throne
That's what I said. The text does not support the idea of a heavenly throne instead of an earthly one.
Yes it does. if God establishes something through and by someone, how can it be considered anything but spiritual. from what source is its authority?
As i stated before Buz and I have different perspective as to what the kingdom is in a physical form, i believe it is the Church, matt 16, Col 1:17 and he believes it is a future one in jeruselum.
But to me (presently) this is beside the point. Anything God does is spiritual in nature and eternal in character. if Solomon is gone and his kingdom is gone, how is anything God promised to and through David, FOREVER AND EVERLASTING.
IOW, by whos and what authority was this kindom removed, as you believe it was presently. it was given from spiritual sources, maintained by spiritual forces (Gods supernatural intervention to sustain it), then taken away from spiritual places and sources
Secondly, can ANYTHING and I mean anything God does, be considered less than spiritual
While there is certainly a heavenly aspect to Gods existence and KINGDOM, as there can really be nothing else, the earthly part is no less spiritual, becuase heavenly and spiritual have to do with authority first, then position and place. Its source and power determine its true DESIGNATION
Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
Edited by EMA, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by purpledawn, posted 01-10-2010 1:09 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 164 by purpledawn, posted 01-10-2010 3:19 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3457 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 164 of 427 (542538)
01-10-2010 3:19 PM
Reply to: Message 163 by Dawn Bertot
01-10-2010 2:49 PM


Re: Earthly Throne
quote:
Yes it does. if God establishes something through and by someone, how can it be considered anything but spiritual. from what source is its authority?
The spirit is not something that exists outside the human body. The throne spoken of in 2 Samuel 7:13 is a physical throne with a physical earthly king. Show me that the words say otherwise.
He is the one who will build a house for my Name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever.
quote:
As i stated before Buz and I have different perspective as to what the kingdom is in a physical form, i believe it is the Church, matt 16, Col 1:17 and he believes it is a future one in jeruselum.
I'm not comparing you and Buz, so I don't really care what you two do agree or don't agree on. Don't take my response to him as a response to you and vice versa.
quote:
if Solomon is gone and his kingdom is gone, how is anything God promised to and through David, FOREVER AND EVERLASTING.
As I said several times, the forever was contingent upon behavior. See Message 131.
quote:
IOW, by whos and what authority was this kindom removed, as you believe it was presently.
God giveth and God taketh away.
quote:
Secondly, can ANYTHING and I mean anything God does, be considered less than spiritual
Irrelevant. 2 Samuel 7:13 does not refer to a heavenly throne.

Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
-- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 163 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-10-2010 2:49 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 165 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-10-2010 3:22 PM purpledawn has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 165 of 427 (542539)
01-10-2010 3:22 PM
Reply to: Message 164 by purpledawn
01-10-2010 3:19 PM


Re: Earthly Throne
Irrelevant. 2 Samuel 7:13 does not refer to a heavenly throne.
you have not addressed any of my previous points concerinng authority and source and you are avoiding the point

This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by purpledawn, posted 01-10-2010 3:19 PM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 166 by PaulK, posted 01-10-2010 3:31 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied
 Message 167 by purpledawn, posted 01-10-2010 6:33 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024