Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8926 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-21-2019 8:31 PM
26 online now:
DrJones*, dwise1, kjsimons, Theodoric (4 members, 22 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jedothek
Post Volume:
Total: 860,199 Year: 15,235/19,786 Month: 1,958/3,058 Week: 332/404 Day: 50/96 Hour: 1/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
2
3456
...
15NextFF
Author Topic:   Jews Rejected God's Offer
JasonChin 
Inactive Suspended Member


Message 16 of 219 (162266)
11-22-2004 7:15 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by arachnophilia
11-22-2004 6:59 AM


Re: A matter of opinion and belief
For the sake of argument, let's say some of the prophecies that Jesus fulfilled weren't really there to begin with.......still, there certainly are a great number of prophecies that he did fulfill, and the rest he still CAN fulfill.

Therefore, there's no scriptural obstacle for His divinity.

if you want to discuss more, i suggest starting a new thread.

Go for it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by arachnophilia, posted 11-22-2004 6:59 AM arachnophilia has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by arachnophilia, posted 11-22-2004 7:26 AM JasonChin has not yet responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 207 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 17 of 219 (162267)
11-22-2004 7:21 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by JasonChin
11-22-2004 6:56 AM


Re: A matter of opinion and belief
The Bible never states that Messiah would be the rightful heir to David's throne via heredity, just that he'd be of David's bloodline.

actually, the bible never states that the messiah will be of david's bloodline, if you want to be technical about it. so why do matthew and luke go through hoops to make david the ancestor of jesus?

because the jews at the time were looking for a messiah who would be an heir to throne of david. the new testament is evidence of this. if this wasn't the case, they'd totally ignore the bloodline, like mark and john do.

I doubt this, as there have been a number of though-to-be Messiahs over the course of Jewish history, and I don't recall them all being named Immanuel. After all, a mother would be accused of blasphemy simply by naming her child Immanuel and claiming that he was the Messiah (as Jesus was accused of blasphemy for claiming the same thing).

no, jesus was accused of blasphemy because he was called the son of god.

if immanuel existed, it was in the intertestamental period. as i said, he would have liberated israel from assyria. there's a period of several hundred years in which the writing of the bible is closed. in jewish circles, it still is closed. it is not blasphemy to name a child with a statement about god. lots of people do it today.

My Bible says "God with us", and I've always been taught by every source that it was a name specifically suggesting the divinity of Messiah........I may have been taught incorrectly, but I'd need some proof of that.

look, even if the word "is" is not present, it still does not denote that the bearer is divine. it just means that god is with us again, and that we will prevail over the assyrians. the child is a symbol for the presence of god, yes. but the child is not god.

this is a traditional christian reading, and it's WRONG in every respect. the implication of divinity was a later addition, because it was said to denote christ. it cannot denote christ because christ existed AFTER the israelites were released from assyria.

if it does mean the bearer is god, than some other guy hundreds of years before jesus was god incarnate, and not jesus.

BTW, if I'm not mistaken, there are other prophecies suggesting the divinity of Messiah.......such as that he'd live forever and his kingdom would never end.

human beings can be granted immortality. read genesis 3.

Revelations speaks of Jesus conquering Babylon........does that mean when Jesus returns, he's gonna literally conquer Iraq? Because I think Dubbya beat him to it........

maybe george w. bush is the second coming of christ? (the anti-christ, maybe...)

revelation is 100% symbolic. it's a code to the christian church in rome, when it was still quite illegal to oppose the roman emporer by being a christian. babylon = rome, because in both instances believers were forced to die for their beliefs.

That's because the Jews misinterpret scripture by being too literal......

uh, no, that award goes to the christians. most jews actually read most of the bible very liberally, allowing for errors, and allegory. it's just that most of the rest of the world is capable of reading things in context, and the context does not indicate what the christian churches say it does.

I don't know anything about this, but I'm pretty sure that was after large portions of the Talmud were already taken as Canon.

the talmud is not canon. the ketuvim (psalms, proverbs, etc) is barely considered canon. just because beliefs are commonly held and interpretations run rampant does not mean the text is canon. every christian thinks there was a war in heaven before creation, and lucifer/satan fell, where he tempted adam in the garden of eden. does that mean that milton's "paradise lost" is canon? this story is found there, not in the bible.

and it was after constantine's conversion.

If you admit this, then you admit that there is no obstacle in the OT to Jesus being the Messiah.

What you just seem to have a hard time understanding is that Jesus is the Christ NOW........Jesus was Christ before the creation of the world.........not all prophecy has been fulfilled, but Jesus is Christ, and God is God, always has been, is, and forever more He will be.

you're mistaking my argument for personal belief. i'm a christian. i'm arguing why jewish people don't agree.

and no, there is little to no indication of jesus in the old testament. i will happy to discuss ever verse that you think mentions him in another thread.

This is obviously impossible........do you think Matthew was too dim to understand this?

i hope not, but that's what it says. whether or not he actually sat on both, i don't care. the point is that matthew was too dim to understand that zechariah was refering to only one animal, with the standard poetic device of basically EVERY jewish poet at the time.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by JasonChin, posted 11-22-2004 6:56 AM JasonChin has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by YesthisisTrue, posted 11-23-2004 4:49 AM arachnophilia has responded

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 1686 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 18 of 219 (162268)
11-22-2004 7:21 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Thugpreacha
11-21-2004 10:47 PM


Re: A matter of opinion and belief
quote:
We could examine the prophecies concerning the Messiah, but that would involve a new thread.
No it wouldn't. I asked to be shown. So go for it.

NOTE: If you do present prophecy, please present one at a time in separate posts and put the passage number in the title. This will keep it straight when people are discussing specific prophecies. I also ask that if you or anyone else discussing a prophecy decides to remove themselves from the debate, please let us know.

quote:
From morning till evening he explained and declared to them the kingdom of God and tried to convince them about Jesus from the Law of Moses and from the Prophets. Some were convinced by what he said, but others would not believe.
So Paul presented the offer to the Jews? Show me what Paul showed them.

Isaiah 6:9-10 Tanach
9 And He said: 'Go, and tell this people: hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not. 10 Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they, seeing with their eyes, and hearing with their ears, and understanding with their heart, return, and be healed.'

Isaiah 6:9-10 Complete Jewish Bible
..."Yes, you hear, but you don't understand. You certainly see, but you don't get the point!"

Paul's quote is a bit different than Isaiah itself.

Isaiah 10 is saying God caused their (Jews) hearts to be calloused, stopped up their ears, and shut their eyes so they couldn't repent.

Acts 28:28
"Therefore I want you to know that God's salvation has been sent to the Gentiles, and they will listen!"

When did God give Paul this revelation? When did God ordain Paul to speak for him?

quote:
Rom 11:7-21
What Israel sought so earnestly it did not obtain, but the elect did. The others were hardened, as it is written:
"God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes so that they could not see and ears so that they could not hear, to this very day."
Show me what Israel was seeking and did not obtain. Who are the elect and what did they obtain?

Isaiah 29:10 Tanach
10 For the LORD hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep, and hath closed your eyes; the prophets, and your heads, the seers, hath He covered.

Isaiah 29:10 NIV
The Lord has brought over you a deep sleep: He has sealed your eyes (the prophets); he has covered your heads (the seers).

Again Paul's quote not really the same as Isaiah.

Matthew 15:24
He answered, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel."

Exactly! So since Jesus was only sent to the lost sheep of Israel, the righteous were already prepared for the Kingdom of God, judgment day, and weren't required to "believe in Jesus" since he wasn't there for them.

Show me where God says that the Messiah was only going to be sent to the lost of Israel?

quote:
Again, I must emphasize: The Jews individually each had a chance to accept the Messiah, and, many did. As a nation, however, they were cut off after they rejected, as a nation, the Messiah.
Please explain to me what "accepting the Messiah" means within the timeframe of Jesus, not present day.

Then show me where God explains to the Jewish people, before the death of Jesus, that if they individually or as a "group" do not accept the Messiah that God will cast them aside.

Paul supposedly presented his case from the Tanach, you should be able to do the same.


A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Thugpreacha, posted 11-21-2004 10:47 PM Thugpreacha has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Thugpreacha, posted 11-22-2004 10:34 AM purpledawn has responded
 Message 39 by YesthisisTrue, posted 11-23-2004 5:01 AM purpledawn has not yet responded
 Message 40 by YesthisisTrue, posted 11-23-2004 5:02 AM purpledawn has not yet responded
 Message 41 by YesthisisTrue, posted 11-23-2004 5:02 AM purpledawn has not yet responded

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 207 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 19 of 219 (162270)
11-22-2004 7:26 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by JasonChin
11-22-2004 7:15 AM


Re: A matter of opinion and belief
For the sake of argument, let's say some of the prophecies that Jesus fulfilled weren't really there to begin with.......

no, they were there. it's that they weren't refering to anything like jesus. something refering to liberation from the assyrians cannot apply to christ.

it can be symbolically linked, sure. jesus is yehoshua, or joshua. in the torah/nevi'im, it's joshua who brings the sons of israel into the promised land, over the jordan river. this is not prophesy, but the name of jesus is linked to this story. and that's a powerful connection.

but it's not fulfilling the words of the prophet moses when he said "Be strong and of a good courage: for thou shalt bring the children of Israel into the land which I sware unto them: and I will be with thee. "

understand what i mean?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by JasonChin, posted 11-22-2004 7:15 AM JasonChin has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by lfen, posted 11-23-2004 11:37 AM arachnophilia has responded

  
Thugpreacha
Member
Posts: 12683
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 20 of 219 (162307)
11-22-2004 10:13 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by arachnophilia
11-22-2004 4:20 AM


Re: A matter of opinion and belief
Aracnophilia writes:

the immanuel prophesy was indeed messianic, but did jesus liberate israel from the assyrians? no, he was several hundred years after that. the prophesy is not talking about him.

The type of liberation that Jesus did is a spiritual liberation. The Jewish people were looking for a natural concrete liberation from the oppression on earth, rather than a spiritual liberation from the unclean spirits which bound humanity since the Fall.
Arachnophilia writes:

jesus was not a king, he never sat on a throne.

A matter of belief. Jesus sits on a throne today and always.
Matt 21:1
The explicit instructions of Jesus regarding the ass and colt indicate the significance of the event. On other occassions Jesus had usually walked, and here the distance was not more than two miles. 4,5. Fulfillment of Zech 9:9 was the motivation for this act, although the disciples were unaware of it before the Resurrection (John 12:16). Jews generally regarded the passage as Messianic (Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus, II, 736). 6-8. Both animals were brought (the ass being needed to quiet the previously unridden colt), but all the Evangelists testify that Jesus rode the colt. Some from the multitude spread their garments on the path as a mark of homage to him whom they now acclaimed as King (2 Kings 9:13). Others strewed palm fronds in the way (John 12:13). The ass was a lowly beast, and no Jewish king since Solomon had ridden upon one officially. But meekness and lowliness were earmarks of Messiah predicted by Zechariah, and now fulfilled
(from The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, Electronic Database. Copyright (c) 1962 by Moody Press)
Do you as a serious student of the Bible disagree with Wycliffe?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by arachnophilia, posted 11-22-2004 4:20 AM arachnophilia has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by macaroniandcheese, posted 11-22-2004 6:58 PM Thugpreacha has not yet responded
 Message 32 by arachnophilia, posted 11-22-2004 10:58 PM Thugpreacha has not yet responded
 Message 64 by ramoss, posted 11-23-2004 6:46 PM Thugpreacha has not yet responded

  
Thugpreacha
Member
Posts: 12683
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 21 of 219 (162314)
11-22-2004 10:34 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by purpledawn
11-22-2004 7:21 AM


Re: A matter of opinion and belief
purpledawn writes:

Show me what Israel was seeking and did not obtain.

Rom 11:7-10
What was it that Israel strove for which she did not obtain? Paul has already answered this in Rom 9:32 and 10:3. Israel strove for righteousness. But instead of submitting to the righteousness of God, she sought to establish her own.
--------------------
Jesus did come from the lineage of David. Simon Greenleaf was one of the founders of the Harvard Law School. He wrote the famous three volume set, A Treatise on the Law of Evidence, still considered as one of the best authoritative sources on the subject. Greenleaf was once a skeptic concerning Biblical evidence of the Resurrection and using his own methodologies, concluded the evidence as overwhelming. Need we dismiss a Harvard professor so lightly?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by purpledawn, posted 11-22-2004 7:21 AM purpledawn has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by lfen, posted 11-22-2004 11:57 AM Thugpreacha has responded
 Message 26 by purpledawn, posted 11-22-2004 3:52 PM Thugpreacha has responded
 Message 65 by ramoss, posted 11-23-2004 6:47 PM Thugpreacha has not yet responded
 Message 66 by ramoss, posted 11-23-2004 6:51 PM Thugpreacha has responded

  
lfen
Member (Idle past 2906 days)
Posts: 2189
From: Oregon
Joined: 06-24-2004


Message 22 of 219 (162338)
11-22-2004 11:57 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by Thugpreacha
11-22-2004 10:34 AM


Re: A matter of opinion and belief
His field was law. A court of law is rather different from a peer review by experts in one's field. Greenleaf's arguments should be evaluated on their merits of course. He wrote in the 1800 so didn't have recent evidence.I would say that we would need historians of the period to give accounts from Jewish as well as Christian and pagan sources.

The church created a dogma for various purposes having to do with struggles between different groups. At the core of religion may be experiences of something beyond the ego, but the dreary dogmas of free will, Satan,heaven, hell and who's righteous and who isn't is secular politics played out by theocratic priests striving for control.

That Christianity was adopted by Constantine is historically well documented. The further back from that event the more difficult it becomes to document what was going on in the various sects of Judaism, Christianity being a sect of Judaism that was adopted by some gentiles. By the time we get to trying to find a historical Jesus not much is there. The mythical Jesus of the church has been well established culturally for over a thousand years.

Religious theories are much easier to create than scientific ones and basically don't have requirements of proof. This can be seen in modern times with the Moonies, the flying saucer stuff, etc. People find it easy to create religions and believe in them. And by the way the flying saucer people did die for their belief that they would be taken on board the comet, so early Christian martyrs are not unique in that.

The Jews and Christians had a power struggle over interpretation, practise, etc. Each side claiming they represented God. But I think the divinity doesn't need representation. The laws of gravity work beautifully without need of advocacy. I wish people would stop attributing their religions to the source of the universe. It's tacky to assume the source of gravity and quantum mechanics etc. would create such a botched job as Bibles, Korans, and religion in general.

lfen


This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Thugpreacha, posted 11-22-2004 10:34 AM Thugpreacha has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Thugpreacha, posted 11-22-2004 12:11 PM lfen has responded

  
Thugpreacha
Member
Posts: 12683
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 23 of 219 (162341)
11-22-2004 12:11 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by lfen
11-22-2004 11:57 AM


Re: A matter of opinion and belief
Ifen writes:

A court of law is rather different from a peer review by experts in one's field.

So what field are you speaking of, Ifen? There is much documentation from educated professionals regarding the accuracy and meaning of scripture. I keep hearing refutations, yet I see no documented evidence by these "experts" whom you mention.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by lfen, posted 11-22-2004 11:57 AM lfen has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by lfen, posted 11-22-2004 12:33 PM Thugpreacha has responded

  
lfen
Member (Idle past 2906 days)
Posts: 2189
From: Oregon
Joined: 06-24-2004


Message 24 of 219 (162345)
11-22-2004 12:33 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Thugpreacha
11-22-2004 12:11 PM


Re: A matter of opinion and belief
So what field are you speaking of, Ifen? There is much documentation from educated professionals regarding the accuracy and meaning of scripture. I keep hearing refutations, yet I see no documented evidence by these "experts" whom you mention.

I'll quote my post that you were responding to.

I would say that we would need historians of the period to give accounts from Jewish as well as Christian and pagan sources.

The field I'm speaking of is history.

lfen


This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Thugpreacha, posted 11-22-2004 12:11 PM Thugpreacha has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Thugpreacha, posted 11-22-2004 4:38 PM lfen has not yet responded

  
Amlodhi
Inactive Member


Message 25 of 219 (162374)
11-22-2004 2:33 PM


One orthodox Jew talking to another orthodox Jew:

Jew #1 > "I don't understand it. I raise my son up in orthodox Judaism and then the first thing I know he's into this Christianity thing. Do you have any advice for me?"

Jew #2 > "Funny you should ask me. I had the same trouble with my son."

Jew #1 > "What did you do?"

Jew #2 > "I asked God for advice."

Jew #1 > "What did he say?"

Jew #2 > "He said, 'Funny you should ask me . . .


Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by arachnophilia, posted 11-22-2004 11:01 PM Amlodhi has not yet responded

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 1686 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 26 of 219 (162394)
11-22-2004 3:52 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by Thugpreacha
11-22-2004 10:34 AM


Righteousness
quote:
Rom 11:7-10
What was it that Israel strove for which she did not obtain? Paul has already answered this in Rom 9:32 and 10:3. Israel strove for righteousness. But instead of submitting to the righteousness of God, she sought to establish her own.

Romans 9:31-32
but Israel, who pursued a law of righteousness, has not attained it. Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works....

Unfortunately, all you are giving me is Paul's opinion and belief. What backs up Paul's opinion besides Paul.

Show me that the Jews had not attained a law of righteousness.

Exodus 33:19
...I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

Torah
19And He answered, I will make all My goodness pass before you, and I will proclaim before you the name Lord, (Lit. My face will go and I will.)and the grace that I grant and the compassion that I show. (Lit. My face will go and I will.)

And to this Paul said:

Romans 9:16
It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy.

Then he quotes what God told Moses to say to Pharoh:

Exodus 9:16
But I have raised you up for this very purpose, that I might show you my power and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.

God also told Moses:

10:1-2
Then the Lord said to Moses, "Go to Pharaoh, for I have hardened his heart and the hearts of his officials so that I may perform these miracuous signs of mine among them that you may tell your children and grandchildren how I dealt harshly with the Egyptians and how I performed my signs among them, and that you may know that I am the Lord."

And Paul concludes:

Romans 9:18
Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden....

So did the Jews or any of us truly have a choice?

You still haven't shown me what scripture from the OT Paul used to support his Gospel.


A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Thugpreacha, posted 11-22-2004 10:34 AM Thugpreacha has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Thugpreacha, posted 11-22-2004 4:23 PM purpledawn has responded

  
Thugpreacha
Member
Posts: 12683
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 27 of 219 (162402)
11-22-2004 4:23 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by purpledawn
11-22-2004 3:52 PM


Re: Righteousness
You still haven't shown me what scripture from the OT Paul used to support his Gospel.
You are asking me to "prove" Paul? Lets flip it, then. What "learned" scholars are there who are refuting Paul? Granted that I am assuming Paul to be accurate as many scholars have done. I don't have time to dig all this stuff up!
Unfortunately, all you are giving me is Paul's opinion and belief. What backs up Paul's opinion besides Paul.
So, obviously, you are in the camp that sees no inerrency in scripture. This is not a field of my expertise, obviously. Show me the "experts" who have suggested rewriting history and dismissing Biblical authority and authenticity so easily. From my view, the burden of proof is not on scripture. The scriptures are as valid of a historical record of that time that we have. It is one thing to dismiss them, yet there is no other writings that even approach them in authenticity. The burden of proof is on the claim that suggests that the scriptures are inaccurate.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by purpledawn, posted 11-22-2004 3:52 PM purpledawn has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by purpledawn, posted 11-22-2004 7:26 PM Thugpreacha has not yet responded

  
Thugpreacha
Member
Posts: 12683
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 28 of 219 (162408)
11-22-2004 4:38 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by lfen
11-22-2004 12:33 PM


Re: A matter of opinion and belief
Ifen writes:

The field I'm speaking of is history.


The Bible is the primary source reference to the history of that era that we have. We have little else. We have no transcriptions of messages from Roman governors to Rome concerning any matters of the day. Justin Martyr wrote corroborations of scripture in A.D. 150. Tertullian also boldly wrote using scriptures as evidence. In that these men were writing to the governing officials of that day, why would they risk their reputations inaccurately naming sources?
If we start with the rational assumption that scripture IS our record, we can verify the fact from there. If we start with the irrational assumption that scripture was contrived and that the defense of scripture, other scripture, equates to circular reasoning,
we have NOTHING but our own relativistic opinions to guess what history was like. Little was written about Jesus apart from scripture because, from the Roman point of view, Jesus was a nobody. A commoner. Nothing was important except Caesar!
I will say that from a Jewish point of view, Jesus was a misguided teacher. Either the largest "cult" in history sprang up from a myth, an irrational supposition and insult to human passion, or more likely this Jesus chap had some influence!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by lfen, posted 11-22-2004 12:33 PM lfen has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by jar, posted 11-22-2004 5:35 PM Thugpreacha has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 31180
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 29 of 219 (162421)
11-22-2004 5:35 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by Thugpreacha
11-22-2004 4:38 PM


Can you walk awhile with an old man?
Question?

If you and I made a deal, a pact, would you expect me to honor it?


Aslan is not a Tame Lion
This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Thugpreacha, posted 11-22-2004 4:38 PM Thugpreacha has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by Thugpreacha, posted 11-23-2004 12:28 AM jar has responded

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 2157 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 30 of 219 (162425)
11-22-2004 6:58 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Thugpreacha
11-22-2004 10:13 AM


Re: A matter of opinion and belief
is wycliffe the voice of god now, then?

why do people pay so much attention to people who interpret the bible and no attention to the bible itself? it's not that hard to read!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Thugpreacha, posted 11-22-2004 10:13 AM Thugpreacha has not yet responded

  
Prev1
2
3456
...
15NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019