- This topic has 3,120 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 8 months ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (journey42 @ Oct. 22 2013,04:42) So it was inside him, and also next to him. It went everywhere with him.
Hi journey,I have never thought that Jesus was God – but thanks for the lesson anyway.
Look at the words you wrote in the quote box above, and then answer this simple question:
If the Word was “inside God” and “next to God”, how could the Word also BE God?
Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Oct. 22 2013,13:48) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 22 2013,10:59)
Gene,Did the Father God Almighty Himself become flesh and dwell on earth with the glory of His own only begotten Son? YES or NO?
No……….
And yet the Word DID become flesh and dwell on earth with the glory of God's only begotten Son, right?Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 22 2013,17:16) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 21 2013,05:33) Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 17 2013,11:19) I point out that your insistence that you go by the literal interpretation of the statement “the word was made flesh” put you in conflict with a literal interpretation of the words ” Jesus came in the flesh”. Can you explain how your interpretations of those two passages are not in conflict?
Already explained, Kerwin. If God causes an already existing spirit being to be born from the womb of a human woman, both of these things can be said about that spirit being:1. He was made flesh.
2. He came in the flesh.
The only contradiction is in your own mind – and the contradiction in your own mind is cause by personal desires.
In other words, you are creating a “problem” when in reality, none exists.
Mike,You need to show more work instead of leaving me to figure out the connections especial if I am taking the position of not knowing that connection.
Show my work?
Kerwin, I have no time for games. If and when you get around to addressing those nine points from before, we can get to the “show my work” portion of the discussion.
Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 22 2013,17:12) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 21 2013,05:39)
Like I've said, I don't require ONLY a YES or a NO. You are free to explain your YES or NO in as many words as you like………………… AS LONG AS THE ANSWERS START WITH A “YES” OR A “NO”.
Mike,Oops! Sorry, I thought you did require a yes or no.
I do. I'm saying that you can EXPLAIN your “YES” or “NO” however you want to………. as long as there IS a YES or a NO as part of each of the nine points.You can even break them down, and do one point at a time if you want.
Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 22 2013,18:40) we going to have patience for WAKEUP to answer our question, Mike
I'm befuddled by journey's and Wakeup's hesitance to directly answer my simple questions.I asked them if “God” became “Not God”, and they won't just say YES or NO. Instead, they keep explaining a million other unrelated things, or keep going over the same thing again and again – but never end up answering the simple question I actually asked.
You and I know that if the Word was actually the being of God Almighty Himself, then God Almighty Himself “became flesh”.
On the other hand, if the Word WASN'T God Almighty Himself, then the translation “and the Word was God” is faulty.
The only other option is that the Word WAS God Almighty Himself at first, but then became something or someone other than God Almighty Himself before being made flesh. But that would mean that “God” became “Not God”.
So the only option that actually works is that the Word never was God Almighty Himself, but a different being who dwelled WITH God Almighty Himself in the beginning, and then was made flesh.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 23 2013,07:15) Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 22 2013,18:40) we going to have patience for WAKEUP to answer our question, Mike
I'm befuddled by journey's and Wakeup's hesitance to directly answer my simple questions.I asked them if “God” became “Not God”, and they won't just say YES or NO. Instead, they keep explaining a million other unrelated things, or keep going over the same thing again and again – but never end up answering the simple question I actually asked.
You and I know that if the Word was actually the being of God Almighty Himself, then God Almighty Himself “became flesh”.
On the other hand, if the Word WASN'T God Almighty Himself, then the translation “and the Word was God” is faulty.
The only other option is that the Word WAS God Almighty Himself at first, but then became something or someone other than God Almighty Himself before being made flesh. But that would mean that “God” became “Not God”.
So the only option that actually works is that the Word never was God Almighty Himself, but a different being who dwelled WITH God Almighty Himself in the beginning, and then was made flesh.
Mikeit is difficult for them because they have that believe that unless you give that explanation to make some of the scriptures fit ,but then they are breaking some other scriptures and so on ,and that is why they should throw what they know ;and start from scratch ;with the scriptures only ;and reject what they can not prove by other scriptures ;
but this i think is hard to do for some ,
Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 23 2013,01:40) Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 22 2013,18:36) Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 22 2013,23:23) Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 22 2013,18:12) Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 22 2013,22:32) j42 Quote So what I was trying to relay in my previous post is that God's Word became flesh and not God himself. The Word was just that before Christ. The Word.
When the Word became flesh and changed to the form of a man, a new creation came to be,how come that Paul mist this explanation in his letters or did he
were is it say so in his letters
Terra.Paul did not explain about the word of God.
But john did.
God and his Word had no beginning.
John said in the beginning was the Word.This was when God's Word was *beginning* to be used by God to create. God was beginning to speak out his Word.
After God brought forth his Word,a *living being*.They had glory together in creating.
What God wants said,His Word speaks out.
God spoke and it stood fast.wakeup.
Quote They had glory together in creating.
What God wants said,His Word speaks out.
God spoke and it stood fast.if this is true ;WHY DID IT TOOK SO LONG TO CREATE ALL THINGS
Terra.Why did it took so long in creating all things?
God has his plan worked out accordingly.
Man had to multiply from generation to generation.
This takes time.
While evil has to grow from bad to worse,
all this takes time.
The seed of evil was sown in the garden,and the time of harvesting the evil; is at the time of the harvest.(rev 14:18–20).wakeup.
it seems you are accommodating yourself to your own understanding ;God commanded and all who was part of it took their part of it ,
Ge 1:26 Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, in our likeness
WHO HIS THE “US” AND WHO HIS THE “OUR”
Terra.The *US*and *OUR* are God and his Word; that God had *brought forth* out of himself before the world was.
God's Word,*now* a shaped Being next to God.
And they had glory together; creating and creating.wakeup.
Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 22 2013,04:52) all WHY IS SO DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND THAT ” WORDS DO NOT EXIST UNTIL THEY ARE SPOKEN ;” AND IF THE “WORD “IN JOHN1-1
ARE WORDS AND NOT “THE SPOKESMAN ” OF GOD THEN GOD COULD NOT SPEAK UNTIL HE CREATED HIS OWN VOICE ,
Terra.I agree with you here.
wakeup.
Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 23 2013,08:41) Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 22 2013,04:52) all WHY IS SO DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND THAT ” WORDS DO NOT EXIST UNTIL THEY ARE SPOKEN ;” AND IF THE “WORD “IN JOHN1-1
ARE WORDS AND NOT “THE SPOKESMAN ” OF GOD THEN GOD COULD NOT SPEAK UNTIL HE CREATED HIS OWN VOICE ,
Terra.I agree with you here.
wakeup.
You agree on the first or second part of my quote
Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 23 2013,08:39) Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 23 2013,01:40) Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 22 2013,18:36) Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 22 2013,23:23) Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 22 2013,18:12) Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 22 2013,22:32) j42 Quote So what I was trying to relay in my previous post is that God's Word became flesh and not God himself. The Word was just that before Christ. The Word.
When the Word became flesh and changed to the form of a man, a new creation came to be,how come that Paul mist this explanation in his letters or did he
were is it say so in his letters
Terra.Paul did not explain about the word of God.
But john did.
God and his Word had no beginning.
John said in the beginning was the Word.This was when God's Word was *beginning* to be used by God to create. God was beginning to speak out his Word.
After God brought forth his Word,a *living being*.They had glory together in creating.
What God wants said,His Word speaks out.
God spoke and it stood fast.wakeup.
Quote They had glory together in creating.
What God wants said,His Word speaks out.
God spoke and it stood fast.if this is true ;WHY DID IT TOOK SO LONG TO CREATE ALL THINGS
Terra.Why did it took so long in creating all things?
God has his plan worked out accordingly.
Man had to multiply from generation to generation.
This takes time.
While evil has to grow from bad to worse,
all this takes time.
The seed of evil was sown in the garden,and the time of harvesting the evil; is at the time of the harvest.(rev 14:18–20).wakeup.
it seems you are accommodating yourself to your own understanding ;God commanded and all who was part of it took their part of it ,
Ge 1:26 Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, in our likeness
WHO HIS THE “US” AND WHO HIS THE “OUR”
Terra.The *US*and *OUR* are God and his Word; that God had *brought forth* out of himself before the world was.
God's Word,*now* a shaped Being next to God.
And they had glory together; creating and creating.wakeup.
So who his The WordQuote (terraricca @ Oct. 23 2013,14:25) Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 23 2013,08:41) Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 22 2013,04:52) all WHY IS SO DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND THAT ” WORDS DO NOT EXIST UNTIL THEY ARE SPOKEN ;” AND IF THE “WORD “IN JOHN1-1
ARE WORDS AND NOT “THE SPOKESMAN ” OF GOD THEN GOD COULD NOT SPEAK UNTIL HE CREATED HIS OWN VOICE ,
Terra.I agree with you here.
wakeup.
You agree on the first or second part of my quote
Terra.I agree with this, your statement.
Words does not exist untill spoken.wakeup.
Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 23 2013,14:26) Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 23 2013,08:39) Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 23 2013,01:40) Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 22 2013,18:36) Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 22 2013,23:23) Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 22 2013,18:12) Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 22 2013,22:32) j42 Quote So what I was trying to relay in my previous post is that God's Word became flesh and not God himself. The Word was just that before Christ. The Word.
When the Word became flesh and changed to the form of a man, a new creation came to be,how come that Paul mist this explanation in his letters or did he
were is it say so in his letters
Terra.Paul did not explain about the word of God.
But john did.
God and his Word had no beginning.
John said in the beginning was the Word.This was when God's Word was *beginning* to be used by God to create. God was beginning to speak out his Word.
After God brought forth his Word,a *living being*.They had glory together in creating.
What God wants said,His Word speaks out.
God spoke and it stood fast.wakeup.
Quote They had glory together in creating.
What God wants said,His Word speaks out.
God spoke and it stood fast.if this is true ;WHY DID IT TOOK SO LONG TO CREATE ALL THINGS
Terra.Why did it took so long in creating all things?
God has his plan worked out accordingly.
Man had to multiply from generation to generation.
This takes time.
While evil has to grow from bad to worse,
all this takes time.
The seed of evil was sown in the garden,and the time of harvesting the evil; is at the time of the harvest.(rev 14:18–20).wakeup.
it seems you are accommodating yourself to your own understanding ;God commanded and all who was part of it took their part of it ,
Ge 1:26 Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, in our likeness
WHO HIS THE “US” AND WHO HIS THE “OUR”
Terra.The *US*and *OUR* are God and his Word; that God had *brought forth* out of himself before the world was.
God's Word,*now* a shaped Being next to God.
And they had glory together; creating and creating.wakeup.
So who his The Word
Terra.Who is the Word?
The Word is God's Word.
His spoken Word,his breath,his Word formed into his own image. A living being next to God.
He was inside God,untill God brought him out of himself.Now there is God and his living Word in the shape of his own image. It was HE that was made flesh.
Born of a woman: now only given the name Jesus.wakeup.
Mike,
I have heard the claim that after Jesus went to so much effort to proof he was not a spirit but flesh and bone he then changed into a spirit. Wakeup is only trying to speculate on a reason that an absurd claim might be reasonable. What Jesus was doing it giving proofs he was alive and not a ghost, who could not be touched or eat. As far as I can tell the Koine Greek, unlike the English, language does not use use pneuma to mean supernatural creature but instead use daimonion for that purpose.
It seems some believe angels are immaterial and take on flesh and bone at will and so are are called the plural of pneuma in Scripture. Unlike them you believe angels have a body and don't just put it on for a show.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 23 2013,07:05) Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 22 2013,17:12) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 21 2013,05:39)
Like I've said, I don't require ONLY a YES or a NO. You are free to explain your YES or NO in as many words as you like………………… AS LONG AS THE ANSWERS START WITH A “YES” OR A “NO”.
Mike,Oops! Sorry, I thought you did require a yes or no.
I do. I'm saying that you can EXPLAIN your “YES” or “NO” however you want to………. as long as there IS a YES or a NO as part of each of the nine points.You can even break them down, and do one point at a time if you want.
Mike,I am doing a poor job of communicating because I am not putting all my thoughts into words. I thought it was a strict yes or no without an explanation you demanded. I think I finally got it right.
Mike,
Quote The NET scholars don't think the disciples were still in actual disbelief……. and therefore, the eating wasn't a “proof” of anything. So these net scholars are saying that “they did not believe” does not mean “they did not believe” because of their reason for not believing.
That does not sound like a credible claim by whoever voices it as I do not see God accepting that excuse for not believing.
Not Barnes.
Quote Barnes' Notes on the Bible
Behold my hands … – Jesus proceeds to give them evidence that he was truly the same person that had been crucified. He first showed them his hands and his feet – still, pierced, and with the wounds made by the nails still open. Compare John 20:27. He told them to handle him and see him. He ate before them. All this was to satisfy them that he was not, as they supposed, a spirit. Nor could better evidence have been given. He appealed to their senses, and performed acts which a disembodied spirit could not do.Nor Clark.
Quote Clarke's Commentary on the Bible
And supposed that they had seen a spirit – But if there be no such thing as a disembodied spirit, would not our Lord have shown them their error? Instead of this, he confirms them in their opinion, by saying, A spirit hath not flesh and bones as you see me have, Luke 24:39; therefore he says, handle me and see me. They probably imagined that it was the soul only of our blessed Lord which they saw; but they were soon fully convinced of the identity of his person, and the reality of his resurrection; for,1. They saw his body.
2. They heard him speak.
3. They handled him.
4. They saw him eat a piece of broiled fish and honeycomb, which they gave him.
In these things it was impossible for them to have been deceived.
Gill does not speak of the food but he does make the point spirits cannot be touched as they have no “solid substance” to be touched.
Quote Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
Behold my hands, and my feet,…. The Evangelist John adds, “and side”; that is, the prints of the nails and spear, in his hands, and feet, and side; and the wounds they made there, and the scars they left behind; by which they might be convinced he was not a spirit, and be assured of the truth of his resurrection, and that in the same numerical body in which he suffered; as well as that it might be observed by them how great was his love to them, to endure what he did for them.Handle me and see; or know by feeling, as well as by sight; so that if the one was not sufficient, the other might confirm; sight might be deceived, but feeling could not: Apollonius Tyaneus, to them that did not know whether he was alive or dead, and who took him for a spirit, proposed himself to be touched, and handled, that they might be convinced (z):
for a spirit hath not flesh and bones; nothing but appearance, or air at most; no solid substance to be felt and handled:
as ye see me have; or may perceive, both by sight and feeling.
(z) Philostratus de Vita Apollon. l. 8, c. 5.
Pulpit does the same.
Quote Pulpit Commentary
Verse 39. – Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. “See,” he says, inviting the terror-stricken disciples to a calm, unaffrighted contemplation – “see my hands and my feet pierced with the nails which fastened them to the cross; it is I myself.” Handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. The first words quietly told the awe-struck ones to look closely at him, and to ascertain from the dread marks he bore that what they looked upon was Jesus their Master. Then he proceeded to bid them touch him, handle him, and so assure themselves that it was no phantom, no bodiless spirit, that stood before them.Jamieson-Fausset just points out that flesh and bone avoids using blood which “is the life of the animal and corruptible body” in reference to the use of “flesh and blood” in some passages pf the New Testament.
Quote Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
39-43. Behold, &c.—lovingly offering them both ocular and tangible demonstration of the reality of His resurrection.a spirit hath not—an important statement regarding “spirits.”
flesh and bones—He says not “flesh and blood”; for the blood is the life of the animal and corruptible body (Ge 9:4), which “cannot inherit the kingdom of God” (1Co 15:50); but “flesh and bones,” implying the identity, but with diversity of laws, of the resurrection body. (See on [1748]Joh 20:24-28).
Not one of those quoted by biblehub.com actually say what you say the net scholars are saying. The ones I quoted disagree with your chosen teachings. The rest may or may not as they did not actually address these things.
Note: Commentaries on Luke 24:39.
Mike,
Net notes chooses to translate pneuma to ghost because they acknowledge a ghost cannot either be touched or eat and in so narrowing the meanings they avoid the issue we are addressing from coming up between those relying on their translation. The choice of translating it to spirit keeps the vagueness of the original.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 23 2013,07:03) Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 22 2013,17:16) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 21 2013,05:33) Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 17 2013,11:19) I point out that your insistence that you go by the literal interpretation of the statement “the word was made flesh” put you in conflict with a literal interpretation of the words ” Jesus came in the flesh”. Can you explain how your interpretations of those two passages are not in conflict?
Already explained, Kerwin. If God causes an already existing spirit being to be born from the womb of a human woman, both of these things can be said about that spirit being:1. He was made flesh.
2. He came in the flesh.
The only contradiction is in your own mind – and the contradiction in your own mind is cause by personal desires.
In other words, you are creating a “problem” when in reality, none exists.
Mike,You need to show more work instead of leaving me to figure out the connections especial if I am taking the position of not knowing that connection.
Show my work?Kerwin, I have no time for games. If and when you get around to addressing those nine points from before, we can get to the “show my work” portion of the discussion.
Mike,I already answered those questions that were answerable of the group. Some of them, if taken literally, do not agree with your doctrine and so require you to interpret them so that I know what you mean instead of me guessing while others were not Scriptural.
Instead of telling me that He was made flesh = He came in the flesh show me the work of how you came up with that solution.
Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 23 2013,09:54) Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 23 2013,14:26) Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 23 2013,08:39) Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 23 2013,01:40) Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 22 2013,18:36) Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 22 2013,23:23) Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 22 2013,18:12) Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 22 2013,22:32) j42 Quote So what I was trying to relay in my previous post is that God's Word became flesh and not God himself. The Word was just that before Christ. The Word.
When the Word became flesh and changed to the form of a man, a new creation came to be,how come that Paul mist this explanation in his letters or did he
were is it say so in his letters
Terra.Paul did not explain about the word of God.
But john did.
God and his Word had no beginning.
John said in the beginning was the Word.This was when God's Word was *beginning* to be used by God to create. God was beginning to speak out his Word.
After God brought forth his Word,a *living being*.They had glory together in creating.
What God wants said,His Word speaks out.
God spoke and it stood fast.wakeup.
Quote They had glory together in creating.
What God wants said,His Word speaks out.
God spoke and it stood fast.if this is true ;WHY DID IT TOOK SO LONG TO CREATE ALL THINGS
Terra.Why did it took so long in creating all things?
God has his plan worked out accordingly.
Man had to multiply from generation to generation.
This takes time.
While evil has to grow from bad to worse,
all this takes time.
The seed of evil was sown in the garden,and the time of harvesting the evil; is at the time of the harvest.(rev 14:18–20).wakeup.
it seems you are accommodating yourself to your own understanding ;God commanded and all who was part of it took their part of it ,
Ge 1:26 Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, in our likeness
WHO HIS THE “US” AND WHO HIS THE “OUR”
Terra.The *US*and *OUR* are God and his Word; that God had *brought forth* out of himself before the world was.
God's Word,*now* a shaped Being next to God.
And they had glory together; creating and creating.wakeup.
So who his The Word
Terra.Who is the Word?
The Word is God's Word.
His spoken Word,his breath,his Word formed into his own image. A living being next to God.
He was inside God,untill God brought him out of himself.Now there is God and his living Word in the shape of his own image. It was HE that was made flesh.
Born of a woman: now only given the name Jesus.wakeup.
Quote The Word is God's Word.
His spoken Word,Ps 94:9 Does he who implanted the ear not hear?
Does he who formed the eye not see? (DOES HE WHO FORMED THE MOUTH NOT TALK)
Ps 95:7 for he is our God
and we are the people of his pasture,
the flock under his care.
Today, if you hear his voice,i HAVE ADDED THE CAPITAL LETTERS BECAUSE IT COULD BE SAID ABOUT ALL WHAT MEN HAS AS QUALITIES ARE ALSO EXISTING IN THE CREATOR.
AND SO SAYS THAT “HIS WORD “WAS CREATED IN THE BEGINNING IS FLAWED BECAUSE GOD COULD SPEAK ,SEE,AND HEAR,AND THINK AND MUCH MORE ,WITHOUT HIS CREATION ,
IT IS UNTHINKABLE TO THINK THAT GOD NEEDED ANYTHING ADDITIONAL TO HIMSELF TO PERFECT HIS BEING ,
SO THE ONLY DESCRIPTION THAT PAUL AND JOHN GIVE HIS ABOUT CHRIST ;”THE WORD” THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD ,THE ONLY BEING THAT GOD AS CREATED FROM HIS OWN NATURE, AND CONSIDERING THAT SCRIPTURES SAYS “THAT NO MEN CAN SAVE ANOTHER FROM SIN ” SO IT AT TO BE SOMEONE FROM HEAVEN THAT CAME DOWN FREE OF SIN AND THE CURSE OF DEAD ,AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THE FATHER DID ,HE SEND HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON TO EARTH TO DIE FOR US AND FREE US FROM OUR SINS ,JESUS MANY TIMES SAID HE IS FROM ABOVE ,HE CAME DOWN FROM THE FATHER ,HE RETURN FROM WERE HE CAME BEFORE ,
ALL THE SCRIPTURES AND THE PLAN OF GOD UNFOLDS PERFECTLY ,AND WITHOUT BREAKING ANY SCRIPTURE ,WITHOUT NEED TO GIVE INTERPRETATIONS ,AND LONG OPINIONS MEN MADE STORIES ,
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 23 2013,11:00) Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 21 2013,20:03) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 22 2013,11:06) Wakeup, 2 Chronicles 36:22 Young's Literal Translation
And in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, at the completion of the word of Jehovah in the mouth of Jeremiah, hath Jehovah waked up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, and he causeth an intimation to pass over into all his kingdom……….Was God Himself inside the mouth of Jeremiah? Or does it mean that Jeremiah spoke the literal words that God gave him to speak? Which one?
Mike B.Hebrews 1:1 God, who at sundry times and
***in divers manners***
spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets……….
Hi Wakeup,Please directly answer the question I asked. Which one?
Mike B.You need to read this scripture carefully.
Hebrews 1:1 God, who at sundry times and
***in divers manners***
spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets.GOD SPOKE TO THE PROPHETS IN **DIFFERENT MANNERS**.
1.GOD SOMETIMES SPOKE TO THEM IN AUDIO.
2.GOD SPOKE TO THEM BY INSPIRATION.wakeup.
Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 22 2013,23:27) Quote Paul did not explain about the word of God.
But john did.
God and his Word had no beginning.
John said in the beginning was the Word.SO PAUL AND JOHN ARE IN DISAGREEMENT
WHY AND HOW IF “THE WORD ” HIS “CHRIST ” THEY ARE NOT IN DISAGREEMENT AT ALL ,ONLY IF YOU SAY THAT THE WORD HIS “NOT” CHRIST THEN PAUL AND JOHN ARE IN A DISAGREEMENT ,
Terra.You are making things up as you go.
Why should Paul and John disagree?
This baffled my mind.It was John that is **more into** the Word
of God.
Why do you interpret that as a disagreement
between Paul and John?wakeup.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
