Osnola Kinnard.

Have you tested what you have heard and repeated?

James preaches against the teaching of faith alone by teaching faith without works is dead. Actually Paul does to but his words are not as literal after all righteousness from God is works; it is just God’s works. I have not mentioned grace but it is in there both in that faith…[Read more]

I am probably guilty of that as I believe the everything is related.

There is a couple of methods to derail a topic that you did not mention.

1) Ad Hominem fallacy
2) Red Herring fallacy

What you mention may or may not fall in the secound one depending on how relevant it is.

Richard,

You simply quote without the letter of Scripture.

The logos is the logos. The connection between Philo’s and John’s teaching is well know and Philo of Alexandria did not teach that the logos was the Christ. He did and does teach the logos has the qualities of God as some of those who teach Jesus is God but unlike them those qualities…[Read more]

I also have no preference as all of them are biased if for no other reason that translating from an original language to English invokes mysteries and each expert resolves them according to their bias. Some of them try to resolve that problem by using a democratic solution but it only gives the most popular translation in the group.

Gene,

Actually I did consider that. The works of the Law means attempting to perform Spiritual works while walking according to the flesh. It simply cannot be accomplished because the flesh is opposed to the Spirit. The best that can be done is as dirty rags in the sight of God. (Isaiah 64:6)

Beware libertarian bias as that “FORCED…[Read more]

Ed,

Did you see my post of how and how not the spirit of a human son is connected to their father’s spirit. They are connected only to the point they follow the same desires.

Nick,

The whole of scripture pointed to the salvation God was to offer. Job knew he would be yet be alive after death.

I tend to think Job 19:26 is speaking of the resurrection but there is a debate whether ū·mib·bə·śā·rî should be translated to “in my flesh” or “from my flesh”. If the earlier then is could be that John was referring to it wh…[Read more]

Nick,

The whole of scripture pointed to the salvation God was to offer. Job knew he would be yet be alive after death.

I tend to think Job 19:26 is speaking of the resurrection but there is a debate whether ū·mib·bə·śā·rî should be translated to “in my flesh” or “from my flesh”. If the earlier then is could be that John was referring to it wh…[Read more]

Nick,

Obedience to the law was always possible in the grace of God and does not assume any form of anointing.

Your are missing the point of Paul’s teaching to the Romans that is summed up with his words:

English Standard Version
For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of…

[Read more]

Ed,

No, the human spirit is not unified some have a proud spirit while others have a humble spirit. The most common unity is its unity to the spirit of the Evil one.Some have become children of God.

If I had children I would like their spirit to unified with mine as I am unified with God.

Nick,

Please forgive the poor grammar in that last question as it is not meant to be a yes and no question even though I phrased it that way. It is not coming to me how to rephrase to say what I actually mean. Please answer the intent and not the letter. Thank you!

Nick,

Hi KW,

Your ideas that he was anointed previous to his anointing are only your doctrinal justifications.

Find it written first.

The Pharisees taught that there was a resurrection of the dead but the Sadducee it was not written. Did Jesus testify the implied or written teaching was correct?

It is implied Jesus had walked according to…[Read more]

Ed,

You jump to just as ridiculous conclusions as Nick.
No, Jesus was born “the spirit of Christ” (ref. Micah 5:2),
so naturally the Son of the Holy Spirit has unity with God.

Not so ridiculous as you have told me the one Spirit in Ephesians 4:1-6 is the Spirit of God.

Ephesians 4:1-6Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

4 I therefore, the…

[Read more]

Ed,

Do you understand that Jesus is claiming to be the mediator between God and humanity in Matthew 10:32-33?

Nick,

I believe Jesus did not stand before God justified by the Law. Instead “the righteousness of the law” was fulfilled in him for he walked by the Spirit and not after the flesh.

In context

Romans 8:4Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

4 that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after…

[Read more]

@t8,

This was a duplicate post. I made it by stopping the sending of data to server after hitting the submit but and then making a minor change to the post as if the data was not sent and then submitting it and discoing I not abort the first attempt in time.

@t8,

This was a duplicate post. I made it by stopping the sending of data to server after hitting the submit but earlier and then editing the post and then submitting it.

Ed,

Hi Kerwin,

I would like to answer that because you say you are lost as to what I believe because you don’t read my posts.

No – Jesus is “the Spirit of Christ” (ref. Micah 5:2) therefore
his spirit(the Spirit of Christ) is part of God’s Spirit(HolySpirit).
He received all (ref. John 3:35) of God’s Spirit (HolySpirit) at Jordan.

[Read more]

Ed,

Hi Kerwin,

I would like to answer that because you say you are lost as to what I believe because you don’t read my posts.

No – Jesus is “the Spirit of Christ” (ref. Micah 5:2) therefore
his spirit(the Spirit of Christ) is part of God’s Spirit(HolySpirit).
He received all (ref. John 3:35) of God’s Spirit (HolySpirit) at Jordan.

[Read more]

Nick,

Hi KW,

So you really feel God was doing a useless thing offering men the law?

If so Jesus proved you wrong

First, you jump to conclusions instead of listening to what Scripture states as Paul already answers your question with the words in Romans 3:19-20 and other places and Jesus did not prove him wrong.

pertinent clauses:

Therefore…

[Read more]