So is Evan Jesus the father of Lucifer? Y or N?

[nrajeffreturns]

Originally Posted by James Banta

All I see from that is you admit you have no respect from the rules of the owner of what ever site you post on.. IHS jim

That's all you see because you're still in your sins and haven't been regenerated so you're spiritually blind to the truth....or something like that. I forget exactly how the mantra goes. But one of you will probably be using within the next few days, so the exact wording will be coming soon to a forum near you.

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by dberrie2000

Could you explain for us what youtube has to do with what the Biblical record testifies is true?--- not by faith alone.





Is that faith that is alone for salvation?

]

saved by Grace, though faith...not by works.....not by faith alone....not by works alone....not by faith and works......


understand yet?

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by nrajeffreturns

So if the leaders of Christianity of the apostolic era was teaching .....

Once again, any Bible teacher is only worth listening to if what they teach is in agreement with god's bible....

if they teach a different message?...then reject them.

Even if they come dressed as an angel from heaven....reject them

[nrajeffreturns]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Once again, any Bible teacher is only worth listening to if what they teach is in agreement with god's bible....

You really don't see the inherent flaw in that reasoning? It's obvious to me, and here it is:

How do you determine, for sure, that any Bible teacher's interpretation of the Bible is really in agreement with it? For example, if one interprets the Bible as saying that the rapture will occur before the tribulation, and another interprets it as saying the rapture will occur after, how do YOU figure out which teacher is in agreement with the Bible? The same dilemma exists in regard to any number of controversies: Arminian vs. Calvinist soteriology. Transubstantiation vs. Consubstantiation. Pedobaptism is OK with God vs. not OK with God. Female pastors vs. No Girls Allowed. Pictures of Jesus OK vs. they are a graven image. God is OK with you subs***uting grape juice in your eucharist, vs. it must be wine.

It might be true that any Bible teacher is only worth listening to if what they teach is in agreement with god's bible, but modern Christendom is unable to come up with a 100% reliable way of determining whether any Bible teacher is in agreement with the Bible on every issue. So your litmus test sounds GREAT, but is not very useful in the real world.

[Libby]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Once again, any Bible teacher is only worth listening to if what they teach is in agreement with god's bible....

if they teach a different message?...then reject them.

Even if they come dressed as an angel from heaven....reject them

Lots of "Bible teachers" who sincerely believe they are teaching what is in the Bible, differ greatly in interpretation.

I think we need to lean on the Holy Spirit for understanding.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Libby

Lots of "Bible teachers" who sincerely believe they are teaching what is in the Bible, differ greatly in interpretation.

Your interpretation of the verses that say ALL have sinned couldn't be written any clearer and you deny what it says and you say you have a different interpretation. It is simply an excuse on your part to deny what God has said because it doesn't agree with your opinions based on feelings.

[Libby]

Originally Posted by Billyray

Your interpretation of the verses that say ALL have sinned couldn't be written any clearer and you deny what it says and you say you have a different interpretation. It is simply an excuse on your part to deny what God has said because it doesn't agree with your opinions based on feelings.

Not so. My interpretation is not only more sensible (and truthful) it is also biblical. See the story of Adam and Eve.

Do you agree that we should lean on the Holy Spirit for interpretation of the Bible?

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Libby

Not so. My interpretation is not only more sensible (and truthful) it is also biblical. See the story of Adam and Eve.

It certainly is not Biblical and again you haven't given me a single verse that proves otherwise. Give me the verses that you keep talking about so we can look at it.

[dberrie2000]

Originally Posted by Billyray

Your interpretation of the verses that say ALL have sinned couldn't be written any clearer and you deny what it says and you say you have a different interpretation.

Billyray--I would tread lightly here--you flat deny that "all men" could mean all when speaking of Christ's Atonement:

Romans 5:18 (King James Version)

18 Therefore as by the offence [1] of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.


To you--"all men" there means just a few--right?

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by nrajeffreturns

You really don't see the inherent flaw in that reasoning?

Once again to be clear...

If a Bible teacher is teaching things that are not found in the Bible, you should reject them...

If a bible teacher is teaching about different gods, then reject them.

it's that simple...

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by dberrie2000

Billyray--I would tread lightly here--you flat deny that "all men" could mean all when speaking of Christ's Atonement:

Romans 5:18 (King James Version)

18 Therefore as by the offence [1] of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.


To you--"all men" there means just a few--right?

All men in the context to the surrounding verses is referring to all men who come to Christ. The quote that I gave in context to the surrounding verses confirms that all min sin. Also I gave multiple verses that support the fact that we all sin and another quote that says that the only person who is good is God alone. If some are perfect then certainly they would be good based on their own merits but this conflicts with what Christ has said.

[alanmolstad]

so while the Lord is the creator of all things, (he himself not being a thing that was ever created) he is not the "Father" of all things.

The term "creator" is talking about the role of making things...of a builder....or a maker.
The term "Father" is talking about a loving relationship a person has with another.

God is my "Father" because I have that type of relationship with him.
but Jesus was clear when he told the Jewish leaders that Satan was their "Father"

Jesus said this because he knew that god was not their father due to the fact that the people had no relationship with God.

[alanmolstad]

"Father"is a term that talks about the relationship

"Creator" is a term talking about the action and position.

The Lord is the "Creator" of all things....But the Lord is the "Father" only of a few....

[dberrie2000]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

"Father"is a term that talks about the relationship

"Creator" is a term talking about the action and position.

The Lord is the "Creator" of all things....But the Lord is the "Father" only of a few....

Hebrews 12:9---King James Version (KJV)
9 Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?

If God the Father is only Father of a few spirits--then could you reveal to us what other God is the Father of the remainder?

[Berean]

Originally Posted by dberrie2000

Hebrews 12:9---King James Version (KJV)
9 Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?

If God the Father is only Father of a few spirits--then could you reveal to us what other God is the Father of the remainder?

Nonsense

The word "Father," as used in this example, does not dictate a literal interpretation. Mormon scriptures agree that we are "spiritually begotten" and "become" "adopted" sons and daughters of Christ when we have faith alone in Jesus Christ:

Mosiah 5:7 And now, because of the covenant which ye have made ye shall be called the children of Christ, his sons, and his daughters; for behold, this day he hath spiritually begotten you; for ye say that your hearts are changed through faith on his name; therefore, ye are born of him and have become his sons and his daughters.

[dberrie2000]

Originally Posted by dberrie2000 View Post

Hebrews 12:9---King James Version (KJV)
9 Furthermore [COLOR="#FF0000]"we have had fathers of our flesh[/COLOR] which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?

If God the Father is only Father of a few spirits--then could you reveal to us what other God is the Father of the remainder?

Originally Posted by Berean

Nonsense

The word "Father," as used in this example, does not dictate a literal interpretation.

So--""we have had fathers of our flesh"--is not a literal truth?

And so was the context set--"we have had fathers of our flesh"--"the Father of spirits,"