Search results

We don’t. Moslems might, but they are in error. “Hebrew” is a term denoting ethnicity, while “Muslim” is a term denoting religious adherence.

Fine… be ridiculous then; I really don’t care.

Abram was not born in Iraq, because Iraq did not exist when Abram was born. He was born in Ur. Abram was not a Jew because there was no such thing as a Jew until after Abram’s great-grandson Judah was an adult. Please go and learn what a fallacy of anachronism is.

While some of it certainly is, some of Scripture simply is not “simple straight-forward (sic) literal truth”. There are many kinds of figures of speech that defy such narrow classification… and interpretation. As for cognitive dissonance, don’t make accusations that work against your position.

Don’t ask stupid questions.

Do you honestly think that anything a human can do can puts Jesus in danger of judgment? Don’t be ridiculous.

In light of your repeated foolishness, your whining is pathetic. Another asinine assumption.

A Bible (more properly, ‘the Bible’) is a written or printed book containing the various messages that God has given to humankind (generally) which He wanted recorded to tell us about Himself and His relationship with us and all His creation. Most importantly, the Bible tells us why our...

Your entire post is the most ridiculous thing I’ve read all month, which is quite an accomplishment. My goodness… do you get your “facts” directly from a Moslem ‘evangelist’?

I have repeatedly addressed your penchant for making asinine assumptions, and you haven’t learned. What is wrong with you?

Only in flat-earth circles.

I know English isn't your first language, but that's stretching comprehensibility.

I already explained to you your error in interpreting Isaiah 34. Repeating your error just makes you look more foolish. There you go with the unsupportable assertions again. You don't learn too good.

Do you realize I'm not an ignorant noob when it comes to the content of Scripture? According to you, perhaps, but that's not a valid argument outside your head.

The verses you provided are Scripture, but they don't support your assertion.

He didn’t, He didn’t, and He didn’t. He chose Hebrew, Aramaic, and koine Greek.

Your claim is not supported by Scripture. It’s not judging; I am simply certain that you aren’t keeping the Law because there is no Temple and there are no priests.

Perhaps you should read more carefully. "Anglo-centric" does not mean "Anglican-centric". Not even a little.

You aren't keeping the Law, nor is any self-proclaimed Sabbath keeper. Galatians 3:10.

All of us who are Christians were condemned by the Law. However, Christians have been transferred from death to life and are under Christ's blood. We are no longer under the Law. Incomplete theology, in this case, is wrong theology.