God Himself even allows the beast and Satan out of their prison once in a while. So you are in good company.The prison guard told me that I have to log off and return to my cell.
bye, be back later
-
God Himself even allows the beast and Satan out of their prison once in a while. So you are in good company.The prison guard told me that I have to log off and return to my cell.
bye, be back later
-
Disagree.
Essentially, the AC type is a pseustēs Christ. An INTENTIONAL counterfeit , a lying facsimile.
Bibi and Hamas are not any of that. They are rebels perhaps and unbelievers for sure. But not a type of AC.
The overarching concept is a counterfeit meant to SUPPLANT Christ by deception. The son of perdition who is to come, "the lie" being the ultimate incarnation, indwelt by Satan himself.......the greater Judas.he didn't say "man of sin".
Who is the liar, if it is not the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, who denies the Father and the Son. (1 Jn 2:22)
By this you will know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and which is already in the world at this time. (1 Jn 4:2-3)
For many deceivers have gone out into the world, refusing to confess the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist. (2 Jn 1:7)
Just because on apostle does not say "Man of Sin" does not mean it is not valid, since another apostle uses that exact term. There are many designations for the Antichrist in Scripture.he didn't say "man of sin".
Yet the Bible is full of accounts of violence in relation to the Israelites and their enemies. And God's wrath coming down upon a wicked world will also bring much violence. A river of blood about five feet high and about 200 miles long will flow because of God's wrath. The "winepress of God's wrath' is mentioned in Scripture (Rev 14:20)Since God opposes violence in any form is it right to point it out?
Just because on apostle does not say "Man of Sin" does not mean it is not valid, since another apostle uses that exact term. There are many designations for the Antichrist in Scripture.
Read your Bible much buddy? I doubt it. You had better do your homework before issuing your persistently erroneous opionions.....
Gen 17:19
And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with ****HIM***, for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him.
Gen 17:20
And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation.
Gen 17:21
BUT my covenant will I establish with Isaac, which Sarah shall bear unto thee at this set time in the next year.
The term son in the Bible refers to heir, so the term has to be understood in terms of the covenant. It is possible to have ten children and only one heir.Your ignoring the point - Gen 22:2 says 'only son' - I'm not talking about the covenant.
The term son in the Bible refers to heir, so the term has to be understood in terms of the covenant. It is possible to have ten children and only one heir.
If there ever was a time for Christians to be praying, it's now!! Israel has declared war. Biden has at least said he stands with Israel.
for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.any passages to back up your opinion – your saying that any one called ‘son’ means heir – there is all so the issues of 'firstborn' has rights
maybe you could help with this as well;
Gen 21:15 - When the water in the skin was gone, she put the child under one of the bushes.
Ishmael must have been around 14 when Isaac was born, about 17 at the time of the above. Them days 14 year old boy was considered a man, working and caring for the family – above implies his a little child.
for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
Galatians 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
Galatians gives us the contrast between Isaac and Ishmael. Isaac was an "heir according to the promise", Ishmael was not.
Romans 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
This is more than simply calling on the Lord. Pull out any gospel tract on how to get saved and they talk about being born again, there is no requirement to be led by the Spirit of God. Simply believe Jesus rose from the Dead and call Him Lord and you shall be saved.
Galatians 4:5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.
Being redeemed is not the same thing as "receiving the adoption of sons". But it paves the way. This term adoption of sons is a reference to a wealthy landowner assigning a child as an heir to the family business. It was a legal document.
Galatians 4:7 Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.
When the Jews were under the law they were like being a servant, just as Hagar was a servant. The child of a servant is not an heir, but a son is an heir.
Galatians 4:30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
The reason Hagar and Ishmael were "cast out" is because they were not heirs. Yes, Ishmael was Hagar's son, but not Abraham's. He was Abraham's child, but not Abraham's heir.
Romans 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
This is more than simply calling on the Lord. Pull out any gospel tract on how to get saved and they talk about being born again, there is no requirement to be led by the Spirit of God. Simply believe Jesus rose from the Dead and call Him Lord and you shall be saved.
Titus 3:7 That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
Being justified is past tense, we should be made is future. We are justified by His grace before we are made heirs. All of these gospel tracts equate being justified from sin with salvation. That is true, you are saved from sin, but that does not mean you have been made an heir. You could never be made an heir if you were not justified, so that is the foundation, but it isn't the house.
Hebrews 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
To be "appointed heir" is equivalent to this concept of being adopted as God's sons. We are born of God, we are His children, but you have to be led by the Spirit to be appointed an heir of God
Hebrews 1:14 Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?
Who are they talking about? These are the believers and yet they are not yet "heirs".
Hebrews 11:7 By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.
We are saved by faith. Noah believed God and that was reckoned to Him as righteousness. However, it was what he did after that, the preparing of the ark and the preaching of the gospel to the world, condemning the world of sin, that caused him to become an heir. This is why James talks about being saved by the work of faith. To be justified by sin is immediate, as soon as you receive the work the Lord did on the cross. But becoming an heir, that is a result of a work of faith.[/Q
for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
Galatians 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
Galatians gives us the contrast between Isaac and Ishmael. Isaac was an "heir according to the promise", Ishmael was not.
Romans 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
This is more than simply calling on the Lord. Pull out any gospel tract on how to get saved and they talk about being born again, there is no requirement to be led by the Spirit of God. Simply believe Jesus rose from the Dead and call Him Lord and you shall be saved.
Galatians 4:5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.
Being redeemed is not the same thing as "receiving the adoption of sons". But it paves the way. This term adoption of sons is a reference to a wealthy landowner assigning a child as an heir to the family business. It was a legal document.
Galatians 4:7 Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.
When the Jews were under the law they were like being a servant, just as Hagar was a servant. The child of a servant is not an heir, but a son is an heir.
Galatians 4:30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
The reason Hagar and Ishmael were "cast out" is because they were not heirs. Yes, Ishmael was Hagar's son, but not Abraham's. He was Abraham's child, but not Abraham's heir.
I’m sorry but this is all your interpretation – Ishmael is called ‘son’ a number of times & doesn’t in any show that son = heir or explain the ‘only son’ – not arguing about who was the promise.
What about Ruth
Ruth 2:13 Holman Christian Standard Bible
My lord,” she said, “you have been so kind to me, for you have comforted and encouraged your slave, although I am not like one of your female servants.”
Ruth – Moabite (descendant of lot incest) – is also called a ‘slave, maidservant, handmaid – use the same word as Hagar - שִׁפְחָה
God says He is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. God Himself chose who would be heirs of the promise.Im sorry but this is all yoru interpretation - doesnt in any show that son = heir or
God says He is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. God Himself chose who would be heirs of the promise.
God here isn't choosing according to the natural process He previously established. It should lead one to ask why? What is He revealing?
Fair enough. Since we know Abraham had other children, God is using the term "only" to refer to Isaac as a type of Christ.we were discussing
Gen 22:2 says 'only son' - I'm not talking about the covenant / promise - Ishmael is also referred to Abrahams son
You don't need to be sorry to me, say you are sorry to the Apostle Paul.Im sorry but this is all yoru interpretation - doesnt in any show that son = heir or