Search results

In 2nd Timothy, Paul writes to Timothy. Note that he specifically does not write to anyone else.

It's on Bishop Timothy, actually. 2nd Timothy 1:2 "To Timothy..." Not in 2nd Timothy you're not.

But it's also a more direct reference, "hath begotten us again", to being born again, cf. John 3. Indeed, Ephesians 2:1 Sure.

This is accomplished in coming to Mass. Come, to Mass.

The hope of course indicates something future. But the hope comes from being 'begotten again'. Is how I read it. I don't think it's really possible to read it another way. "Hath begotten", not 'will beget'.

I'm not sure how you're wanting to discuss, so perhaps this is off the topic, but to John 3 and the womb being compared with the grave, 1 Peter 1:3 clearly is writing to people who have already been born again, and I don't think anybody thinks his audience had all risen from the dead like Christ...

Saying it doesn't make it so. Put up. No one said it was. Saying it doesn't make it so. Put up. I'm not doing any of those things, JudgeRightly. I'm not moving any goalposts. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The everlasting covenant (Heb13:20) being 'put on hold' is...

Thread title. lol

Chapter and verse on that claim? Thought so. And it is the "everlasting covenant" and it has not been "put on hold."

Because it was the police who said it, and they obviously are all liars. It was probably a baloney sandwich, and they saw it and thought, "That was probably made with a knife," and then thought, "Close enough"---POW!

That's not what the Lord Jesus Christ said. He didn't break it and say, "This is bread," He said, "This is My body." I don't do that. Yes I did. Just recently too. Didn't see anything in there about a newsflash that the "everlasting covenant" was "put on hold". Romans 11 is actually more...

Oh please. Just above verse 29 is verse 24, Paul recounts, "the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: 24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body". This is the immediate, proximate context of verse 29. "You are completely blind"...

Can't be. How else could they know with such precision how many people have been va----oh.

Or, it's not there at all, and you're seeing ghosts. You don't believe in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, in spite of His own words, and many of Paul's words which are consistent with His Real Presence, such as 1st Corinthians 11:29, "For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily...

Grasping at straws. And yet not explicitly so, and for such a big change! To be nowhere found, where the "everlasting covenant" is "put on hold". Dispensationalist dreaming. You don't seem to know any of the Apostles, let alone Paul, who wrote some of the most Catholic words that the...

The Trinity has been taught explicitly by the Apostles for as far back as we can see in history (the Apostles' Creed, Nicene Creed e.g.). That the "everlasting covenant" was "put on hold", not so much. Specifically, we have zero record of that teaching until like the 1800s. It is not Apostolic.

You all claim that the "everlasting covenant" that Christ dedicated with His own blood, was "put on hold", even though you confess that such a momentous thing is never explicit in Scripture.

"Knowing Jesus Christ personally and directly" is never more satisfied than when receiving His body, blood, soul and divinity in the Eucharist. And it is "an ocean" of His Real Presence. Come, to Mass.

Where else? Because I've read the whole chapter. I don't detect the slightest mention of an everlasting covenant being put on hold, let alone such a thing being said explicitly and clearly and plainly in Acts 9.

So where in the Bible is the everlasting covenant of Hebrews 13:20 put on hold.