sin/sins is not the issue today!

[God's Truth]

If the Jews had to believe and do works to be saved then why would the Lord Jesus tell them that it only took believing to be saved?:

"Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life" (Jn.5:24).​

The Jews had to do works to make themselves clean; those special works are called ceremonial works. We do not have to do those works because we only have to believe that Jesus' blood cleans us. That does not mean we do not have to obey anything else! We still have to obey Jesus' teachings.

 

[God's Truth]

Grosnick Marowbe's behavior is curious to me. He seems to be an intelligent man but when confronted with John 5:24 where the Lord Jesus says that those who "believe" are saved it seems as if Grosnick just cannot believe Him. Could it be that he is so brain-washed by the false teaching within the Neo-Mad camp that it is just impossible for him to believe what the Lord said?

I have seen this exact same thing with those who have been brain-washed into the Marian cult. You can show them passages from the Scriptures which directly contradict the teaching of Rome concerning Mary and those Scriptures mean nothing to them

What is your opinion about why what the Lord Jesus says at John 5:24 seems to mean nothing to Grosnick?

Thanks!

Jesus was speaking to JEWS who HAD to do the ceremonial works and were obeying the ceremonial works, but those works were going to be soon fulfilled by Jesus. Those works were no longer going to be required but having faith in Jesus' blood was going to be required.

We still have to obey Jesus' commands but we no longer have to do the ceremonial works because now we only have to believe his blood cleans us.

The ceremonial works cleaned them.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Jesus was speaking to JEWS who HAD to do the ceremonial works and were obeying the ceremonial works, but those works were going to be soon fulfilled by Jesus. Those works were no longer going to be required but having faith in Jesus' blood was going to be required.

We still have to obey Jesus' commands but we no longer have to do the ceremonial works because now we only have to believe his blood cleans us.

The ceremonial works cleaned them.

You're a "One trick Pony." You always say the same thing. Ceremonial
works is your one and only comeback. Read and study the entire
Bible. Cover to cover, word for word, name by name. Then, come
back and have something else to say besides, "Ceremonial works."

 

[God's Truth]

You're a "One trick Pony." You always say the same thing. Ceremonial
works is your one and only comeback. Read and study the entire
Bible. Cover to cover, word for word, name by name. Then, come
back and have something else to say besides, "Ceremonial works."

I speak God's truth and give scripture. I understand that the truth is a stench of death and pony talk to many.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

If the Jews had to believe and do works to be saved then why would the Lord Jesus tell them that it only took believing to be saved?:

"Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life" (Jn.5:24).​

And why would He say that it is His words that bring life if His words alone were not enough to bring life?:

"It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life" (Jn.6:63).​

Will you answer that?



Prove that you can answer my questions in an "intelligent" manner.

I already gave you the answer above. I won't repeat it. Why?
because you won't accept it anyway.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

I speak God's truth and give scripture. I understand that the truth is a stench of death and pony talk to many.

It's a stench of death? Name who has said that?

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Some posters, such as, GT seem to enjoy exaggerating. People that
use this form of deceit aren't able to back up what they say. It makes
them very transparent to others.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

In your posts you simply state again and again your general proposition. For anyone who does not already believe it, this approach is singularly unconvincing. To establish a doctrine you have to provide exegetical evidence from passages and verses. You cannot expect anyone else to assume your general proposition and to then apply it to the verses. This is begging the question.

For instance, Jerry keeps asking you how Jesus could be preaching that the Jews could be saved through faith PLUS works when He so often said that men could obtain eternal life through believing in Him. Instead of meeting him on that ground you hurl insults and restate your doctrine without addressing the relevant verses.

You approach (proclaiming your general propositions without addressing specific scriptures) makes you look evasive. For instance, rather than rebut my argument that 1 Peter 1:25 shows that what Peter preached had no expiration date on it, you say simply that I do not know how to rightly divide the scriptures. Now this verse seems fairly straight forward to me and I do not see any reason why I should not accept what it says on the face of it. The WORD = the gospel preached by Peter lasts forever. If this is true then it could not have faded away some time in the First Century. "Forever" is obvioulsly a little longer that 20-30 years. If Peter's message lasts forever then it is reasonable to assume it is still active and relevant today. How can that be "divided" so that it means anything else? I think what you mean by "rightly dividing" is "sliced and diced."

What amazes me is that someone who claims to be a follower of Paul's teachings could claim that meritorious works could contribute to anyone's salvation when Paul himself said "by the works of the law shall NO one be justified."

Paul was sent to the Gentiles with the Grace Message. I couldn't
get through all of your post. Too much to read. Especially, when
it's posted by somebody I'm not interested in conversing with.

Make it short and I'll take the time to read it. Otherwise, don't
bother. This isn't a college course, it's a forum. Write a book if
you want to reach more readers.

 

[patrick jane]

Paul was sent to the Gentiles with the Grace Message. I couldn't
get through all of your post. Too much to read. Especially, when
it's posted by somebody I'm not interested in conversing with.

Make it short and I'll take the time to read it. Otherwise, don't
bother. This isn't a college course, it's a forum. Write a book if
you want to reach more readers.

lol - good yes, it's true -

 

[patrick jane]

It's a stench of death? Name who has said that?

what's pony talk ?

stench ?

Francis the Talking Horse ?

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

what's pony talk ?

stench ?

Francis the Talking Horse ?

Maybe, Mr. Ed?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

I already gave you the answer above. I won't repeat it. Why?
because you won't accept it anyway.

Here is the answer you gave and it is indeed a pitiful answer:

Again, Paul was speaking to the Gentiles in Romans. You're not very astute, are you?

So here those under the law were Gentiles?:

"Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all" (Ro.4:16).​

You are totally confused if you think that the words "which are of the law" are referring to Gentiles. And you accuse me of not being very astute.

It is you who is not very astute but worse you suffer from dementia. And you said nothing about what Peter, who lived under the law, said here:

"We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are" (Acts 15:11).​

Since Peter said that his salvation was on the principle of grace then it is obvious to anyone who will use his brains that "works" had nothing to do with his salvation.

 

[aikido7]

Once folks begin to study the unique voice print of Jesus and let go of ideas that sin enters the human race in men's semen, a more realistic faith can emerge from the ancient theological formulations we are supposed to hold dear.

 

[aikido7]

More of your "useless" generalities. Surprise yourself and others; say
something intelligent and worthwhile? We're waiting?

Be accountable for your own fear, alarm and defensiveness and just admit you are in fact "waiting" to pounce and criticize.

It's not anything new. Traditional Christians and Muslims are clearly feeling unmoored in a global, interconnected world. I can't help you figure out what you believe and to feel confident about it.

 

[aikido7]

"do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?" (Jn.10:36).​

When the Lord Jesus said that He is the Son of God they charged Him with blasphemy because of that. And here is what they believed He meant when He said that He is the Son of God:

"The Jews answered him, “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God" (Jn.10:33).​

*sigh*

Again, I go with the history involved. John's Jesus is not the Jesus of the synoptics. John is NOT a historical record of the Galilean who walked the dusty roads of Palestine. John is Christian theology.

The Jesus he recognized is myth, not history. The differences in John's gospel cannot be squared with the Jesus of the other three gospels.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

John's Jesus is not the Jesus of the synoptics. John is NOT a historical record of the Galilean who walked the dusty roads of Palestine.

Prove it.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Be accountable for your own fear, alarm and defensiveness and just admit you are in fact "waiting" to pounce and criticize.

It's not anything new. Traditional Christians and Muslims are clearly feeling unmoored in a global, interconnected world. I can't help you figure out what you believe and to feel confident about it.

I feel confidant of this, you have absolutely NO Spiritual
discernment or ability to maintain, even one iota of civility
or intelligent discourse.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

*sigh*

Again, I go with the history involved. John's Jesus is not the Jesus of the synoptics. John is NOT a historical record of the Galilean who walked the dusty roads of Palestine. John is Christian theology.

The Jesus he recognized is myth, not history. The differences in John's gospel cannot be squared with the Jesus of the other three gospels.

Your "denial" of the "inspired written word of God" is repulsive and
anti-Christian. You're simply NOT a member of the Body of Christ.
God's inspired written Word is complete and inerrant.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

A7, you may think of yourself as a Christian, but, you are simply
grasping a form of religiosity that will not lead you to eternal life.

If things don't change, you're destined to face God for judgment
in accordance to your works and subsequently, you'll be cast into
The Lake of Fire.

No one can reject parts of God's written Word and have the Holy
Spirit dwelling in them.

 

[glorydaz]

A7, you may think of yourself as a Christian, but, you are simply
grasping a form of religiosity that will not lead you to eternal life.

If things don't change, you're destined to face God for judgment
in accordance to your works and subsequently, you'll be cast into
The Lake of Fire.

No one can reject parts of God's written Word and have the Holy
Spirit dwelling in them.

:e4e: