can anyone answer this?

[white pegasus]

yes it does tell me that-but you didn't answer my question-

[AHIYAH]

You had three questions and yes they are all answered. Unless there's a focus on another question, if so please state it.

[dream jo]

all
i no iv lenr ovr yrs sum of relgers pele can e judgmelt jud us fr sines we do bt not sins thy do
i admt i sin evry day
bt

[AHIYAH]

I can type like that in zukumbwambelunduku of the Mountain dialect of the highest order. Laugh Loud. But I won't.

Originally Posted by Mystic Mark

Elohim of the Old Testament and Theos of the New Testament are the same thing (God). You want me to give you the proof that the Lord (Jehovah) is not Theos. Sorry, not gonna happen.

John 8:42 - "If God (Theos) were your father, you would love me, for I came forth from God (Theos) ... "

Correction - Elohim is the plural form of the word. I meant to say El.

In the Hebrew language--Elohim is NEVER plural for the true living God as gods--just for the false gods. The trinity scholars know this is fact, yet continue to mislead 2 billion into breaking Gods #1 commandment daily by teaching a non existent trinity god. Fact--Moses, David, Solomon, Daniel, Isaiah, Matthew, Luke, Peter, and Jesus never taught, served or worshipped a trinity god. From Moses on up until this very day--Israelites taught, served and worshipped a single being God.

[AHIYAH]

Originally Posted by kjw47

In the Hebrew language--Elohim is NEVER plural for the true living God as gods--just for the false gods. The trinity scholars know this is fact, yet continue to mislead 2 billion into breaking Gods #1 commandment daily by teaching a non existent trinity god. Fact--Moses, David, Solomon, Daniel, Isaiah, Matthew, Luke, Peter, and Jesus never taught, served or worshipped a trinity god. From Moses on up until this very day--Israelites taught, served and worshipped a single being God.

As opposed to breaking a Commandment weekly and teaching people its ok? It's Ironic you mention Moses. Just saying.

[dream jo]

sum tims wen im stuk
thees
songss giv me ansers thy do
hears 1 wish can giv evry 1 a ansr if it can
https://vimeo.com/24437452

[AHIYAH]

Originally Posted by dream jo

sum tims wen im stuk
thees
songss giv me ansers thy do
hears 1 wish can giv evry 1 a ansr if it can
https://vimeo.com/24437452

Wn me got da ansa me sho vely vely upresh itiv. Me larf owt lowda. Butt du Ewe no da fng? Me no dem fng vely vely wowl. Owe Ma kudnis me sho far knee me neely pish me shelf. Role on flaw bords larfing owt lodly. Jk

[white pegasus]

Originally Posted by AHIYAH

What it should tell you about them(depending on the them) is that they're fed up with the hypocrites of this replacement religion prancing around with its pagan festivals which is made law and was once forced on people. This is the angle I am coming from and so are the rest of my Spiritual Family. Isaiah 57:14 pick and choose which of the bibles translation that tickles your manly. If you're a man.

__________________________________________________ __________

so your answer is

1. fed up with replacement religion

2. having a little bit of fun by fulfilling prophesy

3. a righteous thief

okay

[davidsun]

Reprise to White Pegasus:

Originally Posted by davidsun

P.S. My interpretation is based on what (what you call) 'the Holy Spirit' has revealed to me. Your presumption that what you think is necessarily the 'right' (or 'Holy') way to think and therefore that the thinking of what anyone who disagrees with that (simply by virtue of that fact) must not be 'right' (or 'Holy') shows me that the Spirit which you subscribe to is personal-self-reinforcing and therefore not 'Holistic'. That is not true Christianity in my view, because I see the Christ Principle as being holistic.

Please note: IMO, I am a true-er 'Christian', i.e. Christ Consciousness subscriber, that you are. I am only 'ex'Christian in the sense of having 'left' the kind of 'Christianity' which flag-waving 'Christians' have generally subcsribed to. I respect the fact that you do not regard my kind of 'Christianity' as being legitimate. I obviously do not share such opinion, however.