If you do not believe in God, you must not have read the Bible

If I understand the question the theoretical was no more than the faintest of breezes. Within the realm of probability the conception of not was inevitable, however in the current construction we cannot not be, so reorientation in the form of atonement was immediate. In this world we live with and for each other and as we discover each other we discover ourselves and when we discover ourselves we learn we are co-creators with god.

On the other hand willedwill, it is obvious that I am driving off a cliff here and since history is living tissue I'm not sure that cultivating this kind of memory is as useful as selective forgetting.

Robbing and thieving follow the absence true proportion, specialness. None are outside or special, all are precious. Tradition is the trading away of real proportion and the betrayal of every child on the planet.

Then comes the discontent of youth, not a native environ of youthful spirit
but rather the indigestion of sour grapes. The ingenuity of man being ingenuous, that is artless, in comparison to our creations which we do not really know or appreciate, being convinced we are in need of intermediaries.

 

There are none so blind as those who refuse to see, the answer is there but you refuse to see.

The "word" Jehovah is God's name and that is simply the truth and yes that truth does help me to recognize who is my brother in Christ and who is not. It also helps me to know that the Holy Spirit serves God and that God does not serve the Holy Spirit.

Once again you show that your spirit buddy has not taught you all things, because if it had you would know I do not venerate God's name as God but the "word" Jehovah is what God has asked us to call him and that Jesus even asked us to honor that name.

Which of Christ's brothers have I given Pharisaical treatment?

That really is up to you if you do not lie, I will not call you a liar.

That is what God's word the Bible says.

Once again you have not learned the rule: “Do not go beyond the things that are written”.

Also, I have never denied the existence of the Holy Spirit, Never. I have seen the operation of Holy Spirit in many and seen the operation of Holy Spirit in my own life. You are just not one of them.

If you're are going to use the Bible at least get it right; "Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you." and not try to make your additions look like they are part of the Bible.

Yes your god has given you a spirit but by your own admission you do not know Jehovah and since his son Jesus is as one with God that means you do not know Jesus either and so neither Jesus or his father Jehovah would send you the Holy Spirit. So the only question is who is the god that would send you a spirit that would keep you ignorant of who Jehovah and Jesus Christ are?

I know almost nothing of your 44 years but I do know what you have discussed with me and it is from that I drew my conclusion. As for judging you, not really, I was mere stating what I've seen you do.

I'm not feigning anything, that is the way I was raised. Whether I'm good at it or not is a judgment call and once again the one who says we should not judge has judged me. Can you say contradiction?

I wish I had a button that would pop up all the times you have said; judge not lest you be judged.

No it stems from your saying that you don't know who Jehovah is and that is God's name, by the way.

No I hold your apostate statements against you.

Oh I recognize you and what you say.

I recognize Christ's brothers just just fine they are easy to recognize and that makes it also easy to recognize those who are not, you for instance.

It is also easy to recognize those who are teaching the lessons of the Holy Spirit, they will not be contradictory as your "lessons" are and will not go beyond the things written as you do. (Galatians 1:8)

I have never condemned you, Never. Only God can do that. Once again your spirit has lied to you.

You need to look at your spirit companion, he is deceiving you and will not let you come to know God or his Son Jesus.

None, that is why I know that your spirit is not the Holy Spirit.

It is a name and it is God's name, so yes, for one thing. For another, your denial of the Christ Jesus' sacrifice.

I have never admitted to judging by appearances, your spirit has lied to you again.

Sound like another judgement call to me.

One more time? Don't you ever get tired of making the same tired statements over and over again, especially ones like this that are so bogus?

Do not go beyond the things written.

That is talking about Christ's brothers which you seem to be trying your hardest to prove you are not.

I have never doubted your sincerity. The problem is, that like Paul once did, you are zealously working against God and Christ. You need to turn back to God and his Christ.

If God says the Bible is alive, it is alive.

Yet it remains that the spirit you have is not the Holy Spirit.

Ravings like this only show that you do not have the Holy Spirit, I hope that one day you will realize that what you have is not the Holy Spirit, so that you can truly receive the blessings of the true Holy Spirit and come to know the truth.

Tell me where is the love of God in all this? Has your spirit not taught you what the Christ said; "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind." then he said "This is the first and greatest commandment." You never seem to mention this, why is that? What do you find wrong with loving God, so wrong that you never seem mention this greatest commandment?

 

Yes, I refuse to continue to answer the same questions that you have asked over and over again that I have already answered over and over again. Because doing so is pointless because you will just ask me the same question again. I have even spent the time to go back and copy and paste all the many times I have answered them before, which is extremely time consuming but even that does no good because as soon as you are backed into a corner and have no answer to what I have said to you, you will just ask the same old questions again.

 

He probably did not. He more than likely used some Hebrew and Aramaic or a combination of both.

As I pointed out I believe it did, Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, merely confirms what the Bible indicates.

 

I'm sorry for accusing you of pretending.

I feel that the words of the Bible do penetrate the soul and that they continually reveal God's nature to me. What is troubling to me is that you say the spirit guides you yet you say that Jesus' sacrifice was meaningless. That goes against the teachings of the spirit and going against it mean you're rebelling against God. I worry because doing so will keep you from having eternal life and I would like you to receive eternal life.

I sense also your enthusiasm but trusting in God is very important. If your spirit is saying things like Jesus' sacrifice is not important than it may be the wrong spirit to embrace. If the spirit reminds of us of all then he would remind you the importance of the sacrifice.

Not everything Jesus had said and done was recorded, that's true because doing so would make the Bible much bigger than it is. But if we keep to the sayings of Christ and don't add or subtract to what we have available then we can guard ourselves from things that can harm us.

 

I know there are powerful sayings in the bible because I keep them. There are words in the bible however that are not of the same informing quality. I know that many have a belief that the bible has been magically protected from the abuse of the unscrupulous and time. It is true that enough content endures to transcend those common devices, but that is because of the nature of that content. It exists as a potential for every man and only informs when it is embraced and that contract is between you and god and no other device whatsoever. God knows us in secret.

There is another current in the life of christian community and that involves all kinds of intrigues with each other and they develop precepts for the sake of profiting off of, and over each other. They teach the precepts of men as doctrine and use the doctrine to rob and steal from that true secret relationship with god. There is no teaching or earthbound intermediary to substitute for our relationship with our creator. Yet there is the church hierarchy and the church rules and the officially sanctioned doctrines and group prayer and group think and the group despairs anything that doesn't look like them.

What I said was that jesus did not sacrifice his life in the sense of giving up something he would have preferred to keep. Jesus did give his life so that he could pick it up again. Jesus said I desire mercy not sacrifice. Never once is it recorded that jesus said he sacrificed himself. God's commandment is eternal life, not sacrifice.He gave his life as the measure given is the measure received, he shed his blood for us that he be with us eternally. To have all, give all to all, for the measure you give is the measure you receive and it is also the measure you share. No greater love has a man than he give his life for a friend and no man is greater loved than christ.

What teaching of the spirit and what spirits def zeppelin? If you mean by teaching, common interpretation of the bible then yes, what I say is at variance with common interpretation of the bible. I am never against god.
The holy spirit does not teach contrary to christ. How am I rebelling against god?
Jesus showed the way to transcend sin and so death through forgiveness.
Sin is a slander against the holy child of god, forgive them, they know not what they do. Christ said he would be ransom for many, not because payment is required but because they were held hostage by deceit and the truth sets us free. It is important to let go of the the idea that you are unworthy for we are to love our brother as ourselves.

If I did not trust god I would not be putting myself out here in an obvious heterodox fashion.
The holy spirit reminds of all christ said, but does not invent things not said.
When did god say jesus sacrificed himself? When did jesus say he sacrificed himself? You show me where he said he sacrificed himself and I will believe and you can have a clear conscience about the duration of my life.

Exactly, keep the sayings of christ and don't add or subtract. Where did jesus say he sacrificed himself? Is not christ resurrected?

I apologize if I seem harsh because I begrudge no person their belief, however I would caution anyone about using their belief as a license to accuse me of guilt.
Understand our only jeopardy is in loosing our appreciation for the holy spirit.

 

Why would you need to "confirm" what the bible "indicates"?
Where does the bible indicate the meaning of a greek word? You filled out or enhanced appreciation of the meaning with the use of a reference material. You demonstrated how you came to discern the meaning in a biblical passage by examining the expanded conjugations of a greek word, even though you do not speak or read greek and greek is not the language in the english bible.
If the bible interprets itself then you have not demonstrated it in this thread. There was another instance where you came to a deductive conclusion in which you demonstrated your steps about when the last meal should be reenacted.

 

People were then such immediate 'slaves' to the state for the feeling of being arrested.

And then when they were wickedly actually arrested, they were according to the newest theories of archaeology no longer slaves just talented or able-bodied men.

 

Bull

Prove it.

Me for one.

When I witness for christ I do not lie.

I do not go beyond. Does love seek it's own?

Yes you do in me, you do in you.

What does that look like?

 

I personally don't believe in magic but a universe too complex for current man to understand so it only appears to be magic at the time.

Aside from that, again, I don't mean to accuse you of anything especially since I don't know you in person. I give you the benefit of the doubt that you apply the sayings of the Bible in your day to day; in that way God knows us from our hearts and only God can know that for sure. But I do know, through your responses in these forums, is what you believe and not believe. Saying that, it seems that you disagree with a paramount teaching in Christianity in that Jesus died for the redemption of sins and to pay off the debt created by Adam. That is what concerns me since such a belief is linked to not receiving salvation; again that is my concern.

I personally believe that the time is coming when God will bring down a judgement on all churches that teaches falsehood in his name and end up confusing many. Actually, the Bible condemns such a thing many times. I also agree that every person has a responsibility for their own salvation so putting so much trust in the precepts of man and hierarchies as to become an authority does create group think and among other things.

Although he never says directly that he is a sacrifice, he does refer to giving of his life as a ransom and the redeeming effects it will have for humanity (Matthew 20). The word ransom that is used is 'lytron' which literally means "a means of loosing". It's used in conjunction with paying for a debt that was owed (Lev 25:24). So even though he never uses the word sacrifice, the main issue is of acceptance of the redeeming qualities of the ransom. From reading your posts from some time, it seems that you're against the idea that his death had any redeaming qualities at all. That is at the heart of the issue and I feel that not accepting this would mean the spirit you refer to is telling you things contrary to what Jehovah's spirit teaches.

The thing about requiring mercy instead of sacrifices is not to imply that we can do anything, including rape and murder, just as long as we have mercy. It's more in reference to sacrifices that are displeasing to Jehovah like in the in the case in Amos:

... Even though you offer me your burnt offerings and grain offerings, I will not accept them; .... But let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream. -- Amos 5:21-24

or in the Case of God accepting Abels Sacrifice but not Cains, so not all sacrifices are displeasing to God.

The teaching that Jesus is a random for the redemption of sin and that it pays off a debt. The spirit is the spirit of Jehovah God. Although you may not be rebelling against the god that you describe, you are rebelling against God by disagreeing with what is taught throughout scripture and what Jesus taught. Again, I can only go by what you say to me.

See, that is the troubling part, thedope, is that you say many truthful things but then you change it, so in a way you are teaching something contrary to what Jesus taught. The ransom was a way to pay off debt made by Adam. Although all men (aside from Jesus) are unworthy to be the already unblemished sacrificial lamb, men can still be counted as worthy (2 Thessalonians 1:11). Love is good, but reverence for what God says is also good and will lead to good things (James 3:17)

Yeah it's true that Christ is resurrected, but it's also true that the ransom needs to be remembered, giving thanks, and that's hard or impossible to do if we believe it was a meaningless sacrifice mentioned at amos.

No problem, but I don't think you seem harsh.

What I am explaining, now not accusing, is what Jesus had said and what he said is that you're in jeopardy of losing eternal life unless you believe in what we talked about (accepting the ransom which is a sacrifice).

 

Why is that waterbrother, so you can remember the principle? It is attributed to jesus the words judge not lest you be judged and also, do not judge by appearances but rather use right judgement. This lesson of the holy spirit is bringing the distinctions between the two mental transactions to the fore.

I said I have never used the word jehovah except in such a conversation.
I know what you revere the name jehovah to be. Perhaps you could show me where the bible says it. It has never been presented to me by me creator as any kind of functionary in whether or not he loves me. The holy spirit teaches me of names, that I am is the surname we inherit in creation.

I have renounced no belief I have ever held with the exception of those things that I had been shown by the holy spirit were not true. I used to have many misconceptions about myself, my brothers, and the world. But I have never had a misconception about the presence of gods love or the verity of the holy spirit. The holy spirit reminds that christ teaches to take no oaths. I take no oath to any belief because belief is only required until the truth is manifest.
If what you hold against me, god also holds against you*.(that which you forgive will be forgiven you, but that which do not forgive will not) What apostate statements are you making? Could it be that you deny any belief that the holy spirit is in me?

Who am I then and what do I say?

As you do unto to the least of these you do also to me.

It is good we all prophecy. I do not go beyond the teaching of the holy spirit and the teaching that the holy spirit is giving is not inconsistent of the holy spirit teaching.

If you have never condemned me then why take offense at the teaching of the holy spirit. Look at the statement again. You, we, they, must condemn in order to justify, your, our, their unwillingness to forgive.

No. You need to pray for my well being. Whatever you ask in his name it shall be done for you. So if god makes me well, then I am in no need of healing. But if you continue to see your brother sick and deny him the holy spirit, then it is you who are in need of healing.

I keep telling one thing and you keep saying it seems I am doing something else, and it is that something else that you go with.

I would hope that we would be further along in our powers of distinction by now. Do not judge by appearances but rather use right judgment.

What is beyond the teaching of the holy spirit to say the kingdom of god and his children are without blemish? What is bogus about the teaching, if the eye be sound, if you are using right judgement, then the whole body will be full of light.

I think it is you who are trying to deny me my rightful place at gods table.

No where in the bible does it say the bible is alive.

For the measure you give will be the measure you receive. As you give unto your brother you give unto your self.

I hope the holy spirit has a way with me to help you realize the truth never makes the children of god guilty.

The measure you give is the measure you receive and gods love is in you whether you recognize it or not. Your judgement of my worthiness or the worthiness of the teaching of the holy spirit is preventing you from recognizing love. We must condemn in order to justify our unwillingness to forgive.

If I do not understand that commandment I do not understand the next in line that is like it, that you love you brother as yourself. Perhaps the holy spirit is satisfied that you understand that greatest commandment. However loving god is not defining god and deciding who may be given the holy spirit and who may not. Be vigilant only for god and his kingdom. His kingdom includes the entire sonship. God is the measure of his children, his children's beliefs are not the measure of god.

 

Because not will takes the Bibles word for it, you for instance.

why would it or even have to?

Why yes I did why is that a problem?

no I didn't. I merely showed confirming evidence for what the Bible already says,for people like you who not believe the bible.

Dope, the Bible was not written in English, it was written in Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic.

If you weren't so intent on blindly trying to prove the Bible doesn't interpret itself, you would have seen how the Bible interprets itself in what was said just before all this you seem to be so worried about.

No but nice try. Care to play again?

 

What did my mother ever do to you?

If you really had any Holy Spirit even near you, you would not being calling into question how my mother raised me.

This is a demonstration of a lack of Christian Love so egregious that it shows you have no love of God or of his son Jesus.

Personally I didn't really care about the lies you've told about me but what about being a "brother of Christ" and having the "Holy Spirit" gives you the right to cast aspersions on my mother? How is that being a "foot step follower" of the Christ?

It is out of the heart the mouth speaks and now we can all see how black your heart really is.

 

No I'm done with this particular issue as reason is not effective when ignorance is chosen or there is no capacity for comprehension. The fact is that the brain sorts and interprets everything it sees, irrespective if it is the bible or a cheeseburger. The bible certainly does not interpret itself to people who cannot read.

 

Absolutely nothing brother. You said your mother taught you to be polite, I asked if she taught you how to lie?

That is not what is happening. I am probing to discover how you achieved your current deceptive state. I am speaking to your behavior and now you want to blame your behavior on your mother. You offered your mother as defense in an attempt to cast me as without love.

As I point out above, you claim an offense so egregious that it shows I have no love of god. An offense against your mother. Boy, you are throwing your mother under the bus for the sake of your own satisfaction.

Those who love christ keep his sayings. I have told you I said nothing directed at your mother. Forgiveness will restore your vision of your brother in christ, unless you care not to have christ or his brother in you.

See above.

I know you as a brother in christ.

You were saying?

 

(as an interesting aside, how do you know that this passage is "inspired" by God? If you believe only what the bible says, then you must find a bible passage that says, "John 6 is inspired of the Holy Spirit." As there are no explicit texts that say so, how are you so sure? If you appeal to sources outside of scripture you are violating sola scriptura; if you truly believe sola scriptura though, it seems you have no evidence to support the claim that John 6 is inspired of the Holy Spirit.)

Non sequitur fallacy: why you suppose that by "spirit" Jesus means to say "symbolic". This would be entirely inconsistent with the whole bread of life discourse. There is nothing harmful about a "symbolic" reading of John 6. If it was truly symbolic, why did so many leave him? Further, why didn't Jesus clarify when he saw all these poor souls misunderstand him? Further still, why did he challenge the apostles to walk away if they didn't accept? Believing that Jesus' words here are symbolic is too easy; there is nothing startling about them if that is what Jesus meant. But if he meant them literally, then of course it's easy to see that many- just like protestants today- walked away from him. It isn't what they wanted to hear.To my knowledge, Jesus repeats himself 4 times in this passage, and it is the only biblical passage where Jesus does this. No other passage does Jesus explain 4 times over. Only two other passages do people leave Jesus because they despise what he is saying (including the apostles)- 1) the eucharist; 2) divorce; 3) renunciation of wealth/rich young man; in all three of these passages not only does Jesus lose disciples, but also the apostles question him.

Maybe it's important to help non-catholics realize that we don't believe that we are biologically eating Jesus' flesh when we partake of Holy Communion. Jesus is giving himself to us mystically, in a very unique way that can't be fully understood.It is communion; but it is a true spiritual act- that is to say, it involves man's entire being in all its dimensions physical and spiritual. It's the same sort of thing that happened to the disciples on their way to Emmaus on the first Easter Sunday (end of Luke)- they recognized him only in the Scripture and the breaking of bread. That is what Catholics participate in in the Mass.

Doesn't confirm anything other than the fact that Peter's faith was stronger than the other apostles in that moment of trial. He didn't understand, but he did believe. His belief in the eucharist follows from His conviction that Jesus- as the son of God- couldn't be lying. It's worth noting that in John 6:66 Jesus for the first time alludes to his betrayer. Isn't it interesting that Jesus does this right after laying down his teaching on the Eucharist? He seemed to know that his betrayal was linked to the rejection of this sacred teaching.

Maybe, but the issue isn't what could have been meant, but what really was meant. "I would say..."- who cares? Opinion is irrelevant. That's not up to you or I to decide- unless of course you claim to be infallible in your interpretation. Yet if you do, why is it so hard to accept papal infallibility? If you claim no infallibility, why should we trust your interpretation? It's an impossible dilemma for any protestant: become a pope unto yourself or have no basis for anything you say other than mere opinion!

It's important to juxtapose this text with 1 cor. 12(i think) where St. Paul talks about the "tradition" handed down by Jesus. The tradition- the liturgy of the Eucharist- unlocks the entire meaning of the Scriptures just as it did for the disciples en route to Emmaus, as well as the early Christians- we are told in Acts 4 that they devoted themselves to prayers, the teachings of the apostles and the breaking of bread. This effectively means they were devoted to the liturgy of the word and the liturgy of the eucharist- i.e., daily mass. If these words of Jesus at the last supper were merely a matter of symbolism, why would Matthew, Mark and Luke devote so much time to it in their Gospels? Unless of course, it has a deeper meaning. Why a lengthy bread of life discourse that was apparently so poorly taught by Jesus that many of his followers abandoned him? It's a really a silly hypothesis when you think it through- there's nothing at all unsettling about taking this story symbolically- no one would have had any reason to become hostile to Jesus. Unless of course, he meant it literally. To be sure, perhaps Jesus didn't entirely mean it to be taken literally though- the pharisees made the same mistake as protestants today, they mistook his teaching for cannabalism. They couldn't understand that since he was God he could give himself to them in a unique way in which He would share his divine nature with them. They were of the world, not of God. Only those not of this world can grasp this- there as a strong parallel here between Peter's response and Matt. 16 where Jesus says, "flesh and blood have not revealed this to you..." Peter was given the grace of faith to accept his and rejoice in it.."you have the words of everlasting life"; "thou art the messiah, the son of the living God..." When Jesus says, "my words are spirit and life" he doesn't mean to say, "my words are merely symbolic don't take them literally" but at the same time he is indicating, "this isn't about cannablism". Jesus was preparing to give himself in a unique way that was both physical and spiritual and can't be fully grasped by reason. Neither cannablism or symbolism- the mysterious middle ground is what Catholic's believe in the doctrine of the Holy Eucharist.

In the OT, the Hebrews had to eat the flesh of the sacrificial lamb on the night of passover; in the NT we must consume the flesh of New and eternal passover lamb to move from death to life, "unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood you have no life in you". We don't sacrfice Christ again; rather we are made present to him during his one sacrifice- brought as it were simultaneously to the foot of the cross, to the tomb, to the right hand of the father, to the cradle in bethlehem..it's a profound mystery.

 

The notion that the Bible is self-interpreting and understandable to "babes" seems naive. Many of us think our opinions are the right ones and those that disagree must be wrong, nuts, and/or perverse; but the existence of thousands of Christian denominations and sects shows how the same words can be given different interpretations that seem reasonable to the believers. Take a few examples:

• ingesting blood. (Genesis 9:4; Leviticus 3:17; 17:10-16; Deuteronomy 14:21).

Most Christians interpret this to mean eating, and the context is in consuming flesh of animals which haven't been drained of blood. Jehovah's Witnesses, however, interpret it to include blood transfusions, even though the procedure was unknown at the time, thus risking millions of human lives.

• The Trinity

Traditional Christians believe that Jesus is the Son of God and that He coexisted with God the Father and that He is one with the Father in the Trinity. Jehovah's Witnesses, however, believe that He is the Archangel Michael, created by God the Father. This issue controversy led to considerable bloodshed in the early days of the Church as followers of Arias struggled with Catholic Christians. From the above discussion, I gather there may still be some heated disagreement among the posters in this Forum on the issue.

• The Night of the Living Dead (Matthew 27:52).: ...the graves were opened and bodies of men and women who died were raised.

Fundamentalist Christians take this literally, and believe that corpses actually walked the streets, and a majority of translators of standard editions of the Bible agree, even though no other competent observer, including the authors of the other Gospels, reported such an amazing event. The New World Translation (Jehovah's Witness) takes the more plausible view that the graves were opened by an earthquake and bodies tumbled out upright and were seen by by-passers who went on to town. Obviously their reading of the Greek is quite different from most scholars. And did either version happen? Or can we allow for some metaphorical hyperbole to Matthew in conveying a cataclysmic event.

What would "babes" make of these differences? Does it matter?

 

Experiential conjugations.

 

You cast aspersions on my mother, who in your own admission never did anything to you and you don't even have the common courtesy to apologize.

All you can think of is defending yourself.

And you call yourself a Christian, a brother of Christ. Have you no shame? Go crawl back into the hole you crawled out of and stop smearing Jesus Christ's great name by saying you are his brother.

By your fruitage you will be known, and this meanness that you defend is not of the Christ or his Brothers.

You need to take a good long look at yourself and see what you have become.

 

Friend, evidently you did not read my posts and have your own conclusions to contend with. I said nothing of your mother. I asked you if your mother taught you to lie. If the answer is no, then say no, don't say I accuse your mother and then call me despicable. In your zeal to defend your beliefs you have judged me falsely. If your beliefs were sound, they would not need defending.

I tell you if you keep the sayings of christ you will see that we are brothers in god, created in the likeness and image of our creator. Created good by the judgement of god to create the good, I am a disciple of christ and am in the counsel of gods holy spirit. I have no occasion nor am I led to make this claim with anyone but you. Predominately I am not begrudged for what I share except by you.

Look at what you are saying. You must condemn in order to justify your unwillingness to forgive. You want so badly to prove me without the love of our father who art in heaven, because you care so much more for your conceptions on the letter than you care about a child of god, that you cannot conceive of embracing me.

I told you I was initially alerted by the fact that you had found good cause to hold hate in your heart. You cannot serve two masters. Either you are totally devoted to love or you are devoted to nothing. As you see here your words turn to bile as you stumble in the face of your indecision. I know you mean me no harm and you simply don't have your good wits about you at the moment.

There is no reason, being gathered in christs name, that we should not be able to discuss ideas without flying into hysteria, and no reason for you not to recognize me unless you are not here in christs name or not seeking gods kingdom.


I asked you where does it say gods name is jehovah?

Also, you say the bible was written in aramaic, hebrew, and greek, as response to my comment about an english translation. When I asked you if jesus taught in greek, you said probably not. So I ask, what is your point in saying the bible was originally written in greek if jesus didn't teach in greek?