Re: A rational explanation - or something more sinister?
- From: "Phil" <philipew.saunders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2011 10:08:51 +0100
Kendall Down wrote:
On 22/07/2011 19:54, Phil wrote:
And where is that scripture Ken? The one that says that those that
don't believe in Jesus will be saved?
Zechariah talks about people asking "What are the marks in your
hands?" which is commonly interpreted to mean people in heaven not
knowing the gospel story.
Zechariah? The passage isn't about salvation nor is it about heaven.
In heaven? "8And it shall come to pass, that in all the land, saith the
LORD, two parts therein shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be
left therein." nice try Ken but no Cuban lung killer for you!
Paul assures us that all that is necessary to know about God is
revealed to us in nature.
Does he Ken?
20For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly
seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power
and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 21Because that, when they
knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became
vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23And changed the
glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man,
and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. 24Wherefore God
also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to
dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25Who changed the truth of
God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the
Creator, who is blessed for ever.
In fact he says that the lost are without excuse because they know God
exists but don't glorify him and instead act wickedly. Hardly saying that
they are saved without Jesus is it Ken?
Ministers of God who don't believe the bible accounts are like monuments to
the foolishness of men.
Phil
.
- References:
- Re: A rational explanation - or something more sinister?
- From: John
- Re: A rational explanation - or something more sinister?
- From: - .. -- Tim .-.
- Re: A rational explanation - or something more sinister?
- From: Kendall Down
- Re: A rational explanation - or something more sinister?
- From: Phil
- Re: A rational explanation - or something more sinister?
- From: Kendall Down
- Re: A rational explanation - or something more sinister?
- From: Phil
- Re: A rational explanation - or something more sinister?
- From: Kendall Down
- Re: A rational explanation - or something more sinister?
- From: Phil
- Re: A rational explanation - or something more sinister?
- From: Kendall Down
- Re: A rational explanation - or something more sinister?
- From: Phil
- Re: A rational explanation - or something more sinister?
- From: Kendall Down
- Re: A rational explanation - or something more sinister?
- From: Phil
- Re: A rational explanation - or something more sinister?
- From: Kendall Down
- Re: A rational explanation - or something more sinister?
- From: John
- Re: A rational explanation - or something more sinister?
- From: Kendall Down
- Re: A rational explanation - or something more sinister?
- From: Phil
- Re: A rational explanation - or something more sinister?
- From: Kendall Down
- Re: A rational explanation - or something more sinister?
- Prev by Date: Re: A rational explanation - or something more sinister?
- Next by Date: Re: A rational explanation - or something more sinister?
- Previous by thread: Re: A rational explanation - or something more sinister?
- Next by thread: Re: A rational explanation - or something more sinister?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|