Beware - "red letter" antichrists

Originally posted by @sonship to karoly aczel
I think your best bet is to get out of the way with the chit chat and let him and I see if we can arrive at some truth.

That is unless you want to distract me with snippets like you're doing.

Hey karoly aczel, you been asked "to get out of the way" on a public forum by the preacher who refuses to start a blog.

Originally posted by @karoly-aczel
I have no 'next move'. I'm not playing your game, I'm living my own life and choosing to respond to what I see fit for my soul. I have no intention of you dissecting my posts in 20/20 hindsight. I am absolutely certain of this edit: Am I lying?

God doesn't demand absolue mathematical like certainty in the Christian life.
He calls for faith.
He makes up the other side of the equation in being FAITHFUL.

To know anything with total certainty you would have to be God Himself - omniscient.

Now don't go feeling sorry for people who have faith. Jesus lived by faith too. And His impact on the human race was catyclysmic.

I think faith leaves nothing for man to boast in.
I think faith leaves nothing for man's pride to brag about.

I think between the finite creature and the infinite, uncreated, eternal Being the bridge of communication is faith.

I think if God is not faithFUL our faith means not much.

I think this faith is mysteriously a gift from God too.
That I cannot explain.

Lastly, it appears that from the earliest pages of the BIble and on through it, a distinction is made between genuine faith and presumption.

Obviously from Genesis to Revelation not everything about man's reaction to God counts as FAITH. Some reactions were clearly rejected and exposed as, for lack of a better word, I would call presumption.

PS. I don't have in myself anymore faith then anyone else. I do know where to go GET SOME. In the word of God.

Originally posted by @sonship
ThinkOfOne has asked some good question of me.
Why don't you let him and I hash some of this out?

Though we have disagreements I do appreciate some more thoughtful posts facilitating some serious challenging discussion from him.

I think your best bet is to get out of the way with the chit chat and let him and I see if we can arrive at some truth.

That is unless you want to distract me with snippets like you're doing.

Snippetts? Seriously? I lead you to pure water and all you see are 'snippets' . Dont think I haven't noticed you ignoring me. Feel free to challenge me on the living knowledge of the gospel? If I dont know I will asko who does. ok?

Originally posted by @sonship
God doesn't demand absolue mathematical like certainty in the Christian life.
He calls for faith.
He makes up the other side of the equation in being FAITHFUL.

To know anything with total certainty you would have to be God Himself - omniscient.

Now don't go feeling sorry for people who have faith. Jesus lived by faith too. And His impact on ...[text shortened]... ve in myself anymore faith then anyone else. I do know where to go GET SOME. In the word of God.

I cant get past your first line. The universe is based on mathematics. Mark my words.

as for 'faith' , the kind jaywill precribes, I have no need for it. I know. Bang!! end of story, thanks for coming 🙂

Originally posted by @sonship
You and FMF should go play a game of hopscotch together.

Febuary 4th, 2018 was the last time I discussed something about demons I believe. on Thread [b]the Gospel of Jesus vs the Gospel of Paul

FMF:

Do you think ThinkOfOne is engaging in "demonic activity"? It's a yes or no question.

sonship:

I don't know. Do you th ...[text shortened]... that the blood of Christ would be your covering and protection against Satan's schemes.

[/b]

Is that a “yes I do still think Rajk999 is under the influence of demons”?

Or is it a “no I don’t think Rajk999 is under the influence of demons”?

Originally posted by @karoly-aczel
as for 'faith' , the kind jaywill precribes, I have no need for it. I know. Bang!! end of story, thanks for coming 🙂

Which kind of faith do you have a need for?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Which kind of faith do you have a need for?

none for myself, as for others at times I need a little faith that they will b alright

ThinkOfOne I do expect you to explain why you insist on using my old tag jaywill, or to just update your addresses to me from now on, with my new one sonship.

My thoughts on Why the Blood of Christ is important will not be that systematic. And they cannot be exhaustive because it is too reverent a subject for me which would require eternity to appreciate I feel.

And frankly it is deep and mysterious. But something can be said.

God cannot die.
God does not die.
God is uncreated and eternal - the Creator and not the creature.

But God became a man. And the Scripture even says that God purchased the church with His own blood.

" ... shepherd church of God, which He purchased with His own blood." (See Acts 20:28)

One respected scholar (J.N. Darby) says it should be translated "the blood of His own". I would not argue with a man who translated both the Hebrew Old Testament and the Greek NT. But I prefer the former rendering -"His own blood".

God told made the unmistakable link between a living being and the blood of that being in Genesis. Its life is in the blood.

I believe the emphasis on the blood of Christ in the Bible has to do with God communicating to us on no uncertain terms that Christ's life was God's life - Christ's living was the living of God. And He conveys to man as far as it is possible for man to understand - God and Man were united in Jesus Christ.

This amounts to God going as far to die for us Himself in order to save us from ourselves - from the potentiality of creatures with free will to rebel against the Ultimate Governor of being to tragically choose to revolt.

The uncreated took up a form in which He went the last measure, the ultimate sacrifice, the ultimate laying aside Himself in love, that we be saved from revolt against God.

He purchased the called out assembly with His own blood.
This was only possible by way of the incarnation of God as a man.

He Who cannot die virtually died.
He Who cannot remove Himself virtually did.
Emphatically, the blood of Christ stands for the very life of Christ. And the life of Christ was God mingled with humanity in incarnation.

" ... the church of God which He obtained with His own blood."

To me when I read words of John that Christ said to live we must eat His flesh and drink His blood, this is not just a man speaking. This is the uncreated, eternal God, the ground of all being speaking saying - we have to receive without reservation His incarnation into a man - Jesus Christ.

I count this as God / man speaking of the wonder of His incarnation.

"Jesus therefore said to them, Truly, truly, I say to you, Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you do not have life within yourselves.

He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up in the last day. For My flesh is true food and My blood is true drink." (John 6:53-55)

Men and women in this fallen world of corruption and sin and rebellion must realize and receive God Himself - that God and man are united in Jesus Christ.

These are only preliminary remarks.

Originally posted by @sonship

So jaywill, can you succinctly explain what you think is the purpose of this literal "blood of Christ", why it was necessary and why you think it efficacious?

Oh, I think it would take eternity for us to fully explain and appreciate this. But I will write something.

What is important is what the word of God says.
And what is importan ...[text shortened]... n't get me to discard God's word for human philosophy.

That's part of your problem, you know?

There was a reason that I placed succinctly in bold. If you don't think that your up to the request, then that's okay.

You seemed to have gotten yourself in the weeds and I was hoping that you would be able/willing to provide an uncluttered foundation from which to start.

Originally posted by @sonship

So jaywill, can you succinctly explain what you think is the purpose of this literal "blood of Christ", why it was necessary and why you think it efficacious?

My tag name is now sonship.
When I went from [b]jaywill to sonship I informed everyone on this Forum WHY that was done.

Is it some subtle contempt I detect in your ...[text shortened]... ain with a different tag."

What's up with your insistence in using my old tag? Just curious.[/b]

As I recall, in the first post you made after making the switch, you explained why it was done. Evidently some posters had not seen it and kept busting your chops even after you had tried to explain that you had, in fact, explained it earlier. I had seen the first post and I defended you.

I call you jaywill because after years of interacting with you, that's how I thought of you and continue to think of you. It's as simple as that.

Originally posted by @thinkofone
As I recall, in the first post you made after making the switch, you explained why it was done. Evidently some posters had not seen it and kept busting your chops even after you had tried to explain that you had, in fact, explained it earlier. I had seen the first post and I defended you.

I call you jaywill because after years of interacting with you, that's how I thought of you and continue to think of you. It's as simple as that.

I call you jaywill because after years of interacting with you, that's how I thought of you and continue to think of you.
So, regardless and in spite of what someone else prefers, you opt to go with what you want.

Is that for clarity's sake, or are you after something else entirely, passing it off as harmless nostalgia?

Originally posted by @freakykbh
[b]I call you jaywill because after years of interacting with you, that's how I thought of you and continue to think of you.
So, regardless and in spite of what someone else prefers, you opt to go with what you want.

Is that for clarity's sake, or are you after something else entirely, passing it off as harmless nostalgia?[/b]

He asked me to explain it and I explained it.

As I recall, he had simply forgotten the password and ended up starting a new account and announced it as such. It had nothing to do with "preference" per se.

Not sure why he's questioning my motives now. Perhaps it's because of the FMJ/dj2becker/romans1009 thing and he doesn't want to be tainted by it.

The difference with the FMJ thing is that he wasn't honest and upfront about it.

Originally posted by @divegeester
Is that a “yes I do still think Rajk999 is under the influence of demons”?

Or is it a “no I don’t think Rajk999 is under the influence of demons”?

Bump for sonship.