Author Topic: Some questions  (Read 4313 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline fullarmor2

  • 300
  • *
  • Posts: 419
  • Gender: Male
Re: Some questions
« Reply #25 on: June 29, 2008, 07:42:03 PM »
    Waitingonthelamb,    I think your allowing your self to be offended way too easily.  And that is causing you to be defensive and perhaps judgmental towards  SOtW.  Do you know SOtW, or what is really in his heart?  I think you are mistaking his boldness in stating his positions as being negative and that is not true.  Its actually a good thing.
 We all have a "coat of many colors" and a light which we are to let shine. Lets not be offended at each other when we do it. And are simply trying to be the best we can be for God. 
For all those who live in the shadow of death,  a glorious light has dawned!  And for all those who stumble in the darkness,   behold,   your light has come!!

Offline studier

  • Restricted
  • *
  • Posts: 1805
  • Gender: Male
Re: Some questions
« Reply #26 on: June 29, 2008, 07:49:40 PM »
There is no arrogant manner in which I present anything to you waitingonthelamb, it is confidence is not arrogance since I know what I am talking about. I feel you are too sensitive, and do not know how to react to someone who is confident in their answers.

Are you not the person who has some questions? So if you ask questions, would you not expect someone has the answers to those questions? There is no condescending manner in which I present these answers, nor is it arrogant of me to know the answers to these questions and present them.

Once again, not for your benefit any longer, but for the benefit of others who might be confused by your answer, I will answer the rebuttal of 'Isaiah 14'.




Isaiah 14 says nothing of Satan. The word Lucifer, is a Latin word inserted by Jerome in the 4th Century, it has no purpose being in Scripture. It is a purposeful mistranslation and historically proved and documented that it is an error in translation from Hebrew to Latin, and the word remained from Latin to English.

So this is what the erroneous KJV says,

Isaiah 14:12
How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! [how] art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

Here is what the truthful Hebrew says,

[05307]   naphal   
[08064]   shamayim   
[01966]     heylel   
[01121]     ben   
[07837]     shachar
[03213]     yalal   
[01438]     gada`   
[0776]     'erets   
[02522]     chalash
[01471]     gowy

Notice carefully that there is nowhere the Latin word 'Lucifer' is written in Hebrew. First, there is no Scriptural source which defines Lucifer as Satan. Second, the it is the Hebrew word, Heylel, which was the literal name of Venus; and, Shahar, which just means "Star of the Morning" or sometimes translated, "Son of the Morning'.

Isaiah 14:12
How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!

So who is this 'morning star, son of the dawn'?

The title was in reference to Babylonian Kings and titles they used to claim their divine right to rule. Artifacts such as the Cyrus Cylinder, confirmed such assertions were made by kings of the ancient world. Babylonian Kings such as King Nebuchadnezzar, who according to Babylonian culture, was either worshiped as a God, or an agent or son of God and very common title which they bestowed upon themselves. According to Daniel, Nebuchadnezzar was given all authority and dominion over mankind, beasts of the field and birds of the air, and where they live. God made him ruler over them all with the title of King of Kings (Daniel 2:36-38); a title also reserved for Persian King, Artaxerxes (Ezekiel 26:7); and in Christianity to Jesus Christ (1 Timothy 6:13-16, Revelation 17:14, 19:16). This tells us, the man who has dominion over the beasts of the field, birds of the air, and over mankind, indeed had his power based in heaven and were called by the title, Light Bringer, Morning Star, Son of the Morning, etc.. To lose such authority would have him fall from heaven and cast to earth. Jesus Christ claims this title and confirms this title
(1 Timothy 6:13-16, Revelation 17:14, 19:16) in presently.

So who was the Morning Star being described in Isaiah 14?

Isaiah 14:3-4
On the day the LORD gives you relief from suffering and turmoil and cruel bondage, you will take up this proverb against the king of Babylon: How the oppressor has come to an end! How his fury has ended!

The king of Babylon is not a secret codeword to mean Satan. The king of Babylon is a secret codeword to mean king of Babylon.

Isaiah 14:9-20
The grave below is all astir to meet you at your coming; it rouses the spirits of the departed to greet you—all those who were leaders in the world; it makes them rise from their thrones—all those who were kings over the nations.

They will all respond, they will say to you [king of Babylon], "You also have become weak, as we are; you have become like us. All your pomp has been brought down to the grave, along with the noise of your harps; maggots are spread out beneath you and worms cover you. How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations! You said in your heart, 'I will ascend to heaven; I will raise my throne above the stars of God; I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly, on the utmost heights of the sacred mountain. I will ascend above the tops of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High.' But you are brought down to the grave, to the depths of the pit."

Those who see you stare at you, they ponder your fate: "Is this the man who shook the earth and made kingdoms tremble,the man who made the world a desert, who overthrew its cities and would not let his captives go home?"

All the kings of the nations lie in state, each in his own tomb. But you are cast out of your tomb like a rejected branch; you are covered with the slain, with those pierced by the sword, those who descend to the stones of the pit. Like a corpse trampled underfoot, you will not join them in burial, for you have destroyed your land and killed your people. The offspring of the wicked    will never be mentioned again."


This prophesy is speaking against the king of Babylon, a man once called the Son of the Morning, who would lose everything and his kingdom by defeat by a union of kings called the Medo-Persian Empire. When the Medo-Persians defeated Babylon, they released Israel from their suffering and turmoil and cruel bondage under Babylon. The name of the King of Babylon, that this proverb was against? King Nabonidus, also known to the book of Daniel as King Nebuchadnezzar (not to be confused with Nebuchadnezzar II), just as Isaiah 14 said would happen.

Isaiah 14 does not share, or convey in it's message, the story of Lucifer the 'fallen angel'. This myth is found nowhere in Scripture. It always amazes me though, how people defend this myth without knowledge.
« Last Edit: June 29, 2008, 07:59:55 PM by SOtW »

Offline Sarah

  • 300
  • *
  • Posts: 415
  • Gender: Female
Re: Some questions
« Reply #27 on: June 29, 2008, 08:51:31 PM »
Waitingonthelamb,

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.  I know it isn't politically correct to say you are knowledgable or have the answers, but sometimes you have to search it out to see if in fact it is true.  When I first started posting, I at first took offense to the manner at which Sotw challenged me on an issue and his confidence in his knowledge and quickness to point out others errors.  I decided not allow my perception of him hinder my learning from him.  Look past the way he presents and search out what he presents.  You only cheat yourself when you refuse the food because of the plate it comes on.

Our Wings are Burning

  • Guest
Re: Some questions
« Reply #28 on: June 30, 2008, 07:22:53 AM »
If UR is what you put out there, I want nothing to do with it and I am sure there will be more that you push away.

Please don't do this.  This is what nonbelievers do because of the harsh manners of many evangelical Christians.  Don't be like them.  Doing this would be saying, "I won't believe this doctrine because I don't like you."

Take Sarah and fullarmor2's advice.

waitinontheLamb

  • Guest
Re: Some questions
« Reply #29 on: July 01, 2008, 07:08:07 AM »
If UR is what you put out there, I want nothing to do with it and I am sure there will be more that you push away.

Please don't do this.  This is what nonbelievers do because of the harsh manners of many evangelical Christians.  Don't be like them.  Doing this would be saying, "I won't believe this doctrine because I don't like you."

Take Sarah and fullarmor2's advice.
I was not going to respond any further on the board, and in fact, I will be a silent person around here. But rest assured I am not done investigating this. I just don't want to ask anything further. I ask about Lucifer and get a pat "lucifer is a myth" answer. That is not helpful.

Regardless of what came thereafter, I will still look into this. I am not convinced of anything yet. I am disturbed by the outcome of some of this UR thing, in that it ends up with people forgoing attendance in a local congregation, or congregating with some of the liberal Uni churches instead.

Anyhoo, I will look further into it. I won't let sotw stop that. I follow Christ, not him.

God's richest to you...

jabcat

  • Guest
Re: Some questions
« Reply #30 on: July 01, 2008, 07:56:30 AM »
Can I share a little testimony about me, as a UR believer wotl?  All because of and by the grace of God...everything I am is because He gives me my very life and breath, in fact, in Him I "live and move and have my being".

I....
Believe in God's power and plan to reconcile all to Himself (Collosians 1:20>)
Believe in Jesus, the divine Son of God, whose blood saves us, cleanses us, and that His death and resurrection provided for His drawing (Gr. helkou, drag)ing not some, but all men to Himself!  Hallelujah!
Believe we shouldn't divide from other believers, but that buildings are not the "church".  That the body of Jesus is the ecclesia ("church"), and we live Him and share Him wherever we are.  That wherever 2 or 3 gather in His name He is there...that we are to meet with other believers, but that can be a home just as well or maybe better in some cases than a building with a steeple.
That much of what orthodoxy believes and teaches is missing much of the truth.  Not all, just a lot of it.
That we are not all saved yet as some teach, but that God is in the process of dragging some now, but will be Lord of all later;  when every knee bows and every tongue confesses Jesus as Lord...confess means things like "joyfully acknowledge, give thanks"...and scripture says we can only do that IN the Holy Spirit (not by, as the KJV says).  Paul said this would occur in this order;  "But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at His coming....The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.  ...  then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him that put all things under Him, that God may be ALL IN ALL" (I Cor. 15:23-28).
Believe differently than some UR'ers, that the logos and rhema (God's written, revealed, spoken words and thoughts) are God's Word...that Jesus is also the Word of God, but that His manifesting the Word in flesh did not negate the logos/rhema from also continuing to be God's Word.
Believe bible mistranslations have contributed to error in doctrine, but that was also part of God's plan, as He reveals what and when He chooses.  He veiled Israel unto this day...He placed all in disobedience so He could show mercy to all (Romans 11:32).

So, I personally am a Bible-believing, non-orthodox believer in Jesus.  I believe the Bible, when accurately translated and Spirit revealed does teach many things that are different than mainstream Christianity.  To me, being a follower of Jesus, including the true Good News of "Jesus, Savior of all men" is Christ-centered, scripture-based, non-traditions of men, Son-set free, God's-got-a-bigger-plan salvation.

Hope this helps.  I also posted a "what and why I believe" in a thread titled "Taking The Plunge--Sharing UR With The Pastor".  If you don't find it there feel free to PM me and I'll send it to you.

God's blessing, James.
« Last Edit: July 01, 2008, 08:01:57 AM by jabcat »

Offline studier

  • Restricted
  • *
  • Posts: 1805
  • Gender: Male
Re: Some questions
« Reply #31 on: July 01, 2008, 07:26:32 PM »
Quote
I ask about Lucifer and get a pat "lucifer is a myth" answer.

I actually did explain it, but instead of asking questions about it you went about defending that it wasn't a myth. When I told you Lucifer is a myth, you were the one with questions, why then did you start defending Lucifer? Now, I did explain from Scripture where Satan came from and shown you the Lucifer myth is not found in Scripture, passing your litmus test. Still, you pass it off with another Ad Hominem Fallacy instead of the knowledge of truth, unfortunately continuing to fail your own test.

Paul Hazelwood

  • Guest
Re: Some questions
« Reply #32 on: July 01, 2008, 07:57:20 PM »
I am disturbed by the outcome of some of this UR thing, in that it ends up with people forgoing attendance in a local congregation, or congregating with some of the liberal Uni churches instead.

Anyhoo, I will look further into it. I won't let sotw stop that. I follow Christ, not him.

God's richest to you...



I understand your concern here WOTL.

If it is of any use I will tell you why I left church.   There is much more than just stating God saves all and walking out of a congregation.

Leaving organized religion, was one of the hardest things I have ever done.  But it was also probably one of the most thought out things I have ever done as well.

But I have not left church, for the church of Christ does not know of walls, pews and such.  I regularly fellowship with people in the manner of sharing what I believe.  I fellowship when I am helping someone God has placed in my path.

What I left was a social environment that I had become dependant upon. Few people will admit or even see that they are in bondage to organized religion.

I left routines and procedures that was choking the life out of me. They were said to give hope to people in need when all they do is enable people to be dependant upon a church organization above finding freedom in the Gospel.

I left an entity that gives the power of our destiny to man, no different than the self help section does at Barnes and Nobel.

I left the teaching of a God that contradicts scripture by saying eventually someone will be in hell forever because God gave up on them.   If Gods love never fails, then indeed that is a lie if anyone cannot ever be with God at some point.

It took me three years to actually get the courage to walk out in obedience to God.   It doesn't matter who is disturbed, or who believes that God would call someone out of organized religion. 


Do you believe that God has the power to cause everyone to accept Christ eventually?

Offline Molly

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 11244
Re: Some questions
« Reply #33 on: July 01, 2008, 10:07:07 PM »
Isaiah 14:12
How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!




Lucifer

H1966
הילל
hêylêl
hay-lale'
From H1984 (in the sense of brightness); the morning star: - lucifer.


H1984
הלל
hâlal
haw-lal'
A primitive root; to be clear (originally of sound, but usually of color); to shine; hence to make a show; to boast; and thus to be (clamorously) foolish; to rave; causatively to celebrate; also to stultify: - (make) boast (self), celebrate, commend, (deal, make), fool (-ish, -ly), glory, give [light], be (make, feign self) mad (against), give in marriage, [sing, be worthy of] praise, rage, renowned, shine.



1 Corinthians 13:1
If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.




Main Entry: Lu·ci·fer
Function: noun
Pronunciation: 'lü-s&-f&r
Etymology: Middle English, the morning star, a fallen rebel archangel, the Devil, from Old English, from Latin, the morning star, from lucifer light-bearing, from luc-, lux light + -fer -ferous -- more at LIGHT
1 -- used as a name of the devil
2 : the planet Venus when appearing as the morning star

Offline willieH

  • Read Only
  • *
  • Posts: 2260
  • Gender: Male
Re: Some questions
« Reply #34 on: July 01, 2008, 10:17:57 PM »
willieH: Hi Paul...  :cloud9:

If it is of any use I will tell you why I left church.   There is much more than just stating God saves all and walking out of a congregation.

Leaving organized religion, was one of the hardest things I have ever done.  But it was also probably one of the most thought out things I have ever done as well.

But I have not left church, for the church of Christ does not know of walls, pews and such.  I regularly fellowship with people in the manner of sharing what I believe.  I fellowship when I am helping someone God has placed in my path.

What I left was a social environment that I had become dependant upon. Few people will admit or even see that they are in bondage to organized religion.

I left routines and procedures that was choking the life out of me. They were said to give hope to people in need when all they do is enable people to be dependant upon a church organization above finding freedom in the Gospel.

I left an entity that gives the power of our destiny to man, no different than the self help section does at Barnes and Nobel.

I left the teaching of a God that contradicts scripture by saying eventually someone will be in hell forever because God gave up on them.   If Gods love never fails, then indeed that is a lie if anyone cannot ever be with God at some point.

It took me three years to actually get the courage to walk out in obedience to God.   It doesn't matter who is disturbed, or who believes that God would call someone out of organized religion. 

Very nice personal (and to the point) testimony Paul...  :goodpost:

Especially in the Blue above...

GOD so LOVED the WORLD... (John 3:16-17) that LOVE is UNCHANGING and ETERNAL... and the mission of CHRIST was to SEEK and to SAVE that which was LOST (Luke 19:10), ALL men are LOST, for ALL have SINNED and in need of a Savior...

For CHRIST to have accomplished His mission which was based upon GOD so LOVING the WORLD... He must needs SAVE IT ALL, for ALL of it is that which GOD LOVES...  :dontknow: 

ANY other result shows CHRIST as at least a partial failure... and GOD's LOVE goes ETERNALLY unfulfilled. 

Futhermore, His endeavor is shown to be less than ALL MIGHTY... therefore rendering GOD as "Some Mighty" and not ALMIGHTY.

peACE...
...willieH  :Sparkletooth:
« Last Edit: July 01, 2008, 11:15:25 PM by willieH »

Offline willieH

  • Read Only
  • *
  • Posts: 2260
  • Gender: Male
Re: Some questions
« Reply #35 on: July 01, 2008, 11:14:14 PM »
willieH: Hi Molly...  :icon_jokercolor:

Me again!  :IloveU:  As I said before... when I observe you or anyone else, pose something which is not substanciated in the Word, and/or which overlooks what is plainly IN the WORD... I shall object to it...

No offense to YOU personally is intended in my objection...  :friendstu:

Here is that objection:

First... If I might, for those which would like to read a fine rebuttal to this thinking of "LUCIFER" = "satan"... here is a link to L. Ray Smith's observation of it:

http://bible-truths.com/lake9.html

YOU SAID:

Isaiah 14:12
How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

Lucifer

H1966
הילל
hêylêl
hay-lale'
From H1984 (in the sense of brightness); the morning star: - lucifer.

H1984
הלל
hâlal
haw-lal'
A primitive root; to be clear (originally of sound, but usually of color); to shine; hence to make a show; to boast; and thus to be (clamorously) foolish; to rave; causatively to celebrate; also to stultify: - (make) boast (self), celebrate, commend, (deal, make), fool (-ish, -ly), glory, give [light], be (make, feign self) mad (against), give in marriage, [sing, be worthy of] praise, rage, renowned, shine.

1 Corinthians 13:1
If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.


Main Entry: Lu·ci·fer
Function: noun
Pronunciation: 'lü-s&-f&r
Etymology: Middle English, the morning star, a fallen rebel archangel, the Devil, from Old English, from Latin, the morning star, from lucifer light-bearing, from luc-, lux light + -fer -ferous -- more at LIGHT
1 -- used as a name of the devil
2 : the planet Venus when appearing as the morning star

Again, you are seen using word definitions when they (hopefully) benefit your theological observations... however,

There are several problems with the ORTHODOX understanding of these passages which you [APPARENTLY] adopt in your theology Molly... (as you do not state your agreement with this belief [lucifer=satan] in your answer)

(1)  In no way does the above "word definition" prove "LUCIFER" to be "satan"... The appearance of this word in THIS passage is the ONLY occurence of the word "LUCIFER" in ENGLISH translations, ...and therefore, it cannot be cross-referenced... this "belief" that "lucifer" = "satan" is thereby reduced to being a RELIGIOUS ASSUMPTION... as it has NO "2nd witness" in the Bible...  :dontknow:

(2)  As Craig pointed out, the passages in Isaiah 14 in which the ENGLISH word LUCIFER, appears, ...are addressed to a MAN which was the King of Babylon... which is found eventually in a GRAVE (vs 11) which WORMS cover (no ANGELIC being goes to a "grave")... 

(The further display of hypocritical and RELIGIOUS translating is displayed by the variable translations of #H7585 -- SHEOL to be HELL in Vs 9 and then 2 verses later, GRAVE in Vs 11) :rolleye:

(3)  Also, this person is indentified in the CONTEXT:

...(a)  Verse 4 as the "King of Babylon", and then in
...(b)  Verse 12  as "Lucifer", and then in
...(c)  Verse 16 as a MAN...

Also, if indeed this passage is as you (apparently) view it to be... and an ANGELIC "being" is indeed, in a GRAVE, covered with WORMS... then how is that "being" present with us today?

Word definitions are good to use in the scrutiny of theological observances, but are still subject to be questioned, ...especially when they (as does the word "lucifer"), ...only appear ONCE in the WORD, and have no additional applications/substanciations with which to explore... and compare...

Just because a word is defined in Strongs, does not write that word IN STONE... if merely notes the definition given to it in ENGLISH, by those translation efforts...

A theological proposal must be firmly confirmed elsewhere by additional witnesses in Scripture, otherwise... it is shown standing alone, without verification.  :dontknow:

You are welcome to believe as you will...  :sigh:

peACE...
...willieH  :Sparkletooth:

Offline studier

  • Restricted
  • *
  • Posts: 1805
  • Gender: Male
Re: Some questions
« Reply #36 on: July 02, 2008, 06:54:03 AM »
Molly,

As I demonstrated before, the word "Lucifer" is name of the Morning Star, it is not the Name of Satan prior to falling to earth. It is LITERALLY the name of the planet 2nd from the Sun, also known as the Heylel in Hebrew,  Eosphorus in Greek and Lucifer in Latin, then later Venus in Latin as it remains today. Although Roman religion was used to name the lights in the skies, literally, the usage of Morning Star does not refer to the Roman myth, it refers literally to what we know today as the Morning Star, a light that precedes the Sun to announce a new day is coming, the 2nd planet from the Sun. The word 'Lucifer' is not found in the Hebrew translation, it is Heylel. Heylel has never been anything more than the 2nd planet from the son. There was no legend or myth surrounding it for the Hebrew people, other than it was the title the kings of ancient word called themselves. Artifacts from the time period, demonstrate this soundly.

Heylel actually means, "Mourning", it literally means to 'Grieve the end of the Day', which by Hebrew tradition, the day begins in evening and ends in day. The Morning Star was an announcement that the day is almost over. This helps people understand why Paul called Jesus the Morning Star in the letter to Timothy, and that everything ends in the Light of Day. Jesus is also quoted by John in Revelation as being the Morning Star, the star which is signifies both the Beginning and End (the Morning Star is also the Dawn Star, they are the same Star).

Instead of using the Hebrew word for the Morning Star, Heylel, Jerome used the word 'Lucifer'.  This was done in the 4th Century A.D. and gained acceptance by the Roman people who already believed and were taught the Roman religion where Lucifer, god of the morning, the Morning Star, challenged Apollos/Sol (the Sun God) to who is the most powerful. Lucifer led a rebellion against Apollos/Sol, but lost being cast down to prison on earth and replaced by Jupiter's daughters, Venus. Later, Augustine expounded on the invented doctrine and found new ways to incorporate, perhaps not consciously, the Roman myth into Christianity. Jerome also used it in reference to his political adversary, the Bishop of Cagliari, Lucifer Calaritanus. He then, for the first time in Christian doctrine and theology, said that it was the name of Satan prior to his fall from Light, a doctrine which had never been taught previously and applied it to the serpent in the Garden of Eden. He used it deceivingly, in order to discredit his political and theological adversary.

The question one must ask, is why did Jerome change one instance of 'Morning Star', and not all the instances of 'Morning Star' to the name, "Lucifer"?  Well history shows he in fact did. He also replaced other places he thought spoke of the 2nd Planet from the Sun with the name "Lucifer" as well.

Job 11:17
Life will be brighter than noonday,and darkness will become like Lucifer [morning].

2 Peter 1:19
And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and Lucifer [the Morning Star] rises in your hearts.

Revelation 22:16
"I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and Lucifer [the Bright Morning Star]."

The Catholic Dictionary defines Luficer: The Syriac version and the version of Aquila derive the Hebrew noun helel from the verb yalal, "to lament"; St. Jerome agrees with them (In Isaiah 1.14), and makes Lucifer the name of the principal fallen angel who must lament the loss of his original glory bright as the morning star. In Christian tradition this meaning of Lucifer has prevailed; the Fathers maintain that Lucifer is not the proper name of the devil, but denotes only the state from which he has fallen (Petavius, De Angelis, III, iii, 4).

As the evidence piles up, even the Catholic church admits that it was an invention of Jerome, and not a Christian doctrine at all.  It is a tradition of Christianity that prevailed, but not correct. There are many 'Christian' traditions that prevailed, but have no truth in them at all. Personally, I am still astounded after all the facts are shared, that people still continue to believe other things.
« Last Edit: July 02, 2008, 04:31:18 PM by SOtW »

whyiloveitaly.com

  • Guest
Re: Some questions
« Reply #37 on: July 02, 2008, 04:21:14 PM »
Maybe just believing in Jesus Christ for salvation  is the only belief that'll really count in the end.
No one knows for sure what other people believe. Even what we ourselves believe can change, or we discover that we just don't know. It's like a river that brings in new things every day, and sends out old things too. I too am on a journey.

How many of us here have said recently, "Gee, I really don't have an answer to that." or "ya know, I've never understood that either."
For some strange reason, we (especially Americans) need to have all the explanations right at our fingertips. It's as if we need to have God and His plans all under our control (which they will never be).

Whether we have all our doctrinal ducks in a row or not probably isn't very important at all in the end. -And it's certainly not anything worth fighting with other people about.

I've watched born-again believers argue and condemn everyone around them because they had all the answers. (The day before, they were lost sinners on the verge of destruction. The next day, they were saved and had it all figured out! The problem was, the rest of the world wasn't as "enlightened" as they were!)
It's terrible, and a shame.

I, for one, have a lot to learn. Sometimes I'm appalled at how much I have to learn!

Love to all,
Brian