Perhaps one of the best verses explaining the true nature and character of our God.

@papa-pepper, a few days ago you made a comment that associated me with Satan and claimed that I was lieing about you, putting words in your mouth, and making false accusations about you. I guess I should

I see your point, and the answer to that question is no, I don't believe the talmud is authoritative.

@dwells, my wife read your last few comments because I didn't quite understand what you were saying. Here's how she understood it based on your last few comments on this thread and I think I understand

Thanks for the reply. But your answer isn't clear. I want to be clear, not to trap you in your words, but to understand what you believe because as I've said, I do believe the New Testament is inspired

That's another topic for another time. I'll rest my case on this train of thought. My logic doesn't matter anyhow.

@dwells, I thought I answered you. I guess I'll answer it more plainly. I believe that Paul's writings, and that of the whole New Testament, are inspired by God and equal in authority as the Old Testament

By that logic, then the church can not be the new Temple of God since the Tabernacle, then the Temple of Solomon then the second Temple would still be the place and focus of worship of Yahweh. Rather,

@dwells, I believe the New Testament was given by God as a combination of Old Testament prophesy, then current historical witnesses and not beforehand revealed revelation by the Holy Spirit. For the New

So, you do believe that Paul's writings are inspired Scripture equal to that of the Torah? Or don't you believe this? As I've said previously, if you don't believe in the inspiration and authority of the

@dwells, that's a pretty good exestential question. I'm not sure why they considered it Scripture, since I never met them. What I can say is that I consider the Torah to be scripture because it is truth,

I laid out dozens of scriptures and asked you to show me why they don't say what they plainly say. Should I write those scriptures out again? You keep bringing up the point that I didn't circumsize my

I have learned things as I went, but the Gospel Truth that I heard and received 24 years ago now hasn't changed. @dwells, I am not trying to prove that I am right and you are wrong so much as trying to

@dwells, did you just state in a round about way that Paul's writings are not Scripture?

Ok. I understand your point now. Thanks for clarifying. Your understanding has at least one thing wrong with it. It presupposes that Timothy not being circumsized even though he was a spirit filled believer

Nevertheless, abstaining from drinking blood is the same as not pouring the blood out(so you don't drink the blood). You didn't resolve the issue of your interpretation of that verse as being the same

How is my question a misdirection ? Did I not answer your first question I this thread? I then asked a relevant question of you regarding Timothy and his being circumsized, which you brought up to prove

Your argument is based on the incorrect assumption on the inspiration and writing of the Bible. God inspired Moses to write Genesis 17. God also inspired Paul to write what he wrote in the New Testament.

@dwells, furthermore, yes, abstaining from fornication was listed and falls under sexual immorality. Also, so James told them to abstain from blood and then from things strangled, did James not know that

I don't know. Why did Moses not circumsise his son's as they left Egypt, but had his wife Zipporah do it to save his life from the destroying angel? I don't know that one either. Your question is a