Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

bshields · 05-12-12 9:54 pm

Tom, you are the pot calling the kettle black. Hubert is hell bent on tithing and you are hell bent on some false reformed Sabbath.

bshields · 05-12-12 9:57 pm

Hubert, You skipped over the unclean meat issue. Was that intentional? Does the NT re-introduce the laws governing what we eat as far as clean and unclean?

bob_2 · 05-12-12 11:41 pm

bshields, I think has pointed out as I have, Jesus was born under the OC, so His statements about tithing that the leaders should tithe as well as be just, this is still Old Covenant times. Not until Jesus dies does the New Covenant begin. Yes, a preacher preaching the gospel should expect to be able to survive with gifts and offerings from those benefiting. I have never condemned tithing. I think it is self defeating. But bshields and Tom are correct, no place in the NC/NT does it state what should be given for Paul's survival or others. They willfully gave but it does not say how it was figured.

But I am more concerned that "another gospel" is being taught by hanging on to the Sabbath fulfilled by our Savior. It is so clear in Col 2:16, 17; and 2 Cor 3; and Heb 8:13; and Heb 4 with the uniquely used sabbitismos. Yet for some reason, the NT can not be read clearly by the tSDA so the church does projects like hatcheting up the Great Controversy into The Good Hope, salvaging EGW in this way is almost laughable, yet it is being done rather than preaching pure scripture.

As we have people bragging they gave up sports and other activities to honor the Sabbath. In one case, I heard a father bragging about his son who on Friday evening, played basketball until sundown and came out of the game, to honor the Sabbath hours. Is this not bragging about effort to save oneself with nothing to back it, than OC/OT words??? Is this not "another gospel". Obsolete is the Old Covenant, all of it, not picking and choosing moral over cermonial. Lev 23 shows the Sabbath as an "appointed festival". But no, we say the punctuation was wrong, and hang on to what is clearly declared obsolete, Heb 8:13.

This is not rocket science folks, if you believe in the inerrancy of scripture, and when one covenant ends and another starts with new and better promises, our very salvation. WOW!!!

Last edited by bob_2 (05-12-12 11:45 pm)

hfsturges · 05-12-12 11:49 pm

Tom,
You must be getting mellow in your old age!
As for tithe, I have given the main documentation that I know of to support tithing from the Old Testament and from the New.
I don't believe that a Christian can separate the Old from the New Testament and get the message of God for us.
I might be glad to go onto your tithe thread, but I believe your point is well expressed in your last post.

The main reason that I see for Christians to speak against the tithe is because of their false economy,
or worse, a desire to destroy the church.

hfsturges · 05-12-12 11:57 pm

Bob Shields,
Leviticus 11 considers all the "unclean animals" as unclean! The reason for avoiding unclean meats is not health !!! God says "Ye shall therefore be holy, for I am holy." See Leviticus 11:41-47; Isaiah 66:17. Common sense would indicate that if animals were unclean in 1450 b.c. they are still unclean today.
Again this is not a test of faith..

hfsturges · 05-13-12 12:01 am

Bob2,
Your view of the covenant is so far from mine, that we are both frustrated by trying to talk about it.
Just one question. Daniel says that Jesus "confirmed the covenant"
Does that mean that He ended one covenant and started another?
Would God desire to confirm the Old Covenant that is faulty and about to die?

bob_2 · 05-13-12 3:26 am

Hubb, where in Daniel.My online Gateway Bible can't find it in Daniel. I did find this:

Deuteronomy 4:31 For the Lord your God is a merciful God; he will not abandon or destroy you or forget the covenant with your ancestors, which he confirmed to them by oath.

If you look in Strong's Concordance at this verse "confirmed" seems to talk about this word meaning taking an "oath" or "swaring" an oath. This is a conditional covenant, that depended on the Jews obedience. When they failed, He turned to the Gentiles under the New Covenant to take His Gospel to the world.

Hubb you hang out in the OT/OC which is ok but make sure you know what happens as the Bible goes from OT to NT and OC to NC. The New Covenant has better promises. It is not just a duplication of the OC on the hearts of the NC believer. The OC Law became obsolete as Heb 8:13 says.

The Jews if they do not persist in their unbelief can be saved as indicated here:

Romans 11:22 Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God: sternness to those who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue in his kindness. Otherwise, you also will be cut off. 23 And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 24 After all, if you were cut out of an olive tree that is wild by nature, and contrary to nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much more readily will these, the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree!

Last edited by bob_2 (05-13-12 3:30 am)

hfsturges · 05-13-12 3:49 pm

Bob2
Could you explain what you mean by Old Covenant, considering Cain in Genesis, Israel in Exodus, and Jewish Christians in Hebrews 8-10. The Old Covenant takes a number of different forms, but these are the three main forms.

bshields · 05-13-12 3:51 pm

hfsturges wrote:

Bob Shields,
Leviticus 11 considers all the "unclean animals" as unclean! The reason for avoiding unclean meats is not health !!! God says "Ye shall therefore be holy, for I am holy." See Leviticus 11:41-47; Isaiah 66:17. Common sense would indicate that if animals were unclean in 1450 b.c. they are still unclean today.
Again this is not a test of faith..

The problem was that all the remainder of the World ate pigs and other meats that were forbidden to Israel. God didn't give Gentiles unclean laws. Noah was allowed to eat anything he wanted. Swine have been domesticated for centuries before the Israelites came into history. You and I are not Jews. We have never been advised by God that pigs are not fit for consumption. Ellen ate hog meat for years. My family were farmers and hogs were a large money crop. They butchered hogs every year. I was raised on pork. I didn't eat it for almost 40 years, so now I don't have a taste for it, but for those who do I see no reason to ever say anything to them about laws only for Israel.

You tell me that it is not for health reasons that SDAs do not eat pork. Other SDAs tell us that that is precisely the reason SDAs don't eat it. I guess it is because they think only the part of the OC written by Moses was nailed to the Cross so they have to have some other excuse for not partaking of it. They have to somehow vindicate ellen.

What does "Ye shall therefore be holy, for I am holy." mean Hubert? Can any man stand before God and truthfully tell Him that they are Holy? Jesus said that it isn't what goes into the mouth that defiles, it is what comes out. Only through the righteousness of Jesus can we stand before the Father and be declared righteous.

hfsturges · 05-13-12 3:58 pm

Bob2,

Bible wrote:

27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. Daniel 9:27 (KJV)

Here is what Strongs (online version) says about "confirm"

Strongs Dictionary wrote:

Transliteration: gābar
Phonetic Pronunciation:gaw-bar'
English Words used in KJV:
prevail 14
strengthen 3
great 2
confirm 1
exceeded 1
mighty 1
put 1
stronger 1
valiant 1
[Total Count: 25]
a primitive root; to be strong; by implication to prevail, act insolently :- exceed, confirm, be great, be mighty, prevail, put to more [strength], strengthen, be stronger, be valiant.
Strong's Talking Greek & Hebrew Dictionary.

Nothing is said here about "taking an oath." To confirm means to make stronger. My question still is:

Hubb wrote:

Daniel says that Jesus "confirmed the covenant"
Does that mean that He ended one covenant and started another?
Would God desire to confirm the Old Covenant that is faulty and about to die?

bob_2 · 05-14-12 5:02 am

Hubb, it proves you got to read more than Daniel and Revelation to get the true meaning. The rule of covenants seems to be they are ratified or started by blood.

Hebrews 6:17
King James Version (KJV)
17 Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath:

confirm (Heb 6:17)

1) to act as a mediator between litigating or covenanting parties
a) to accomplish something by interposing between two parties
b) to mediate
2) act as a sponsor or surety
a) to pledge one's self, give surety

Also read Heb 9
http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lex … 3315&t=KJV

Last edited by bob_2 (05-14-12 5:26 am)

bob_2 · 05-14-12 5:29 am

Hubb, the words are too clear for you to claim only one Covenant. Hebrews is too clear one Covenant was confirmed or ratified by animal blood and the other with Jesus' blood. You are trying too hard to make your concept work. It only creates chaos when you do.

Take this version, even clearer

Hebrews 6 (Amplified Bible)
17 Accordingly God also, in His desire to show more convincingly and beyond doubt to those who were to inherit the promise the unchangeableness of His purpose and plan, intervened (mediated) with an oath.
18 This was so that, by two unchangeable things [His promise and His oath] in which it is impossible for God ever to prove false or deceive us, we who have fled [to Him] for refuge might have mighty indwelling strength and strong encouragement to grasp and hold fast the hope appointed for us and set before [us].
19 [Now] we have this [hope] as a sure and steadfast anchor of the soul [it cannot slip and it cannot [c]break down under whoever steps out upon it—a hope] that reaches [d]farther and enters into [the very certainty of the Presence] within the veil,
20 Where Jesus has entered in for us [in advance], a Forerunner having become a High Priest forever after the order (with [e]the rank) of Melchizedek.

Last edited by bob_2 (05-14-12 5:36 am)

bob_2 · 05-14-12 5:47 am

As to your question, Hubb, about the Old and New covenant, read Heb 8:13.

Heb 8:13 By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.

Also:

Heb 9:8 The Holy Spirit was showing by this that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle was still functioning. 9 This is an illustration for the present time, indicating that the gifts and sacrifices being offered were not able to clear the conscience of the worshiper. 10 They are only a matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washings —external regulations applying until the time of the new order.
11 But when Christ came as high priest of the good things that are now already here, he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not made with human hands, that is to say, is not a part of this creation. 12 He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, thus obtaining eternal redemption. 13 The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean. 14 How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!
15 For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance —now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.
16 In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, 17 because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is living. 18 This is why even the first covenant was not put into effect without blood. 19 When Moses had proclaimed every command of the law to all the people, he took the blood of calves, together with water, scarlet wool and branches of hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and all the people. 20 He said, “This is the blood of the covenant, which God has commanded you to keep.”21 In the same way, he sprinkled with the blood both the tabernacle and everything used in its ceremonies. 22 In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.
23 It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ did not enter a sanctuary made with human hands that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence. 25 Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. 26 Otherwise Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But he has appeared once for all at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, 28 so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.

bob_2 · 05-14-12 5:54 am

A covenant was made with Cain, with Noah, with Israel and with Christians. You are beginning to see my point. Cain's , Noah's and israel's covenant can not save but the one to us Christians can save eternally!!! You got it, Hubb!!!

Cain and Noah's covenants were not about eternal salvation. But Israel's a shadow of the Christian Covenant are the primary two covenants that the Bible speaks of often with strong clarification in Hebrews as seen above.

Last edited by bob_2 (05-14-12 5:57 am)

bob_2 · 05-14-12 6:18 am

Notice also the word "confirm" in 2 Cor 2:8 and Gal 3:15 in Strong's:

confirm
1) to make valid
2) to confirm publicly or solemnly, to ratify

bshields · 05-14-12 9:44 am

How can the New Covenant be better and yet be the same as the Old Covenant. Hubert has proclaimed a mystery that even he cannot solve.

Some go on the premise that God does not change and therefore the covenants are the same That theory still doesn't change the fact that He could give a new people a different covenant. That "new people" are us, born again Christians. A new covenant for a new people.

1 Cor 15:56(NLT) For sin is the sting that results in death, and the law gives sin its power.

The Old Covenant was all about law, the new is all about Jesus and love. Jesus takes away the power of the law.

Galatians 3:19 (NLT)
19 Why, then, was the law given? It was given alongside the promise to show people their sins. But the law was designed to last only until the coming of the child who was promised. God gave his law through angels to Moses, who was the mediator between God and the people.

2Cor 3:7(NLT)
The old way, with laws etched in stone, led to death, though it began with such glory that the people of Israel could not bear to look at Moses’ face. For his face shone with the glory of God, even though the brightness was already fading away. 8 Shouldn’t we expect far greater glory under the new way, now that the Holy Spirit is giving life? 9 If the old way, which brings condemnation, was glorious, how much more glorious is the new way, which makes us right with God! 10 In fact, that first glory was not glorious at all compared with the overwhelming glory of the new way. 11 So if the old way, which has been replaced, was glorious, how much more glorious is the new, which remains forever!

Old way Moses. New way Jesus. Pick ye this day which one ye will chose. Will it be the SDA way of the old or the Christian way of the new?

hfsturges · 05-14-12 5:49 pm

Bob2,
You have not yet answered my question: Which covenant did Jesus ratify at Calvary?
Now here is your verse, you offered:

Bible wrote:

17 Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath:

There are three "ceremonies" associated with the covenant of God. Each had a different purpose.
Genesis 15 describes a ratification ceremony similar to what was expected in society in that day. Abraham had asked "Whereby shall I know that I shall inherit it?" He had just been promised land, and it was too much for him. He wanted reassurance that he would receive the land. God condescended to reassure him with a ratification ceremony. This was NOT a different covenant. It was a ratification of a specific promise, only.

After Abraham "offered" Isaac, God swore by Himself that He would stand by His covenant. He swore that He would fulfill His covenant. It was NOT a ratification of the covenant.

Daniel 9:27 states:

Bible wrote:

"And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease."

In this the Covenant of God, Covenant of Redemption, the New Covenant, etc was ratified, strengthened, made certain. Man could now move from anticipation to faith in an accomplished fact.

This was not the "Old Covenant" which was old, faulty, and about to pass away. If you read Hebrews 8 and 9 carefully, you will find described the corrupted view of the Ceremonial law compared with the true and effective Covenant of redemption ratified by Jesus Himself on Calvary.

The Covenant of God, "My Covenant," was the New Covenant, the Covenant of Redemption, the covenant of what God would do to save man. It was given first to Adam and Eve, then to Abraham, then to Israel at Sinai and extended to All Abraham's descendants through the Old Testament, and to God's people in the church age. It was confirmed by Christ on Calvary.

bob_2 · 05-14-12 7:12 pm

Hubb, you are making this more complicated than God does in the Bible. As far as salvation, as I have said before there are two covenants and a Promise to Abraham. The Promise allows our adoption into the New Covenant which was for a believing Israel, or at least a believing remnant.

The text you quote from Daniel is prophetic of Christ being here on earth to usher in the New Covenant and "cause the oblation to cease, the Old Covenant.

Although you want to make covenant numbers out of Gen 3:15, Cain's story and Noah's story, that is not how the story is writen by inspired authors.

Galatians 3:29
King James Version (KJV)
29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

then look at the other two parts of salvation , the New and Old Covenant:

Galatians 4:21 Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?
22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
27 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.

28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.

29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.
30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.

The 1st Covenant didn't start until 430 years later at Sinai after Abraham, and ratified by bloody sacrifices of animals. All Abraham had was a promise until Sinai, but his faith was counted as righteousness.

Gal 3:16 The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,” meaning one person, who is Christ. 17 What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant[promise to Abraham about the Messiah] previously established by God and thus do away with the promise. 18 For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer depends on the promise; but God in his grace gave it to Abraham through a promise.
19 Why, then, was the law given at all? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come. The law was given through angels and entrusted to a mediator. 20 A mediator, however, implies more than one party; but God is one.

21 Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! For if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law. 22 But Scripture has locked up everything under the control of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe.

Then go to:

Heb 8:13 By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear

Last edited by bob_2 (05-14-12 9:09 pm)

bshields · 05-14-12 10:20 pm

Hubert, why is it Bob is able to give beautiful, easy to understand, scripture for what he believes and you give a prophetic verse and statements that I cannot understand? Are the covenants that hard to understand? Did Paul and the writer of Hebrews leave some stuff out? Why is it that more theologians can't come to the same conclusion you have?. Why is it you have to go clear back to Adam and name all the covenants and confuse everyone with the past? Shouldn't we be concerned with the covenant of promise Jesus gave to Christians, you know, the one He tells us if we believe we will be saved and not come into judgment. Jesus is the saver and we are the believers. Jesus is the bread of life and His blood covers our sins. We take the bread and drink the cup in remembrance of the Lamb sacrificed from the foundation of the Earth in our behalf.

Matthew 11:28
Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Another promise of the covenant, Jesus gives us rest.

bob_2 · 05-15-12 2:20 am

bshields, I am humbled by your comments. I was not taught this in our schools, but have studied it until it made sense, although, does God's love toward us after such dreadful sin humanity has brought on itself make sense? If I could, I would just tweak it with this that I have studied, we ALL will face the judgement, but those covered by Christ's blood will escape condemnation. The blood covering us, by faith, is what is needed by us all to pass the judgement. Following are some texts, there are others:

Romans 14:10 You, then, why do you judge your brother or sister? Or why do you treat them with contempt? For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat

Hebrews 9:27 Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment,

Hubb, I understand that you are concerned that from Adam to before Abraham, you want everyone covered. I believe that all are covered as Abraham is if they have his faith. No one from Adam to Abraham was not told there was a plan. But we can not falsely fabricate the plan and it's unfolding. It has been amazing to study how salvation is available to us and search the Bible to see how God unfold's His plan. AMAZING!!!!!

Last edited by bob_2 (05-15-12 2:27 am)

bshields · 05-15-12 10:05 am

I understand your thinking Bob. I take my que from the book of John. He quotes Jesus several places with the thought that those who believe in Him have eternal life. John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth him that sent me, hath eternal life, and cometh not into judgment, but hath passed out of death into life.

The following is my logical synopsis as to how we escape being judged. As we, the ones who have accepted Jesus as Savior, stand before the throne we are plucked by Jesus before the Father passes judgment. Jesus, our advocate, tells the Father they are mine. I promised they would not be judged. I have covered for them.

Synonyms for condemnation
disapproval
accusation
judgment
reproach
sentence
censure
blame

hfsturges · 05-15-12 12:28 pm

The Bible tells us that it is impossible to understand what you do not want to understand.

bshields · 05-15-12 12:42 pm

Ditto.

bob_2 · 05-15-12 2:30 pm

bshields, a man wiser than me on Biblical matters, John Gill in his Exposition of the Total Bible said on this matter:

and shall not come into condemnation;
neither for original sin, though judgment has passed upon all men unto condemnation for it; nor for actual sins and transgressions: for though everyone deserves condemnation, yet were there as many sentences of condemnation issued out as sins committed, not one of them could be executed on such who are in Christ Jesus, as he that believes in him is openly and manifestatively in him: the reason is, because the death of Christ is a security against all condemnation; and whoever believes in him shall not be condemned, but saved; and though he may come into judgment, yet not into condemnation: he shall stand in judgment, and be acquitted by the righteousness of Christ, which he, by faith, receives as his justifying righteousness.

http://www.studylight.org/com/geb/view. … &verse=024

The concept of escaping judgement I have found mainly with Baptists that believe in a pre-tribulation rapture to protect believers at the time of the rapture to a rewards banquet. I believe no one needs to go to heaven to be protected, God can protect them right here on earth until Jesus second coming.

bob_2 · 05-15-12 2:37 pm

bshields, notice a bunch of other versions: http://bible.cc/john/5-24.htm

New International Version (©1984)
"I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.

New Living Translation (©2007)
"I tell you the truth, those who listen to my message and believe in God who sent me have eternal life. They will never be condemned for their sins, but they have already passed from death into life.

English Standard Version (©2001)
Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

International Standard Version (©2008)
"Truly, I tell all of you with certainty, whoever hears what I say and believes in the one who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged, but has passed from death to life.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010)
Timeless truth I speak to you: “Whoever hears my word and trusts in him who has sent me has the eternal Life, and he comes not into judgment, but he moves from death into Life.

GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
I can guarantee this truth: Those who listen to what I say and believe in the one who sent me will have eternal life. They won't be judged because they have already passed from death to life.

King James 2000 Bible (©2003)
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that hears my word, and believes on him that sent me, has everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

American King James Version
Truly, truly, I say to you, He that hears my word, and believes on him that sent me, has everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death to life.

American Standard Version
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth him that sent me, hath eternal life, and cometh not into judgment, but hath passed out of death into life.

Adventists for Tomorrow

Announcement

#51 05-12-12 9:54 pm

Re: Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

#52 05-12-12 9:57 pm

Re: Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

#53 05-12-12 11:41 pm

Re: Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

#54 05-12-12 11:49 pm

Re: Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

#55 05-12-12 11:57 pm

Re: Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

#56 05-13-12 12:01 am

Re: Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

#57 05-13-12 3:26 am

Re: Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

#58 05-13-12 3:49 pm

Re: Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

#59 05-13-12 3:51 pm

Re: Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

#60 05-13-12 3:58 pm

Re: Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

#61 05-14-12 5:02 am

Re: Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

#62 05-14-12 5:29 am

Re: Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

#63 05-14-12 5:47 am

Re: Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

#64 05-14-12 5:54 am

Re: Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

#65 05-14-12 6:18 am

Re: Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

#66 05-14-12 9:44 am

Re: Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

#67 05-14-12 5:49 pm

Re: Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

#68 05-14-12 7:12 pm

Re: Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

#69 05-14-12 10:20 pm

Re: Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

#70 05-15-12 2:20 am

Re: Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

#71 05-15-12 10:05 am

Re: Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

#72 05-15-12 12:28 pm

Re: Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

#73 05-15-12 12:42 pm

Re: Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

#74 05-15-12 2:30 pm

Re: Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

#75 05-15-12 2:37 pm

Re: Sola Scriptura: First Century Christians Had Scripture and Living Apos

Board footer