The Holy Spirit

Discussion in 'Sacred Scripture' started by Rexlion, Aug 29, 2021.

  1. Invictus

    Invictus Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    2,735
    Likes Received:
    1,530
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Episcopalian
    BTW I hope I'm being clear that I am not intending to accuse you of 'heresy' or 'heterodoxy' or anything like that at all. There is no defined dogma on the subject, and certainly with a book as obscure as the Book of Revelation can be, a variety of approaches to interpretation is to be expected and is legitimate. My objection is to the notion that the premillennial view is the correct interpretation, which I don't think has been established - plenty of competent scholars of the Book of Revelation are not premillennialists - and it is indeed a minority view, for whatever that's worth. In any case, it is, or at least I see it as, an issue of interpretation about which reasonable people can disagree, rather than a moral issue or a question of 'orthodoxy'. I'm sorry if I did not make that clear in my earlier comments.
     
    Rexlion likes this.
  2. Tiffy

    Tiffy Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    3,502
    Likes Received:
    1,745
    Country:
    UK
    Religion:
    CofE
    1. John says nothing to place this chapter in the time sequence. He simply says that he saw an angel. Except that he came from heaven, the angel is not distinguished in any way. John does not describe his appearance. He concentrates on what he does. The final unimportance of Satan is perhaps indicated in the fact that it is not the Father who deals with him, nor the Christ, but only an unnamed angel. The angel had the key of the abyss (see note on 9:1) and a great chain. Both are clearly symbolical, for there cannot be a key to the abyss, nor can a spirit be shackled with a chain. But they show that the angel had authority over the abyss and that he could restrain Satan.
    2. The angel laid hold on the evil one, who is given all four of the titles by which he is designated in this book: the dragon, the old serpent, the Devil, and the Satan (see notes on 12: 3, 9). The angel proceeded to tie him up for a thousand years. It is likely that we should take this symbolically. One thousand is the cube of ten, the number of completeness. We have seen it used over and over again in this book to denote completeness of some sort, and this is surely the way we should take it here. Satan is bound for the perfect period.
    3. The angel threw Satan into the abyss, and proceeded to lock and seal it. Satan is completely controlled (cf. Isa. 24:22). That (hina) introduces the purpose. Satan is locked up not as a punishment, but as means of curtailing his activities. Those who interpret all this of the end-time object that Satan is so obviously active that it is nonsense to talk of him as bound during the present age. They remind us that elsewhere John stresses his present activity (Rev.12:12). But we must bear in mind John's singular ability for concentrating on one thing at a time (cf. his description of heaven with no mention of the Lamb in chapter 4). We must remember also his complete indifference to the possibility of reconciling one of his pictures with another (see note on Rev.1:17). It is true that he can picture all the evil on earth as coming ultimately from a very active Satan. But it is also true that he never thinks of Satan as having a free hand. Again and again he uses the expression 'is given' when he speaks of the authority to do any evil act. Here he specifically tells us that Satan was restrained that he should deceive the nations no more. From verse 8 we find that this means that Satan cannot gather the nations for the final cataclysm. The End is in God's control, not Satan's. John may also mean that, though Satan is busy, he is restrained from doing his worst. He cannot destroy the church. He cannot even destroy the martyrs, for they reign with Christ. The period of restraint will end, for Satan must (dei) be loosed, though only for a little season. As verse 8 shows, this is God's way of bringing on the End. Because it is God's plan Satan must be released.
    4. Attention is concentrated now on those who have suffered for Christ's sake. They reign with Him through the 1,000 years. This section is thus contemporaneous with the preceding.
    John saw thrones (cf. Dan. 7:9 mg.). He does not say where they were. Those who see a literal millennium usually place them on earth (cf. verse 1). But John does not say this. He uses 'throne' forty-seven times in all, and except for Satan's throne (2. 13) and that of the beast (Rev.13:2, Rev.16:10) all appear to be in heaven. It would accord with this if he here meant a reign in heaven. John does not say how many thrones there were nor who sat upon them. But at the end of the verse he speaks of those slain for Jesus' sake as reigning during the 1,000 years, and so presumably it is these who sit on the thrones.

    Judgment was given unto them. The passionate concern for justice throughout this book (and for that matter throughout the New Testament) is not to be missed. The expression may mean that they were given authority to execute judgment, or that justice was done to them, 'judgment was given for them'. John saw the thrones first and then the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word rif God. In that he speaks of souls only and not of bodies (contrast 1 Cor. 15) it may be that he is thinking of a temporary state. For the 1,000 years the souls of the martyrs reign with Christ in bliss, but the final state awaits the general resurrection.

    Beheaded (pepelekismenon) strictly means 'killed with an axe'.

    Under the Roman Republic public execution was by beheading with an axe, but in the Empire this had given way to the use of the sword. But here the word clearly means 'executed', irrespective of the method. We cannot confine it to the beheaded. The words and which (kai hoitines) may explain the preceding (so Charles), or possibly introduce another class (so Swete). In the former case the passage is concerned only with the martyrs; in the latter another group is introduced, probably those later called confessors (people who in a persecution were not executed but suffered a smaller penalty such as imprisonment). It seems that the former is almost certainly correct, for from Rev.13:15 ff., it appears that those who would not receive the mark of the beast were slain. John's concern here is with the martyrs. For the witness of Jesus see note on 1:2 (where the same expression is translated 'the testimony of Jesus'). With this is linked the word of God. It will point to much the same activity, but there will be in mind also the fact that this could be used as a designation of Christ (Rev.19:13).

    From the positive things they stood for John moves to the negative. They did not worship the beast nor his image and they refused his mark. John goes on to tell us that these souls lived (ezesan). This is not the usual word for resurrection (though cf. Jn. 11:25). It appears to mean that the martyrs, though slain in ignominy, lived on in heaven with Christ. But not only did they live. They reigned with Christ a thousand years. They have not lost everything. They have gained royalty and triumph.
    5. The martyrs are thus differentiated from others. The rest must await the conclusion of the 1,000 years. Grammatically, this is the first resurrection could refer to this raising at the end of the 1,000 years. But the sense appears to require that it be taken to denote the raising of the martyrs to life in glory with Christ. It is a strong point of the pre-millennial view that a first resurrection implies a second. Other views make the two resurrections of different types, but the pre-millennial view does not. On the other hand it is also the case that John speaks only of one resurrection. He never speaks of 'the second resurrection' to correspond with the first.
    6. For blessed, etc., see note on 1:3. To have a part in the first resurrection is a singularly blessed and holy experience. One negative blessing and two positive ones are singled out. The second death has no power over such people (see note on verse 14). Positively they are to be priests of God and of Christ (cf. Revelation 5:10, Isa. 61:6; note also the close connection between God and Christ). And they are to reign with him a thousand years. The supreme joy of the blessed ones is that they are associated with Christ in priesthood and in royalty.
    John reverts briefly to a theme he has mentioned several times, namely the gathering together of all the forces of evil at the end-time to do battle with God. Here he deals with it very shortly. The triumph of God is speedy and certain

    7. At the end of the millennium Satan will be released. We might have expected an angel to set him free, just as an angel had confined him. But John does not say how it will be done. His when is hotan, 'whenever', so that the time is also uncertain (as far as it goes this supports a symbolical meaning for the 1,000 years).
    8. Upon his release Satan will resume his deceitful activities, but on a larger scale. Like the 'unclean spirits like frogs' he will gather the nations for the final battle. The expression Gog and Magog seems to signify all people. Gog is mentioned in the Bible only in a genealogy (1 Chr. 5:4), in a prophecy (Ezk. 38, Ezk:39), and here. Magog is found similarly in genealogies (Gen. 10:2, 1 Chr. 1:5), the Ezekiel passage, and here. Magog appears to be the land from which Gog came (Ezk. 38:2, though in LXX Magog seems to be a prince). In later Judaism Gog and Magog were thought of as two leaders. In apocalyptic writings, for example, they often symbolize the forces of evil. For John the combination is another way of referring to the hosts of the wicked. He has in mind the last great attack of evil on the things of God. Satan will gather all his henchmen. He will assemble the greatest possible number to oppose God (the number of whom is as the sand of the sea). This is the decisive moment, the final battle (cf. Rev.17:14, Rev.19:19).

    John was imprisoned on the island of Patmos along with all the Old Testament scriptures and had plenty of time to study them minutely and work an apocalyptic text to bypass Romam censorship with a message of hope, and reach the 7 churches of believers that he specifically addressed his book to.
    .
     
    Invictus likes this.
  3. Rexlion

    Rexlion Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    4,242
    Likes Received:
    2,164
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Christian attending ACNA
    "Obviously"? Really? But no one can really say with any certainty what it symbolizes, it's all guesswork and conjecture.

    The phrase, "thousand years," turns up twice in the O.T. and six times in the N.T. The two usages in the O.T. are non-literal. Of the six in the N.T. five are found in Rev. 20; the sixth is in 2 Peter and might be literal or might be metaphorical. So you're saying that the way the phrase was used in those 3 instances controls how it must have been used in the final 5 instances even though they were penned by a different writer? That is preposterous. One might as well claim that the word "armor" must always be interpreted metaphorically just because it was so used in Eph. 6:13, or that the word "ass" was used as a metaphor in a few scriptures so therefore Balaam didn't ride a real ass. Proper hermeneutics calls us to prioritize the context of the surrounding verses first, then secondly the book or letter as a whole, then thirdly (down the line) the context of the Bible as a whole. In picking out the scant few metaphorical uses of "thousand years" in other books of the Bible, the amillennialists turn the hermeneutical approach on its head; they look first to other books and last to the context within the setting of its surrounding verses.

    If, as amillennialists insist, the entirety of Revelation must be interpreted as symbols and metaphors, then John never literally had a vision (Ch. 1) because visions symbolize something. He was never given actual messages to 7 actual churches, because the churches themselves as well as the messages are nothing but metaphors for something else. The stern warnings issued to some of those (pretend?) churches were not literal, they only symbolized something else. John saw no God on the throne surrounded by strange looking beings, elders, or multitudes, because these are all metaphors for something else. Come on, get real! Revelation is a mixture of the symbolic and the literal. Without some elements of literalness, the entire narrative of John's account is reduced to meaningless mush! The trick is to examine the language used, in context, and see if it has a plain and sensible meaning; if not, then (and only then) we need to try and adduce the symbolism behind the passage. Some things will have a dual significance (both literal and symbolic), while there will always be some things we can't be positive about (such as, do angels really blow literal horns or trumpets?)
     
  4. Rexlion

    Rexlion Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    4,242
    Likes Received:
    2,164
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Christian attending ACNA
    The Anglican position is to look at the first 4 councils and first 500 years of the church. The emphasis is on the earlier church writers, not later ones, because they were closer in time to the 'first-person' instruction by the people who heard Jesus speak.
     
    Invictus likes this.
  5. Rexlion

    Rexlion Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    4,242
    Likes Received:
    2,164
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Christian attending ACNA
    Oh, okay. I guess I had gotten the impression that you were dogmatically opposed to the premillennial view as if it could not possibly be correct. Thanks for clarifying. I agree with you, reasonable Christians can disagree. :thumbsup:

    Can you tell that I didn't read every single new post before replying to the first new one I'd read? :duel::laugh:
     
    Invictus likes this.
  6. Invictus

    Invictus Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    2,735
    Likes Received:
    1,530
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Episcopalian
    This has never been officially clarified. The Books of Homilies quote from the first Six councils but not the Seventh (though C.B. Moss argued that Anglicans ought to accept the Seventh, and that the early Reformation's rejection of it in England was more or less a historical accident based on a misunderstanding). Jeremy Taylor and Lancelot Andrewes tended to refer to the first Four as the most authoritative. It's possible for both positions to be correct. The ACNA's position on the Ecumenical Councils, according to their website, is:

    Concerning the seven Councils of the undivided Church, we affirm the teaching of the first four Councils and the Christological clarifications of the fifth, sixth and seventh Councils, in so far as they are agreeable to the Holy Scriptures.
    Of course. It's all good. I should have made that clear earlier on. :)
     
  7. Rexlion

    Rexlion Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    4,242
    Likes Received:
    2,164
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Christian attending ACNA
    But I learned it from folks on this forum, so it must be so! :laugh: :halo:
     
    Invictus likes this.
  8. Invictus

    Invictus Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    2,735
    Likes Received:
    1,530
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Episcopalian
    There is an element of truth to it, to be sure. It just isn't "the whole story". :cool:
     
    Rexlion likes this.
  9. Oseas

    Oseas Member

    Posts:
    265
    Likes Received:
    6
    Country:
    BRAZIL
    Religion:
    Christian
    The theories and false interpretations of JESUS's coming is good for nothing. What matters and prevails is the Word of GOD. Scriptures explain Scriptures with Truth. The Word is GOD.

    According the Word of GOD, many things will happen in this beginning of this millennium, in which we are already living in its first century, and the main event in this millennium is the coming or return of JESUS here of course.

    But before JESUS returns and sets up his millennial Kingdom here, GOD's Kingdom according His Gospel -that is THE WORLD TO COME or NEXT WORLD, as JESUS said and is written in Luke 20:v.35-36 combined with Hebrews 11:v.3 and Hebrews 1:v.1-3 - , I highlight two great and simultaneous events at this beginning of the current millennium; one extremely wonderful event, and the other extremely terrible and satanic, as described in the book of our GOD or Word of our God, as follows:

    THE SATANIC EVENT (before JESUS's COMING)
    - 2 Thessalonians 2:v.3-4and9-12:

    3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that MAN of sin be revealed, the SON of perdition;
    4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called GOD, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
    9 Even him, WHOSE COMING is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
    10 And with all the deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the Truth, that they might be saved.
    11 And for this cause GOD shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
    12 That they all might BE DAMNED who believed not the Truth(John 1:v.11to14), but had pleasure in unrighteousness-(John 5:v.43to47-the Jews will believe in a false messiah, an esoteric, and kabbalistic, and spiritist messiah, the son of perdition, MAN of sin, a false God, AN IMPOSTER).

    Jeremiah 30:v.23-24
    23 Behold, the whirlwind of the Lord goeth forth with fury, a continuing whirlwind: it shall fall with pain upon the head of the wicked.
    24 The fierce anger of the Lord shall not return, until he has done it, and until he has performed the intents of his heart: IN THE LATER DAYS YE SHALL CONSIDER IT.


    THE PROPHETICAL AND WONDERFUL EVENT (before JESUS's COMING)
    1 Thessalonians 4:v. 13-18


    13 But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.
    14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.
    15 For this we say unto you by the Word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. (FIRST RESURECTION OF THE DEAD IN CHRIST -Isaiah 26:v.19-21. Check it)
    16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, WITH THE VOICE (message) OF THE ARCHANGEL, and with the trump of GOD: and the dead IN CHRIST shall rise FIRST:
    17 And we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them...to meet the Lord...and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
    18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

    1 Corinthians 15:v.52-54
    We shall not ALL sleep, but we shall all be CHANGED-(Philippians 3:v.20-21. Check it), at the last trump (the voice/the message of the archangel): for the trumpet shall sound (future , imperative), and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.(Philippians 3:v.20-21. Check it) For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, Death is swallowed up in victory-Luke 20:v.35-36 among others).

    THE COMING OF THE ARCHANGEL (before JESUS's COMING) -THE LAST TRUMP - THE SEVENTH TRUMP
    Daniel 12:v.1-3 and 6-7 and 10-12

    1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.
    2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.
    3 And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.
    6 And one said to the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?

    7 And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he (he whom? 2 Thes.2:v.2-3) shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.
    10 Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.
    11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.
    12 Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days. (THE WONDERFUL AND MAGNIFICENT DAY 1.335 ) https://friendsofjesus.proboards.com/thread/9898/mysterious-day-335-daniel-12#.YruxfxXMLIU


    No, but the TAIL of red Dragon, that old serpent, called the Devil and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world. By the way, IN THIS TIME OF APOCALYPSE, red Dragon is the NEW NAME of the old serpent, the Devil and Satan. "red' is linked with eddom (red)

    Be careful or get ready
     
  10. Oseas

    Oseas Member

    Posts:
    265
    Likes Received:
    6
    Country:
    BRAZIL
    Religion:
    Christian
  11. Oseas

    Oseas Member

    Posts:
    265
    Likes Received:
    6
    Country:
    BRAZIL
    Religion:
    Christian
    Greatings in Christ JESUS

    You're wellcome, honestly I like to read your posts, your language style is very very polite and of a high level, are you a teacher?

    Regardings the person of the Holy Spirit, the advocate, the Paraclete and Comfort, he is a person similar to JESUS spiritually speaking, because he receives from what is of JESUS -John 16:v.12-15 , if it were not so, he would not had any message to speak and preach, I mean a message from he himself from his own. In fact JESUS is the Greater Light, the Sun of righteousness, in the other hand, the person of the Holy Spirit is the Lesser Light, but not a light from he himself, by analogy like the moon - Genesis 1:v.16- , the person of the Holy Spirit receives the light that proceeds from Jesus as the moon receive the light from the Sun, it's actually a case of light reflection.

    Seizing the opportunity, regardings the seven spirits of GOD, which were given by GOD to the person of JESUS and of the Holy Spirit, and to us too, they are revealed in Isaiah 11:v.1-2, as follow:

    1 And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:
    2 And the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, (the source of spirits)
    the spirit of wisdom,
    and understanding (intelligence),
    the spirit of counsel,
    and might, (Luke 10:v.19)
    the spirit of knowledge,
    and of the fear of the Lord;

    It is how I see and understand / interpret


    P.S.
    Sorry for my delay in responding to your post.
     
  12. Oseas

    Oseas Member

    Posts:
    265
    Likes Received:
    6
    Country:
    BRAZIL
    Religion:
    Christian
    Greatings in Christ JESUS

    I would highly recommend to read and meditate more deeply in the Holy Scriptures, the book of the Lord as He recommended-Isaiah 34:v.16-, Scriptures explain Scriptures, as is showed by Daniel - Daniel 9:v.2 - . What matters and prevails is the Word of GOD, the Word is GOD, yeah, the Word is GOD.

    Revelation 1:v. 1
    The Revelation of Jesus Christ,
    which God gave unto Him,
    to shew unto His servants, (unto us of course),
    things which must shortly come to pass;
    and JESUS sent and signified it by his angel
    unto his servant John:

    It's it.
     
  13. Invictus

    Invictus Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    2,735
    Likes Received:
    1,530
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Episcopalian
    I want to make sure I understand correctly. Are you recommending that people not use commentaries?
     
  14. Oseas

    Oseas Member

    Posts:
    265
    Likes Received:
    6
    Country:
    BRAZIL
    Religion:
    Christian

    The Scriptures you quoted above from chapter 19, speaking of the white horse rider, he is not JESUS, absolutely not, by the way he has a NAME that no one(no MAN) knows but himself, so you know not his NAME, then how do you want to give a name for him? You say it's JESUS wrongly, you're kicking as men say.
    In fact the white horse rider is an ambassador of the KING, the LORD JESUS,
    here on the earth as prophesied by Jeremiah 49:v.14 and Obadiah 1:v.1.

    Jeremiah 49:v.14 - 14 I have heard a rumour from the Lord, and an ambassador is sent unto the heathen (gentile nations), saying, Gather ye together, and come against her, and rise up to the battle.

    Obadiah 1:v.1 - 1 The vision of Obadiah. Thus saith the Lord God concerning Edom; We have heard a rumour from the Lord, and an ambassador is sent among the heathen, Arise ye, and let us rise up against her in battle. (against the Great Whore which rides upon the Beast of sea having 7 heads and 10 horns and upon his 10 horns ten crowns, and upon his 7 heads the NAME of blasphemy (Vicarivs Filii Dei). (sea= waters=peoples, and nations, and multitudes of all tongues). One of his 7 heads will be wounded to death by the Sword - the Word of GOD.

    The whise horse rider goes forth conquering, and to conquer. It's it.
    No, the child is not JESUS. I don't work with symbolism and guessings, but revelation of the GOD's Spirit. GOD is Spirit. The Word is GOD. GOD is the Truth.
     
  15. Invictus

    Invictus Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    2,735
    Likes Received:
    1,530
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Episcopalian
    Is that a 'yes' or a 'no' to my question?
     
  16. Oseas

    Oseas Member

    Posts:
    265
    Likes Received:
    6
    Country:
    BRAZIL
    Religion:
    Christian
    No, you are saying that. I only highlighted that the book of the Lord is above of all human literature not inspired by the Holy Spirit, as GOD recommended through the prophet Isaiah -Isaiah 34:v.16-, and I confirm the Word of GOD that is the TRUTH . Scriptures explain Scriptures, as you and all can see by Daniel - Daniel 9:v.2 - . What matters and prevails is the Word of GOD, the Word is GOD, yeah, the Word is GOD.

    2 Timothy 3:v.16-17

    16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of GOD, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
    17 That the man of GOD may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.


    John 3:31

    He that is of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth: he that cometh from heaven is above all. - (heaven is not SKY, the physical space of Universe)
     
  17. Invictus

    Invictus Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    2,735
    Likes Received:
    1,530
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Episcopalian
    Then I don’t know what point you’re trying to make. The relationship between the things you think you’re asserting and the Scriptures you cite in support of them has already been shown to be tenuous at best. It might make things easier for everyone, including yourself, if you simply speak plainly what your own thoughts are, rather than cite dozens of disconnected passages as though the combined meaning were obvious.
     
  18. Oseas

    Oseas Member

    Posts:
    265
    Likes Received:
    6
    Country:
    BRAZIL
    Religion:
    Christian
    It is in my above post 89.
     
  19. Invictus

    Invictus Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    2,735
    Likes Received:
    1,530
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Episcopalian
    That was in response to a different question altogether. I still don’t know what point you’re trying to make, and it’s not for lack of trying.
     
  20. Oseas

    Oseas Member

    Posts:
    265
    Likes Received:
    6
    Country:
    BRAZIL
    Religion:
    Christian
    You say that it because you have not discernment, your vision of Scriptures still is so tenuous and fail, you see only letters, the letter kills.

    Actually it's you who is desconnected from the Spirit of Scriptures, and is unable to discern the connection and support the Scriptures give to my assertions. It's a question of revelation, not speculation.