User Profile: JGraham III

JGraham III

Member Since: September 22, 2010


123 To page: Go
  • April 1, 2015 at 10:48am

    I am multilingual: I speak English fluently and then in my prayer language I speak the tongues of men and/or angels. How many do you speak? I can efficiently use Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew lexical aids well enough to understand the meaning of words as they are meant biblically, without having to be fluent in them. That is what biblical research is all about. Can you tell me the difference, biblically speaking between “first born” and “only begotten”? Where is the Bible text (and NOT some commentary no matter how old or by some long dead church father) that can show me scripturally how these two easily understood phrases somehow got turned on their heads in order to have Mary ‘immaculate’? BTW yet another ‘thorny’ verse for you RC’s is Mathew 1:24-25 “Then Joseph being aroused from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: and knew her not till she had brought forth her FIRSTBORN son: and he called his name Jesus.”
    When it comes to choosing what to believe, either the Bible which is quite clear on this issue, or what the RC traditions say, I will take the Word any day, and so do most commonsensical Christians.

  • [1] April 1, 2015 at 10:31am

    Consider that John the Baptist was Jesus’s cousin and was 6 months older as per the record in the Gospels where shortly after Mary’s conception she went to visit her cousin Elizabeth who “was in her 6th month”. John couldn’t have been conceived until sometime in June as Zechariah served in the course of Abia which was a two week service period for Levites that ended in June. Given this info, John would have been born in the spring some 9 months later (likely March). Jesus, being 6 months younger would have been born in the fall of the year, likely on or very near the first of Tishri, in association with the Day of Atonement, which would have likely had a September date in that year. That would make His conception sometime in December.. food for thought. Not born Dec 25 (which was the Roman holiday of Saturnalia, the sun god..) but perhaps conceived near or on that time. :)

  • [1] April 1, 2015 at 10:22am

    I have heard it said that the Resurrection is the fulcrum of all human history. Happy Resurrection!

  • [2] March 31, 2015 at 8:56pm

    Consider Galatians 1:19…but other of the Apostles saw I none, save James the Lord’s BROTHER.” Not my words, but those of the Holy Spirit as He spoke to Paul in giving him the book of Galatians and of course this is one of those “thorny” verses that is hard to reconcile with predetermined RC doctrine. Jude was another brother He had as well..
    The gospel record actually calls James and the other siblings of the Lord his “half brethren” which fits, not because they were Joseph’s by a previous marriage, but because James had Joseph for his father while Jesus had God for his father, thus making them “half brethren” with Mary as the mother of both.
    You keep telling me “be not afraid”, but I would admonish you to do the same; be not afraid to for once do the thinking for yourself instead of tired old traditions that deny what the scriptures say. In the spirit of preparation for the Passover/Resurrection, cast out the leaven of wrong teaching and allow the light of the Word fill your heart!

  • [3] March 31, 2015 at 9:57am

    Can you cite your reference to ‘Jewish law’? Saying something is so is one thing, but proving it, especially from scripture is quite another entirely.

  • [4] March 30, 2015 at 11:57pm

    What utter nonsense! I am not having trouble understanding the difference between ‘first born’ and ‘only begotten’. The word in Luke is “prototokos” and occurs 9 times in the NT. It is translated ‘first born’ 8 times and ‘first begotten’ once. There is no reference to a variant text using ‘only begotten’ any where that I can find, and I have a better than usual lexical library available to me. So I would say you are the one having a problem with the wording of scripture, but that hasn’t stopped you guys in the past so why start now, eh? It is precisely this mule-headed attitude about RC tradition trumping scripture that makes so many of us suspicious of some other RC doctrines, which are equally hard to find in the written Word. Then, your attitude when confronted with this problem is to say, ‘try the catechism’. Why bother when you are clearly in error on a simple reading of Luke 2:7? Scripture interprets itself, if of course one can get their religious predilections out of the way. Most is easily understood right where it is written. Some requires a grasp of context, both immediate and then more remotely. Occasionally a difficult word or concept must be searched for where it was previously used, often all the way back to where it first occurs. There is NO place in scripture where it will say Mary had only one son. just as it doesn’t say the Lord’s half brethren are Joseph’s by a previous marriage. Another RC fiction.. Truth vs. Tradition.

  • [2] March 30, 2015 at 7:39pm

    Same ol’ rodeo… why does Luke 2:7 say that Mary “brought forth her FIRSTborn son..” if Jesus were really her only-begotten son as the RCC claims? Someone is wrong, and I am willing to bet the gospel account is not wrong. But of course I am only a protestant, so what do I know? But I can read… :)

  • [1] March 30, 2015 at 7:21pm

    Soros requires a return on his investments and so do does Lucifer. What comes to mind is that episode of South Park with the devil and Sadaam Hussein…

  • March 30, 2015 at 7:07pm

    Image the “brew-haha” this will cause given the widely contested nature of who gets to control the territory…

  • [21] March 30, 2015 at 11:00am

    I would think Mr. Soro’s investment would be better spent on plastic surgery for himself, although I’m not sure one billion will be enough to stop his face from looking like 10 miles of bad road.

  • [12] March 30, 2015 at 10:50am

    I had assigned that comparison to ol’ Slick Willie and Cankles but perhaps it can be employed again?

  • [9] March 30, 2015 at 10:48am

    “Caesar! Beware the Praetorian Guard!”

  • [23] March 30, 2015 at 10:47am

    If those who put him in office repent and ask for forgiveness, of course God will forgive them, or do we have a new definition for the ‘unforgiveable sin’?

    Responses (2) +
  • March 30, 2015 at 10:32am

    Thanks again but I am already ahead of you on virtually all of what you posted to me. As a Christian who has spent virtually all of the time of being one in some variation of the Pentecostal movement, I can tell you way more about it both good and bad than what you are likely to find on the internet. One thing I have learned over the years is that one man’s religion is another man’s cult. Be careful about hurling that accusation around as by the classic definition of a cult given by so-called experts on the subject, the RCC is a big qualifier. Just saying. And I suppose your response that ‘not all have the gift’ will exclude anything else I say about it, right? Slick move, but not expected. Needless to say, all the manifestation ‘gifts’ are part of the package deal that God gave when a person is born again, so all can if they can overcome their fear of doing so. “No man can (really) say Jesus is Lord, but by the Holy Ghost” Paul said in 1 Co 12. Another verse to put along side 1Co14:37 I guess.
    If you really want to understand a portion of Christianity that is different from the one you currently embrace, go to someone who is a satisfied customer, not a disgruntled former “member”. That you are a satisfied customer of RCC doctrine is readily evident, but despite all your negative press you want to give Pentecostals, the blind see, the deaf hear and the lame walk. The best mix is the Spirit AND the WORD and little tradition! Happy Resurrection!

  • [11] March 30, 2015 at 9:41am

    Israel at the time of Christ actually had two new years in a sense. Nisan had been made the beginning of months at the time of the Exodus and was the New Year for the cycle of the Feasts, but Tishri while having been the original New Year remained so for governmental purposes. The age of a king, as well as the official beginning of his reign would have been calculated from Tishri.
    There is a rather interesting statement made at the conclusion of Noah’s flood and that is the ark “rested on the 17th day of the 7th month” (Nisan). It corresponds to the day and month that the Lord was raised from the dead.. curious…:)

  • March 29, 2015 at 9:06pm

    While there are those of the Pentecostal persuasion who would claim that unless a person speaks in tongues, he ain’t saved, I am not of that number. Another subject about which it is difficult to get good teachings. You are aware that it was only in the late 60′s the RCC got with the charismatic movement, yes? Interesting since the Apostle Paul said, “I thank my God I speak in tongues more than ye all” in reference to the entire Corinthian congregation. There are indeed benefits to utilizing one’s prayer language as the NT will attest. Romans 8 would be a good place to start looking, as well as the familiar passages in 1 Co 12 thru 14. In one place it calls tongues “perfect prayer”. Why would someone not want that? A reminder: 1 Co. 14:37 ‘…the things I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.” Love you, Catholic brother of mine!

  • [-1] March 29, 2015 at 5:53pm

    I find it amusing and quite telling that despite your disdain of things ‘protestant’ you nevertheless will quote that devil of all Protestant devils, Martin Luther, but only when it supports your argument. I believe I have answered your query about what I thought of the record of communion in 1 Co 11. Soooo… does that mean you will now answer mine about how you intend to deal with ‘keeping the commandments’ as cited in 1 Co 14:37, especially when it comes to the subject of tongues?

  • [7] March 29, 2015 at 10:02am

    As most SNL skits of late have only earned a courtesy laugh out of me, this one was quite good. Made me laugh more than once!

  • [-1] March 28, 2015 at 10:24pm

    Won’t read? I have no objection to reading them, but I do have a time ‘problem’ and as they are not that high on the to-do list, I find it more profitable to read the Word itself and not what someone said about it, no matter how venerated they might be. I will have to pester my pastor to see if he has any copies of them dudes in his rather extensive library.
    You keep using the phrase ‘be not afraid’. Why do you assume that about me? P’raps it is you that is afraid? Just wondering…

  • March 28, 2015 at 8:55pm

    I do NOT teach people to reject God’s commands nor does anyone in my church do this. I DO teach people that the love that God loved us with, which is only available through the saving grace of Jesus Christ is the only way those commandments can be fulfilled.
    As far as the body and blood of the Lord, do YOU recognize what you are saying? The blood shed is for the remission of sins, and his body (not some little wafer either) was given for our healing. Please reference Isaiah 53 :). Communion is a representation of these truths and no I do not believe in the ridiculous notion of transubstantiation as you well know. We will have to differ on this, as I have told you several times already. BTW have you seen someone healed during Communion? Just wondering.
    The representation of bread and wine are as old as Abraham and Melchizedek (or at least that is the first mention of it) and represent two covenants: the covenant of blood and the covenant of salt. Care to research them? And, go ahead and throw down the gauntlet to me Snoop1e if you want to play that game. There are even more things I have asked you that you have yet to answer. One of which is: are you aware that walking by the manifestation gifts is a “commandment of the Lord” as well? 1Co 14:37 tongues included. Should I refuse to answer you if you fail to get back to me? No, I am far more mature than that, my Catholic brother.

123 To page: Go
Restoring Love