Does Christianity make a claim no other religion makes?

page: 10
18
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 28 2013 @ 08:39 PM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
 





Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

IMO Buddha and many other religions discovered that they are Spiritual beings…i.e. they discovered the Spirit of life within etc…

And them discovering the Spirit of life within is them "receiving" the Holy Spirit. They gained understanding of what was always there.



I think 1 can be philosophically realized and internalized by the individual, making them understand that they are spiritual beings etc… Which is what other religious groups/believers have done in the past, thus helping them to walk the righteous path, (keep the commandments) and reduce there Karmic footprint, so too speak.

But receiving the Holy Spirit is an actual real spiritual event, where you actually experience God and the oneness of God, within your being, and in turn you also realize that you are a spiritual being as well.

This is slight teak, to what I’ve been saying, but it is a possibility that the “Holy Spirit” and the “Spirit of Life” are the same thing, but that its only the mechanics of them, that are different, in that one is only philosophically understood, and the other is actually experienced.

Sorry to change my stance slightly, but as a wise master once spoke, “Your opponent, is your guide to the truth”



Although Incidentally, I did both…


First I understood that I was spiritual being after much searching, and then much later I came to believe that Jesus was speaking on Gods behalf, and that He was a spiritual being, who was, who He claimed to be.

I had been discussing some biblical topics here on ATS a few years back, with a member who used to post here on ATS, who’s handle name was (Badmedia)… A poster who incidentally helped me to realize certain truths, but I realized that I still had to find, many other truths on my own and search inwardly etc...

Anyway, one night, I noticed this poster kept quoting John 14…so this one particular night, I decided to just read the whole verse on my own, with a Bible, rather than reading it online. By this time however, I’d already built up a picture in my mind, as to what believing in Jesus really meant, and it was pretty far removed, from standard Christianity.

As I was reading John 14, I began to believe in Jesus, very much like I’ve been talking about here, with you on this thread. I just finished the John 14:20 verse, when suddenly I received the Holy Spirit and experienced rivers of living water, flowing from within my mid section, and throughout the rest of my entire body.

Which is exactly what that John 7:38 verse states, except at that time, I didn’t know anything about that verse. I also experienced a oneness connection to everything, at the same. This is the reason why I have John 14:20 as my signature…




Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
I agree with your belief here, except you said earlier that Jesus had to die in order for others to receive the HS. This is where I'm getting the idea that you are putting emphasis on his death, but maybe I misunderstood you again?


Actually, I think your right to bring it up, and point it out etc because it does indeed look like a contradiction.

Hmm How can I explain this…

Ok, for me Jesus is the spiritually entity that comes into peoples spirits, or at least, connects with their Spirit of Life within somehow.

Jesus doesn’t need his physical body in order to be who He is, but He did need to leave his vessel/body in order to enter into others. But this aspect is not me focusing on his death, as I’ll try to explain.

Modern Christianity teaches that it’s Jesus death that’s save etc…but in reality, it’s the message that Jesus died to bring, that actually saves a person, and He gave his life so that the message of God could be heard.

And when it is believed in this way, the emphasis gets shifted away from Jesus death and punishment from a wrathful God, to pay for sins etc…, and more towards Jesus life message, and how you can find God and salvation through it, and by following it.

The Holy Spirit aspect, is an important part of Jesus overall message. And receiving the Holy Spirit, is a key part of Jesus message of salvation; But because I believe Jesus is part of the Holy Spirit, he had to go in order for it to be received. But his death teaches us nothing about how to receive it, we only learn how to/and the importance of receiving it, through Jesus life message, hence it’s the message which takes precedence…

I hope that makes sense…




Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
I understand what you mean, and I agree. I again believe receiving of the Holy Spirit has a double meaning.

In one, you must be literally born again as a baby through reincarnation, hence Jesus telling us "you must change and be like little children".

In the other, you must gain understanding of the Spirit of life within you, and then it becomes "Holy" and you "receive" understanding of it. This also ties in with the first meaning, because once you gain understanding, you become pure like a child is pure before the world corrupts them.



I agree with everything you said here, with the exception of the reincarnation part. (not that reincarnation doesn’t exist etc) I’ll try to explain.

The Bible states that you become “born again” through receiving the Holy Spirit. But IMO Jesus was drawing a parallel to a “new born baby” with that of becoming a new creation spiritually, in this life time. This happens on the day a person receives the Holy Spirit and becomes aware of God and what they are spiritually. Hence, they become a new creation in this lifetime i.e. they know they have a Father in heaven, and that they are new child; i.e. a son of God.




Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
In what way does Jesus take it further? Even Buddha taught universal truths, just because he taught them in a different way does not mean Jesus is somehow an upgrade from him in my opinion. They both served their purposes equally.


Well, my personal take, is that God wanted us to actually experience what other religions only philosophized etc…which is tied in with the HS experience. In other words, a way to make those things known.

Also, like I was saying, I go along with the Gnostic Christianity, in that receiving the HS, is tied into a higher spiritual salvation. A moving up into higher spiritual realms, which could be classified as heavens, rather than being reincarnated over and over down here…

Or, A slightly more advanced way of looking at it, although I don’t know if this is true or not, is connected to Karma. I think there is a danger that peoples karma, can spiral out of control, from one life time, to the next. And that God decided that there had to be a remedy for this, especially if someone has completely changed their ways from within etc. And so the HS, not only makes a person a new creation in this lifetime, but somehow cleanses them from all other negative Karma debt, from other life times. Although this last part, is just my own theory.

Continued…




posted on Oct, 28 2013 @ 08:41 PM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
 


Continued…



Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
I believe this "speaking in tongues" symbolizes speaking the truth, something the people of this world see as strange because we are constantly being lied to and we buy into the lies. When you gain understanding of the HS or "receive" it, you start "speaking in tongues", or speaking truth, which is a foreign thing to most in this world.


Well, the “speaking in tongues” is one of the Gifts of the Holy Spirit, mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12.



1 Corinthians 12:7-11
7 Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. 8 To one there is given through the Spirit a message of wisdom, to another a message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, 10 to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues. 11 All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he distributes them to each one, just as he determines.





Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

He wrote historical fiction ("Parallel Lives" being an example) for a living and many things in Luke's Acts tie in with stories told by Plutarch, and has many references to Greek mythology, something Plutarch was very interested in.

If you care to, google "Plutarch's Parable", its a free online book that looks into the true identity of Luke, and it was a real eye opener for me personally.

If a historical fiction writer wrote Acts and Luke's gospel, my opinion is that they can only be very loosely historical. The "big picture" is historical but the small details are not, if that makes sense.


Never really heard this theory before, to be honest. Looks interesting though.

I’m guessing there’s more to this than meet the eyes, and this may seem like a simple solution, but could it not just be a case of Luke, being aware of Plutarchs literature, hence the crossover, or is that too simple a solution.

I have to say though that historically, historians just don’t know who authored any of the four canonical Gospels, as the names were ascribed to the texts, much later in the 2nd century.

On a side note, Marcion believe that his version of Luke was the only correct version, but he was accused by the RCC of editing it. So both Marcion and the RCC had slightly different versions of the same book. Which means one side, must have edited it.


- JC



posted on Oct, 28 2013 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Joecroft
 





Sorry to change my stance slightly, but as a wise master once spoke, “Your opponent, is your guide to the truth”


No apology needed brother.
It shows that you are open to change, which is a very important thing when on a spiritual journey.


The problem with religion is that it teaches people to stick with what they are taught and to never question or change it, so I admire your flexibility. I have changed my stance many times over the past few years. At first I was Christian, then I was an atheist, now I consider myself a spiritual seeker who always tries to change his thought patterns with new information, so I appreciate the conversation we're having.

Thanks for your story, I had a similar experience, except it was while watchingTHIS video. It's what really kicked my journey into overdrive.




The Holy Spirit aspect, is an important part of Jesus overall message. And receiving the Holy Spirit, is a key part of Jesus message of salvation; But because I believe Jesus is part of the Holy Spirit, he had to go in order for it to be received. But his death teaches us nothing about how to receive it, we only learn how to/and the importance of receiving it, through Jesus life message, hence it’s the message which takes precedence…

I hope that makes sense…


Sorry, but I still see a contradiction, not out of spite though. If his teachings are what matter then his death has nothing to do with the receiving of the HS in my opinion. His death was only a consequence of his teachings, so I don't understand why he needed to die for us to receive it.




The Bible states that you become “born again” through receiving the Holy Spirit. But IMO Jesus was drawing a parallel to a “new born baby” with that of becoming a new creation spiritually, in this life time. This happens on the day a person receives the Holy Spirit and becomes aware of God and what they are spiritually. Hence, they become a new creation in this lifetime i.e. they know they have a Father in heaven, and that they are new child; i.e. a son of God.


I agree! But I believe we are all born with a pure and "Holy" Spirit, only the world that is set up around us corrupts us. As we experience this corrupt world, our Spirit is also corrupted and we lose understanding. So I still believe it as a dual meaning personally.




Also, like I was saying, I go along with the Gnostic Christianity, in that receiving the HS, is tied into a higher spiritual salvation. A moving up into higher spiritual realms, which could be classified as heavens, rather than being reincarnated over and over down here…


In my opinion heaven, a.k.a. "the Kingdom of God" is within and without, which is what Jesus says in Luke 17:21. It is all around us and inside us. Reaching "higher and higher levels" of the spiritual realms is gaining better and better understanding of your Spirit, climbing higher and higher up the ladder of understanding so to say.

I do not believe reincarnation is escapable because it is the natural order of thing. What I do think is escapable though is forgetfulness. If you reach a high enough point in the ladder, you remember who you are between each incarnation. I believe Jesus had reached this height.



I’m guessing there’s more to this than meet the eyes, and this may seem like a simple solution, but could it not just be a case of Luke, being aware of Plutarchs literature, hence the crossover, or is that too simple a solution.


Very possible, but what would Luke's intentions be behind copying Plutarch's works? Not only do Plutarch and Luke share literary styles, they also share many similarities within their lives as well, they have "Prallel Lives" so to speak. Pun intended.


Take a look at THIS link. It covers the many MANY similarities between the two authors. I believe the similarities in lives and literary styles are too many for it to just be a coincidence.
edit on 28-10-2013 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 29 2013 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
 




Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
No apology needed brother. It shows that you are open to change, which is a very important thing when on a spiritual journey.


Hey, you called me brother!…makes a change from people, calling me Heretic, and confused etc… lol



Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
The problem with religion is that it teaches people to stick with what they are taught and to never question or change it, so I admire your flexibility.
I have changed my stance many times over the past few years. At first I was Christian, then I was an atheist, now I consider myself a spiritual seeker who always tries to change his thought patterns with new information, so I appreciate the conversation we're having.


A “spiritual seeker” is a good term to use for oneself, even if you know many mysteries, that others do not. Bruce Lee once said in an interview, that the word “Superstar” really turned him off, and that he would have preferred it, if people just came up too him, and told him he was a “good actor.” I feel the same way about the whole master, guru thing, and that it is much better to think of oneself as a “good student” or maybe even a “great student.”

And great students are ones who think for themselves and they see themselves as students because there are aware that they’re still learning and adapting and remaining flexible, just like you mentioned. And even if I had ten times the knowledge I have now, I would still see myself as a student, plus it helps me to remain humble.




Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Thanks for your story, I had a similar experience, except it was while watchingTHIS video. It's what really kicked my journey into overdrive.


Wow nice video, apparently Edgar Mitchell, said he had some kind of mystical experience when his ship was returning to earth, while he was looking out into the universe, so yeah, these experiences can and do happen.

Although, I’m not sure if it’s same as my own experience. I mean, my experience literally felt like water, it was almost as if a fountain spring, had been placed inside my mid section, but of course I was reading Jesus words when I experienced this. But I do believe that the Father, The ALL, spoke through Jesus, which is another reason why I believe Jesus is the bringer of that Spirit.




Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Sorry, but I still see a contradiction, not out of spite though. If his teachings are what matter then his death has nothing to do with the receiving of the HS in my opinion. His death was only a consequence of his teachings, so I don't understand why he needed to die for us to receive it.


Yes exactly, Jesus death has nothing to do with the receiving of the Holy Spirit, but his life message does.

Imagine you’re a spiritual being, who is plannig on pouring out your own spirit into people who come to believe in your message, (regardless of whether you die or not) and you know you have to leave your vessel, in order for that to take place, but remember, this is not a que, for people to be focussing on your death. Because learning how to receive it, is the most important part, which is given through your life message.

I hope that makes it clearer, not sure how else, I can best word it, than that.

But anyway, I totally agree, his teachingings are what matter the most, not his death.



Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
I agree! But I believe we are all born with a pure and "Holy" Spirit, only the world that is set up around us corrupts us. As we experience this corrupt world, our Spirit is also corrupted and we lose understanding. So I still believe it as a dual meaning personally.


Yeah, this is what living in a fallen world means, except in Christian thinking they classify everyone as being born a sinner, which is just plain wrong. My own take, is that the story in Adam and Eve, was really all about the knowledge of God, within, which was either taken away from us, or we moved away from it, of our own selfish doing. With the serpant representing our own negative egos, and selfish thinking etc…



Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
In my opinion heaven, a.k.a. "the Kingdom of God" is within and without, which is what Jesus says in Luke 17:21. It is all around us and inside us. Reaching "higher and higher levels" of the spiritual realms is gaining better and better understanding of your Spirit, climbing higher and higher up the ladder of understanding so to say.

I do not believe reincarnation is escapable because it is the natural order of thing. What I do think is escapable though is forgetfulness. If you reach a high enough point in the ladder, you remember who you are between each incarnation. I believe Jesus had reached this height.


Well, this maybe me taking things a bit too far here, and it’s also tied in with your question further up, about the apparent contradiction.

But, I actually believe, that Jesus resurection is an important part of his overall message. And that it’s actually a part, of the message itself, and is in turn connected, with this higher spiritual salvation. In other words, God is giving us a chance, to conintue to a higher realm (heaven), with our current soul and body intact. I also think that the power of the resurection is what kept Jesus words/message intact, even though some are scaterred in other unknown Gospels. And just to add - I personally think that the “Turin Shroud”, is the real deal!

The reason I think re-incarnation was eradicated from the Bible, is because men couldn’t get there heads around, which one was the truth, which resulted in a split. But the reality is, that both co-exist together IMO.

Now I know this is a pretty far out thing to be saying, and there doesn’t appear to be any one else, out there saying it. But to me, it perfectly ties in together with God being just, and with reaping what you sow etc…




Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Very possible, but what would Luke's intentions be behind copying Plutarch's works? Not only do Plutarch and Luke share literary styles, they also share many similarities within their lives as well, they have "Prallel Lives" so to speak. Pun intended.




Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Take a look at THIS link. It covers the many MANY similarities between the two authors. I believe the similarities in lives and literary styles are too many for it to just be a coincidence.


Man, that’s a LOT of similarities. That guys clearly been burning the mid night oil…

I may as well just come clean here…

I’m pretty sure that Jesus words were really just a collection of sayings that came originally from Christian Gnostic texts, and that they were later put into story format, by other writers. But having said of course, that doesn’t mean that there aren’t still elements of truth, in each of them.

- JC



posted on Oct, 29 2013 @ 11:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Joecroft
 





Although, I’m not sure if it’s same as my own experience. I mean, my experience literally felt like water, it was almost as if a fountain spring, had been placed inside my mid section, but of course I was reading Jesus words when I experienced this. But I do believe that the Father, The ALL, spoke through Jesus, which is another reason why I believe Jesus is the bringer of that Spirit.


It was that feeling for me as well. It almost feels like butterflies in your stomach but much much stronger. Actually realizing that we are the All (God) experiencing itself was a powerful experience for me.

Being raised Christian, I tried to apply my understanding of the All with the teachings of Jesus, and I believe they are in agreement. When Jesus spoke of himself, he was speaking of everyone because we are all the same.




The reason I think re-incarnation was eradicated from the Bible, is because men couldn’t get there heads around, which one was the truth, which resulted in a split. But the reality is, that both co-exist together IMO.


The reason reincarnation was removed in my opinion is because reincarnation says that we have more than one shot to get it right. Those who put the bible together wanted to control people, and the best way to control us with their teachings was to tell us we only had one chance and that their teachings were the only way to get it right this one chance.

If reincarnation is true, that completely destroys their doctrine of eternal punishment or eternal bliss. It's much easier to control people when you convince them they only have one shot.




I’m pretty sure that Jesus words were really just a collection of sayings that came originally from Christian Gnostic texts, and that they were later put into story format, by other writers. But having said of course, that doesn’t mean that there aren’t still elements of truth, in each of them.


I totally agree here, I think there's a huge possibility that the story in the gospels was created around the recorded sayings of some wise teacher, possibly named Jesus. I do not believe in the miracles or the resurrection, they are pagan themes inserted by Rome to make Jesus seem "better" than us, hence people worshiping him as God himself.

Though I do believe the miracles and resurrection do represent very natural "miracles". The miracles like walking on water, turning water into wine, feeding the five thousand, etc. all represent natural processes like the sun going over the horizon at the beach, grape vines being grown then turned into wine, and things multiplying through procreation.

The resurrection represents reincarnation. If Jesus really was crucified and died on the cross, he didn't rise again on Earth in the same body, he rose to new life on another planet somewhere else through reincarnation.

But I have to ask, if you are pretty sure the story set up around the words of Jesus are not true, then how can you believe Jesus' death was part of receiving the HS when he may never have existed in the way the story represents?



posted on Oct, 29 2013 @ 06:44 PM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
 




Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
It was that feeling for me as well. It almost feels like butterflies in your stomach but much much stronger. Actually realizing that we are the All (God) experiencing itself was a powerful experience for me.

Being raised Christian, I tried to apply my understanding of the All with the teachings of Jesus, and I believe they are in agreement. When Jesus spoke of himself, he was speaking of everyone because we are all the same.


For me, my experience didn’t show me that we are All God experiencing itself. But only that everything in creation is connected to each other, through it’s very fabric. My current thinking is still based on an ordered structure of creation, with each of us having our own individual spirit/soul which was created by God, and that we are many entities experiencing everything together.



Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
The reason reincarnation was removed in my opinion is because reincarnation says that we have more than one shot to get it right. Those who put the bible together wanted to control people, and the best way to control us with their teachings was to tell us we only had one chance and that their teachings were the only way to get it right this one chance.


Well, that’s a pretty strong view. My own thoughts on this, goes back to what I was saying about Christian Gnosticism and the RCC not understanding the coded language within their writings. Which essentially led to most of the theological mistakes which helped to form the early RCC.

I believe this just happened because of men’s errors. Men who were probably just genuinely trying to deceiver the truth. And I know this a conspiracy website, but I really don’t think there was any conspiracy, just genuine misunderstandings between different views. Although of course those misunderstanding, led the RCC to forcing it’s authority onto others, including the Gnostic Christians.



Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
If reincarnation is true, that completely destroys their doctrine of eternal punishment or eternal bliss. It's much easier to control people when you convince them they only have one shot.


The whole lake of fire idea, as far as I’m aware seems to originate from the Book of Enoch, which has striking parallels with that of the book of Revelations, in regard to it’s description of the lake of fire and judgment.

The problem with the book of Enoch IMO is that it talks about various fallen angels, and of course Enoch is shown some vision, supposedly by a good Angel, but whose to say he wasn’t tricked by a Fallen angel instead. And the big problem here is that the error, was then compounded elsewhere, in various parts of OT, and of course the book of Revelations.

The word Hell in the Bible is translates mostly to the word Sheol, which just means grave. But I think it’s real usage was meant to symbolize death, or more to the point people believing that death was the end. And I think this ties in with Genesis where, death entered the world, because we moved away from the knowledge of God. In other words, we forgot who we were spiritually, and then death entered in, hence the fall, and people living only for the flesh, believing that death was the end, for lack of knowledge etc…Which also ties in with what true salvation is, which is coming to know what you are, and who the Father is etc…

So when Jesus used the phrased “let the dead bury their own dead” for example, he simple meant they were living without the knowledge that they were eternal beings and their divine connection to God, rather than it having anything to do with them being unsaved, and destined for a fiery Hell etc…

But the other key clue, is Jesus came to fulfill the true law, and He states that “In everything, therefore, treat people the same way you want them to treat you, for this is the Law and the Prophets”…

So the idea of God say, throwing someone into a fiery hell forever, or even destroying them forever, goes against Gods own Laws. Especially if all a person ever did was steal a loaf of bread, but lived righteously, for the rest of his life, but never knew God etc…


Sorry for rambling on, I know it’s a bit heavy to take in all at once, especially if you’ve never heard this type of thing before…




Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
I totally agree here, I think there's a huge possibility that the story in the gospels was created around the recorded sayings of some wise teacher, possibly named Jesus. I do not believe in the miracles or the resurrection, they are pagan themes inserted by Rome to make Jesus seem "better" than us, hence people worshiping him as God himself.

Though I do believe the miracles and resurrection do represent very natural "miracles". The miracles like walking on water, turning water into wine, feeding the five thousand, etc. all represent natural processes like the sun going over the horizon at the beach, grape vines being grown then turned into wine, and things multiplying through procreation.

The resurrection represents reincarnation. If Jesus really was crucified and died on the cross, he didn't rise again on Earth in the same body, he rose to new life on another planet somewhere else through reincarnation.


Well funnily enough, the Gnostics use of the word resurrection, had a double meaning, in one context it meant re-incarnation like you said, but in another it meant a spiritual resurrection, which was kind of like their version of salvation, which I mentioned in my other posts. But I think this spiritual resurrection is tied in with actual bodily resurrection. I tend to lean towards the Valentinian school of thought, and the curious thing about it is, that they believed in the resurrection of Jesus, but at they same time they had texts which talked about re-incarnation. So I can only assume they believe and accepted both a true. This is the reason why I think both are possible…


You say you don’t believe in the miracles etc, but imagine the ALL i.e. God, living and working through Jesus in his life time. Also, why do think Rome would want the story of Jesus to continue if they were so apposed it etc…wouldn’t it have been better for them just to stop the resurrection stories altogether…?




Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
But I have to ask, if you are pretty sure the story set up around the words of Jesus are not true, then how can you believe Jesus' death was part of receiving the HS when he may never have existed in the way the story represents?


Well, I believe the stories are true, but that certain aspects of the theology were left out by Rome, because they didn’t understand Christian Gnosticism, with it’s symbolism, coded language and metaphors etc…

I think most of the theological mistakes were made because of this, and also Paul lent more towards OT thinking, but in my view He brought in the tradition of men from the OT, and in turn these were incorporated into early Roman Christianity.

I will admit that though, this is more of a gut feeling I have, and it’s something that’s difficult to prove, historical at least.

- JC
edit on 29-10-2013 by Joecroft because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2013 @ 01:55 AM
link   
You all,

I wasn't happy until found God. Even the one person you can name is closest to you has hurt you but God hasn't and that is why I want to go to Heaven. A piece of Heaven here is thinking or reading about God, speaking to Him.



posted on Jul, 10 2014 @ 01:17 AM
link   
a reply to: JiggyPotamus
Brilliant Post!!



posted on Jul, 10 2014 @ 03:59 AM
link   
Christ's teachings require more than believing In Him. The Gospel repeats this fact, Our Lord Himself tells you.

Matthew 12:50
For whosoever shall do (works) the will of my Father, that is in heaven, he is my brother, and sister, and mother.


Matthew 7:21
Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, (faith) shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth (works( the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.






top topics



 
18
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join