Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 31

Thread: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    3,851
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pbminimum View Post
    Amen. So many people use Romans 7 ( out of context ) as a pre-conversion experience of Paul's , when obviously he was speaking as a saved man. He was explaining his war with his flesh and that even though he does war with his flesh, he has ultimate victory. Romans 7 totally refutes the sinless perfection false doctrine and yet many of them still refuse to see these verses at face value.
    I don't think this is about sinless perfection. I would admit that Romans does make it appear that we ought to be doing better than we were before conversion.

    So, Romans 8 says this:

    Romans 8:3-4 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

    Assuming this is in context with the discussion Paul presents beforehand, I would ask the thread:

    In what way is Christianity no longer "weak through the flesh" if we are subject to all the weaknesses Paul presents in Chapter 7? Surely something must be accounted for in the presence of the Holy Spirit within us. In what way does the Holy Spirit align our flesh and our spirit?

    If our flesh is just some out of control dualistic portion of our being, then all Christianity does for us is pardon us continually for our fleshly beast side of us. We should be careful not to buy into some kind of antinomianism preached by Paul, else we could side with those who use 1 John 3:9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. in a technical sense, i.e. even though the flesh continues in this world as before, whatever is committed in the flesh is no longer sin or accountable TO US because we cannot sin having been "born of God". So the actions of the flesh simply move from one category to another instead of some kind of change occurring.

    Romans 5 is pretty easy to discern: Before Christ, After Christ IN TIME. I think Paul continues the discussion in a before / after sense and in Chapter 7, he specifically addresses the Jew, or those bound to the law. Surely we don't think Paul was still married to the law. He suggests that the law passed away IN TIME (i.e. Romans 5) so that he is free to marry another, i.e. Jesus Christ now that He has come.

    Romans 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

    Surely the above is not a realization of Paul AFTER he was saved. Paul says that the Law spoke the Truth about sin and the fallen condition of humanity but did not have a holistic remedy. That is the before condition. Paul goes on to show that the Law was not the defect and that the Law was not the cause of sin, rather that the law condemned humanity as sinners.

    Personally, I think one's view of depravity also plays into how one views Roman's 7. Can humanity weigh the things that Paul weighs in Romans 7 in their depraved condition? I say yes, and I think Paul does too.
    Watchinginawe

    I Samuel 3:10 And the LORD came, and stood, and called as at other times, Samuel, Samuel. Then Samuel answered, Speak; for thy servant heareth.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Not of this earth
    Posts
    13,892
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    I believe those who have advocated for "sinless holiness" have only tried to posit that they are renewed by a sinless Christ, that the sinless Christ actively produces his own righteousness in us.

    That is, it is not just *our righteousness,* but more, the righteousness of Christ becoming our righteousness. And so, these people feel that in order to say that it is *Christ's righteousness* we must refer to it as a "sinless righteousness."

    Of course, I completely agree with you. Even though Christ is in us, and works the quality of his sinless righteousness in us, that does not mean that our own flawed ways are not mixed in with this righteousness.

    When we love, we love with the love of Christ himself. But that love is somewhat mixed with certain carnal elements that continue to rise up in us, trying to spoil Christ's love. We simply overcome our carnal tendencies by pursuing the revelation of Christ's love and obeying it.

    Totally agree! We have sin in us, as Paul is proving here, and as John says in 1 John 1. We simply "overcome the world," as he overcame the world.
    Yep. You nailed it.
    Day by day
    Oh Dear Lord
    Three things I pray
    To see thee more clearly
    Love thee more dearly
    Follow thee more nearly
    Day by day

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Northeast Alabama
    Posts
    4,855

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    Quote Originally Posted by watchinginawe View Post
    I don't think this is about sinless perfection. I would admit that Romans does make it appear that we ought to be doing better than we were before conversion.

    So, Romans 8 says this:

    Romans 8:3-4 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

    Assuming this is in context with the discussion Paul presents beforehand, I would ask the thread:

    In what way is Christianity no longer "weak through the flesh" if we are subject to all the weaknesses Paul presents in Chapter 7? Surely something must be accounted for in the presence of the Holy Spirit within us. In what way does the Holy Spirit align our flesh and our spirit?

    If our flesh is just some out of control dualistic portion of our being, then all Christianity does for us is pardon us continually for our fleshly beast side of us. We should be careful not to buy into some kind of antinomianism preached by Paul, else we could side with those who use 1 John 3:9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. in a technical sense, i.e. even though the flesh continues in this world as before, whatever is committed in the flesh is no longer sin or accountable TO US because we cannot sin having been "born of God". So the actions of the flesh simply move from one category to another instead of some kind of change occurring.

    Romans 5 is pretty easy to discern: Before Christ, After Christ IN TIME. I think Paul continues the discussion in a before / after sense and in Chapter 7, he specifically addresses the Jew, or those bound to the law. Surely we don't think Paul was still married to the law. He suggests that the law passed away IN TIME (i.e. Romans 5) so that he is free to marry another, i.e. Jesus Christ now that He has come.

    Romans 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

    Surely the above is not a realization of Paul AFTER he was saved. Paul says that the Law spoke the Truth about sin and the fallen condition of humanity but did not have a holistic remedy. That is the before condition. Paul goes on to show that the Law was not the defect and that the Law was not the cause of sin, rather that the law condemned humanity as sinners.

    Personally, I think one's view of depravity also plays into how one views Roman's 7. Can humanity weigh the things that Paul weighs in Romans 7 in their depraved condition? I say yes, and I think Paul does too.
    I agree with you 100%

    On the other hand , it's the sinless perfectionists who always seem to misuse Romans 7 under the false assumption that Paul was speaking about his pre-conversion state instead of his post conversion state.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    7,515

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    Quote Originally Posted by Aviyah View Post
    Was Paul speaking of himself as a Christian here, IOW at the time of his writing it, or was he being hypothetical about his "lost" nature prior to salvation?
    I would say both. Not necessarily Paul at the time of the writing, but Paul reflecting on his own struggles since his conversion and, as well, the normal Christian experience of learning to overcome.
    Some people don't mind contradicting themselves as long as they can keep disagreeing with you...

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    12,003

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    Quote Originally Posted by Old man View Post
    I think Paul's talking about the general Christian experience. Not necessarily his condition at that point in his life.
    I agree. Experience is not condition. That we sin because we have a sin nature is a lie. Every Christian has a 'struggle' but not every Christian has the revelation -"thank God through Jesus"- that they don't need to struggle, so they live with sin they don't have to live with. Being free from sin is freely given but not automatic in experience. If you don't believe the gospel, that you've been crucified, buried, raised with him, and that you do not have to sin when you are tempted, you will sin. If you believe the gospel, that you've been crucified, buried, raised with him, and that you do not have to sin when you are tempted, you will experience power over sin.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    12,003

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    I believe those who have advocated for "sinless holiness" have only tried to posit that they are renewed by a sinless Christ, that the sinless Christ actively produces his own righteousness in us.

    That is, it is not just *our righteousness,* but more, the righteousness of Christ becoming our righteousness.
    I don't find this biblical.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    10,686

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    Quote Originally Posted by Noeb View Post
    I don't find this biblical.
    "Christ in us, the hope of glory."

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    12,003

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    "Christ in us, the hope of glory."
    How does that relate to "the righteousness of Christ becoming our righteousness"

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    10,686

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    Quote Originally Posted by Noeb View Post
    How does that relate to "the righteousness of Christ becoming our righteousness"
    Christ is in us to make his righteousness our righteousness. By inserting his spiritual love into us, we are able to demonstrate "his love," or "his righteousness."

    When we covenant together with the Lord to allow Him to indwell us permanently, what we are doing is embracing his righteousness in place of our own failed righteousness. This does not make us perfect, immediately--that awaits the new creation, or the glorified resurrection of our bodies.

    But when we let Christ dwell in us for the rest of eternity, we're choosing to live by his righteousness and not by our sinful flesh. We defer to his spiritual love in all things.

    This is, I believe, the basis of our salvation, because we are embracing his way forever, rather than just take a part of his righteousness, performing that at times, and at other times doing our own thing. But inviting Christ to rule and dwell in our hearts we are showing that we choose him as our life standard, and not just a tool to be used when it is convenient. By having him rule in our heart we choose to have our entire heart changed. We are transformed by his Spirit.

  10. #25

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    Quote Originally Posted by Aviyah View Post
    For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin. For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.

    So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin.(Romans 7:14-25)

    Was Paul speaking of himself as a Christian here, IOW at the time of his writing it, or was he being hypothetical about his "lost" nature prior to salvation?


    he's speaking of mankinds corrupted nature . Notice what he's talking about there the law of sin inside of man , he notices this law in himself " when I would do good , evil is right there with me....a law warring against the law of my mind bringing me into captivity of sin and death"


    he's speaking of the knowledge of good and evil in mans nature . It's not a hypothetical , it's a teaching about flesh v spirit, good v evil within man about our conflicted nature , constantly in conflict it's how temptation gets us. When Satan deceived them into consuming the knowledge of both good and evil....it produced this double nature Paul speaks so often of its the whole reason for the gospel meant to change us inwardly to rid ourselves of this


    “For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.”
    **Galatians‬ *5:17‬ *KJV‬‬

    But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.”
    **Romans‬ *7:21, 23‬ *KJV‬‬

    you see Paul is saying the same thing here ...this is what he's speaking of the fallen or corrupt nature in man , not created by God , but corrupted after creation by satans lies....


    The beginning, Gods design for man.


    "For I was alive without the law once: .....

    “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

    And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good......
    **Genesis‬ *1:26, 31‬ *KJV‬‬


    but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died."


    the commandent came...

    And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
    **Genesis‬ *2:16-17‬ *KJV‬‬

    sin revived


    Now the serpent .....said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

    And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.”
    **Genesis‬ *3:1-6‬ *KJV‬‬


    the commandment which is good , God meant to keep them safe from death actually brings death to man through sin because of the knowledge of both good and evil.

    And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.”
    **Romans‬ *7:9-11‬ *KJV‬‬


    Paul is speaking of the nature of every man and woman, himself included because we all were present in the beginning, we were in our parents then when they consumed the Knowledge of both good and evil.


    if you read from chapter 6-8 and look at the subject matter it makes much sense

  11. #26

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    Quote Originally Posted by Noeb View Post
    How does that relate to "the righteousness of Christ becoming our righteousness"


    his righteousness comes through believing his word. Just like in the beginning God said " you must not eat the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil for when you do you will surely die"

    Satan came and said " you will not surely die , God knows it will make you as gods knowing good and evil.


    one is Gods word , it's right , it's true , it is to be believed and if they believe what God said they are safe. The other is the word of the one set to destroy mankind, it is a lie if it is believed it forces one to disbelieve Gods word which cannot be wrong or untrue.

    the " imparted righteousness " comes to us because we believe the word of God on every matter, meaning the gospel , the words of Jesus Christ the way , truth and life. People often imagine a magical " spiritual" I parting where we don't really need to agree and believe the gospel and the eternal words of our lord Jesus Christ ....what's odd about all these theories is it's not what Jesus said.


    probably 30 different times in the gospel he makes extremely important points saying " verily verily I say whoever hears my word and believes ....whoever keeps my word will live....you are clean because of the word that I have spoken to you.....over and over until it's not possible to ignore he makes the point " what I Jesus am telling you of things , this is Gods will, this is what his children think and what they do, repent and hear me, no one else can lead you to the father but me, hear me, believe me , follow me, trust me.....


    what we truly believe is what we will do. Righteousness is to believe the word of God . If I believe Jesus his thoughts will become " right" in my mind ....it's what I believe , what I believe is what I will do. Man has many flaws in our nature , corruptions often we don't even know until we see the lord teaching it. He is the one we need to believe and accept his words , he is the one offering salvation, sanctification, new birth ....and he says it all comes through his word . That will never change , diminish even after the world ends his words will remain the truth.

  12. #27

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    Quote Originally Posted by Aviyah View Post
    Sorry, which one do you mean absolutely? That he was speaking as a Christian?

    Chapter 8 is good though, I think it might summarize everything in 7.

    But if Christ is in you, although the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness. (Romans 8)

    Meaning although the body still sins, "it is no longer I who do it?"

    there is no place in scripture where God says anyone keeps sinning. The flesh v spirit, is not the physical body v the spirit but the nature of flesh v the nature of spirit those two conflict it's why were known as sinners, it's not after we sin once that were a sinner, it's the conflicted nature in us that makes us sinners. The gospel isn't meant to allow us to go unchanged and live in sin and be saved at all that's directly the opposite .

    the gospel is about taking the knowledge of evil out of our nature , and imparting the nature of Jesus Christ to us through belief , through faith in his word.


    what your reading there in Romans is seen elsewhere and further explained this should help understand to have the idea sin isn't a big deal isn't accurate


    “This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh. For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.

    But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.

    Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.


    But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.”
    **Galatians‬ *5:16-24‬ *KJV‬‬


    that's pretty strong scripture there and comparing it to Ephesians

    “And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling savour.

    But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints; Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks. For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience. Be not ye therefore partakers with them.”
    **Ephesians‬ *5:2-7‬ *KJV‬‬


    Again very strong scripture for those advocating " sin is acceptable" the works of the flesh we have to crucify through the spirit.....this isn't a magical spirit that possesses us and forces us to do everything right , the spirit has one vehicle in order to get into our minds and hearts.....the gospel, the word of God meant for mans salvation. Again back to Romans


    " if you live after the flesh you will die, but if by the spirit you mortifying the deeds of the flesh you will live.....


    no one is " sinless perfection " lol I e found that's a term people use when they don't really want to repent and follow the gospel. It doesn't make us perfect , it's something we learn and grow in and follow our whole lives , it's not about sinless perfection it's silly to even use that term , no one is without sin....it doesn't make us sinless if we repent , it means we're changing our leadership, changing the things we know are contrary to Gods children's nature ....the nature of Jesus , I parted through the gospel , his words . If we believe him, his knowledge comes into us through this belief of his words , his expressed knowledge to man. We have to go the path Christ set before us , there is no revolution coming no other path to God but the road laid out by Jesus .....


    in order to repent ....one needs first to believe it's possible. And realize it isn't a one time magical change , but repentance is a daily walk, as the love of God is a daily walk that we have to do, if we actually believe him.....we will.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    3,851
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pbminimum View Post
    I agree with you 100%

    On the other hand , it's the sinless perfectionists who always seem to misuse Romans 7 under the false assumption that Paul was speaking about his pre-conversion state instead of his post conversion state.
    The tension between our pre-conversion state and our post-conversion state is apparent in the whole of the New Testament. What is our (humanity's) need? Is our need only to be forgiven? Or is it more to be reconciled to God? Paul makes it clear in Romans that it is the latter; and really the whole New Testament and the Gospel of Jesus Christ makes that clear in my opinion.

    The problem presented in the whole Bible is that humanity cannot unilaterally reconcile themselves to God, no one "hath ascended up to heaven", God is Holy and transcendent and may reveal Himself to us, but we cannot go to Him and we are separated from Him by sin as well. So reconciliation is unilaterally provided for by God's grace in sending Jesus Christ on our behalf.

    Is reconciliation wholly a future thing that we hope for? No, though final reconciliation (or perfection) is held in faith by those who receive the down payment now. That would be those who are reconciled to God in this life and thus cry out "Abba, Father" not from a point of view of desperation, but rather from a point of view of revelation and transformation.

    Regarding our transformation in this life, we need to be careful to not lie to ourselves and others in claiming total victory over sin since death still lies on the frontier. I don't see the profit in stating it as a matter of faith either as in we should and may yet attain perfection over sin in this life, for that is reserved for our perfection on the other side of this life. But we need to be just as careful to examine ourselves, to see if we be of the faith and to prove our own selves (2 Cor. 13).

    Anyway, in every instance where I have read Romans straight through beginning to end I have never really wondered much about whether Paul was talking about himself after his conversion or not. For me, I have always understood him to be using himself as an example to the Jews regarding his state under the law before his conversion and presenting to them God's further revelation in Jesus Christ and how that is not just another way, but that the Law (dare I say the dispensation?) had passed away and God has given another for the Jew to marry.

    I like the idea of God's power in us over sin and the doctrine of sanctification (the "two cure" deal), but I have come to despise the doctrine of sinless perfection. It just puts the honest Christian back in Romans 7 still struggling with ourselves not being able to achieve what is held as promised and expected.
    Watchinginawe

    I Samuel 3:10 And the LORD came, and stood, and called as at other times, Samuel, Samuel. Then Samuel answered, Speak; for thy servant heareth.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    10,686

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    Quote Originally Posted by watchinginawe View Post
    Since we can't edit posts, I wanted to quickly clarify that the bold part above is not my view of Romans 7, but rather our sympathy toward that view by we struggling Christians. We ought not to hold that view as our common experience in my opinion, and I don't believe Paul presents it that way either.

    Blessings,
    You can indeed edit posts--it's just a process. You have to refer to the "Style" field at the bottom of the page , where you can select "Default Mobile Style."

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    3,851
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Is Romans 7 Hypothetical?

    Quote Originally Posted by watchinginawe View Post
    I like the idea of God's power in us over sin and the doctrine of sanctification (the "two cure" deal), but I have come to despise the doctrine of sinless perfection. It just puts the honest Christian back in Romans 7 still struggling with ourselves not being able to achieve what is held as promised and expected.
    Since we can't edit posts, I wanted to quickly clarify that the bold part above is not my view of Romans 7, but rather our sympathy toward that view by we struggling Christians. We ought not to hold that view as our common experience in my opinion, and I don't believe Paul presents it that way either.

    Blessings,

    EDIT: I tried the mobile thing and wound up deleting my post! I think it will work if I figure it out though. Thanks for the tip!
    Watchinginawe

    I Samuel 3:10 And the LORD came, and stood, and called as at other times, Samuel, Samuel. Then Samuel answered, Speak; for thy servant heareth.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Hypothetical Scenario
    By VerticalReality in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: Oct 12th 2010, 09:19 PM
  2. Hypothetical question
    By TomH in forum Apologetics and Evangelism
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: Sep 4th 2010, 07:07 PM
  3. Discussion Lets play hypothetical?
    By Athanasius in forum Young Adults Fellowship
    Replies: 73
    Last Post: Oct 5th 2009, 08:31 PM
  4. Just a hypothetical question.
    By cwb in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: Oct 2nd 2008, 06:51 PM
  5. Hypothetical situation
    By RRWick in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: Jun 2nd 2007, 03:39 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •