Outdoor advertising, transit and billboard media plus custom sign systems division, with offices in South Bend, Lafayette, Fort Wayne, and Alexandria. Includes a gallery of examples.

An independently owned telecommunications systems integrator. Services include cellular phones, paging, and email. Stores in Hammond, Michigan City and South Bend.

"Bart Goddard" wrote in message
news:158.51.19.05.345135000@srcbs.org...


bible@alwaysreadit.com wrote:

> Being good is not enough or doing many good things.

And wrote the exact opposite:

> Live your life according to His Word, and you can be
> assured of eternal life and heaven.

The Gospel Plus is not the Gospel.

Bart
============================
After accepting Christ Jesus.
We wrote.

"If you prayed the prayer above and meant it, get hold of a Bible read and
learn. Live your life according to His Word, and you can be assured of
eternal life and heaven."

Question:
Did you accept Jesus?

GBU

((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you
st. )))


((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))

In article <115.51.06.05.622976000@srcbs.org>, Bob Felts says...

[snip]

>> Since you have not free will, I think that this is the
>> consequence.
>>
>
>Romans 7 explains this nicely.

It does? Then why does the _interpretation_ of Rom 7 differ so sharply between
you, myself, and Gary?


--
---------------------------
Subudcat se sibi ut haereat Deo
quidquid boni habet, tribuat illi a quo factus est.
(St. Augustine, Ser. 96)

((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))

In article <090.36.14.05.368829000@srcbs.org>, basicallyblues says...
>
>
>
>Stephen Adams wrote:
>
>>I'm not Matthew, but the answer is, catholic yes, Roman, no. The
>>books of the OT that Protestants call "Apocrypha" or
>"Deuterocanonical"
>>are accepted by the vast majority of Christians in the world, Roman
>>Catholic & Orthodox. The books were removed by the radical reformers.
>
>
>Well here's some arguments against their inclusion in the canon:

So you say. But upon further review, we find that they are _not_ 'arguments',
just unsupported assertions with a generous sprinkling of nonsense disguised as
history.

>
>While in some cases they have certain historical value, any claim for
>canonicity on the part of these writings is without any solid
>foundation.

Here is an unsupported (and unsupportable) assertion...

> The evidence points to a closing of the Hebrew canon
>following the writing of the books of Ezra, Nehemiah, and Malachi in
>the fifth cen