"Lars Wilson" <> wrote in message ...
> > So your automatic assumption that Cornelius was a gentile is withour
> > foundation.
>
> No. It is not without foundation. The context is that he was a gentile.
>
> Acts 10:34 "34 At this Peter opened his mouth and said: "For a certainty
I
> perceive that God is not partial, 35 but in EVERY NATION the man that
fears
> him and works righteousness is acceptable to him.."
And the Jews were scattered amoung all the nations.
But I understand your need to make him a gentile.
You'll do anything to try and be included in Jesus followers.
> > But because Luke, a gentile made up that story, you automatically
assume
> > that
>
> 1) Cornelius
> > was a gentile,
>
> Can you prove Luke "made it up"? No. (Oops! I blurted out my own
> answer!!)
No more than you can PROVE he didn't make it up.
Funny how people like you always revert to some kind of PROOF, when
you have nothing for anything you say.
> 2) that it actually happened.
> >
> Of course it happend! Can you prove it didn't? No. (Oops! There I go
> again, answering my own questions!!)
OOOOPS, there you go again, asking me for proof, to refute a story you
have
no proof for.
Ironic!!
> > I'm amazed that you take what Luke says, and turn around and tell us
Peter
> > said it.
> >
> Look. You have a problem with Luke. I don't. I'm assuming Luke was
> inspired and wrote an inspired gospel. So, yes, I believe what he
says.
> You don't? That's your issue. Not mine.
As you said, you ASSUME Luke was inspired.
Funny, how you ask me to PROVE, but you can ASSUME!!
> Ha! They have ex-Illuminati on You Tube giving details.
And no doubt in your mind, You Tube is also inspired!!
Smile.
|
