Archbishop of Canterbury "not embarrassed" over new father

[Gurucam]

Why should it be?

The second part of the reply.

One who wants to teach and promote his own thing must have the courage, like the Lord Jesus, to stand apart and alone and teach and promote his own thing on his own name. Such a one is not a Christian. However he can be a false prophet who came in Jesus' name.

Fact is Christianity is about unconditionally obeying the Spirit, 'not seen' and eternal Son of God, Lord Jesus. The Lord Jesus is perpetually doing the work to earn and keep this position.

By simply discerning and being led by the Spirit, 'not seen' and eternal Son of God, Lord Jesus one get no sin. This makes one totally not responsible for one's action. In this way the Spirit, 'not seen' and eternal Son of God, Lord Jesus, takes responsible for all one's sins. This is the gift that is the Spirit, 'not seen' and eternal Son of God, Lord Jesus.

This is not about the physical, 'seen' and temporal son of man Jesus who (according to erring traditional) supposedly died (past tense) for their sins.

This is about the Spirit, 'not seen' and eternal Son of God, Lord Jesus. In this format He lives eternally to shield those who follow Him, from any and all their possible 'real time' current and on going sins. This is the Christian life style. In order to have this life style one must literally know and commune with, the Spirit, 'not seen' and eternal Son of God, Lord Jesus, in real time, all the time.

The Spirit, 'not seen' and eternal Son of God, Lord Jesus is the only leader of Christians. There can be and is no intermediary leader or leaders. He lead and guide each Christian directly, individually and personally. Also, the Spirit, 'not seen' and eternal Son of God, Lord Jesus, is not the Holy Spirit. He is another Spirit who intercedes between humans (according to their individual spirits) and the Holy Spirit. This has absolutely nothing to do with Peter's commission and Peter's church.

 

[Gurucam]

Why should it be?

The third part of the reply.

The Spirit, 'not seen' and eternal Son of God, Lord Jesus is the only leader of Christians. There can be and is no intermediary leader or leaders. He lead and guide each Christian directly, individually and personally. Also, the Spirit, 'not seen' and eternal Son of God, Lord Jesus, is not the Holy Spirit. He is another Spirit who intercedes between humans (according to their individual spirits) and the Holy Spirit. This has absolutely nothing to do with Peter's commission and Peter's church.

The fact is that Peter was appointed by Jesus simply to anchor his Satanic church among the dead who bury their dead. Peter's church is not Jesus' Christian church. Jesus' Christian church is anchored on the example of Paul. However at all events Jesus' Christian church is led and anchored directly, personally and only the Spirit, 'not seen' and eternal Son of God, Lord Jesus, in real time, all the time.

Only foolish uninformed (and spiritually dead) people seek to be leaders of Christians on earth. They are simply assuming responsibility for people's sin and they cannot deal with even their own sin. Simply by leading people one assume responsibility for their sin.

2000 odd years ago, the Lord Jesus rose to heaven clad only in his Spirit, 'not seen' and eternal Son of God, body. Clad in this body He is 'seated' on the right side of the Holy Spirit. There He is ready willing and able to guide Christian, live and direct and to assume their sins, in real time, all the time.

When the Spirit, 'not seen' and eternal Son of God, Lord Jesus assume responsibility for sins of humans, it is because He has the capacity to assume and deal with these sins.

On the other hand foolish and uninformed leaders of supposed Christian churches are unwittingly assuming the sins of their charges and they have no capacity to assume and deal with these sins. They are simply playing Jesus. They do not know what they are doing. They are unwitting.

Most of these supposed Christian leader are of lettered orientation. They are leaders under the Old Mosaic system. They are not Christian leaders. Christianity is anchored only on the Spirit, 'not seen' and eternal Son of God, Lord Jesus. Christianity is also anchored on each person having personal communion with the Spirit, 'not seen' and eternal Son of God, Lord Jesus, through each of their own hearts or spirits.

Our current 'Christian' leaders have not reached this level of actualization. They are simply pretending or they are gravely misled into believing that they are more than they truly are. They are not Christians.

They do not know the Spirit, 'not seen' and eternal Son of God, Lord Jesus (as Paul did). Also the Spirit, 'not seen' and eternal Son of God, Lord Jesus does not know them (as He knew Paul). The Lord Jesus cannot and do not confess them to God. In matters related to the Lord Jesus and God, they cannot help themselves, far less to help their charges.

However they are too spiritually dead to know this fact about themselves. They are simply fools who rush in where angels fear to thread. Ver effectively they are the dead who are burying themselves and their charges.

Those who wish to be (authentic) Christians, must actually know the Lord Jesus, currently, through a live personal, real time communion with His Spirit, 'not seen' and eternal, Son of God form . . . as Paul did (starting on the road to Damascus).

These supposed Christian leaders and their charges have not accomplished this level of development. They do not actually know the Lord Jesus. They only know about Jesus who was physically on earthy 2000 years ago. They are on their own. They are not known to Jesus and/or God. They are bible toting, slogan repeating, spiritually dead people who are spiritually burying their equally spiritually dead followers.

 

[Crucible]

Sir Archbishop is using having been an illegitimate son to be seen as holy.

Or
He's replying to fault finding people.

I don't know. Didn't read it all; the UK is all shenanigans

 

[Gurucam]

Why should it be?

The forth and final part of the reply.

The serious question is whether the mother of Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby was led into her fornicating, adulterous, extra marital sex by the Spirit, 'not seen' and eternal Son of God Lord Jesus or by her own intellectual and/or carnal motivation?

Christianity and common decency demands that Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby make a very clear answer to the above.

Fact is, Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby cannot be separated from his mother (i.e. his genetic, nor can he be separated from the environment of his mother who fornicated, committed adultery and had extramarital sex. If this was done under personalized urging (and guidance) of the Spirit, 'not seen' and eternal, Son of God, Lord Jesus, not only would this be a good thing it would be a divine things and Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby would certainly be a child of God.

If the above is not the case, then, . . . .

To date Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby has denied his genetics. This is a denial of his mother. By this statement he has distance him self from his mother and his genetics. At the very least this is his own open acknowledgement that (for him) his mother's fornication, adultery and extramarital sex was not acceptable. For him the action of his mother were not divine.

The very sad and far more significant fact is that he was the product of his mother's fornication, adultery and extramarital sex. So in effect he has admitted his own 'face value' unfitness to be Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury.

Even if his mother's fornication, adultery and extramarital sex was motivated by the Spirit, 'not seen' and eternal Son of God, Jesus according to Romans: 7 verses: 4 to 6 of the KJV N.T. and therefore divine. There is still the matter of his (first reaction of) denying his genetic and therefore his obvious need to distance himself from his mother and her action.

Clearly his church has him on the run. And he is prepared to deny and distant himself from, his mother and her fornication, adultery and extramarital sex. However is he not at the very center of his mother and this fornicating, adulterous and extramarital sex?

Even from this, it is not quite right to conclude that his mother's fornication, adultery and extramarital sex was carnal and not divine . . . although by Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby denial of his genetics it seems to him that his mother's actions were carnal and sinful, meaning that he was brought forth through a sinful act. Yet he projects that that is no big deal.

. . . the other questions are:
1. Does the buck stop anywhere?
2. Is everyone in (the billion strong) traditional Christianity practitioners of lemon used car salesmanship?
3. Are they all selling lemons?
4. Are they all foolish, deluded and lost? . . . all one billion of them.

Please set me right. Give me an informed answer. I would not like to believe that absolute catastrophe.

1. Show me that 'many are called and few chosen is not correct', if you can. Show that one billion traditional Christian have it right, do not err and are chosen. Indeed, show me that Jesus's prophesy is wrong, or.

2. Show me that 'straight is the gate and narrow the way that leadth to life and few be there that find it', is wrong, if you can. Show that one billion traditional Christian have found the straight gate and narrow way that leadth to life. Indeed, show me that Jesus's prophesy is wrong, or

3. Show that many false prophets did not come and misled many. Indeed, show me that Jesus's prophesy is wrong, if you can.

4. Please show me that supposed Christians churches are not 'the dead who are burying their dead'. Show me that they are not burying their physically dead brethren, with Satan, inside the depths of earth together with their dead physical body, for the past 2000 odd years, to wait on the (still to come) physical return of Jesus. Show me that you guys are not dispatching your dead relatives and friends to Satan inside the depths of earth.

5. Please show me that you guys are not actively attempting to, any which way, convert unsuspecting people to your corrupted/Satanic (dead burying their dead) version of Christianity.

Please, please show me. I will embrace the simplest reasonable answer, that has support from the KJV N.T.

 

[Gurucam]

Have you looked at the genealogy of Jesus?

Indeed, although Jesus' earthly genealogy was projected to be most worthy, it was not good enough. Even the best Jew was not good enough.

Half of Jesus' genealogy had to come from a totally different source.

Additionally, Jesus' genealogy was so superior that only a few were given to follow Him. Indeed few were capable of following and/or getting (i.e. appreciating or using) His actual message. In fact not even His disciple (i.e. the chosen few) ever got, appreciated or used his Christian message. They all remained spiritually dead.

It took Paul to come from the outside and get, appreciate and use Jesus' Christian message. Everyone else including the disciples and all other Jews did not have the genealogy close enough to Jesus to rise to Christianity. They were appeased with a slightly modified version of the already existing Old Testament system.

Indeed this was Peter commission and church. Peter's church is simply a slightly modified version of the Old Testament church. Peter's church is anchored on the Gospel of circumcision. This is 'righteousness of God that is with the law of sin and death'. This is not Jesus, new Christian church. Peter's church is Jesus' Satanic church were the dead bury their dead.

Jesus' Christian church is totally 'not seen'. It is anchored on the Gospel of uncircumcision which was rendered onto only Paul. The Gospel of uncircumcision is righteousness of God that is without the law of sin and death.

Romans 3 King James Version (KJV)
21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets

Romans 8 King James Version (KJV)
2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

Jesus created two churches. One for the dead to bury their dead and another for those who follow him. The first one is under Peter and the other is according to the experiences of Paul. Peter's church is physically based ('seen'). Paul's church is spirit, Spirit and Spirit based ('not seen'),

Matthews: 8 KJV N.T.
22 But Jesus told him, Follow Me, and let the dead bury their own dead.

The Lord Jesus had two agendas. One for those who follow him and the other for the dead to bury their dead. This gave rise to Jesus' two totally different churches.

Are you comparing the genealogy of Jesus to the genealogy of Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby?

Seems that the church to which Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby belong is no more than a slightly modified version of Peter's Satanic church. It is not Jesus' Christian church.

The following defines Peter's church:

Matthews: 16 KJV N.T.
23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

1 Corinthians: 5 King James Version (KJV)
5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

This is a Satanic church in the service of the Lord Jesus. Peter was identified to be Satan by the Lord Jesus. However he was not discarded. He was called to anchor a chuch for the Lord Jesus according to 1 Corinthians: 5 verse: 5 KJV N.T. (above).

Therefore, Peter's church is Jesus' Satanic church, where people are sent for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

Peter's church is not Jesus' Christian church. In Peter's church, physically dead followers are buried, together with their dead physical body, in the depths of earth, in hell, with Satan. There they wait indefinitely on the return of the physical Jesus. Some have spent just 40 or so years on earth and are in hell inside the earth with Satan for over 2000 odd years. This is the way of the dead burying their dead.

Those who follow Jesus are totally different. They are Christians. Christians do not go that way. Christians differs in no way from the Lord Jesus Christ (except that Jesus is Lord of all). This means that when Christians die they rise in three days (like the Lord Jesus Christ) to be like angels in heaven. However, only the chosen few are Christians.

The billion strong traditional Christian are not chosen. They are simply called to be Christian. Only a few are chosen. Peter's church and Peter's practices are the ways of not chosen. The church to which Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby belong is a slightly modified replication of Peter's church. They are all described as the billion strong tradition Christians.

This means that one should not expect any thing Christian to happen in or come out of, Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, his genealogy and/or his church. This is simply the way it is. My post here are simply to awaken at least a few of you guys. I love you all.

The above is truth in the fullness of time. A billion strong traditional Christians have been sadly misled for most of the past 2000 odd years.

How many of you are ready and willing to awaken? Prophesy of the Lord Jesus is that only a few will ever awaken to truth. These are the chosen few.

Do not run with the masses, they can never have truth. Truth is available only among the few, the chosen few.

 

[Gurucam]

I'm glad god is much more forgiving than you are.... just look at the 'genes' of Mary.

The mother of Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby fornication, adultery and extramarital sex was not with: the Holy Spirit. She cannot be compared to Mary, mother of Jesus. Nor can Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby be compared to Jesus.

Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby denial of his genetics is very questionable. Fact is Genealogy matters very much to God.

By deliberate Grace of God, half of the genes of the physical, 'seen' and temporal son of man Jesus had to come from the Holy Spirit. Only this genetics made Jesus significant. Without His genetic as it was, he would be nothing. Genetic matters the most.

Do not be deluded by foolishness.

Do not let Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby's denial of his genetics fool you. He seems to be simply grabbing at straws (and issuing a red herring) so as to try to continue to hold on to his appointment. He is simply being exposed for all to see, now, in the fullness of time. This is simply according to Grace of God, in the fullness of time. You should accept it gracefully.

Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, says he is not embarrassed over the revelation that he was born from an extra-marital affair between his mother and one of Winston Churchill's assistants.

He also said: "People will judge me on who I am and on what I do, not my genetic makeup." The denial of his genetics is a denial of his mother. He is distancing himself from his mother and his genetics. This can be taken to be his confirmation that his mother's fornication, adultery and extramarital sex (from which he was brought forth) was wrong.

Fact is people's genetics does not change for all their life. He is not (and cannot be) free of his mother and his genetics:

Galatians: 4 KJV N.T.
30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

Mothers and sons are judged the same by God. Genetics cannot be denied.

Do not let Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby misguide you. Genetic matters significantly.

The mother of Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby was a fornicating, adulterous woman who had extramarital sex.

Additionally, Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby is also the product of his mother's fornicating and adulterous extramarital sex. And his father is not the Holy Spirit.

Additionally, according to Galatians: 4 verse: 30 KJV N.T. above, mothers and sons are judged the same by God. Genetics cannot be denied.

The scriptures said: 'Cast out the bondwoman and her son' . . . I ask, in what way is Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby and his mother different? Do you have an answer that is supported by revelations in the KJV N.T.?

You said 'I'm glad god is much more forgiving than you are . . . '

Your statement is totally wrong. It is a corruption of Truth.

The fact that 'many are called and a few chosen' means that God is not that forgiving. You are simply making up your own erroneous ideas and believing your foolishness.

Matthews: 22 KJV N.T.
29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.

Matthew 22 King James Version (KJV)
14 For many are called, but few are chosen.

The sad fact is, those who err are not chosen. A billion are called. However form this billion people, only a few are chosen. The very great majority err because they do not know scriptures and they do not make it, they are not chosen. This is straight and simple. There is no room for forgiveness.

There is no forgiveness. It is very straight forward. Each one must find the straight gate and narrow way that leadth to life. There is no bribery or 'functioning connection':

Matthew 7 King James Version (KJV)
14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

If you do not find and walk, the straight gate and narrow way, you will not be among the few who make it.

There will be no forgiveness. Each human will be judged strictly on 'what you sow you shall reap'.

You either have scriptures right, do not err and are chosen or you have scriptures wrong, err and are not chosen.

Galatians: 6 King James Version (KJV)
7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

If one sows corruption one will reap (bring forth) corruption. And God is not mocked . . . therefore, it is this way for all. The scriptures said: 'Cast out the bondwoman and her son'

You are clearly posturing like a lemon used car sales man to uphold corruption. And you are deceiving yourself.

 

[Gurucam]

The Lord did confirm that:

Matthews: 24 KJV N.T.
11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.

It is entirely possible that Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby is a false prophet.

This is not, in any way, an accusation.. This is an inquiry based on revelations from the KJV N.T.

How do we know that "Cast out the bondwoman and her son" do not apply to Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby and his mother? . . . . God is not mocked. God does not have different rules for different humans or does He?

Galatians: 4 KJV N.T.
30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

 

[genuineoriginal]

It matters that your opinion is supported by revelations from the KJV N.T. because we are speaking about Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby. He has accepted a position to be among the highest Christian leaders in Britain. In this role, he is not a private individual.

Also, in this role, he is not a leader on his own right and own making. In this role, he rides on the back of the Lord Jesus in order to have his position and power over other humans.

Therefore, in this role, not only must his teachings exemplify accurate Christianity as confirmed by KJV N.T. revelations, his actions and direction must be totally supportable (and justifiable) by revelations in the KJV N.T.

Both he and you must be prepared to provide KJV N.T revelations to support (and/or justify) all actions of Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby.

You seem to be hung up on the KJV New Testament for some reason.

Could you provide any verse from the KJV New Testament that you believe the Archbishop of Canterbury has violated by finding out that the man that raised him is not the man that impregnated his mother?

 

[Gurucam]

You seem to be hung up on the KJV New Testament for some reason.

I perceive it (the KJV N.T.) to be accurate.

Could you provide any verse from the KJV New Testament that you believe the Archbishop of Canterbury has violated by finding out that the man that raised him is not the man that impregnated his mother?

I cannot. There is no verse from the KJV New Testament that say it is wrong for Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby to be raised by a the man who is not the one who impregnated his mother. You seem preoccupied with this idea. Fact is this not a problem and this is not the problem.

The problem with Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby is not with the father who raised him. Also the problem is not that he was raised by a the man who is not the one who impregnated his mother.

The problem with Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby centered on his mother who fornicated, committed adultery and had extramarital sex.

The problem arose because: How do we know that "Cast out the bondwoman and her son" does not apply to Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby and his mother? . . . . God is not mocked. God does not have different rules for different humans or does He?

Galatians: 4 KJV N.T.
30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

The problem also centers on Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby being brought forth out of fornication, adultery and extramarital sex.

The problem also centers on Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby being brought up by a mother who fornicated, and had adulterous extramarital sex.

The problem also centers on the fact that Justin Welby is not an ordinary 'Joe', private citizen. He is not only responsible for his own (possible sorry) self. He is Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury. He is responsible for and too, millions.

Also the entire thing centers on the basis on which Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby was empowered to be Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury.

The appointment and empowerment of Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby rides on the back of the Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore the appointment, empowerment, words and actions of Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby must be supportable by revelations from the KJV N.T. . . . especially since the Lord Jesus warned that many false prophets will rise and misguide many.

Matthews: 24 KJV N.T.
11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.

Matthew 22 King James Version (KJV)
14 For many are called, but few are chosen.

Matthew 7 King James Version (KJV)
14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

Fact is Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby did rise (so be some kind of prophet). It is therefore critical to some how validated that he is not a 'false prophet who rise and misguide many'.

. . . at any event the church to which Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, belongs is far to big to be the few who have it right, do not err and are chosen. Face value evidence seems to suggest that Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby might be a false prophet who rise and is misguiding many.

 

[Crucible]

Does the Archbishop still live in the Dark Ages when it was frowned upon to be a 'bastard' or 'illegitimate son'?

:think:

I don't understand how this is newsworthy.

 

[Gurucam]

Does the Archbishop still live in the Dark Ages when it was frowned upon to be a 'bastard' or 'illegitimate son'?

:think:

I don't understand how this is newsworthy.

Are you promoting that in this new Age (that is no longer the Dark Age), fornication, adultery and extramarital sex is all O.K.?

Are you saying that, now, in Christianity, fornication, adultery and extramarital sex is all O.K.?

Are you saying that the laws of fornication, adultery and extramarital sex are done away with for Christians?

Are you saying that the fruits of fornication, adultery and extramarital sex are now good? . . . this is the big question.

Fact is Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby seems to be the fruit of fornication, adultery and extramarital sex. The question is can he be a good fruit?

This 'story' is very seriously newsworthy because: How do we know that "Cast out the bondwoman and her son" does not apply to Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby and his mother? . . . . God is not mocked. God does not have different rules for different humans or does He?

Galatians: 4 KJV N.T.
30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

Fact is Abraham had two sons; one with his wife and one with his wife's bond maiden. The former was a child of God. The latter a child of the flesh. The latter child persecuted the former . . . also this always happens, children of the flesh always persecute children of God.

Galatians: 4 KJV N.T
29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.

Like Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, the son of the bondwoman was born out of fornication, adultery and extramarital sex. Scriptures says that the bondwoman and her son should be cast out. Please show how and why is Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby different from Abraham's son with the bondwoman?

Please show how and why Abraham's son and his mother, the bondwoman should be caste out and on the other hand, Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby should be counted among leaders in his supposed Christian church?

Please show the basis of human justice that allows Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby and his mother, to be not caste out, (as instructed by scriptures).

The instruction seems very clear.

Can you show, with supporting KJV N.T revelations, why Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby and his mother should not be cast out?

I am not coming to any conclusion or making any declarations here. I am simply asking a question. Based on the above KJV N.T. revelation (which seems very clear), I am simply asking the above question. Also I am simply asking for the reason why you think that it is not newsworthy.

Are you trying to cover-up corruption according to your own volition?

 

[Crucible]

So, making common the fate of Ishmael with requirements of bishopric ordination :think:

I think you all have lost your minds.

 

[Rusha]

He cannot control what his parents did or did not do... all he can do is conduct himself as he should.

:thumb: ^ This. Outside of gossip, this *news* is not news worthy.

 

[genuineoriginal]

There is no verse from the KJV New Testament that say it is wrong for Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby to be raised by a the man who is not the one who impregnated his mother.

Then your test of the KJV New Testament has failed your attempts to smear a man just because he was begotten by a man other than the man that raised him.

You seem preoccupied with this idea. Fact is this not a problem and this is not the problem.

I have stated several times that I don't see any problem with Welby having one man that begot him and another man that raised him.

The problem with Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby centered on his mother who fornicated, committed adultery and had extramarital sex.

So?
Bring her before the elders of the city and put her on trial for adultery if it means so much to you.

The Bible says that a man is not to be put to death for the sin of his father and that goes for the sin of his mother as well.

Ezekiel 18:20 20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.​

Nothing you have said gives you any excuse to hold the sin of Welby's father against Welby.

 

[Gurucam]

Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby said: "People will judge me on who I am and on what I do, not my genetic makeup."

How is who he is different from his genetics?

Additionally the KJV N.T. confirms very clearly that genetics matters, seriously. Christians are called to judge people on their genetics.

Children of God are brought forth to earth through the seed (genetics) of Issac and his generation. And not at all through the seed (genetics) of Ismael and his generation.

The KJV N.T.says:

Romans: 9 KJV N.T.
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh (the generation of Ishmael), these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise (the generation of Issac) are counted for the seed.

Seed is genetics and it matters very seriously. Children of God are brought forth to earth through the seed (genetics) of Issac and his generation. And not at all through the seed (genetics) of Ishmael and his generation.

Abraham's son with the bondwoman was a child of the flesh. This was Ishmael. Ishmael was brought forth through fornication, adulterous and extramarital sex between Abraham and his wife's bondwoman.

Abraham's other son with his wife was a child of promise. This was Issac. Issac was brought forth through sex between Abraham and his wife.

The child of the flesh persecuted the child of God. So it was before, then and thereafter.

Galatians: 4 KJV N.T.
29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.

What does the scriptures say about the above:

Galatians: 4 KJV N.T.
30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

The aim of Jesus and God is to fill the earth's surface with only children of God, without children of the flesh (in the fullness of time).

Clearly Christians are called to judge people on their genetics.

Only direct descendants of Issac are children of God. Only children of God are favored by Jesus and God. They follow the Lord Jesus.

Descendants of Ishmael are children of the flesh. Children of the flesh are not favored by Jesus and God. These are the dead who bury their dead.

It is clearly antichrist to say or suggest that aspiring Christians and Christians would not judge according to genetics. It is the first responsibility of an aspiring Christian and Christian to check their leaders for a direct genetic link to Issac.

The character and behavior of the mother of Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby can tell if she was a descendant of Issac or Ishmael. This can then tell us if Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby is a descendant of Issac or Ishmael.

It is not at all safe to have Christian leaders who are not descendants of Issac.

Fact is only children of God are Christians. Therefore, it is especially important to check up on the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby because he was brought forth from fornicating, adulterous, extramarital sex. This identified the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby with Ishmael and . . . scriptures instruct that Ishmael and his mother be cast out.

It is very clearly confirmed in the KJV N.T. that from among those called to be Christians, only the descendants of Issac are children of God.

From among those called to be Christians, the genetics of (only) Issac's generation is already (from birth) conformed to children of God.

 

[genuineoriginal]

It is clearly antichrist to say or suggest that aspiring Christians and Christians would not judge according to genetics. It is the first responsibility of an aspiring Christian and Christian to check their leaders for a genetic link to Issac.

:kookoo:

 

[Gurucam]

Nothing you have said gives you any excuse to hold the sin of Welby's father against Welby.

Don't you hold the original sin of the original father of the Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby against him?

I hold nothing for or against Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby.

However it seem that the KJV N.T. holds something against Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby.

He or you need to clear that up. His appointment and authority over millions rides on the back of the Lord Jesus whose book is the KJV N.T..

Seems that Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby was brought forth from fornication, adultery and extramarital sex. There is scriptural reference for this circumstance.

Abraham has two sons. One from fornication, adultery and extramarital sex with his wife's bondwoman and the other with his wife. About the one (the off spring) who was brought forth from fornication, adultery and extramarital sex, the scriptures instruct:

Galatians: 4 KJV N.T.
30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

This does not preclude the right of Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby to be raised by a man who is not his biological father. Also this does not preclude his right to a life on earth (as a private citizen).

However it (the KJV N.T., not me) seems to definitely preclude his right to be a Christian leader. In fact the scriptures seems to instruct that both he and his mother be cast out.

There is another revelation about 'casting' people out:

Matthews; 25 KJV N.T.
30 And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

. . . even 'servants' will be cast out.

Do you think that one who is brought forth through fornicating, adulterous extra marital sex and becomes a servant, can be an 'unprofitable servant'? Is this possible?

Can you explain why the scriptures instructs that the bondwoman and her son must be cast out? This can help to shed more light on the subject at hand. Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby and his mother seems to be in the same circumstance as the bondwoman and her son.

Instead of being disconsolated, crying and offering foolish defenses, please try to shed some light on the (supposed offending) KJV N.T. revelation, if you can.

It is the scriptures that instruct: Cast out the bondwoman and her son . . . not me.

. . . and scriptures seems to confirm that even if one is a servant one can be cast out. Fact is false prophets are also servants and they will be inside what passes for Christianity, so that they can misled many.

Matthews: 24 KJV N.T.
11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.

Matthew 22 King James Version (KJV)
14 For many are called, but few are chosen.

Matthew 7 King James Version (KJV)
14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

 

[Crucible]

I hold nothing for or against Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby.

However it seem that the KJV N.T. holds something against Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby.

He or you need to clear that up. His appointment and authority over millions rides on the back of the Lord Jesus whose book is the KJV N.T..

To one who was brought forth from fornication, adultery and extramarital sex, the scriptures says:

Galatians: 4 KJV N.T.
30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

This does not preclude his right to be raised by a man who is not his biological father. Also this does not preclude his right to a life on earth. However it seems to definitely preclude his right to be a Christian leader.

Oh, put a sock in it already.

I read Galatians 4 and 5, and you're trying to make a law of what is plainly a teaching on bondage vs grace, using the dealing of Abraham's seed in a slave as a sort of symbolism.

 

[genuineoriginal]

I hold nothing for or against Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby.

However it seem that the KJV N.T. holds something against Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby.

No, the KJV New Testament holds nothing against Welby.

If you think it does, you are misreading it.

Of course, your animosity towards Welby's mother flies in the face of all the threads you have started falsely claiming that a Christian must break the law and commit fornication, adultery, and extramarital sex if they are led by the Spirit.

 

[Gurucam]

No, the KJV New Testament holds nothing against Welby.

If you think it does, you are misreading it.

That is entirely possible.

Therefore you read the supposed offending revelation properly and explain why the scriptures instructs that the bondwoman and her son must be cast out in:

Galatians: 4 KJV N.T.
30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

What was the sin of the bondwoman and her son. Why did the scriptures instruct that they both be cast out? Is it because that son was brought forth through fornication, adultery and extramarital sex and therefore, he was a child of the flesh? The revelation clearly confirmed that he was a child of the flesh.

Galatians: 4 KJV N.T.
23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.

Was this son, a child of the flesh because he was brought forth from fornication, adultery and extramarital sex? i.e. like Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby?

I am standing only on the above revelation.

It seems that Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby and his mother is in the same situation as that bondwoman and her son. Both women fornicated, committed adultery and had extra marital sex. And both mothers brought forth sons from their fornicating, adulterous extramarital sex.

This means that, according to scriptures, both Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby and his mother must be cast out.

This could be wrong. Please shed your light.

Your unsubstantiated statement, "No, the KJV New Testament holds nothing against Welby. If you think it does, you are misreading it" seems to be you begging and/or bluffing. Don't beg or bluff.

Stand up and support your statement. Quote the verse and post your perception of its message next to each other. Step into forthrightness. Where is the err in my reading of the revelation?

In your view: Why was the son of the bondwoman, a 'child of the flesh' and why was the son of the wife, a 'child of God'? And why did scriptures instruct that the child of the flesh and his mother be cast out?

Is this, in any way, connected to fornication, adultery and extramarital sex?

The questions are very simple. Do not put on your lemon used car salesman, posturing.