Results 1 - 7 of 7
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Partly under the Law? | Col 2:14 | swerv | 146387 | ||
Mark: Moral law is 10 comm. - could also be argued that any other law specific to our health and keeping us holy is apart of God's law. But he did only write 10 on stone. Marriage, diet, cleanliness I think are all relevant now as they were in OT. Absolutley, the 10 Comm. are the laws on the heart. Many have argued there is only 2 comm. now - love God and love neighbor. But Rom.13 clears this up in clearly saying love thy neighbor is a clear summary of the final 6 of the 10. So to follow the logic the first 4 are summarized by love God with all your heart. To argue any different is blatent disobedience. Sorry to use strong words but I have been doing a study of the Sabbath and diet and scriptural justification for the changes is totally wrong. I grew up a Methodist. But I have found the doctrine in many areas is abosolutely incorrect. 2 Chor. 35:12 - Book of Moses contained all sacrificial laws - moral law (Royal Law - James 2:8) is the 10 Comm. Do we need to keep the law -- YES James 2:10-12 , Rom. 3:31, Math. 19:17 Scriptural evidence is overwhelming. The new coventant said God would write laws on the heart. Does it make sense for God to write them there and we not obey them. The Holy Spirit will give us the power and wisdom to NOT sin (transgress the law). We are to live a Christ -- He did not sin although tempted. ABSOLUTELY CLEAR !!!! Hell - eternal - unquenchable (great study) But look at Math 25:41 , Jude 9, 2 Peter 2:6, Malachi 4:1 Math. 10:28 - "destroy" body and soul. Punishment for sin is death - the second death after judgement by God. Not eternal suffering. Where is that ever evident in God's prior judgement. Rev. 20:5, 9 - fire from heaven will "devour" them. Second death - Rev. 20:14 ----- death is not eternal but the result of death is eternal and everlasting -- do you see the difference. Never will the body/soul ever live again - this is the punishment for sin --- reward for salvation is eternal life -- will never die. Math 13:41, 42 - cast into furnace of fire. God dis say that the world would not ever be destroyed by water but will be destroyed by fire. So to will sin be destroyed by fire. This whole plan of letting sin takes it course was to prove to all God's created being (man - angels and whatever else) that sin cannot win and this result will forever end the debate if the choice of Satan to rebel was better than the love of God. To keep a place called HELL somewhere in existance goes against the purpose of God to rid the existence of sin forever. This was a great eye opener to me after reading these verses. Eze. 18:4 --- the soul will die. !!!! Sodom and Gommooah were destroyed by eternal fire BUT is it still burning now !!! Jersalem was said to be destoyed with unquenchable fire BUT is not buring now !! Logic and proper interpretations are the keys. In love Merv |
||||||
2 | Partly under the Law? | Col 2:14 | jcsav | 146450 | ||
You seem to see death as some kind of none existence. That is not taught in the Scriptures. When Jesus allowed us to see into the after life in Luke 16:22-31. Do you see sin. No. You see a repentive Believer that was willing to Preach the Gospel. And if you see this as the first Death (The Soul still Lives) then how is this different from Rev 20:14-15 ,"And Death and hell (The last enemy 1Cor15:26) were cast into the lake of Fire, (it is now, destroyed, no longer exist) This is the second death. (15) "And whoever was not written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire." Now, tell me, how do you die, seeing death is no more. It is not that you can not live again that is the Hell. It is that you can not die. That is what Jesus meant by the worm will not die and the fire will not be quenched. Mark 9:46. |
||||||
3 | Partly under the Law? | Col 2:14 | swerv | 149408 | ||
Luke 16:22 - this passage refers to a parable only. Mark 9:46 --- The question is does "unquenchable" mean buring forever (eternity) Please look at Jeremiah 17:27 and 2 Chronicles 36:19. Jerusalem was destroyed with unquenchable fire. Is Jerusalem still buring today ??? In love, Merv |
||||||
4 | Partly under the Law? | Col 2:14 | Morant61 | 149421 | ||
Greetings Merv! Where exactly is Luke 16:22 called a 'parable' in Scripture? Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
5 | Partly under the Law? | Col 2:14 | swerv | 150343 | ||
Tim: This is why it cannot be a parable. 1) Do we really think that Abraham's bosom is the abode of the righteous dead ? Actually, the agels will gather the saints at Christ's coming - not at a person's death. 2)It says heaven and hell were separated by a gulf yet the persons could converse with each other. Luke 16:26 - will this be true of the saved and the lost ?? 3) The rivh man was in hell with a body. He had eyes, a toungue, ... Luke 16:24. How did body get into hellfire instead of into the grave ?? No one teaches that bodies of the wicked go right to hell when they die !!! 4) The request for Lazurus too dip the tip of his finger and come through the flames to cool the rich man's tongue is obvioulsy not literal. The whole story is parabolic !!! Merv |
||||||
6 | Partly under the Law? | Col 2:14 | Morant61 | 150387 | ||
Greetings Merv! I am assuming that your first sentence was a typo! :-) So, the answer to my question is that Scripture never calls it a parable - right? In your opinion it is a parable, but Scripture never calls it a parable. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
7 | Partly under the Law? | Col 2:14 | swerv | 150393 | ||
Tim: Yes - Sorry for (many) typos. I must double check my responses before I send them !!! Yes - it does not call it a parable !! I agree !! We both understand that scripture is not for private interpretation. When we say in our opinion scripture means this or that - I agree we must be careful not to make scripture "a private interpretation" which scripture condemns. But in relation to prior discussions. When God told Peter to eat the "creepy things" from the sheet. We know that God did not "really" mean for Peter to violate God's own statues on diet but rather to come to understand that Gentiles are now clean !!! In that account of Peter's vision we never see that Peter did indeed eat it but rather disobeyed God. So the key to understanding is seeing the point God is trying to get to the reader. Thanks for the responses, Thomas |
||||||