Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: dulos Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | New Testament TITHING ? | Bible general Archive 1 | dulos | 74942 | ||
NT: Heb 6:20-7:2 " 19 ... Jesus,... He has become a high priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.1 This Melchizedek as ...priest of God Most High. He met Abraham ... 2 and Abraham gave him a tenth of everything." *NOTE* Please excuse the length of this explination. It is legnthy but worth your while. It may seem strange to you to list 2 chapters at the same time. It helps to know that the original scriptures had no chapter and verse divisions. They were added later. I suggest reading the whole book of Hebrews in one session. It will help you get a better context. In context, if you read from the begining of hebrews Jesus is declared to be high preist in Heb 2:17. In the next chapter the author goes off on what seems like a tangent. He draws an analogy between God apointing Moses in the OT with Moses being faithful to Gods House and Jesus being apointed as God's son over his house (us). Then it is declared that Jesus was found worthy of Greater honor than Moses was. It is shown that none of those Moses led out of the desert entered into God's rest, because of their unbelief. The next chapter shows that we enter his rest through our beliefe and faith. Then it says, still in chapter 4, continuing the thought of when it mentions Jesus as our high preist in chapter 2 that he has passed through the heavens and he can simpathize with us because he has been tempted (being fully man) just as us and yet did not sin (being fully God). It says we can approach God grace with confidence when we have need. We enter the next chapter to the subject of what was a high priest. I calls to our attention that the high priest in the OT was selected from men. He was weak because he was a man and could sympathize, and deal gently with those who were tuning from their sin in the OT "era". It is then explained that he could not take this duty upon himself but must be called by God. In the OT the High priest was of the line of Aaron. So Jesus was apointed as well as My verse in the begining states: VS.6 "a high priest forever in the order of Melchizedek" Another tangent comes showing the imiturity of the believers in that it was hard to explain this to them Heb 5:11-forward. Finally stating in verse 13-20 that God made a promise, an oath to Abraham that he would give him many decsendants. It is explained that we are his descendent through faith in Christ. It is shown elswhere that we believe and just like Abraham it was credited to us as righteousness. It is said in this chapter "we are the heirs" of God's promise to Abraham. It says we have this hope and it is like an ancor for the soul, firm and secure. This hope it is said enters the sanctuary, because Jesus our hope entered it. He passed through the sanctuary just like the Aaronic high priest did, yet he is a priest in the order of Melchizedek. Now there is that name. Who is Melchizedek? In the next chapter 7 It is explained that Melchizedek was a Preist in the OT "era" that collected the tenth from Abraham. So in answer to you question, It is biblical to tithe. Even more so because Jesus was a greater priest than Aaron of the tribe of Levi. The Levitical high preist hood, Jesus was with out sin so he did not need to offer a sacrifice for himself before he offerd himself, a lamb for our sacrifice, because he knew no sin. God required under th law animal sacrifice to atone or cover our sin. We had to be saved by the sheding of blood to meet the wages of sin which is death. In the OT "era" the high priest would offer every year a sacrifice for his sin then one for the sin of the nation of Israel. Since this shows Jesus to be a greater high priest, in the order of Melchizedek mind you that we out to give 10 percent. Like I said just read the entire book and it will make sense. Now most pastors will tell you it should be from your gross income, some would say from your net. I will just advise you to pray about it and be obedient to what God tells you to give. Remmember God owns it all and if you give you will be blessed, maybe not physicaly and financially all of the time. But I'll tell you from my experience, I have been tithing now for 3years and even when it seemed that I could not do it, I did it anyway, and God was always faithful. I have never had to go without, and God has alway provided. I know it from experience and it is promised in scripture (2Cor 9:6-8). *Ask your self what if God said he wanted 90 percent of what is allready his, I mean he owns it all anyway. What if he wanted that and told you to keep ten percent to live off of? Would you be willing to be obedient? Like I said pray about it and if all you get from this respose and may others I'm sure don't help then don't listen to man just pray about it seek the Lord and he will guide you. Sorry again for such a legnthy explanaiton. Your brother in Christ, dulos. . . |
||||||
2 | purpose of the gospel order? | NT general Archive 1 | dulos | 75527 | ||
I think the order of them regardless of tradition set by Clement is more or less man made. We cannot trust this tradition to be 100 percent accurate. Even the most conservative of scholars would agree. *Note that the dates of the Gospel are a debated subject among many Scholars both believing and non-believing. Many books have been writen on the subject of the Gospels. The standard dating scholars use, even the liberal ones date Mark in the 70's, Matthew and Luke in the 80's and John in the 90's. There is a problem with this though when you look at the book of Acts. Paul is the central figure and the book of Acts, Lukes second part, ends seemingly unfinished, with Paul under house arrest in Rome. It leaves you with the question: What happened to Paul? We can speculate that Acts was written before Paul was put to death around 62 A.D. Or else it would have mentioned Paul being put to death. The gospel of Luke then had to have been written sometime before 62 A.D. Now Mark is very "frank" about Peter pointing out his failures as an early follower. So many scholars don't think that it was written until sometime after Peter's death in A.D. 64. They seem to think that Mark's "frankness" would have been diminishing of Peter's character having achieved a leading place in the affection of the early church. I.E. Mk 8:27-33; Mk 9:2-7; Mk 14:27-31,33-34,37, 66-72 It could not have been written later than A.D. 70 since it makes no mention of the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem. Many think that it doesn't matter one iota that he mentioned the falures of Peter while he was alive. They lived in an oral culture so it is quite likely that most believers already knew of Peter's fallures as well as the falures of the other disciples, after all, they all deserted Jesus in the garden. If Mark would not had mentioned Peter's falures, many would have when he was telling the gospel account according to Peter, especialy because it would have been written well withing the lifetime of eyewitnesses. Plus the gospel writers were not trying to cover up anything embarising, they were merely trying to proclaim the truth. With this fact, it is not hard to date it at A.D. 60 even as early as A.D. 50 since it is quite possible that Mark had been a companion of Peter for quite some time. Matthew depending on if he used Mark as a source or not, could have been written as early as Mark could have been written [A.D. 50], and no later than A.D. 70 when the fall of Jerusalem took place. An early date can be possible because the book is very Jewish in nature and quotes many of the OT prophecies of the Messiah that the Jews would have understood. Since the early church was mostly Jewish, it would make sense to place its writing so early. It couldn't have been written later than A.D. 70 because he recorded many of the warnings that Jesus gave to the Sadducees. These were the preistly families who controled the temple at the time of its destruction by the Romans in A.D. 70. John in gerneral has 2 veiws of dating it: 1. Tradition placing it toward the end of the 1st century, 85 A.D. or later. 2. More recently, some scholars say as early as 50's and no later than 70. The first veiw holds that John wrote his gospel to account for things that were not mentioned by the other Gospel writers. Again this is based on the Clemnent tradition. The second veiw holds that John wrote independently of the other Gospel writers, so he could have written it as early as A.D. 50. This also does not nescessarily contradict Clement's Statement. Just because his theology seems to be more developed does not mean anything. The theology of Romans, which was written A.D. 52[date not argued by almost all scholars] has a theology just as developed as John's. All the gospel writers wrote from a personal theological perspective. This gives evidence that neither Mathew or Luke had to have used the gospel of Mark as a source. The fact that the stories agree is mearly a coinsedence. Furthermore, the statement is made in John 5:2 that there "is" a pool "neer the Sheep Gate". He would have said there "was" a pool "neer the Sheep Gate" if he had written it after 70 A.D. since the pool would have been destroyed by the Romans. That is preety much it as far as dating goes. Scholar opinions vary and all we layman can do is let them debate and don't make a big deal over little things. Just enjoy the gospels and trust in God that they are historicaly acurate and show us what Jesus did for us dying on the cross, and lived an example for us to follow. Augustine said it best: "In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all thing charity[love]." Your brother in Christ, dulos |
||||||
3 | must be theologians? | Numbers | dulos | 103693 | ||
Technically, everyone is a theologin. The Word Theology is a combination of 2 greek words. Theos- meanning "God"; and Logos- meanning word or thoughts or ideas about. So the word Theology means thoughts or ideas about God. Just like Biology is thought or ideas about life-from the Greek Bios for life. A theologin then is a person who has thoughts or ideas about God. So we see that everyone is a theologin, even a atheist. This is a person who has a thought or idea about God. Their idea or thought is that God does not exist. It is still a belief in the non-existence of something. We all have an oppinion of God, but only the bible can lead us on the truth or untruth of an oppinion. It tells us all we need to know about God. |
||||||
4 | Do you seek God, for Guidance | Prov 3:6 | dulos | 103695 | ||
1 Pet 3:15 [but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence;] Mt 6:11: [We all need to seek God daily. Jesus, said give us "this day" our daily bread...] This means we seek God daily and listen to the voice of the Holy Spirit. Think if you were at work and people always had questions about the bible, would you say each and every time, "let me pray and see what God says." I think not. We are called to 2 Tim 2:15: "Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth." We need to answer as Jesus would. In grace and truth. Therefore, we should: #1 seek God daily to give us wisdom in our decisions and actions we will take everyday. know our bible and always be ready. (Mt 6:11) #2 Know our bible to give solid answers to the questions people both believers and non-believers have; and yet do this in love.(1Pet 3:15;Tim 2:15) |
||||||
5 | Pentecost Batism, Was it by or in water? | Acts 2:39 | dulos | 75458 | ||
There are more than one baptism. " 1 Therefore let us leave the elementary teachings about Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again the foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death, and of faith in God, 2 [instruction about baptisms], the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment." Heb 6:1-2 This is a difficult and controversial subject. So we need to define some terms. What is a baptism? The Eastons Dictionary says: The words "baptize" and "baptism" are simply Greek words transferred into English. This was necessarily done by the translators of the Scriptures, for [no literal translation could properly express] all that is implied in them. The mode of baptism can in no way be determined from the Greek word rendered "baptize." Baptists say that it means "to dip," and nothing else. That is an incorrect view of the meaning of the word. It means both: (1.) to dip a thing into an element or liquid, and (2.) to put an element or liquid over or on it." The greek word has a wide latitude of meaning. So it can mean washing as well as dipping into. Now there are 3 elements, if you will, in a baptism: 1. The baptizer. This is the one who is performing the dipping or the sprinkling. 2. The baptizee. This is the one who is being baptized. 3. The element of the baptism. I.E. The water of a Water baptism. Now back to the subject of more than one baptism. *Note in Heb 6:1-2 it says baptism(s), plural. We can find 3 baptisms in Scripture: 1. The Holy Spirit baptizes the believer into the Body of Christ. " 12 The body is a unit, though it is made up of many parts; and though all its parts are many, they form one body. So it is with Christ. 13 For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body--whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free--and we were all given the one Spirit to drink." We(batizee) are "baptized by one spirit(baptizer) into one body (element)". This happens at the point of conversion when one is "born again". There we are baptized into Christs death Ro 6:3. 2. Believer(baptizee) baptized by another believer(baptizer) in water (element). After the one believes one should be baptized Mt 28:19, Mk 16:16. Through out the book of Acts the apostes followed this ordinance set by Christ. Acts 8:12; 8:36-38; 9:18; 10:47-48; 16:15,33; 18:8; 19:5,6; 22:16. It is sign to the world that one has put there faith in Christs work. That is why that baptisms were held publicly in scripture. It is also a symbolism of the first baptism. see Ro 6:3; 1cor10:2; Gal 3:27. A sort of outward sign of the inward work of the first baptism. 3. Jesus(baptizer) baptizes believer(baptizee)with the Holy Spirit(element). This is the Pentecost Baptism. This "promise" Peter is speaking of is from the prophecy of Joel 2:28 which he spoke of in Ac 2:17. This was not baptism into to water, but into the Holy Spirit. Jeus is the baptizer Mt 3:11. This is given for believers so they can have power to be witnesses (Ac1:8). So thats it in a nut shell. |
||||||