Results 1 - 7 of 7
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: chris a Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | 4th commandment has been done away? | Ps 111:7 | chris a | 57901 | ||
May-it, We keep running in to each other my friend! I would ask you to reconsider you reading of James 2:10 by continuing to read through v. 12. James 2:10-12 (ASV) For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is become guilty of all. For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou dost not commit adultery, but killest, thou art become a transgressor of the law. So speak ye, and so do, as men that are to be judged by a law of liberty. The key verse for this section is v. 12, for a reference of the Law of Liberty study the book of Galations Ch. 4 and 5, which makes it clear that Liberty is Christ freeing us from the Law (again, all of it). So, I believe James is saying that if we practice the Law we are under all of it, the entire Mosaic covenant, and if we break one ordinance or command we will be judged, so we should speak and act as one under the New covenant ie the Law of Liberty. I want to emphasize that James makes no suggestion that the whole law is the Ten C's, because his initial quote is the Royal law with is in Deut. and is NOT a part of the Ten, so to think he is only talking about the Ten would be incorrect, but rather he is talking about ALL the Law. And, all sides would agree that we are NOT under the whole Law. And, of course, I'm arguing that we are not under any of the Mosaic Law, not the Moral section or the Ten C's, but rather the Law of Christ. GOD bless!! chris |
||||||
2 | How were ppl saved before Jesus came? | Heb 11:6 | chris a | 49219 | ||
Amrit, Prayon is way off on this one!! Read the book of Hebrews and these thing will be made clear! Faith in GOD is the only way of salvation, now we must have faith in Jesus, but then people needed to believe in their Creator and not the creation!! Mommapbs is right on, and again the reference is in Hebrews! See Hebrews 10:4 to counteract Prayons misunderstanding, "For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins." (NKJV) The context is clear that animal blood NEVER took away sin!! GOD bless!! chris |
||||||
3 | Key words: David, next generation, NT? | Acts 13:36 | chris a | 49007 | ||
Jessie, I realized that I had my online bible on my computer, so I got the correct reference for you! Acts 13:36-38, these are most likely the verses you're looking for, and they speak to the same intent that Peter spoke to in Acts 2:25-39. GOD bless!! chris |
||||||
4 | Key words: David, next generation, NT? | Acts 2:25 | chris a | 49004 | ||
Jennie, I believe you're thinking of Acts 2:25-39. The meaning is comparing the prophesies of david with the fact that the king did in fact die, so he could not be the Holy One who would not see decay. This prophecy was looking forward to our Lord Jesus Christ. This may not be what your looking for, but if you go to these verses and look at the references you may find it. Unfortunately, I don't have a reference Bible with me (I'm at the office). Hope this helps!! GOD bless!! chris |
||||||
5 | inmyheart, could Paul be sarcastic? | Acts | chris a | 48984 | ||
Searcher56, I think you may have made a typo. I Cor. 14, only has 40 verses. GOD bless!! chris |
||||||
6 | Per 2Thes 2:3 isn't the rapture postrib? | 2 Thess 2:3 | chris a | 48337 | ||
Glen, I don't believe the 'it' refers to the coming of the Lord and our gathering together with Him. The two (rapture and Day of the Lord) are not at the same time. Why did the believers lose their 'composure' when they heard that the Day of the Lord had started? The only logical answer I know is that they expected to be 'raptured' BEFORE the Day of the Lord. Also notice that the Day of the Lord is not until the lawless one is revealed, but in v7, Paul states that the lawless one will NOT be revealed until the Restrainer is removed. I believe the Restrainer is the Holy Spirit and I believe that the Holy Spirit will be removed when the rapture occurs; because if the Holy Spirit is removed but believers remain, they will be defenseless against the schemes of the devil. Therefore the rapture (removal of the Restrainer) must be before the Day of the Lord. Although it may sound otherwise, I am anything but dogmatic with regards to this interpretaiton, if you see problems with it, please let me know. I'm open on the issue!! GOD bless!! chris |
||||||
7 | Was Mary a virgin her whole life | Matt 1:25 | chris a | 47589 | ||
Jawz, I haven't been on the forum for a while, so if i'm rusty, please excuse. I'm not an expert in greek either, so please enlighten me to any mistakes in my interpretation. I have several greek references from my Online Bible software and all of them suggest that heos is a conjuction simpling joining statements. I cant find anything regarding the tense of this word. I'm also not sure why your referencing Old Testament Scripture as, i'm sure you know, it was written in Hebrew. You may be basing the info on the LXX or perhaps you believe that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew (Aramaic). Whatever the case, Matthew uses heos prolifically and I have some examples I'd like you to explain, (all from Online Bible, ASV) Mt 1:17 So all the generations from Abraham unto(heos) David are fourteen generations; and from David unto(heos) the carrying away to Babylon fourteen generations; and from the carrying away to Babylon unto(heos) the Christ fourteen generations. I may be interpreting you comments incorrectly, but clearly the counting stops at (1)David, (2)the carrying away, and (3) the Christ. This is the same greek construction for heos as Mt. 1:25, but there is no eternal/perpetual idea to heos here. How is this to be correctly interpreted? Mt 2:13 ΒΆ Now when they were departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeareth to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until(heos) I tell thee: for Herod will seek the young child to destroy him. Clearly, Joseph was not to be in Eygpt after the angle told him, so again I don't see the eternal nature of heos. Please explain. Mt 2:15 and was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt did I call my son. Again, he was to leave after the death of Herod. How is this use of heos to be interpreted? I am not questioning your scholarship, but it does appear that the word heos is used in the sense of 'until' in these circumstances. If I'm not seeing you point, I appologize, please clarify. I see heos as a conjuction and the interpretation of time depends on what is being joined, is this wrong? Thanks! GOD bless!! chris |
||||||