Results 1 - 20 of 31
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: brother paul Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Is Gen 2:17 a prophecy? | Gen 2:17 | brother paul | 176952 | ||
Dear Searcher56 Many thanks, would you please look again at 2:17.. 'for in the day that thou eatst thereof'. There is no conditionality, no 'if'. If we compare say Gen 4:7, 'If thou doest well, shall thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door.' We know Jesus is 'the door'. (Jn 10:7) The other commands of God are not followed by the statement, or prophecy 'and when you do commit adultery'. Is there something deeper being expressed, maybe man's fall and redemption is part of the plan? Yours and His, in Him, Brother Paul (or should I say searcher80) |
||||||
2 | Is Gen 2:17 a prophecy? | Gen 2:17 | brother paul | 176954 | ||
... | ||||||
3 | Is Gen 2:17 a prophecy? | Gen 2:17 | brother paul | 176974 | ||
Hello Steve, The examples listed were references to the same Hebrew word. There are 164 times 'pethach' occurs, and although I have not as a study checked everyone, when reading through the old testament every time the door is mentioned I have noted that it is a picture of Christ, and His ministry. I have read through several times and have not found a case when it is out of place. In England we have the very old stain glass windows which contain scenes from the old testament which were used to teach Christ. This was a well established teaching of the early church. Is there any debate that when Isaac carried the wood up the mountain to be sacrificed he became a type of Christ carrying his cross? How far does it go? Where does it stop? The apostle Paul uses the same method, 1 Cor 10:1-4, the Red Sea crossing IS a baptism, the physical rock IS Christ. When we read Jude we begin to glimpse the language of the early church when in vs 12 it launches into all the symbolism of the old testament without explanation or pause. These symbols must have been mutually understood, part of their vocabulary. If this is true then it will affect how we read the New Testament. Were the synoptic gospels written with this principle of the physical events picturing a spiritual message in mind? (Rom 1:20) Would the gospel writers be looking back on the life of Christ and think, that's why Jesus sat down there, stood up, or rested his head on a pillow because he was enacting a particular spiritual message? Acts 28:15, Paul saw three taverns, thanked God and took courage. Is there some biblical symbol contained in the image of three taverns that would have encouraged Paul? Nothing is written in stone, just seeking of Him. Yours and His Paul |
||||||
4 | Judas' betrayal | Matt 27:4 | brother paul | 179681 | ||
Dear Kalos, Ok, you answer Anglies question, was Judas in the plan or not? By the way I did not appreciate your 'answer', if it indeed it was an answer about the holocaust. I lost family. Be kind, there is whole lot more in the Old Testament because it speaks of Christ. It is an adambration of the new. Yours and His Paul |
||||||
5 | Judas' betrayal | Matt 27:4 | brother paul | 179682 | ||
... | ||||||
6 | Judas' betrayal | Matt 27:4 | brother paul | 179712 | ||
Dear all, I returned one post where I did not 'appreciate' the reply. My posts have now been termed as 'amusing', 'silly', 'devisive', 'specious' and 'acerbic'. I did not appreciate one post and now you threaten me with being banned from this site. I do not understand why simple disagreement should recieve such a response. If others can be direct and say what they feel, cannot I not 'appreciate' a comment? Where is the balance? Where is the offence? I did not 'appreciate' dictionary definition, 'To know, understand, to value', I did not appreciate the post. It was not to challenge what was said. Is this where we have two English speaking nations divided by a common language? My truth is your heresy, your truth is my heresy. 1 Cor 11:19, 'There must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be manifest among you.' Can we not debate our differences, can we seek truth? I am sorry if I have offended anyone, I try to come to Him as an empty vessel, I am not sure and know I need Him to bring me into all truth. Everything that is said I take to higher authority, to Him. I do not instantly jump to an already reached conclusion, His truth is deeper. Yours and His, in Him Paul |
||||||
7 | Did the Apostles have a choice? | Luke 5:8 | brother paul | 179486 | ||
Dear KumKum, The rib cage, lungs, breath, the breath of life, He breathed into his nostrils the breath of life. The spirit 'phnema', the air, the holy spirit. Eleven, the number of disciples left after the death of Christ. Twelve. the tribes of Israel, spiritual rule under man's authority. There are spiritual steps beyond eleven and twelve when we relate directly to Him. Although essential parts of the process, we must go further. The authority of Isreal was cast off, the Levitical preisthood superceded, our manmade authoritarian hierarchy must be surpassed. False ribs? The number thirteen is far better, but all of this is very subjective, it is not written in stone. These are the extreme edges of my understanding and conversation with Him. Your and His, Paul |
||||||
8 | The meaning of your statments | Luke 5:8 | brother paul | 179491 | ||
Dear Brian, Sorry for the delay, I've been away, If I understand your reply correctly, you ask how is it that 'sin' and 'evil' are in repemtive plan of God. Thank you for your question. 1 Cor 5:5 speaks p;ainly how an evildoer should be turned over to Satan that the Spirit might be saved. Somehow what we might consider as 'wrong' and 'sinful' has an ultimate goal of bringing people to repentance. Is this how we learn? Did mankind have to fall into 'sin' to begin to understand His ways? Did Judas have to betray Christ? Without Judas would I be a Christian? Is there a 'Judas' in us all? Is it part of the process of coming to know Him? Is 'sin' and realisation of 'sin' a part of reconciliation to Him? Romans 3:7, even Paul's lie is unto His glory. Romans 7:13 where the sin must become exceedingly sinful. When Paul said he had been accused of saying that, 'let us do evil that goog may abound' (Rom 3:8) he was accused of exactly the the point I a, trying to make. I, like Paul, do not advocate a life of sin. I, like Paul, say that God is all in all, (1 Cor 15:28) and averything permitted in God's wisdom could have been prevented by His power. Therefore anything that happens is OK by me. If he has permitted it, why should I object? Once we enter this spiritual understanding, it changes everything, all of a sudden everything is fine, it's in Him, no problems, do not be anxious, we are at peace, in Him. Got it? Love you brother, Yours and His, Paul |
||||||
9 | The meaning of your statments | Luke 5:8 | brother paul | 179527 | ||
Hello Brian, 1 John 1:9 and 7b are explicit, I totally agree, everything must come back through Christ, yes yes yes, that is exactly where I come from. But how does He get us to that place? It is through our experience of sin sepereration and denial, where we stagger from one bad decision to another. That's how He does it, using our experience in sin and spiritual blindness to bring us to a place where we accept Him. My question is, do we judge this procedure as 'wrong'? Therefore is wordly 'sin' wrong and out of God's plan, if ultimately it might bring people to Him? This is the readjustment of our thinking. What we call 'sin' might be His plan. Romans 1:26 explains how God gives evildoers over to sin, and 1 Cor 5:5 repeats the same principle. God uses 'sin' to bring people to repentance. Therefore is it 'wrong'? I do not advocate a life of sin, that is not the point, but I can see how people are concluded in sin to come to God. In Matthew 13:24-30 we have the parable of the wheat and tares. It starts with Jesus saying that the kingdom of heaven is likened unto, and to be in the kingdom of heaven we must be born of the spirit. (John 3:5) In this spirit message Jesus exp;ains how the would be gardeners do not know the difference between the wheat and the tares until they have matured. Do we have to wait until sin has worked it's process? Until sin has become exceedingly sinful? (Rom 7:13) Yes I do think we have to revisit these questions and redifine what me mean by sin in the divine plan of salvation. Yours, and His, in Him Paul |
||||||
10 | Paul, the Answers Are? | Luke 5:8 | brother paul | 179534 | ||
Dear Brad, By your answer you agree that Christ had to be betrayed. The meaning of 'betrayed' involves a close associate who turns against you. Therefore someone close to Christ, intimately involved with Him had to turn against Him, to identify Him as the Messiah. Alright, OK, it didnt have to be Judas, but someone had to do it, otherwise we would not have the confirmation of His special place in the plan of God. Maybe I should say without a traitor would I be a Christian. This does not alter the original precept of the debate. Without a traitor would I be a Christian? This is the centre of my point, that somehow in the plan of God had to betray Christ for me to be Christian, we have to go through rejecton before acceptance. This is how God brings us to Him, 'sin' and 'rebellion' are all part of the process. The question is where legalism seperates itself from Christ, is this process 'wrong'? Yours, and His, in Him, Paul |
||||||
11 | Paul, the Answers Are? | Luke 5:8 | brother paul | 179560 | ||
Hi CDBJ Many thanks, I really felt the Lord in your reply, I have expressed what I felt the Lord has shown me and there is a time when it is best left alone. It can become contentious and unprofitable..... A word in season. Yours and His Paul |
||||||
12 | What did Jesus mean? | John 13:18 | brother paul | 179754 | ||
Dear brother, I deeply thank you for your reply. It is the best post I have received. My thoughts have been concentrated recently on the fact that truth is a person, not an idea. He is truth. The betraying of Christ by Judas is not an obsession, it is only an example. The reason why I return to this example, is because no-one seems to address the principle. Adam has to reject God, Peter deny Christ, Israel condemn Jesus, Paul persecute the church, David commits murder and adultery, Moses kills, to bring Christ to a place where we can accept Him. It is all somehow part and plan of His design. I pray and consider what you have written, I do not reject anything, but merely seek of Him. There is something that the 'sin must become sunful' turn him 'over to Satan that the spirit might be saved'. I have personally experienced this rejection before I feel I know Him. Does anyone else sense this? If we begin to understand that there is a process of alienation before reconciliation, we begin to understand His ways, not merely His acts. I no longer seek to 'prove' certain doctrinual points to win debates. I try to empty myself, so that I can be taught of Him. Your final statement did acknowledge that the betraying of Christ did somehow contribute to His identification and belief that He is Messiah. This is my point, the process of rejection in His divine plan has advanced His purpose. God is all in all, through our sin He has triumphed. Yours and His, in Him Paul |
||||||
13 | What did Jesus mean? | John 13:18 | brother paul | 179776 | ||
Thanks Steve, Yes, yes, yes, everywhere I go in scripture seems to echo this principle, death before resurrection, alienation before reconciliation. On a larger scale did Israel have to be alienated before reconciliation? (Rom 11:15,25, 26) Please look at the scriptures. If it applies to the individual and Isreal, why should it not apply to the world? Going one step further, if Isreal had to fall and be rejected so that 'all Isreal might be saved', did Adam? Did all of us have to go through this procedure? Does 'sin' have a purpose? Then everything starts to make sense, does God work through sin and rejection to create Christ in us? These thoughts gravitate to a God who is 'all in all'. Our meaning and perception of 'sin' alters. There is purpose, design and creation in the fall of mankind. 'To the pure all things are pure', it is subtle, but catalysmic, in a way there is nothing 'wrong'. I find it difficult to explain in words, it is more a spiritual experience, but 'sin' becomes less condemnatory. The first century church seems to have a very relaxed view of sin. 1 Timothy 1:10 where murder, matricide, patricide and all the rest of fallen mankind is merely agaisnt 'doctrine'? Not 'law'? Romans 1:28, where all the slush and degeneration of mankind is 'inconvenient'.It doesnt seem to have the impact of 'sin' as in totally rejected. It is all a bit deeper, not simplistic, not legalistic, and phariasic, we need the Holy Spirit to bring us into all truth and understandind. Truth is His person, not ideas or doctrines, His love and compassion, His infinite grace. Yours and His, in Him Paul |
||||||
14 | What did Jesus mean? | John 13:18 | brother paul | 179813 | ||
Dear Jeff, I must thank you for your reply, your time and patience with me. I can appreciate how wearisome this discussion has become to you and the other people frequenting this forum. It is difficult to explain a total scriptural concept in short postings. I ask you to consider the predestined sacrifice of Christ, our saviour, and the whole journey of mankind through sin to salvation. Project earth, to 'form' man in His image. Here I stand corrected, you are right, Christ is not 'created' in us, I should have used 'formed'. Thank you for pointing out my error, wont do that again. Although man is created on the sixth day (Gen 1:27) he is formed on the seventh. (2:7) These are different processes and the seventh day is still running in Heb 4:1-4 several millenia later. It is this 'forming' that I refer too, the completion of His purpose. The forming (yatsar in Hb.) the work of the potter. I now come to your comments of my remarks concerning the letters to Timothy and the Romans, you said I did not 'read on'. Well lets read on, Romans 2:1-4 says it is wrong to judge such actions. This is the main point of Paul's debate, that these people should not be judged by the believers. Dear brother, I am not playing with words, it is not a game, I seek of Him. I have to harmonize all the mess of this world's mess with a God who is ultimate control. The world is where He wants it to be in His divine plan, otherwise He is not God. The mess that we witness has to have a purpose, He permits that, that He could prevent. It is not an unforeseen accident, it is not crisis management, it is the outworking of His purpose. I will pray and meditate on the thoughts you have given me, I thank you and love you in Him, thank you my brother, Yours and His, Paul |
||||||
15 | why am I banned? | Rom 13:7 | brother paul | 179912 | ||
Dear Doc, I really do not understand, what do I do where do I go? I love my fellow Christians who seek Him, we ask questions, debate avd then someone pulls the plug. Yours Paul |
||||||
16 | verse explains nonChrist knowing savior | 2 Cor 5:15 | brother paul | 178197 | ||
Dear Tim, Thank you for your reply, it is a dilemma, two contrasting sets of scriptures. How do we sort it out? If God seems to reject someone or group in His plan, does it effect the final reconciliation to Him? Israel is cast off, rejected and blinded by Him, (Romans 11:7,15) but then ALL Israel is to be saved. (vs.26) Matthew 7:13 speaks of those who go through the wide gate of popular worldly ways and it leads to destruction. 'Apoleia' in the Greek, a sense of loss of well being is one interpretation, I know because I have been there. Does this alter the final destination? Matthew 7: 21-23 is interesting because it involves entering the Kingdom of the heavens. John 3:5 makes the point that we have to be born of the spirit to enter the kingdom and there are many not at that stage until they recieve the gift from Him. This is the only way I can harmonize these verses, unless you have a better way. I find it difficult to explain but there seems to be a process of God that necessitates the alienation of the believer before adoption. The wilderness experience, the long night of the soul, wrestling with the angel. However you want to call it. It has been my walk with Him. There seems to be a separation that predates reconciliation echoed through the bible. Jesus leaves the church to come again, Eve is separated from Adam before being reunited, Israel is cast off before recieving salvation. Even Genesis 1:1, 'In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.' is using the Hebrew word 'Bara', translated 'create', which means to cut, divide or separate. Therefore in the beginning He separated the physical from the spiritual to perform His will that ultimately would reunite them. I seek of Him, it is my life, but I feel we are not confronting some of the major questions and contradictions that beset orthodoxy. Yours and His, in Him, Paul |
||||||
17 | verse explains nonChrist knowing savior | 2 Cor 5:15 | brother paul | 178278 | ||
Dear Tim, Thank you for your grace and patience with me, One of the scriptures I quoted was 2 Peter 3:9. 'That God was not willing that any should perish, but all should come to repentance.' DocTrinsograce complimented you and acclaimed you as a Grrek scholar. I would deeply appreciate your comments. When I was studying NT Greek we looked at this verse and I inadvertantly pointed out that the word 'willing' was translated from 'boulema'. The teacher (a 1:1 at Oxford) turned whit and visibly shook. I asked what was the problem, and he muttered, 'You know what a Papal Bull is, it is an edict, a law, a statement of intent.' He left the room and was not seen for some time, he never would mention it again. 'Boulema', Vines, ' a deliberate design, that which is purposed.' Thayers, 'to will deliberately, have a purpose, to be minded.' It is the 'boulema; that Jesus accomplished and the other occurences express His plan not a mere desire. Even we reduce the meaning to a wish, doesnt our Sovereign God get what He wishes? John Wesley said of this verse that God was 'not willing (Old English meaning) that any soul he hath made should perish.' Is God's will subject to Satan, will Satan have more victoies than God? There are scriptures that speak of this, this is only one, do you see there is a dilemma? Look forward to your reply, we are all seeking truth of Him, Yours in Him, Paul |
||||||
18 | verse explains nonChrist knowing savior | 2 Cor 5:15 | brother paul | 178304 | ||
Hello Jeff, Thank you for your reply. I do seem to have a problem conveying my thoughts.... I apologize. For many yeas I have preached and taught, pontificating on the right and wrong, good and evil, saved and unsaved. Now I am not so sure. The black and white has faded and a kaleidescopic picture of God's totality is slowly emerging. (1 Cor 15:28) May I share some of the questions that I take to higher authority in prayer and meditation? It may help. If Jesus is the 'lamb slain from the founding of the world' (Rev 13:8) then the predicted fall of man was known from the conception of creation. To proceed with creation while knowing man would fall implies somehow it is part of God's will. I feel Genesis 2:17 is prophetic, 'when (not 'if') thou eatest.' Without Judas would we be Christian? Having played so vital a role in our redemption, is he saved? Jesus said 'I do nothing except that, that I see my Father do.' and again 'I have chosen twelve and one is a devil.' (John 5:19 and 6:70) Was Jesus copying his Father because he did nothing but imitate Him. Therefore if Jesus needs a devil to complete his ministry, did God need a satan to fulfill His plan? Is Pharaoh God's agent or enemy? Does a loving God harden his heart and then condemn him? Did not God create evil, (Isaiah 47:7) put evil spirits into Saul, (1 Sam 16:14,15) put evil in a city, (Amos 3:6) and uses a lying spirit. (1 Kings 22:22) Without David becoming a murderer and adulterer and Judah consorting with someone he thought to be a prostitute, we would not have the lineage of Christ. Have such 'sins' been part of His will? To summarize, I feel that there is something about this process of separation followed by reunion that performs a part of the divine design. Eve is separated from Adam before marriage, Christ leaves the Church to return for his bride, Israel is rejected for 'all Israel to be saved' later. (Rom 14:11) Paul speaks of the sin becoming exceedingly sinful that we might be 'concluded' in sin. This principle seems to be repeated at 1 Cor 5:5, 'deliver such a one unto satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.' This is not condoing unrighteousness, 'God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things that are not convienient.' (Rom 1:28) There is a price to be paid and lessons to be learnt, but it is permitted by Him for a eason in His divine will. The world becomes the compost heap of rotting decaying flesh, but it is a great place to grow seed. His blessing is with you, yours and His, Paul |
||||||
19 | verse explains nonChrist knowing savior | 2 Cor 5:15 | brother paul | 178309 | ||
Thanks Jeff for your work Have to take it to higher authority, I will take a little time to consider and seek, but thank you again, I will come back, speak soon, Yours, in Him, Paul |
||||||
20 | verse explains nonChrist knowing savior | 2 Cor 5:15 | brother paul | 178322 | ||
Hello Glory2Godnow, I couldnt agree with you more, without free will we cannot know true love. Is this the reason why unbelievers cannot know God's love because being in bondage to sin they have constricted free will? They are controlled by all manner of desires which curtail their freedom. The only ones in scripture I can find who are free are the anointed of God, 'If the Son SHALL MAKE YOU FREE, you are free indeed.' (John 8:36) We are not free until we know Him. 'The truth shall set you free,' and truth is His person, not an idea, 'I am the way and the truth....' Is this why He has to choose us and not us choosing Him? (John 15:16) We were not capable of a free will choice until we are in Him. Thank you, yours and His, Paul |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 ] Next > Last [2] >> |