Results 1 - 20 of 30
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: grafted in Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | statusitis | Bible general Archive 4 | grafted in | 215329 | ||
Hello Grace, Glad to be of help. |
||||||
2 | roman8:28to jesus,moses,joseph,jermiah | Bible general Archive 4 | grafted in | 216518 | ||
Vintage, Shalom. Usually the person asking a homework question doesn't use enough common sense to disguise it as something he/she wants to know. The question from 4runner was so confusing it seemed like it was a bonifide query. :o) |
||||||
3 | world vs age | Gen 1:5 | grafted in | 216030 | ||
Greetings FTK, Please reread your Bible. You have had some very, very, very bad, bad teaching. What's sad is when the trials and testings come, and they will, I fear you will crumble underneath them because they don't feel good at all. Feelings very rarely should be the basis for doing anything; they are weak, usually false, and very deceitful. :o( |
||||||
4 | Who then is on this broad way? | Matt 7:13 | grafted in | 217008 | ||
Hello WOS, If my name were William and I moved to Spain, I would expect to still be called William, NOT whatever the Spanish word for that name is. If I were from Israel and my name is Yardonna, here in the states I would still expect to be called Yardonna, not Jordonna. It has something to do with simple respect. Jesus is not His name. When you read the scriptures, you'll notice that more often than not, when someone or something or some place is named, it's given a specific name meaning a specific thing for a specific reason. Names were VERY important in Biblical times. Every time a person read the Hebrew scriptures and came to the word spelled yod shin vav ayin, they were calling on their Savior's name (which means salvation). It's the name God gave Him. I'm going to change it? Not me! |
||||||
5 | Who then is on this broad way? | Matt 7:13 | grafted in | 217016 | ||
WOS, Yes, He has many names and titles. But the name given Him at birth was and is Yeshua (a contraction of Yahoshua). You asked a question, I gave an answer. Simple dialogue. Of course not, not of lesser value. |
||||||
6 | Who then is on this broad way? | Matt 7:13 | grafted in | 217036 | ||
WOS, You are absolutely correct (except John is "Y"ochanan (no letter "J" in Hebrew, no J sound either, not even an equivalent). For one, I, personally use the Hebrew names for all the people (right down to pronouncing the name Eli as you would say El ie, Levi as Lehv ie), I use the Hebrew for the places too, such as Yerushalayim, Beitlechem, Gat Sh'manim, etc. To be perfectly honest, I actually began reading the names like that because it helps in relating to the actual times and places. It became later, just a simple act of respect. If you and I were to meet and you were introduced to me as Mike, my first question to you would be do you prefer to be called Mike or do you like to be called Michael? It's just something I do, I want to be respectful toward you. For all I would know, you might actually prefer Micky or some off-the-wall nickname that your friend knows nothing about (because he never bothered to ask). You might even be Jewish and prefer the Hebrew pronounciation of Meh chah el? Using the correct names still puts me in the relating mode, but I do it now more out of respect. After all, the scriptures are to the Hebrew first, then the Greek. I have a question in reverse. Why do you guys fight so hard against maybe learning something new? Reading through the threads, I, at least, would love it if someone who knew the real Greek name for Timothy (is it Timotheus?) or the other Greek people or some of the cities would slash in the correct word/pronunciation for it. Or the Roman. Or the people and places from the other cities of the OT. Isn't this a bible STUDY forum? Wouldn't that be a part of the study, not an extremely important part, granted, but a part nonetheless. The Hebrew words are not hard to say and putting the names back as they should be really does help put you in the culture you're reading about. (That's why I would like to know the actual names of the other people and places.) Try it, you might like it. But, please, don't fault me if you think my form of respect is stupid. I don't think that it is. And if I choose to use the name Yeshua, it is NOT against Sola Scriptura nor is it against TOU - it is His literal given (God-given) Hebrew name. :o) |
||||||
7 | The Kingdom of God | Matt 11:12 | grafted in | 216237 | ||
Good day Doc, Thank you for your kind explanation and suggestion. Have a great day! |
||||||
8 | Hello and thank you azurelaw | Mark 12:31 | grafted in | 216868 | ||
Dear Jessica, It sounds to me like you had better cut your losses and run (don't walk) to the nearest exit and keep on going. It would not surprise me at all to hear that he has already raised his hand to you (if he hasn't yet, believe me, he will). Get out while there is something left of you to take away. And then find some Christian congregation, get involved and get counselling. Please!! |
||||||
9 | I see alot of people are using the title | Acts | grafted in | 216202 | ||
Shalom Azure I'm reading that you think that the office of apostle has ended - if I've misunderstood you, please pardon me. That passage is simply Luke stating what took place at that moment for that particular need; he was not stating law. Acts 1:21-22 would completely leave Paul out of the loop. Apostle simply means sh'liach or sent one. At a moment's need, Azure, you could be apostle, a sent one. Eph. 4:10-14 has no expiration date on it that I can see. :o) |
||||||
10 | I see alot of people are using the title | Acts | grafted in | 216210 | ||
Greetings stjohn, I didn't say Paul was out of the loop, I said that Acts 1:21-22 taken word for word would put him out of the loop, so therefore, that statement was not a precedent, it most logically fulfilled the immediate need. And there is still no expiration date on Eph. 4:10-16. Else we have to dismiss all other equippers for the ministry as they are grouped right along in there with apostles and prophets. If we have God-called evangelists, pastors and teachers (and I'm sure all agree that we do) then we most assuredly have God-called apostles and prophets. |
||||||
11 | was sadducees against Jesus? | Acts 5:17 | grafted in | 215945 | ||
Searcher, Just because they questioned Him doesn't mean that they were against Him. If you do a study on rabbis and their disciples you'll see that that is how they learned, by asking questions and the rabbi would answer by asking another question. If your pastor invited another pastor to speak at your church, when you got a chance to speak with this person, you would question him. How does his congregation do communion, how are their altar calls handled, etc. Just because you're asking questions would not mean that you are against his ministry. I'm sure there were many Sadducees against His ministry, but not all. At least not until He began talking about resurrection, then they definitely had to pull the stops since they didn't believe in angels or resurrection, that was why they were sad you see? lol |
||||||
12 | Obey your leaders ? | Acts 5:29 | grafted in | 216627 | ||
Greetings Rolff, To a degree you are right. But we must remember that the early christians were kind of stuck with their kings and his appointed entourage. Today, here in America, we are not. We put our people into leadership, we can take them out. And we had better when they turn out to be not what they made us think they were, up to and including the president. Obana's speech to the Egyptiams scared the dickens out of me!! |
||||||
13 | Obey your leaders ? | Acts 5:29 | grafted in | 216649 | ||
Vintage My note is self-explanatory according to the answer-note to which I posted. Rolff spoke of the early christians, as did I. He questioned about Americans today, I mentioned them too. |
||||||
14 | Obey your leaders ? | Acts 5:29 | grafted in | 216669 | ||
Greetings Vintage, No, it doesn't bother me. I did not bring out scripture references as I was talking in terms of the culture back then, before, during and after Jesus' life. The kings came to be by birth or appointed by another king. The other politicals would have been appointed by the reigning king. The only way for folks back then to get rid of their king and heads of office would be by assasination and that certainly would not be a good thing for a Jew or a Christian to be a part of. And then they would have just gotten the next in line by birth (possibly even worse that the first). This is the way I understand the system, before and during Jesus' lifetime and for quite some time afterward. If I'm wrong and I put my foot in my mouth (I've done that before lol) - then accept my apology, please. What I said about today in response still stands - we put our leaders in office by majority vote, be it the police chief, the ADA, the president... and we have the right, nay, the obligation, to take them out of office if they are not what they pretended to be while running for office. And yes, I did the read the original question. I was mainly responding to the responder, Rolff. I may have misunderstood him but it seemed like he was talking like we today have no say in what our leaders decide to do once in office. If I overstepped the legalities of the forum here, please forgive. It was not my intention to start a political debate (I am rather politically unlearned anyway). :o) Have a good evening |
||||||
15 | Obey your leaders ? | Acts 5:29 | grafted in | 216671 | ||
Good morning John Thanks for the correction!! I couldn't carry on a political conversation if you threatened to hang me!! :o) |
||||||
16 | follow up to 1 corinth 15 question | 1 Cor 15:52 | grafted in | 216428 | ||
Daniq, You ask how will we know when it starts if the people are not taken out (which I don't believe is going to happen first) - we will know when the covenant is made to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem and the building begins. I'm a pre-wrath believer. I believe that we will be here to witness that event and the wrath of hasatan on God's people. We will not be here to witness God's wrath on the lawless wicked ones, we will be enjoying the marriage supper of the Lamb! (Mark 13:3-27 is very fine proof-text that we will be here, especially see verses 14-19 and verse 24 is a strong indication that He was not speaking [only] of the persecution that the early church went through.) |
||||||
17 | Rapture | 1 Thess 4:17 | grafted in | 216786 | ||
Shalom Makarios, You left out the preterists!! How could you forget them (smiling)??!! They are the ones who believe the rapture took place in 70AD and we are now in the 2009th year of the 1000 year millenial reign. (Yeah, some people really do believe this. I believe they base it on the passage in Mat. 24 where He says "this generation will not pass away before all these things happen...") I, too, am a pre-wrather. The tribulation spoken of in Rev., prior to the pre-wrath rapture, at the 7th or last trumpet, is not the wrath of God taking place, it's the wrath of hasatan against God's people. After the bride is taken out of the way, the wrath of God against wickedness and evildoers is let loose. (There may be some that come to faith within this period but they will have to die during it or survive it, though I've heard some people teach of a secondary rapture?) Is this how you see the pre-wrath view? Does your screen name, Makarios, mean blessing in Greek? |
||||||
18 | Rapture | 1 Thess 4:17 | grafted in | 216825 | ||
Greetings CDBJ, You preach it, brother!! Amen! I also believe that by studying God's feasts, we can also know the season (not the year, but the season, i.e., spring, summer, winter, fall, season of sowing, first harvest, second harvest). God gave us 7 prophetic feasts and Jesus fulfilled the first ones to the letter, and right on time. It stands to reason that the other, unfulfilled prophetic feasts will be fulfilled in like manner. Study them all out and see if you don't agree... |
||||||
19 | Rapture | 1 Thess 4:17 | grafted in | 216834 | ||
:o) I figured you already had as I believe I remember reading somewhere that you've read The Sign. If I'm not mistaken the feasts are mentioned in the book. (Tho I've read many such books, so I could be wrong on this point.) I was speaking mainly to others who might be reading the thread and not studied the feasts. |
||||||
20 | Paul’s missionary work created a controv | 2 Tim 2:15 | grafted in | 216460 | ||
Evening WW Let's see, No! No! All the way around, No! The Jews believed the only way to become a Christian was by going thru ritual conversion?? You want to explain that one? At the time of Cornelius, there were no Christians, the believers in Messiah were just another sect of Judaism called The Way. Mat 5:17-19 The Torah was not eliminated (the vision had nothing to do with food, it everything to do with people) or else we have a God who changes His mind willy nilly and we'd have to cross out Heb. 13:8 or call it a typo. |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 ] Next > Last [2] >> |