Results 1 - 9 of 9
|
|
|||||
Results from: Notes Author: CarlosDF Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Forbidden fruit in Egypt? | Deut 1:39 | CarlosDF | 204287 | ||
The first principal of principles is the Living God, yes? Funny how there are a few dyslexia words that slip by the spell check. I most humbly submit to you this, if you do not find any life in what I write (questions, answers, notes), I will gladly snap this pen by your judgment. I sought the Lord for a response to your note, it is not what I expected, but I give it to you in faith: "Blest be the tie that binds Our hearts in Christian love: The fellowship of kindred minds Is like to that above. When we are called to part, It gives us inward pain; But we shall still be joined in heart, And hope to meet again." Fawcett May abundant Grace be a balm to the heart of loss. Be strong, and let your heart take courage for our hope is in the Eternal. |
||||||
2 | Forbidden fruit in Egypt? | Deut 1:39 | CarlosDF | 204210 | ||
Oh, I do tend to confuse. A product of dyslexia and ADHD, but healing abounds, does it not? Yes, you have answered in a interesting and consequential way. I believe as well, there is no need for the tree as such to not be in the garden (or paradise) now, as we speak. We enter by the blood, and live by the new life, which is dead to sin. The tree itself is of no consequence, yet does represent some principal. That fundamental principal cropping up in the scriptures in many ways. But I find it interesting that there is no other 'simple' reference. Now, as to those who left Egypt. I did not pull the verse out of a hat, simply because the Hebrew is the same, and is the only other place where that combination occurs. That would be speculation, and lead to mysticism (I jest). However, Egypt is cursed by God, represents the cursed world, yes? And the promised land, ah, a veritable paradise... Once you have eaten the fruit, the result is death. Yet only one can lead into the promise who experienced the life in cursed Egypt. The others who enter were but children in Egypt, or born in the new free life while wandering the wilderness, and Caleb of course, but that is another picture. Oh dear, pictures, pictures, forgive me my friend. Yes, simplicity and sense, balm of peace. I seek no deeper meaning than the simple framework revealed by the Spirit. However, in interpretation, the simple explanation may not be the life giving word. Conversely, that does not make the spiritual revelation complicated. By solid logic, your quoted rule, 'when the plain sense makes good sense seek no other sense', can just as easily be that which closes your eyes to the light, and covers your ears to the living word. You have decided in that, or others, what is good sense. And then decided, "to seek no other sense." A path of orders and structures, but does it lead to life always? Please, in no way think I question the Spirit's prompting within you in such postulation. My regard has deepened, and know that God has used you as a goad for me already, my appreciation be made known. So, tell me, with a heart of complete dedication, that Joshua is no picture of the Messiah. It is a challenge as we only have Stephans discourse, yet that is of His will in Christ if the eyes of the heart be open. Bless you my brother, may your heart be strengthened, I value your replies. May your measure of eternal life be poured out upon the saints you meet with, to His Glory. |
||||||
3 | Should Women Wear Hats? | 1 Cor 11:4 | CarlosDF | 204117 | ||
Dearest saint of the most High God, I fervently inquired of God in the Spirit as to what answer would lead to life. I perceived two things of the Lord, a vision and a word, let them be delivered with the anointing. And may anything of myself be consumed in the flaming, living word He speaks. If I am revealed, as you state, it is to no gain spiritually. I perceived one standing before a mirror, the one on this side having a hat, yet the reflection having none. Are the saints who stand before God, praising Him and giving Him glory forever wearing hats? I do not know but what I see. If one, in faith, chooses to cover in this realm, as a picture of the order of God, do I judge that legalism? No, I have stepped off the throne of my own heart, and can not. We must allow the Spirit to bring forth what you state, the moral imperative, for this day. Yet the spiritual reality that the Spirit pushes forward in this realm, in this age, is the eternal reality of His Kingdom. This leads to the weightier issue of "the headship of Christ in all areas", where we have superceding guidance. To submit to the head practically, one must submit to the body under that head. The building up of the body of Christ is what the life in you wants above all, not to foster contention. That submission is not symbolic! It is by faith, and evidenced by the life you bring forth in the body. If promotion of the wearing of hats was of the Spirit now, in the body where you meet, life would accompany that choice and word. I make no judgment whether that has happened apart from the context of Paul's discourse, is happening somewhere in the universal body, or will happen at some future point. But to raise the question, even with the intention of obedience, yet find dissension in those you meet with, is not finding life. It is judgment of what is correct and incorrect outside of the authority in the body you have submitted to. If it is a prophetic word you bring forth to the members you meet with, a new guiding revelation, you will find life and Grace to give it, even in the midst of persecution, even unto separation from that fellowship. That is extreem, and such a word would be accompanied by confirmation, yes? If it is a 'moral imperative' that you have personal revelation about, then practice it by all means, guarding your heart carefully to not turn that into legalism, which is just as legalistic now as in ancient days, irregardless of new or old economy. Forgive me for not having anything beyond that, no more verses, or vision. May God grant you increased faith extending beyond the mind's comprehension, and a transformed will to follow where He leads in peace. By the Spirit, may His hand lay upon you a new outpouring! With love |
||||||
4 | Solomon's judgment of Adonijah and Joab | 1 Kin 2:13 | CarlosDF | 204103 | ||
I considered carefully by what reply would benefit, please forgive the length. In no way is the intention to speculate, or create some mysticism. However, those things which are revealed, taught, or highlighted by the Spirit are spiritual things, and as such can be seen as speculation from a different perspective. By that, I in no way here claim to be highly enlightened, or full of the vision of God beyond you or the next believer, woe is me, for I am ruined. That is no simple off the cuff justification for your concern, which I take with all regard. Yet at many points in the walk of faith, there are things which appear foolish to the educated mind. One cannot reason their way to a greater supply of eternal life. Perhaps this is where the the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, in that you may be right, your logic infallible, but find not life. And it is certain, that without the anointing, I am wrong, defiled by post hoc ergo propter hoc, and in no way finding or providing life. I will be brief then with the picture, yet I did find life in your prodding beyond the measure experienced previously in seeing Christ in the reign of Solomon. You perceive one aspect of the title, son of David, and that being the blood lineage to satisfy 2 Samuel 7. Of that same covenant, repeated by David in 1 Chronicles 22:9,10, is David confused about what he heard? Or is he simply mixing up the prophecy with the reality? Or perhaps this is the writen word displaying Solomon as a picture of the coming King? But that is speculation, so I hang not my hat there. Let us consider Psalm 72, presumably a consideration of David, about his son, yet clearly it describes the coming eternal king. By what means do you count the title, “A Psalm of Solomon” with the clear description of the future eternal King? If written by David, did he confuse his natural son's reign with the prophetic one? To which author shall we refer here, as to fix the meaning? David speaking in the Holy Spirit? Then there would be no confusion. Again, speculation, so we rest not on that. What do you make at the end of Stephens discourse, a road map of the pictures of Christ throughout, where he states (Acts 7:47) “But it was Solomon who built a house for Him...”? Though not equating the reign of Christ with the reign of Solomon, we find Solomon as a picture of Christ in the building of the temple, which only the king could do, while reigning in a time of peace. More speculation? Yet we have another king who, by the declaration in Hebrews 7, points to the nature of the Messiah. He, our High Priest, is of the order of Melchizedek, who happens to be king of Salem. Yes, the reign of peace, whether by definition, or picture, or reality. The king of peace, perhaps Solomon walked in such a way. Do we claim significance? Coincidence? Linguistic accident that Solomon's name, as revealed by God to David, means peace? And in Christ we have both, High Priest, not of the blood descendants, and Eternal King through the lineage. How amazing is our God! I do not ask rhetorically, or in any way to create some mystical association. The reality of the now by faith, is that there is a King, who reigns over a kingdom, and has subdued all of His enemies, even conquering death itself. This was intended from the foundation of the world, I believe. If the requirement to perceive all the pictures of this current reality comes by logic, reason, or scholarship then the pictures one views do not necessarily lead to more life. In that I do not discount the value of knowledge, or study. But hold finding life in higher esteem. May we find life in the Spirit, in the unveiling of Him daily in our experience, the one who is the living word. And may we find that life together. May the flame that is the living word consume any speculation, and may Grace guide any who read these words to the true King, irregardless of metaphor. Thanks for the provocation, I definitely found a new measure of life in Psalm 72, my blessing to you! |
||||||
5 | Solomon's judgment of Adonijah and Joab | 1 Kin 2:13 | CarlosDF | 203988 | ||
Hmm, "have I uttered that which I understood not"? So the fifteen times or so Jesus is called the son of David in the NT doesn't do it for you without ref... No problem, the king who reigns in peace, builder of the temple, possesing the wisdom of God, I just made some assumption about commonly ascribed parallels. I retract all assumptions. So let me rephrase. My question is if anyone has read any analysis pertaining to these verses under the context of assuming Solomon's reign metaphorically represented the Messiah's, or has perceived any verse supporting the first judgments of Solomon in relation to the Messiah's judgment. Forgive the assumptions and garbled diction, "I abhor myself". Peace in the One who breathes the word into the present. |
||||||
6 | Solomon's judgment of Adonijah and Joab | 1 Kin 2:13 | CarlosDF | 203978 | ||
Good stuff, perhaps this is more specific to a certain interpretation than anything I have come across in general discussion. Take Joab specifically. No way it is simple that Solomon commands one to be executed in the tent before the altar of God. Even holding on to the horns of the altar. First, this signifies that God had utterly departed Joab, and what he represented. That being the 'blood shed without cause', the act is significant. And there was blood shed before the altar, a desecration? But the altar resided in the old, the new temple being built soon. As for the other, wishing to take away part of the wives (bride), to take part of the inheritance. More of a glimmer than a precept. Yet I am sure someone must have made these parallels, rightly or poorly, I just have never come across such. Thanks for your response, my blessing to you. |
||||||
7 | Should Women Wear Hats? | 1 Cor 11:4 | CarlosDF | 203974 | ||
Ah, but by placing it as 'moral issue' and in the writing of an Hebrew who then became one inwardly (Paul), did you not mean the context of the Mosaic law, with consideration of the culture of the surrounding population? The moral guidelines of Paul would be the law (Mosaic), and now that he has become a new man in Christ, the moral guidelines would be of the Holy Spirit's leading. The principal of circumcision was symbolic, yet an absolute practical moral and legal requirement. Arguably an higher moral issue than head coverings, but of the same class. I don't think it's a trivial issue, because it requires, in my belief, the guidance of the Spirit to experientially realize. Christ as fulfillment of the law (moral, religious, and practical requirements), yet awareness of ones impact upon those around you. Great question, there are many today who live by legalism, yet are believers. And many who offend unknowingly, by not knowing or not following the anointing. Amazing Grace indeed! As one already replied, our freedom is absolute in Christ, we can not transgress beyond His sacrifice. Yet, it is the source of life within that guides us actively in the here and now. The living God is the living word, which is the more perfect law. How we should fear God in this! Fervently seek His voice with trembling! Yet praise Him for such grace... Forgive my obtuse communications, far to much education, and not enough humility. May the living word resound in you. |
||||||
8 | Should Women Wear Hats? | 1 Cor 11:4 | CarlosDF | 203946 | ||
Paul circumcised Timothy in Acts 16:3, the purpose of which was "... because of the Jews that were in those parts..." Paul counts circumcision as naught after this in 1 Corinthians 7:18, and even as loss in Philippians 3:7. With this in mind, can I make the comparison to a practice, done in the new life, for the purpose of not offending those under the law? Circumcision is clearly not required of us physically, neither would it seem other similar symbolic manifestations of the law, if we take this as precedent. In love, wearing a hat when I'm with you. |
||||||
9 | Gifts of prophecy and tongues passed? | Rom 16:7 | CarlosDF | 203944 | ||
My humblest apologies to all. Yes, the true wise man will hold his tongue(s). Sorry for the open ended indefinites, better men than I have pontificated on the topic extensively. Peace. | ||||||