Results 1 - 20 of 138
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: There Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Can women be preachers? 1Cor.11:4,5 | 1 Cor 14:34 | There | 26332 | ||
Hi again, There are definitely places in scripture that are left "iffy" for us, but there are also many teachings that land right on the dime. And when they do, we have to stand fast on each of those issues. Pride in our own opinion is definitely wrong, but standing on God's word is not pride. It's necessary. He is the only Person that does not lie. An example of what I mean... I was in a discussion today with someone who thinks homosexuality is not sin because he believes it is an innate trait in some people. My response was pretty simple. God says homosexuality is an abomination [sin] (Lev. 18:22), and that we can choose to sin or not to sin (Gen. 4:7)... so therefore homosexuality is a choice. I suggested he simply believe God's word instead of taking the word of any man about it. There are many other issues like that too... where God's word is clear. And praise God, any and all sins can be forgiven us if we repent... (all but blasphemy of God's Spirit that is). God bless you, LisaMarie. |
||||||
2 | Leadership within the church | Eph 4:11 | There | 26320 | ||
Thanks again Searcher. I also found some more too. So, it seems there are really only two "titled positions", that of 1) overseer/bishop/elder, and that of 2) deacon... yet there are to be several elders in each church body, none of which have more authority than any other. And those elder men are to teach an entirely active "body" who make use of the gifts of the spirit to edify the church... Sounds quite awesome really... the whole body being led and used by the Spirit of God at the meetings for the edification of God's church. It doesn't sound like the common infrastructure within most churches today. God bless. |
||||||
3 | Do we play or pray? | Col 2:16 | There | 26300 | ||
Yes, we will won't we? :) God bless. |
||||||
4 | Can women be preachers? 1Cor.11:4,5 | 1 Cor 14:34 | There | 26299 | ||
Hi LisaMarie, They may be fantastic, but I'm not sure I'm correct. :) Discussion in this forum is both a sharing experience and a learning experience for me... for which I'm grateful. The only thing I'm pretty sure about is that the women Paul was rebuking were doing something wrong. lol And we may have to wait till heaven before we find out exactly what... and by then it won't matter anyway. God bless. |
||||||
5 | Can women be preachers? 1Cor.11:4,5 | 1 Cor 14:34 | There | 26298 | ||
There is a difference, but I don't understand the difference to mean one is singular while the other is for a group. In 1Cor. 14:29 the word translated "judge" is "diakrino" meaning to separate thoroughly, i.e. to withdraw from, or oppose, fig. to discriminate (by impl. decide), or hesitate: -- contend, make (to) differ (-ence), discern, doubt, judge, be partial, stagger, waver. So... how do you understand the difference in words to imply that it only speaks of the men? Or the elders? Or who? In your opinion, what is being judged in verse 29? The prophet or the prophecy? Just curious. I still apparently do not understand where you're coming from, huh? :) God bless. |
||||||
6 | Leadership within the church | Eph 4:11 | There | 26296 | ||
Thank you Searcher... I will come back to this with a few more questions probably, when I have more time. God bless. | ||||||
7 | Can women be preachers? 1Cor.11:4,5 | 1 Cor 14:34 | There | 26191 | ||
I wonder why a woman judging spiritual things would upset the male leadership in a church, since everyone is told to do that (1Cor. 2:15), if they truly are spiritual (1Cor. 3:1; 14:37)? So perhaps those women were not truly spiritual, but yet carnal in their opinions and that is why Paul told them to be silent. Something that comes to mind too is 1Cor. 14:39 where Paul sums up what he has been talking about earlier I think. "Therefore, brethren, desire earnestly to prophecy, and do not forbid to speak with tongues." Perhaps the women were objecting to those things... and Paul rebuked them for it? God bless. |
||||||
8 | Will we know our loved ones in heaven? | 2 Sam 12:23 | There | 26179 | ||
Hello Daniel, In 1Cor. 15:35-58 Paul explains that the it is our physical, flesh bodies that will be changed and resurrected at Christ's return if we are saved, not our consciousness. It would seem that since our minds/soul/spirit have already been renewed to a state of communion with God, there is no need for them to remain separated from Him. I believe the scripture you've mentioned from Ecclesiates 9 explains that after physical death, no one will have part in anything "under the sun". So the dead will not participate in any way with those still physically alive, and eventually memory of them will be forgotten by those who are physically alive. And Psalms 146... I believe is a good reference for Ecclesiates, and is saying the same thing. At death, man will no longer give any thought to what is going on here on the earth, i.e. thoughts of things happening "under the sun" will perish at a person's death. Hope this helps. God bless. |
||||||
9 | Can women be preachers? 1Cor.11:4,5 | 1 Cor 14:34 | There | 26086 | ||
Thanks Nolan, I don't think you appear rigid or legalistic for your view. Perhaps the reason is that I don't think women were to be elders of the church either. And the church was to be "led" if you will, by the elders. Not one man, but a group of men that had become wise in the faith. But I do think, while being under the authority of the elders, many women spoke in the churches -- whether the Lord gave them "words of wisdom", or "prophecies", or "interpretation of prophecy", or "teachings". I would suggest that it was probably those elders that brought the issue to Paul in the first place. Possibly because the women would not listen to them either... which could also take the issue back to "submission". But anyway, I think it was the misuse of the women's words that Paul was admonishing them for. Not for speaking, but for not doing it properly. And since they couldn't do it properly, then they should just be quiet. My opinion. God bless. |
||||||
10 | Would you kindly explain this text. | 1 Cor 14:34 | There | 26085 | ||
As I told Tim, I disagree. I think it's fine if we agree to disagree. God bless. |
||||||
11 | Would you kindly explain this text. | 1 Cor 14:34 | There | 26084 | ||
At this point Tim, I disagree with you. I don't think Paul would have admonished them as harshly as he did if they were just talking. Especially since he goes on to ask them basically if they think they know more than anyone else about the Lord (v.36). It seems to me they must have been doing more than just "talking". God bless. |
||||||
12 | Can women be preachers? 1Cor.11:4,5 | 1 Cor 14:34 | There | 25852 | ||
Hi Nolan, 1Corinthians is telling women not to: 2980 "laleo", preach, say, speak (after), talk, tell, utter. 2980("laleo") means an extended or random harangue. It really doesn't seem to be telling them not to preach so much as not to give "tongue lashings", especially towards their husbands or men in general I think. Please note that what Paul considers shameful is that women were using the church as a place to "rebuke others", when they preached. So it seems women were preaching, they were just not doing it properly. And since there were many "house" churches in Corinth quite probably, Paul is saying that the women who are behaving shamefully in those churches, should "be silent"... and learn something from their own husbands. I think he's probably telling them to learn something about submission from their husbands. But that's my guess. God bless. |
||||||
13 | "Once Saved Always Saved" | NT general Archive 1 | There | 25759 | ||
I do understand.... :) God bless!! | ||||||
14 | "Once Saved Always Saved" | NT general Archive 1 | There | 25722 | ||
Hi Lisa, The numbered texts below are taken from the revised Catholic Catechism (1997). 1035. "The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of MORTAL SIN descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, 'eternal fire.'[Cf. DS 76; 409; 411; 801; 858; 1002; 1351; 1575; Paul VI, CPG # 12.] The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs." 1496. "The spiritual effects of the sacrament of Penance are: - reconciliation with God by which the penitent recovers grace; - reconciliation with the Church; - remission of the eternal punishment incurred by MORTAL sins; - remission, at least in part, of temporal punishments resulting from sin; - peace and serenity of conscience, and spiritual consolation; - an increase of spiritual strength for the Christian battle. " 1457. "According to the Church's command, 'after having attained the age of discretion, each of the faithful is bound by an obligation faithfully to confess serious sins at least once a year.'[Cf. CIC, Can. 989; Council of Trent (1551): DS 1683; DS 1708.] Anyone who is aware of having committed a MORTAL SIN must not receive Holy Communion, even if he experiences deep contrition, without having first received sacramental absolution, unless he has a grave reason for receiving Communion and there is no possibility of going to confession.[Cf. Council of Trent (1551): DS 1647; 1661; CIC, can. 916; CCEO, can.] Children must go to the sacrament of Penance before receiving Holy Communion for the first time.[Cf. CIC, can. 914.]" 1854. "Sins are rightly evaluated according to their gravity. The distinction between MORTAL and VENIAL SIN, already evident in Scripture,[Cf. 1Jn 16-17 .] became part of the tradition of the Church. It is corroborated by human experience." [[Do you know what biblical reference they refer to above 1John 16-17? If you do, I'd appreciate being told.]] [[Mine - a repeat. James 2:10 "For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all."]] 1857. "For a SIN to be MORTAL, three conditions must together be met: 'MORTAL SIN is SIN whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent.'[RP 17 # 12.]" 1858. "Grave matter is specified by the Ten Commandments, corresponding to the answer of Jesus to the rich young man: 'Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and your mother.'[Mk 10:19 .] The gravity of sins is more or less great: murder is graver than theft. One must also take into account who is wronged: violence against parents is in itself graver than violence against a stranger." 1863. "Venial SIN weakens charity; it manifests a disordered affection for created goods; it impedes the soul's progress in the exercise of the virtues and the practice of the moral good; it merits temporal punishment. Deliberate and unrepented venial SIN disposes us little by little to commit MORTAL SIN. However venial SIN does not set us in direct opposition to the will and friendship of God; it does not break the covenant with God. With God's grace it is humanly reparable. 'Venial SIN does not deprive the sinner of sanctifying grace, friendship with God, charity, and consequently eternal happiness.'[John Paul II, RP 17 # 9.] While he is in the flesh, man cannot help but have at least some light sins. But do not despise these sins which we call 'light': if you take them for light when you weigh them, tremble when you count them. A number of light objects makes a great mass; a number of drops fills a river; a number of grains makes a heap. What then is our hope? Above all, confession.[St. Augustine, In ep. Jo. 1, 6: PL 35, 1982.]" 2484. "The gravity of a lie is measured against the nature of the truth it deforms, the circumstances, the intentions of the one who lies, and the harm suffered by its victims. If a lie in itself only constitutes a venial SIN, it becomes MORTAL when it does grave injury to the virtues of justice and charity. " [[See James 2:10]] One of the "mortal" sins is intentionally missing mass on Sunday Lisa. We were taught that as children and young adults too. Even as adults we needed to "confess" to the priest if we had missed mass or be forever doomed to hell. And you seem to be under the impression that we ex-Catholics each knew only one "priest" during our Catholic experience. I can't speak for others, but I was very close friends with several. I have learned under a total of probably at least 10 priests over the years, possibly more. And they all taught the same thing... even the younger ones. And the reason for that I assume is that they all learned from the same teachings. God bless. |
||||||
15 | what is the true worship day sun. or sat | Col 2:16 | There | 25717 | ||
Actually I usually try to look at and understand the other person's position, even if I do disagree with them. I have not made this apparent in my postings though, or it would not have surprised you. But anyway, in this paticular case... I do disagree. Your interpretation sounds so close, but it does change the context of the verse in my opinion. You said: "Let no man therefore judge you in your feasting and fasting on the feast days, or the new moons, or the ceremonial sabbath days: Although I think "feasting and fasting" could be a pretty good understanding of "eating and drinking", I do think it strays far away from the context after that. Paul clearly states either "or" or "and" between "regards to eating and drinking" AND "in respect to festivals, etc.". That is a first clue that he did not mean people were not to be judged only for the "eating and drinking" that was done on certain days. So I believe that Paul meant what he said. Men were not to judge others concerning ALL of those things: eating, drinking, festivals, new moons, sabbaths. But one of the reasons I think Paul said what he meant when he used the "or" or "and" in respect to the festivals etc.... is completely explained in the remainder of Paul's statement in verse 17. Again... I wish you could understand why I keep bringing that up. One part of the sentence is only that -- one part. One part of a whole thought on Paul's part. In order to put the first part in context, we must at least include the second part of his thought. You said: 17 These (i.e., the feasting and fasting) are a shadow of things to come; rather let the Church decide such matters." It was not just the feasting and fasting (eating and drinking) that were a shadow of things to come. It was ALL of those things he'd mentioned. The point though is that verse 17 explains what all those things have in common. "WHICH ARE a shadow of things to come, but the substance (body) is of Christ". Oviously Paul and the early Christians knew by this time that the eating and drinking (communion?), festivals, new moons, and the Sabbaths were all to be fullfilled in/through Christ Jesus... whether during His first coming to begin His church, or His second, when He would finish what He'd started. I think all Paul was saying is that "all those things" are a shadow of what is coming to and will be shown within the body of believers (body of Christ). I don't believe the "body" is the one to make decisions for the "body". I believe the "head" is to make decisions for the "body". If Christ is our head, we will be led by His Spirit, not by man or man's decisions. I'm not sure I'm making myself understandable. But I don't know of any other way to say it, other than to quote Paul in Col. 2:16-17. :) God bless. |
||||||
16 | "Once Saved Always Saved" | NT general Archive 1 | There | 25697 | ||
Lisa, Norrie was correct in her explanation of purgatory, mortal, and venial sins. I think the big difference between what you have been taught and what we were taught is not Vatican II, but in that we were taught the whole catechism basically word for word... whereas you seem to have been taught concepts instead. Perhaps you should study the catechism of the Catholic Church so you will know what it's doctrines and dogmas actually are. Then make a decision as to whether or not you agree with it's teachings. Since you are already reading the Bible, you will have something to compare one with the other too. Excerpt from the updated Catholic Catechism (1997)Where Bible references are given, please Lisa check them out too so you will see how they compare with the Catholic teaching they refer to: 1031. "The Church gives the name PURGATORY to this final purification of the elect, which is entirely different from the punishment of the damned.[Cf. Council of Florence (1439): DS 1304; Council of Trent (1563): DS 1820; (1547): 1580; see also Benedict XII, Benedictus Deus (1336): DS 1000.] The Church formulated her doctrine of faith on PURGATORY especially at the Councils of Florence and Trent. The tradition of the Church, by reference to certain texts of Scripture, speaks of a cleansing fire:[Cf. 1 Cor 3:15 ; 1 Pet 1:7 .] As for certain lesser faults, we must believe that, before the Final Judgment, there is a purifying fire. He who is truth says that whoever utters blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will be pardoned neither in this age nor in the age to come. From this sentence we understand that certain offenses can be forgiven in this age, but certain others in the age to come.[St. Gregory the Great, Dial. 4, 39: PL 77, 396; cf. Mt 12:31 .] " [[My own Bible reference concerning the above doctrine. Please check out 1Peter 1:3-12, and 1Cor. 3:2-17, as the above reference verses do not teach a cleansing fire after our physical death. And Matt. 12:31 "Therefore I say to you, EVERY sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven men."]] 1472. "To understand this doctrine and practice of the Church, it is necessary to understand that sin has a double consequence. Grave sin deprives us of communion with God and therefore makes us incapable of eternal life, the privation of which is called the 'eternal punishment' of sin. On the other hand every sin, even venial, entails an unhealthy attachment to creatures, which must be purified either here on earth, or after death in the state called PURGATORY. This purification frees one from what is called the 'temporal punishment' of sin. These two punishments must not be conceived of as a kind of vengeance inflicted by God from without, but as following from the very nature of sin. A conversion which proceeds from a fervent charity can attain the complete purification of the sinner in such a way that no punishment would remain.[Cf. Council of Trent (1551): DS 1712-1713; (1563): 1820.]" [[My Bible reference. James 2:10 "For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all." (Specifically as the Catholic Catechism states that "mortal" sins are the breaking of any one of the Ten Commandments.) And Matt. 12:31 again. There is only ONE unforgivable sin.]] 1475. "In the communion of saints, 'a perennial link of charity exists between the faithful who have already reached their heavenly home, those who are expiating their sins in PURGATORY and those who are still pilgrims on earth. between them there is, too, an abundant exchange of all good things.'[Indulgentiarum doctrina, 5.] In this wonderful exchange, the holiness of one profits others, well beyond the harm that the sin of one could cause others. Thus recourse to the communion of saints lets the contrite sinner be more promptly and efficaciously purified of the punishments for sin." [[My reference. Hebrews 9:27 "And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgement..." There is no cleansing period in-between physical death and the judgment.]] 1498. "Through indulgences the faithful can obtain the remission of temporal punishment resulting from sin for themselves and also for the souls in PURGATORY. " [[RCC's meaning of "indulgence" is "remission of temporal or purgatorial punishment still due for a sin after the guilt has been forgiven". Reference verse. Matthew 26:28 "For this is My blood of the covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins." (Remission means forgiveness.) And Hebrews 10:18 "Now where there is remission of these, there is no longer an offering for sin." Jesus does it all, as we both know.]] I will send a new post with the Catholic Cathechism teachings about Mortal and Venial Sins. Please read that one also, Lisa. God bless. |
||||||
17 | "Once Saved Always Saved" | NT general Archive 1 | There | 25605 | ||
Brian, You said: First, Catholics do not require other Catholics to define whether we are Roman Catholic, etc. Catholic means universal and we accept and respect each other, without question. I would hope Lisa does not dignify your question with an answer. I think you are attempting to admonish me wrongly, Brian. LisaMarie mentioned that we all assumed she was "Roman Catholic", because we had never asked to find out what she was. I will copy and paste her remarks. LisaMarie said: "I think I'm also past due for pointing out that not all Catholics are Roman Catholics. The proper term being CCC, Catechism of the Catholic Church. Not RCC, Roman Catholic Catechism. Roman, Byzantine, Greek, (But not Greek Orthodox.) I believe 7 branches in all founded by apostles who set out to spread the word of God. Just about everyone responding here assumed that when I said Catholic, I meant Roman. No one ever asked." So I asked. And if LisaMarie finds it acceptable to imply that someone should ask, I think it would be nice if she would "dignify" the asker with a reply. God bless. |
||||||
18 | "Once Saved Always Saved" | NT general Archive 1 | There | 25602 | ||
Hello Brian, You said: "Next, today when people are learning, they can go to a Bible class, or a bookstore, and gain an education. When the Catholic Church was carving out Christianity, they were preaching to people who lived in caves and huts, and no concept of a written language." The Catholic Church did not carve out Christianity Brian. I'm not picking words here, but it was God through Christ that is building His church. God's church is people who believe Him. People who learn from Him -- from His Holy Spirit. [Romans 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are the sons of God.] Concerning the written language... during Abraham's day there were libraries and schools. And that was about 2,000 BC! Archeologists have discovered sites in Ur, Lagash, Nippur, Sippar (which means "Book Town"), and every important city in Babylonia during the approximate time of Abraham -- with schools, temples, libraries with thousands of books; Dictionaries, Grammars, Reference Works, Encyclopedias, Official Annuls, works on Mathematics, Astronomy, Geography, Religion and Politics. In Ur, also in the stratum of Abraham's day, they uncovered 150 school Exercise Tablets, with Mathematical, Medical, Historical texts, and one large tablet in parallel columns with a Complete Conjugation of the Sumerian verb and its equivalent in Semitic. And in Canaan, near Hebron, city of Abraham, was a town called "Kiriath-Sepher", which means "scribe-town". And did you know that in Rome during the days of Christ... people had running water and public bath houses? Even Jerusalem during the time of King David had aquaducts that brought water into the city to fill the wells from underground. Early Christians were not "cavemen", nor primitives who lived in "huts". Each community used the resources that were available to them to build houses, temples, stadiums, stores, palaces, etc. In fact many times great cedars and marble blocks were shipped (in a boat) from one country to another... and each ship usually had written manifestos for their cargo. They've found bills, and receipts, and all kinds of things in the strata for that time period. Not only in Rome and Israel, but also Egypt, Babylon, etc. Even though in Jesus' day everyone did not have the elitist training that Paul and other scholars had... the remainder of the apostles --- who were basically common folk --- could apparently write... and write quite well as we see in the gospels and epistles. Certainly if they could, then surely others during the next few hundred years could also. The dumbing down occurred during the dark ages (late 400's-1100's AD). It is a time that gradually got bleaker over the years for the common people due to severe oppression from those in power over them. Schools were not permitted because the rulers knew that with knowledge, comes power -- and those in power didn't want to be usurped. I won't go any further with this thread, but that is the juxt of the matter as to why many people couldn't read during those years. Another point is that the Bible was not available to them even if they could have read it. But there too... if anyone believed God... they could not so easily be duped into doing whatever they were told. Ignorance is bliss... but only to those who want to control the ignorant. It was during the Reformation that public schools were built, and Bibles were translated into common languages, with the intent that people should learn to read so they could read the Bible for themselves. You said: "Let's look at Christian theology. Every Christian religion today is built upon the theological principles defined by the Catholic Church over the past 2,000 years." Actually Brian, I think the principles were defined long before the Catholic Church became involved. It was God who defined those principles in His inspired Word - the Holy Bible. And it is God's "teachings" that should be taught. I think I have said this on here before, but I will say it again because you may not know my stance on this. I thoroughly believe that the only "doctrine" that should be used AS "doctrine" for a Christian denomination -- is the Word of God. Nothing added and nothing taken away. The Lord even set up a plan to keep false understandings of His Word out of His church. And by the way, His Church is not Catholic, or Methodist, or Baptist, nor any other denomination. God's church is people who believe Him. It is universal only in the sense that God has saved people all over the planet. God bless. |
||||||
19 | what is the true worship day sun. or sat | Col 2:16 | There | 25582 | ||
Honestly dconklin... to me "or" makes more sense than "and". But I think I understand where you are coming from. Please tell me if I'm wrong. Do you understand that verse to be speaking of ONE thing, as opposed to multiple things? For instance if "and" is used, then a person could understand that verse to be saying "let no man judge you in [the singular event of] eating, drinking, a festival i.e. new moon, sabbath" because "and" could give one the idea that those things are all joined together into one event. Whereas "or" would separate them, and suggest that Paul was saying "let no one judge you in any one of these things". Is that why you think "and" makes more sense? |
||||||
20 | "Once Saved Always Saved" | NT general Archive 1 | There | 25581 | ||
Hi Lisa, You said: I also read last night that the actual "Hebrew Canon" was put together after the Christian one. I found that kinda curious. Prior to our Bible, they were only interested in a scroll of The Law. Unless I misunderstand what you're talking about, the Hebrew Canon (laws or body of laws of a church) was written by Moses, with the exception of the few verses at the close of Deuteronomy which give an account of his death. It was possibly written in archaic Hebrew (although some say Aramaic, which is very similar to Hebrew from what I understand) on clay tablets, leather or papyrus. Papyrus was commonly used in Egypt in those days, and it is possible that the first five books of the law were written on that if Moses had the forethought (or inspiration from the Lord) to take some along when the Exodus occurred. And clay tablets would be very heavy to haul around... but they definitely had the manpower and animal power to do so. But personally I think leather is a more practical expectation. For those forty years in the wilderness, they would have had a ready supply at hand. Just my thoughts on it since I don't know which they were written on. :) If the original was written on leather or papyrus, they wore out with use and were replaced with new copies. If clay, they apparently wore out or broke too, since archeologists have found MANY fragments of such. Again, unless I'm mistaken the "scroll of the Law" that you mentioned, was usually made of leather, because it generally lasted much longer than papyrus. The entire Old Testament (which included the Torah [law] was translated into Greek and called the Septuagint, made in the 3rd century BC, and was in common use during Jesus day. The gospels (memoirs of the apostles) and the epistles (letters) were first "gathered together" by Eusebius during the reign of Constantine. This was in the early 300's AD, and the bibles were printed on vellum (a fine parchment - [animal skin, prepared as a surface for writing]). These were possibly the original Sinaitic or the Vatican Manuscripts. During the time of Jesus, it was still the custom that letters were scrolled [rolled] and sealed to be delivered to the addressee. From what I've read that is possibly the form used by the apostles who wrote the original epistles (letters). You said: The Hebrews rejected all Greek writings because they didn't see the Gentiles as people of God. No possible way he would send the Holy Spirit unto them! Since their law was also written in Greek several hundred years before Christ, we know they did not reject Gentiles because of the Greek writings. They rejected the Messiah and therefore rejected his teachings which just happened to be written in Greek. You said: The entire New Testament is written in Greek. Of course the Hebrews, not believing in Jesus, reject all the New Testament as well. It's my understanding that the Jews believe in the man Jesus, but do not believe He was/is the Messiah. And this reminds me that in Acts 10, Peter was given a vision which he did not fully understand... until the Spirit informed him that he should go to meet Cornelius. And in 10:28 Peter said "You know how unlawful it is for a Jewish man to keep company with or go to one of another nation. But God has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean..." So if it had not been for the Lord's instruction to Peter personally, he probably would have been one of "those of the circumcision who believed" and "were astonished because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentile" believers. God bless. |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ] Next > Last [7] >> |