Results 181 - 192 of 192
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Scribe Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
181 | where was Jesus? | Eph 4:8 | Scribe | 41368 | ||
They were walking around in Jerusalem? Not much said is there? | ||||||
182 | Where was satan when he first sinned? | Bible general Archive 1 | Scribe | 41366 | ||
This is a deep subject (no pun intended) that the stones of fire are those under neath the earth. That Lucifer had something to do with this realm seems evident by the description of both the precious jewels of his being and of the mention that he walked up and down in the stones of fire. There is a lot here to meditate on and compare with other verses. I do not see any scripture that say Lucifer was in heaven and fell long before man was created. That is raw speculation on the part of centuries of Bible teachers repeating each other not the Bible. That he was cast down from heaven is true but when? The only verse we have is this one. He was perfect in Eden. Then he was found with iniquity. So whatever the time frame was between the creation of Eden and the serpent tempting Eve, Lucifer went from perfect to having been found with iniquity. Now we know that it was the serpent that spoke to Eve and yet satan gets the blame. We know that even in Eden satan could not be seen by Eve, he had to embody a serpent. So it could be that satan was in the Garden as one of the Cherubs that had a job or position that related to planet earth and he had access to the lower parts of the earth, There was no hell there yet. I am guessing. Brain storming. :) Not trying to start a new cult or anything :) |
||||||
183 | Where was satan when he first sinned? | Bible general Archive 1 | Scribe | 41365 | ||
I am open. I have not concluded anything yet. But if in all instances where Mount of God occurs in the Bible it refers to the one in Jerusalem, then why would be a different Mount in Ezek 28 and if one decides that it is a different one what right or basis does he have to conclude this? In Ezek 20 Ezek referred to the mount and said... Ezekiel 20:40 0 For in mine holy mountain, in the mountain of the height of Israel, saith the Lord GOD, there shall all the house of Israel, all of them in the land, serve me: there will I accept them, and there will I require your offerings, and the firstfruits of your oblations, with all your holy things ... so if the same Ezek later says Ezekiel 28:14 4 Thou [art] the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee [so]: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire. .. Would not this same prophet be still referring to the same mount he has mentioned in a previous prophesy. What right or basis would one have for calling this Eden a different Eden than the Garden of Eden where we all saw that satan was indeed in in Gen 3. So we know that satan was in THAT Garden of Eden, we have no knowledge of any other Garden of Eden. But let us consider the stones of Fire for clarity. One concept I utterly reject is that such descriptions are ever placed in the Holy Word of God for emotional emphasis or poetic language. I believe there is always a power truth and revelation and in this instance a literal application behind such descriptive words as stones of fire. I used to listen to other preachers repeat other preachers about satan falling ages before the garden. I want to see the verse now. I only have this one about when he was perfect and then he was found with iniquity. It distinctly says he was perfect while still in Eden and then he was found with iniquity. When he shows up in Gen speaking to Eve, we know he has iniquity. We never see him in Gen in his perfect state. So unless you can demonstrate how in other parts of the Bible the Heavenlies are called Eden then I only have a right to assume that Eden is the Garden of Eden and no other Eden since I know of no other Eden. Making up things about "we can call heaven Eden if we want to" is Bambi theology and I cannot have anything to do with it because I can only put faith in the Word of God and not in any "made up" explanations. Until I see a passage where a prophet calles heaven Eden and it does not refer to the Garden Adam was in then I cannot say Ezek meant anything but Eden the garden Adam was in. But back to the stones of fire? If I just say that "stones of fire" is just phrases to inspire awe then I am not any closer to an answer to "what is the mount of God here?" And "which Eden does he refer to?" But if the stones of fire have meaning and can be identified then maybe that will bring me closer to a revelation that God would want me to be seeking out, (since He did see fit to put the words in the Bible for our instruction in righteousness). Consider these verses Ezekiel 28:14 4 Thou [art] the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee [so]: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire. Ezekiel 28:16 6 By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire. Now look at Job 28 5 [As for] the earth, out of it cometh bread: and under it is turned up as it were fire. 6 The stones of it [are] the place of sapphires: and it hath dust of gold. 7 [There is] a path which no fowl knoweth, and which the vulture's eye hath not seen: |
||||||
184 | Where was satan when he first sinned? | Bible general Archive 1 | Scribe | 41148 | ||
I think Jensen made a good point here. That there are heavenlies and not just one heaven that God dwells in that satan was at. satan can and still has access to that heavenly realm where he accused Job. I am of the opinion that satan was able to access a higher level before and was cast down after his fall but my main question is do you see that fall occurring in Eden as stated by Ezek 28:13-15? | ||||||
185 | Where was satan when he first sinned? | 2 Cor 12:2 | Scribe | 41146 | ||
Great point Jensen, and an important one. It does apply to my topic but I will apply it later. Let me bring out now that I have not seen the verse that says satan sinned in heaven. We seem to assume that based on other verses such as that satan was cast down from heaven. But let me post this verse and see where it goes. Ezek 28:13 thru 15 13 Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone [was] thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created. sardius: or, ruby beryl: or, chrysolite emerald: or, chrysoprase 14 Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire. 15 Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee. 16 By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire. 17 Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee. Verse 13 says that Lucifer was in Eden. Verse 14 says he was in the mount of God (which seems to indicate that the mount of God was in Eden) Verse 15 says that Lucifer was perfect in Eden. Then iniquity was found in him. now maybe I am simple but it appears to me Lucifer was perfect in Eden then iniquity was found in him. |
||||||
186 | christians don't sin??? | 1 John 3:9 | Scribe | 41135 | ||
Thank you brother Tim. Amen, I agree. But saying it that way is not as fun as "You will find that the Spirit of God in you as your own thoughts is screaming in your spiritual ears.. "I can't do this, I Can't keep doing this, I can't live this way, This is not what God has called me to., I am never going to be happy doing this, I will never have peace until I repent... etc) " God Bless You. |
||||||
187 | where was Jesus? | Eph 4:8 | Scribe | 41105 | ||
I get my information from this verse Matthew 27:53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many. Don't you think here that is means after His Resurrection the saints came out and were seen? |
||||||
188 | Does Rev 22:19 teach loss of salvation? | Rev 22:19 | Scribe | 41095 | ||
Two points. One I have known people that were born again and lived it and after many years just went back into the world of obvious wicked living. These people are not going to heaven according to Paul when he said, be not decieved brothers (christian brothers) they that practice (unrepenting) drunkenness, fornication etc are not going to inherit the kingdom of heaven. Therefore I know that these people were born again, we were very close and they once lived in holiness and spoke intimately of the truths of Christ in them. But now they are drunkards and fornicators. You can construct all the twists and turns around scripture but Paul says they are not going to heaven unless they repent. You can say they were not born again but that is far worse sort of judgement on your part than agreeing with Paul that people that live like that are not going to heaven. Or you can say they are going to heaven but loosing rewards, but that is to confuse ministry works with wicked lifestyle. You can say the kingdome of heaven is seperate than eternal life, but that is trying too hard to dodge what Paul said. Now I do not understand how one that is born again and has known the joy of walking with God can live in sin any length of time without suffering a nervous breakdown. I know that christians will sometimes fall. I know that they are not unsaved if they fall. Having fallen before and experienced the misery of it I have no fear of losing my salvation. I understand that he that is born of God cannot sin, or cannot stay in sin becuase it is too hard for him. He will be too miserable because of the Word of God in him. If you are born again of the Word of God you will not be able to stay in sin. If someone does stay in sin and you know they have been born again, do not comfort them with lieing words that they are going to heaven anyway. All the apostles wrote and preached about it as though eternal damnation waits for those that do not repent. Let us preach the same way. Point 2 I love the book of Revelation and I am glad the KJV scholars kept true to the language when they used words like angel in Rev 2-3 which by doing so brings out truths that changing it to messenger would have ruined. |
||||||
189 | WAS JESUS FORSAKEN BY HIS FATHER? | Matt 27:46 | Scribe | 40932 | ||
Thanks EdB. You are preaching the truth. Jesus was not forsaken in the sense of God leaving Him, or the Father not able to accept Him. The Bible on numerous occasions stresses just how acceptable the sacrifice of Christ on the Cross was. So you cannot have an acceptable sacrifice and an unacceptable one at the same time. Also, if Christ had died spiritaully there would be no legal right to be the substitution for our spiritual death, he suffered in all points like us YET WITHOUT SIN, is the rest of that verse. If at any time he was found with sin He would not qualify to take our place for sin or to become sin for us, which is quite different than being guilty of commiting sin. This was most definetly a cry for all those to remember to read that Psalm which at the time was not Psalm 22. How did they identify a portion of Psalms then? By saying the opening verse maybe? It was as if Jesus was saying READ THE PSALM "MY GOD, MY GOD why hast thou forsaken men" and if they did, they would have seen the reference to the soldiers casting lots for his garment, the piercing of the hands and feet, the offering of the drink to quench his thirst, and much more. Now that being said, was the Prophecy of Psalm 22 speaking about God Forsaking the Messaih? And if so what does that mean. It is the same kind of cry David often wrote about when He was in anguish of soul and said such things as "how long God? Will you be angry . ... etc. We know that God does not forsake those that serve Him but at times of anguish of trial and tribulation many men of God and prophets have expressed such words. So often does this occur in the scripture that you soon get the idea that every saint will feel this way at some time. But God is still there and victory is just around the corner. Jesus is simply expressing the Human emotional pain He suffered on our behalf, and also quoting the Psalm 22 (howbeit Jesus probably continued in lower volume or whispers the whole psalm 22 in comfort to get Him through this greatest of all trials) If people will continually reference the OT in their study of the New Testament, they will find many truths that are much more solid than what they have always heard from other teachers that did not really understand. GBU all and may you study the Word Daily. |
||||||
190 | when we die where do we go immediately | Bible general Archive 1 | Scribe | 39784 | ||
sleep becuase for the saint it is temporary. I think the first time that this became understood to the new testament saint was when Jesus said about one how had died, "he sleepeth" when the believer in Christ dies he is imeddiately with the Lord as the previous post made quite clear, but to us that are here on earth he sleepeth. We see only the dead body. But that state is not eternal. That body will be raised incorruptible and perfect. That is going to happen as sure as God is God. The promises of our body being raised incorruptible is a foundation of faith. As Paul said, if you remove the faith of a body raised from the dead, you remove faith of salvation. Paul said if the body be not raised you are still in sin. Only those that inherit the promise of a bodily resurrection have entered into the kingdom of not having sin imputed to them. It is a theological understanding that should be studied out. God Bless | ||||||
191 | 1 day is 1000 years, why? | 2 Pet 3:8 | Scribe | 39776 | ||
Good point CDBJ, but what about the idea of being in the Last Days. If as Peter stated in Acts 2 we are in the Last Days since the day of Pentecost at least, becuase he said this is that spoken of by the prophet Joel, 'that in the last days I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh' then we have to be getting to the very end of the end days. This is why. If you draw a time line of earth history and place the day of Pentecost on the time line you have some 4500 years before it and some 2000 years after it. Now if Jesus comes again soon and wraps things up you can see how the day of Pentecost began the last third of man's history thus calling it the last days applies. But if you go too much further in the future say another 1000 years added to the one we are in, you see that the day of Pentecost was in the middle of the time line and thus it would be more like the middle days of man's history on the day of Pentecost when peter called it the Last Days. Now we could get all mentally indifferent to logic and just say, something like "who cares" but I think God's word is written with logic and understanding and that if Peter said that that was the Last Days and we are still in it, it HAS to end soon. God bless you. | ||||||
192 | 1 day is 1000 years, why? | 2 Pet 3:8 | Scribe | 39774 | ||
Dear Love Fountain, You stated "Regarding Psalm 90:4, a thousand years in thy(mans) sight are but as yesterday sure sounds like 1 day is a thousand years to me" The statement by David is to God when he says "a thousand years in thy sight" he is referring to God. In God's sight or from God's Almighty and eternal view, a thousand years is as a day. No "less than that" It is like a "watch in the night" that is a three hour period. So now which is the 'formula' is it a day or a watch in the night? See the point of David is that of Isaiah and repeated by Peter.. All flesh is grass and as the grass withers and passes away so is man and all his history and man accomplishments. The point of David in Psalms 90 is the frailty of man.. that indeed as you stated, we 'are no one'.. " we spend our years as a tale [that is told " ps 90:9. So when Peter uses this text he is reminding those that were well read "remember how little this passage of time really matters to God" and do not say "all things continue as they have since the beginning". I have heard the 7 day theory and frankly I like it. But I do not see that this verse supports it the way it is often used. It may help to allow us to speculate about the 7 day prophetic time table, but we should do so with the attitude of "it could be" not "it is written" May God Bless you in your study. | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ] |