Results 21 - 27 of 27
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: djconklin Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
21 | what sabbath does it refer to? | Col 2:16 | djconklin | 25514 | ||
Very good question! Too bad the others didn't catch on to that one! The key is to look at how the word "heorte" was used in the LXX; it turns out that you'll find the same answer if you take very careful note how the words "chaq" and "mo'ed" are used in the Hebrew text. Hint: it wouldn't makes sense to use the word "heorte" (feast in English) to refer to a day of fasting (such as, the Day of Atonement and the feast of Trumpets--both of which are?). | ||||||
22 | What day do YOU attend church? | Col 2:16 | djconklin | 25512 | ||
"Please know that we are not trying to mean or anything. Those of us that have been around for a while have had to fight tooth and nail for clear Biblical statements. You might say that we desire 'hot or cold' and 'yes or no' answers, because there are so many 'lukewarm' and 'maybe' answers that are not answers." Sorry, but I have been attacked so frequently by my fellow Christians that I am quite leery of going beyond what the Bible says. |
||||||
23 | What day do YOU attend church? | Col 2:16 | djconklin | 25511 | ||
"What day do you attend church?" You are assuming that I go to church. Much like many "commentators" assume that they know what Col. 2:16-17 is talking about. Tit-for-tat and it won't hurt as much as (well, that assumes you don't put your foot in it): what is Col.2:16-17 about? |
||||||
24 | Sunday or Saturday? | Col 2:16 | djconklin | 25409 | ||
"Would your congregation be as confused as we are after your sermon? :-)" According to my email (3 tonite) others got it quite fine. |
||||||
25 | Sunday or Saturday? | Col 2:16 | djconklin | 25408 | ||
"The original question was "What is the true worship day, Sunday or Saturday?"" However, the devil lies in the details and here we are looking at specifically at Col. 2:16-17. What does it say about Sunday? --- Skipping the sarcasm; "I truly can't see that you have made a conclusive statement on this issue." I have said it a number of times; let's try it again in a different way: THIS VERSE DOES NOT CONDEMN SABBATH-KEEPING AS IS COMMONLY CLAIMED. IT ISN'T EVEN TALKING ABOUT THE SEVENTH-DAY SABBTH IN THE FIRST PLACE. Hmm-m-m, capitalizing definitely does help it to stand out. |
||||||
26 | What IS your belief? | Col 2:16 | djconklin | 25363 | ||
If they really, really believe that they are following Scripture then why do they refer you to the mere ramblings and speculations of man? What I have found from studying the grammatical and linguistic features of Col.2:16-17 is that it is not talking about the seventh-day Sabbath. It does not say anything about the keeping of Sunday. That practice crept into the church over a long period of time. |
||||||
27 | Ten Commandments obsolete? | Rom 10:4 | djconklin | 24843 | ||
No. What he is saying is that Jesus is the "telos" of the law. "Telos" here is not temporal but goal.* Jesus is the goal of the law in two ways: 1) The motivating power for the law is love and God is love, love is the fulfillment of the law. 2) When we do sin we have an advocate with the Father; so the Law drives us to Jesus as our Savior--it shows us our need. *"How can we determine what Paul was trying to say in this verse? To decide such a scriptural controversy, one ideally should take into account three kinds of information: 1) The history of the way the passage in question has been interpreted by the Christian community through the centuries. 2) The ways in which a questionable word is used in other texts, especially other biblical texts with similar grammatical constructions. 3) The meaning of the passage in its immediate context and in the larger context of the book in which it appears. Fortunately, all three types of information about Romans 10:4 are available in the book Christ the End of the Law: Romans10.4 in Pauline Perspective (JSOT Press, Sheffield, England, 1985), the doctoral dissertation of Robert Badenas, an evangelical New Testament scholar. In this article, I will summarize Badenas findings, which present a clear resolution to our question about the meaning of the phrase "Christ is the end of the law." To put the current debate about the meaning of Romans 10:4 in context, it will be helpful to look at the history of how this verse has been understood by Christians. Dr. Badenas surveys this history in the first chapter of his book. It is especially interesting to see how Rom. 10:4 was explained by the early church fathers. Being much closer than we are to Paul's own setting, patristic sources may be more closely in touch with the concerns that led Paul to write his epistle to the Romans." From http://www.graceandknowledge.beliefnet.com/telos.html |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 ] |