Results 21 - 40 of 121
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: FTimA Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
21 | human clones - souls? | Ezek 18:4 | FTimA | 65232 | ||
Lionstrong, I am curious about the process of cloning. Do you exactly how it is done? I can understand a human being cloned from a fertilized egg having a soul because the initial joining of the male and female gamete is part of God's original design in reproduction. On the other hand, cloning from a piece of genetic material would, in my present state of understanding, not produce a soul. If you consider that each cell of the human body has the genetic makeup of that particular individual, just like the male and female gametes do, a soul may be possible. The scientists are probably saying to themselves, "We really won't know until we do it." | ||||||
22 | tithing | Acts 13:39 | FTimA | 65231 | ||
Tithing is an Old Testament practice carried over to the present. Paul, speaking to the Corinthians, says in 2 Cor 9:6 Now this I say, he who sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and he who sows bountifully will also reap bountifully. 7 Each one must do just as he has purposed in his heart, not grudgingly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver. Again he says in 1 Cor 16:1 Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I directed the churches of Galatia, so do you also. 2 On the first day of every week each one of you is to put aside and save, as he may prosper, so that no collections be made when I come. We are not bound today by the "one tenth" rule, but as Paul says, "God loves a cheerful giver" and sowing sparingly, reaps sparingly, sowing boutifully, reaps bountifully. This collection was to help the needy saints in Jerusalem. What happened after this need was satisfied? Did the brethren stop collecting, laying by, saving? This is a much debated issue and I will not get into it too deeply. I will only say that tithing today is not what tithing was when it began. Tithing is first mentioned in Gen 14:20. Abram gives Melchizedek (a priest of God Most High, vs 1) a tithe of all. I am sure those who read this are aware that tithe only means "one-tenth". Some principles of tithing can be learned in Deut. 14:22-29. It says here that the tithe was to be paid every third year (vs 28) and it was to only be a tithe "of that year". The things tithed were to support the Levitical preisthood, strangers, orphans, and widows (if I miss anything, please let me know). The lesson to be learned here is that Israel was to take one tenth of everything they possessed and contribute it to the Lord (for the above purposes). We today are not bound by tithing but we can read that Jesus and his disciples had a treasury, we know that in today's world it takes money to do just about everything and individual congregations are not excluded, maintaining a building, a minister, aid to the needy, etc. all take money. Whether we call it tithing or whatever is immaterial. |
||||||
23 | Explanations of difficult verses | NT general Archive 1 | FTimA | 65229 | ||
My point here is that God wrote Mark 16:16, while the catechism's were written by men based on, pardon the expression, apostasized interpretation. To be frank, I feel that the catechisms fall under the penalty of Rev 22:18,19 I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; 19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book. Jesus says Matt 15:9 'BUT IN VAIN DO THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE PRECEPTS OF MEN.' If these catechisms are accepted as doctrine somebody will have a lot of explaining to do. |
||||||
24 | Explanations of difficult verses | NT general Archive 1 | FTimA | 65228 | ||
Why is the death and resurrection of Christ considered a mystery? | ||||||
25 | Explanations of difficult verses | NT general Archive 1 | FTimA | 65226 | ||
The interpretation is not as important as how it aligns with the truth revealed in the scripture (2 Peter 1:20,21). | ||||||
26 | Explanations of difficult verses | NT general Archive 1 | FTimA | 65205 | ||
Was John the baptist a bishop, a priest, or a deacon? Ananias, Apollos, Philip? (They could have been) Mark 16:16 says, "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned." The above passage is plain, simple, understandable. Catechism #1256 says, "The ordinary ministers of Baptism are the bishop and priest and, in the Latin Church, also the deacon.[57] In case of necessity, any person, even someone not baptized, can baptize, if he has the required intention. The intention required is to will to do what the Church does when she baptizes, and to apply the Trinitarian baptismal formula. The Church finds the reason for this possibility in the universal saving will of God and the necessity of Baptism for salvation." My question to you is this. Who wrote Mark 16:16? Who wrote catechism 1256? |
||||||
27 | Explanations of difficult verses | NT general Archive 1 | FTimA | 65200 | ||
Catechism #1258 has no biblical support. James 2:19 You believe that God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder. Belief and faith, I feel are two different things. For example, when you fly on a plane, you believe that the plane is there, you can touch it. You must have faith that it will fly. That may be a lame analogy but I hope you see my point. When these catechisms say "the church says" or "the church has always held" it is as though "the church were a person (the pope maybe?). The church is the sum total of all believers that have obeyed the gospel of Jesus Christ and no other. There is no biblical support for #1259. What in the world is the Paschal mystery? There is no biblical support for #1260. I can cite scripture that says one must hear the word of God and after hearing, believe it. Repent of their sins, confess Jesus to the world that he is their lord and savior, and then be baptized for the remission of sin. There is no half way. It is all the way or none of the way, according to the bible. There is no biblical support for #1261. I guess this is why the catholic religion baptizes infants, for fear they are endowed with original sin. The bible teaches otherwise. Ezek 18:20 "The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself. This passage in Ezekiel supports individual responsibility of sin. Children cannot sin until they know the difference between right and wrong. I thank you for your patience Emmaus. It is getting late. We will talk again. |
||||||
28 | Explanations of difficult verses | NT general Archive 1 | FTimA | 65198 | ||
Post #2 Meanings of the word baptizo "The Didache was written around A.D. 70 and, though not inspired, is a strong witness to the sacramental practice of Christians in the apostolic age. In its seventh chapter, the Didache reads, "Concerning baptism, baptize in this manner: Having said all these things beforehand, baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit in living water [that is, in running water, as in a river]. If there is no living water, baptize in other water; and, if you are not able to use cold water, use warm. If you have neither, pour water three times upon the head in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit." These instructions were composed either while some of the apostles and disciples were still alive or during the next generation of Christians, and they represent an already established custom. The Didache is also called the "teaching of the apostles". Who wrote it? What then are Romans through Revelation? Romans, 1st and 2nd Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1st and 2nd Thessalonians, 1st and 2nd Timothy, Titus, Philemon, and probably Hebrews were all written by Paul, an apostle inspired of God. James, probably written by James, an apostle inspired of God. 1st and 2nd Peter, written by Peter, an apostle inspired of God. 1st, 2nd, 3rd John and Revelation, written by John, an apostle inspired of God. Jude, not an apostle (v 17), but inspired all the same. You yourself confess that the Didache is not inspired. The books of the bible are. Which one do you choose to put your faith in? Hippolytus of Rome said, "If water is scarce, whether as a constant condition or on occasion, then use whatever water is available" This is a small bit of what I found on Hipplolytus. He was an orthodox Father of the Christian Church, a Roman Catholic Saint, and a disciple of Irenaeus. Author of a large body of early ecclesiastical writings, among which is the famous Apostolic Tradition which was highly influential on the developing liturgy of the Roman Church, and a 10 volume series titled Elenchos, or Refutatio Omnium Haeresium (Refutation of All Heresies). Cyprian advised that no one should be "disturbed because the sick are poured upon or sprinkled when they receive the Lord’s grace" Tertullian described baptism by saying that it is done "with so great simplicity, without pomp, without any considerable novelty of preparation, and finally, without cost, a man is baptized in water, and amid the utterance of some few words, is sprinkled, and then rises again, not much (or not at all) the cleaner" Obviously, Tertullian did not consider baptism by immersion the only valid form, since he says one is only sprinkled and thus comes up from the water "not much (or not at all) the cleaner." Emmaus, I have difficulty with a lot of the teachings of the Catholic church and have no faith in what the Didache, Hippolytus, Cyprian, or any other "uninspired" man said or wrote to establish it. I am sorry but when people believe in men more than in God, apostasy occurs. Please take this as it is intended, in brotherly love. |
||||||
29 | Explanations of difficult verses | NT general Archive 1 | FTimA | 65197 | ||
Post #1 Meanings of the word baptizo Emmaus, This will have to come to you in two posts.I have read a few posts from you and realize you are catholic. The information you have supplied is interesting but to put your faith in writings that are not inspired and conflict with that which IS inspired IS very dangerous. "But immersion is not the only meaning of baptizo. Sometimes it just means washing up. Thus Luke 11:38 reports that, when Jesus ate at a Pharisee’s house, "[t]he Pharisee was astonished to see that he [Jesus] did not first wash [baptizo] before dinner." No one in ancient Israel practiced immersion before dinner, but the Pharisees "do not eat unless they wash [nipto] their hands, observing the tradition of the elders; and when they come from the market place, they do not eat unless they wash themselves [baptizo]" (Mark 7:3–4a, emphasis added). So baptizo can mean cleansing or ritual washing as well as immersion. Luke 11:38 What is the setting? Jesus is having dinner with a Pharisee. Jesus does not wash prior to eating. Why? From what I have learned the Pharisee's (at least some) were so avid about washing that some would wash IN BETWEEN BITES! Jesus, as a means to show the blatant perversion of the law, proved to this Pharisee and others who may have been there that this behavior was wrong. "Pharisees were punctilious in observing the laws regarding ceremonial purity. For this reason, they could not purchase items of food or drink from a “sinner” for fear of ceremonial defilement. Nor could a Pharisee eat in the house of a sinner, although he might entertain the sinner in his own home. Under such circumstances, the Pharisee would provide the sinner with clothes to wear, for the sinner’s clothes might be ceremonially impure." After the Babylonian captivity, the Jewish rabbis began to make meticulous rules and regulations governing the daily life of th people. These were interpretations and applications of the law of Moses, handed down from generation to generation.(NIV footnote, Zondervan)." Pharisees were known to be "keepers of the law" yet they abhorred sinners, the very people they should have ministered to. Jesus taught the Pharisees many a lesson on many an occasion. In any case, the setting has a lot to do with the use of the word. Sometimes a figurative "baptism" is a sort of "immersion"; but not always. "but before many days you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’" Did this mean they would be "immersed" in the Spirit? No: three times Acts 2 states that the Holy Spirit was poured out on them when Pentecost came (2:17, 18, 33, emphasis added). Later Peter referred to the Spirit falling upon them, and also on others after Pentecost, explicitly identifying these events with the promise of being "baptized with the Holy Spirit" (Acts 11:15–17). These passages demonstrate that the meaning of baptizo is broad enough to include "pouring." " The key here is this is "figurative" language. The Holy Spirit could neither be poured nor sprinkled, and one could not "physically" be immersed into the Holy Spirit because its a spirit! The language is used here to denote an overwhelming presence felt by the apostles as though they were immersed in the Spirit of God. |
||||||
30 | Explanations of difficult verses | NT general Archive 1 | FTimA | 65179 | ||
Thank you. I will study this. | ||||||
31 | Explanations of difficult verses | NT general Archive 1 | FTimA | 65143 | ||
What does foot washing have to do with being saved? Jesus washed his disciples feet to show humility. How would you feel if the son of God Almighty removed your dirty sandals and washed your filthy feet. Pretty small I would bet. But he did this because that is the type of behavior he expects out of his followers. Do not get so wrapped up in the act itself but behind the purpose. This applies to foot washing as well as baptism. In those days people wore sandals, they walked in unpaved dirt roads. I would hazard a guess that the climate was hot at times, causing sweat, which in turn would cause the road dust to stick to their feet. Foot washing was a common practice of a host towards his guests. John 13:12 So when He had washed their feet, and taken His garments and reclined at the table again, He said to them, "Do you know what I have done to you? 13 "You call Me Teacher and Lord; and you are right, for so I am. 14 "If I then, the Lord and the Teacher, washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another's feet. 15 "For I gave you an example that you also should do as I did to you. 16 "Truly, truly, I say to you, a slave is not greater than his master, nor is one who is sent greater than the one who sent him. 17 "If you know these things, you are blessed if you do them. The purpose or principle Jesus is teaching here is humility towards your fellow man (vs 16). The purpose or principle taught in baptism is obedience through faith to the God who said it must be done (too many passages to list). Does anybody else think that Jesus is teaching his disciples how to wash feet? Or is there something of a spiritual nature to be learned here? |
||||||
32 | Explanations of difficult verses | NT general Archive 1 | FTimA | 65141 | ||
If a person has waited all of their life to finally realize that there is a way of salvation and they want to take advantage of it because they are on their last breath, I would use that last breath to find the nearest place to take them to get baptized. If they die before that happens, then it would be God's judgment this person would have to look forward to. If a person wants to get baptized then baptize them, even if you have to carry them to the water. The word itself means immersion. Why would you sprinkle or pour when evidence in scripture clearly shows that much water is needed? God's grace provides us salvation through faith and that faith includes believing His word. Again, use a concordance. For what does the Scripture say? Romans 4:3 |
||||||
33 | Explanations of difficult verses | NT general Archive 1 | FTimA | 65139 | ||
Why have we changed? Boy, that's a good question. Where in the New Testament does it specify who can baptize? John (the baptist) did it, he was not ordained (except by God). Jesus' disciples did it. Were they ordained? Apollos, Cephas, Paul, Timothy...who knows who else? When someone desires to become a Christian in the assembly I associate with, during a worship service, they generally let it be known by coming forward. The minister is usually the one who takes this responsibility, but there is a family of 13 where the father has baptized each one of the children. Again, I think the only stipulation would be that a person baptizing others would have to be a Christian, because only a Christian would (at least should) understand its purpose and meaning. There is no passage of scripture that I know of that says this. John the baptist certainly was not a Christian, nor were any of those who were baptized by him or prior to Christ's death, or were they? From what I have learned the term "christian" was first used as a slanderous term. Who knows? Baptism is connected to salvation. How do I know? The bible tells me so. Pull out your concordance, look up the word baptize, baptism, baptized, and baptizing. Read the scriptures associated with them, with intent. Sure, you will read of the baptism of the Holy Spirit and the baptism of John, but if you consider all of scripture dealing with this subject, and "receive the word with eagerness" and "search the scriptures" (Acts 17:11), you will see that they all had their purpose and that water baptism is a very important part of salvation. Or you won't. |
||||||
34 | Non-denominational theology? | John 3:16 | FTimA | 65099 | ||
Jesus said, Matt 24:35 "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away. Mark 13:31 "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away. Luke 21:33 "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away. I believe God had something to do with it! |
||||||
35 | Non-denominational theology? | John 3:16 | FTimA | 65095 | ||
I am not sure I understand your meaning behind "combination of Scripture, which is not always absolutely clear on all points and the witness of the early history of the Church as written by the apostolic fathers" making it clear that the early Church had bishops, priests (presbuteri, elders) and deacons. The word presbuteros is the Greek word used whenever bishop, elder, shepherd, and overseer is used. The position of a bishop is the same as the rest. A deacon however is subordinate. Jesus is the head, then elders, deacons, then christians. Laying on of Hands - Does it always mean something was imparted or that baptism of the Holy Spirit occurred? 1. Acts 6:5 The statement found approval with the whole congregation; and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, and Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas and Nicolas, a proselyte from Antioch. 6 And these they brought before the apostles; and after praying, they laid their hands on them. The passage above says of Stephen, "a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit". Why would he need to be brought before the apostles if he was already full of the Holy Spirit (I personally believe that this phrase "full of the Holy Spirit" is synonomous with "full of faith", the Holy Spirit causes belief), if for no other reason than to receive a gift of the Holy Spirit. They certainly would not have had to be "ordained" to serve food would they (Acts 6:1)? 2. Acts 9:17 So Ananias departed and entered the house, and after laying his hands on him said, "Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road by which you were coming, has sent me so that you may regain your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit." 18 And immediately there fell from his eyes something like scales, and he regained his sight, and he got up and was baptized; Acts 13:2 "...Set apart for Me Barnabas and Saul...they laid their hands on them, they sent them away. At what point in the passages above did Paul actually receive the Holy Spirit? Ananias says (vs 17) that the Lord sent Paul to him for that very purpose. The event in Acts 13:2, I believe, was a result of the love the brethren shared for Barnabas and Saul and the "laid their hands on them" would have been similar to a brotherly embrace. Our Lord Jesus appeared before Paul. He chose him for a specific purpose. Can we not assume that the Lord gave Ananias special dispensation in order to impart the Holy Spirit to Paul? Or can we assume that there were more people other than the original eleven, Matthias, and Paul who could impart baptism or gifts of the Holy Spirit to others? This would have some serious consequences. First, Acts 2 teaches that only the eleven and Matthias received baptism of the Holy. Second, although Cornelius and his household received baptism of the Holy Spirit, the bible does not mention him or any of his household imparting the Holy Spirit or any gift to anyone else. The purpose behind them receiving this was to prove that God does not show partiality and that salvation is available to all men, not just the Jews. Third, scripture specifically says that gifts of the Holy Spirit were imparted through and only through the Apostles (Acts 6:6, 8:18). The passage 1 Tim 5:22 presents a dilemma for me. Why would Paul say this to him if for no other reason than to be careful who he imparted gifts to? This I will have to study further. Matthew 16:18-20 proves nothing but the fact that Jesus is the Christ, and because he is, the church will be built upon him (not Peter). 1 Cor 3:11 For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Matt 28:18 And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19 "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." John 20:19 So when it was evening on that day, the first day of the week, and when the doors were shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in their midst and *said to them, "Peace be with you." 20 And when He had said this, He showed them both His hands and His side. The disciples then rejoiced when they saw the Lord. 21 So Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you; as the Father has sent Me, I also send you." 22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them and *said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 "If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained." What did the disciples receive here in the passages of John? Only the power to forgive sins? I honestly don't know and must study this further.e disciples receive here in the passages of John? Only the power to forgive sins? I honestly don't know and must study this further. |
||||||
36 | Non-denominational theology? | John 3:16 | FTimA | 65067 | ||
Thank you for the wealth of scriptural reference. I will do some research to see of what you say is accurate (Acts 17:11). | ||||||
37 | Non-denominational theology? | John 3:16 | FTimA | 65047 | ||
If this is true, show me the passage that proves it, please. I would rather read the word of my Father in heaven, which is truth, than a "Apostpolic pre-Nicean Church Father", who was not inspired of God to write whatever they wrote. I will save the link for study material. Thank you. |
||||||
38 | Explanations of difficult verses | NT general Archive 1 | FTimA | 65045 | ||
Baptizo 1)to dip repeatedly, to immerse, to submerge (of vessels sunk) 2)to cleanse by dipping or submerging, to wash, to make clean with water, to wash one’s self, bathe 3)to overwhelm Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon, (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.) 1995. It matters not which way a person faces as long as they are totally immersed. John 3:22 After these things Jesus and His disciples came into the land of Judea, and there He was spending time with them and baptizing. 23 John also was baptizing in Aenon near Salim, because there was much water there; and people were coming and were being baptized-- 24 for John had not yet been thrown into prison. As the passages reveal in John 3:23, the water should be sufficient enough to immerse. Pouring or sprinkling will not do. Romans 6:3,4 3 Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death?4 Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. When Christ died he was buried in a tomb. As many of us who have been baptized into Christ are baptized into his death. When a person dies are they not covered completely? In Jesus' case he was covered completely by rock. The Romans even sealed it! Today, are we not completely buried in dirt or a tomb of some sort? When a person is baptized, they are buried in water, as the bible commands and shows overwhelming evidence of. Baptism is a crucial part of salvation. Not after salvation but unto salvation. For until one is baptized they do not come into contact with Christ's death! They are not saved...according to the bible. The thief on the cross was blessed with forgiveness by Jesus before Jesus died. There was no need for him to be baptized. It matters not what kind of water is used as long as "there is much water there". Who is allowed to baptize? The bible is not explicit on this but it does show enough example of someone else baptizing the one being baptized. John the baptist, Jesus' disciples, and others. 1 Corinthians 1:12 gives us some idea, "Now I say this, that each of you says, “I am of Paul,” or “I am of Apollos,” or “I am of Cephas,” or “I am of Christ.” 13Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? 14I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15lest anyone should say that I had baptized in my own name. 16Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas. Besides, I do not know whether I baptized any other. From this I would say Paul, Apollos, and Cephas(Peter) baptized. Christ didn't baptize because the bible tells us he didn't in John 4:2. Acts 8 tells us of Philip baptizing the Ethiopian eunuch. There are others but I would say, based on what we find in the bible, that anyone could baptize as long as they are in Christ. You say you can find no answers for these questions? I found answers to all of them in less than ten minutes using the search function of this web page and some bible software I have. |
||||||
39 | Non-denominational theology? | John 3:16 | FTimA | 65021 | ||
In Acts 1:20 Peter quotes two passages from the book of Psalms, Psalm 69:25 "Let their dwelling place be desolate; Let no one live in their tents" and Psalm 109:8 "Let his days be few, And let another take his office" Apostolic succession is undisputed by whom? The language used in Acts 1:20 refers to the position, office, or charge of an Apostle. Laying on of hands is not how this position is obtained. Jesus personally chose the first twelve Apostles. Jesus also chose Paul. Matthias was selected with prayer and casting lots. It never says in the bible that other Apostles laid hands on him or anyone else to receive the position of Apostle. Matthias, being one who was with Jesus from the beginning (Acts 1:21), had already been baptized into Christ (yes this is an educated assumption), and he was numbered with the eleven, therefore received baptism of the Holy Ghost with the eleven on the day of Pentecost. Acts 18:14 says, "Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: 15Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: 16(For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) 17Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost. 18And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles’ hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, 19Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost." The above passage clearly teaches that the Holy Ghost was received "through the laying on of the apostles' hands", vs.18, and Simon wanted to purchase this power saying, "that on whomsover I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost". He was sharply rebuked for even thinking such a thing. Why would they have had to send for Peter and John, both apostles, if this is not true? Your reference to Paul and Timothy goes like this, 1 Timothy 4:6-16 "If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained. 7But refuse profane and old wives’ fables, and exercise thyself rather unto godliness. 8For bodily exercise profiteth little: but godliness is profitable unto all things, having promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come. 9This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation. 10For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe. 11These things command and teach. 12Let no man despise thy youth; but be thou an example of the believers, in word, in conversation, in charity, in spirit, in faith, in purity. 13Till I come, give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine. 14Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery. 15Meditate upon these things; give thyself wholly to them; that thy profiting may appear to all. 16Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee." Paul tells Timothy in vs 14, "Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery." Timothy was not an Apostle, not an elder, but a preacher, a minister, or an evangelist (the last three being basicall the same thing). Paul tells him not to neglect the gift given him by the laying on of the hands of the presbytery. Comparing this with the Acts 18 passage, the "presbytery" would be one or more APOSTLE, but here is the crucial point! Paul states that he himself is the one that "imparted" the gift to Timothy. 2 Timothy 1:6 "Wherefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands." If my comments above are wrong please show me where? |
||||||
40 | Non-denominational theology? | John 3:16 | FTimA | 65006 | ||
Two verses supporting who the head of the church is. Eph 5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. 2 Col 1:18 He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything. Christ is the head of the church. This rules out any and all others who claim or are regarded as head of the church. The initial organization of the church follows, Christ is head, 1 Cor 12:28 And God has appointed in the church, first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, various kinds of tongues. Since there are no more Apostles, for there were only 13 (the original twelve minus Judas, plus Matthias, plus Paul), they no longer hold a physical position in the church, BUT that which was written by them (or their scribe) remains as doctrine for us today. Some would say we still have prophets, miracles, gifts of healings, and various kinds of tongues, but this is debatable. We also have evidence of who is to be in charge of each church. Acts 14:23 When they had appointed elders for them in every church, having prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord in whom they had believed. And the scope of their responsibility, 1 Pet 5:2 shepherd the flock of God among you, exercising oversight not under compulsion, but voluntarily, according to the will of God; and not for sordid gain, but with eagerness; Some denominations have layer upon layer of organized administration. This is not bible teaching. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ] Next > Last [7] >> |