Results 41 - 60 of 69
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Aspilos Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
41 | Why the eye? | Luke 11:34 | Aspilos | 61449 | ||
Thanks for your reply BB. I believe your reply was accurate, but I guess what I was wondering was whether the Lord was pointing out that the eye reveals something about the soul. For example, when someone is hateful it usually shows up in the eyes. Bendiciones! Aspilos |
||||||
42 | Why the eye? | Luke 11:34 | Aspilos | 61447 | ||
The Pharisees didn't exactly accept the Lord with open arms. Is is possible too, that he may have seen darkness in the form of hatred in their eyes? | ||||||
43 | Are modern services merely a tradition? | 1 Cor 14:29 | Aspilos | 60651 | ||
prayon, thanks for your reply. Indeed we should search to see if what the speaker says is true, but what if it isn't? Should we speak up and question that person or let it go and let all the listeners fall prey to his error? Bendiciones! Aspilos |
||||||
44 | Are modern services merely a tradition? | 1 Cor 14:29 | Aspilos | 60650 | ||
Searcher, I'm not sure that I agree with your statement about two or three prophets speaking being part of the problem, although it may be a problem with the way services are conducted today. Paul actually seems to be in favor of it by saying, "Let two or three prophets speak..." Perhaps it would be better than one person dictating to the people. You are absolutlely correct in saying that we'd better pay attention. Speaking of the Bereans, Acts 17:11 says that that they were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. Why are speakers insulted today when someone questions their message? Even Paul went through this, yet he apparently found these people to be, "of more noble character." Today, not many will consider you doing a good thing if you question the preacher. Bendiciones! Aspilos |
||||||
45 | What does the statue symbolize? | Dan 2:31 | Aspilos | 60475 | ||
fuego@firehousemail.com | ||||||
46 | is there 2 kinds of tongues if yes need | 1 Corinthians | Aspilos | 60474 | ||
Berean49, I don't see the distinction between these two. In chapter 12 he says, "different kinds of tongues" referring to that which is foreign or unknown to the speaker. If you continue to read verse 10 he also adds, "to still another the interpretation of tongues". 1 Cor 12:10 NIV to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues. If a tongue or language is not unknown, there would be no need for interpretation, so this would still be in the same catagory of the unknown tongue. If you're reading from the KJV, you'll notice that the word unknown is in itilics in chapter 14. That's because it is added, [rightly so] to clarify that the writer is speaking of an unknown language. Though I would like to know what you mean by describing one as a, "Prayer Language" and another as, "different Languages"? Is this scriptural? Bendiciones! Aspilos |
||||||
47 | Aspilos,How was Rome divided?ateo | Dan 2:31 | Aspilos | 60375 | ||
ateo, my friend, thanks for the confirmation! Bendiciones! Aspilos |
||||||
48 | From where is the KIngdom Lydia? | Dan 2:31 | Aspilos | 60356 | ||
Ateo, you wish to think that the fourth empire is that of the Greek's because, as you stated, "Daniel 2:41 claims that the empire will be divided" but in chapter 7 the four empires are again mentioned, but this time as beasts. Note the description of the third one. Dan. 7:6 NIV "After that, I looked, and there before me was another beast, one that looked like a leopard. And on its back it had four wings like those of a bird. This beast had four heads, and it was given authority to rule. As you stated, "His empire [Alexander the Great] was then divided up among his 4 generals." Four seems to be the description of the third beast. The heads representing rulers of authority and the wings for the swiftness in which the conquered. Surely the writer wouldn't have written something to contradact himself only a few chapters later. Don't forget also that Rome was divided. Note the fourth beast in Dan. 7. Bendiciones! Aspilos |
||||||
49 | What does the statue symbolize? | Dan 2:31 | Aspilos | 60352 | ||
Loran, there's a lot of knowledgeable people here that I'm sure can do you a lot of good. More than I, I must humbly say! Test you knowledge and stay with EdB. Bendiciones! Aspilos |
||||||
50 | What does the statue symbolize? | Dan 2:31 | Aspilos | 60351 | ||
Are the descriptions of these beasts not chronological timelines from Babylon to Rome? If so, the beast in Revelation could be none other than the Roman Empire. And what about that woman on his back in Rev. 17? What I find most amazing about her is the title, "THE MOTHER OF PROSTITUTES". So then, who are her daughters? Bendiciones! Aspilos |
||||||
51 | What does the statue symbolize? | Dan 2:31 | Aspilos | 60314 | ||
I know I'm asking you a lot of questions about this subject, but you seem to have studied it somewhat. The beast coming out of the sea in Rev 13 is said to, "resembled a leopard, but had feet like those of a bear and a mouth like that of a lion". Theses are the same images of the first 3 beasts in Dan. 7. Coincidence or the same? Bendiciones! Aspilos |
||||||
52 | What does the statue symbolize? | Dan 2:31 | Aspilos | 60050 | ||
inheavenseyes, thanks for your reply. I would also like to know if the four kingdoms in Dan. 7 are the same kingdoms. What have you studied about that? | ||||||
53 | Is the new Jerusalem the chruch? | Rev 21:2 | Aspilos | 56939 | ||
J.Wishart, Thank you for your reply. You said, "i find this part is particularly detailed and can not really find any reason to consider it not to be real..." Even if it is symbolic of the church, would it not be symbolic of something, "real?" Why is the holy city said to be, "prepared as a bride adorned for her husband?" Also, why in verses 9-10 does the angel say to John, "Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb's wife" and John continues saying that, "And he [the angel] carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God?" God Bless! Aspilos |
||||||
54 | Mount Sinai or Zion? | Heb 12:22 | Aspilos | 56884 | ||
prayon, what or where is the new Jersalem? You say that the redeemed of the Lord will live there with Christ. I'm not saying that I disagree, but I would be curious to know what scripture you use for your emphasis. | ||||||
55 | What if you don't obey that command? | Rom 6:4 | Aspilos | 56786 | ||
Just as I figured, very informative. Thanks! God Bless! Aspilos |
||||||
56 | What if you don't obey that command? | Rom 6:4 | Aspilos | 56768 | ||
Hello Hank! Excuse me for intruding here, but I would like to know your view of the two verses I have included below. It seems that these two verses are implying that faith is a type of work. I have read several of the messages that you have left in this forum and I perceive that you are a person of great intellect. If anyone can give me a suitable answer, I'm sure you can. You say, "There is absolutely nothing that man can do, no action of any kind that can or does contribute in any way to his salvation" and who can argue with that? After all, it is scriptural. God Bless! Aspilos 1 Thessalonians 1:3 Remembering without ceasing your work of faith, and labour of love, and patience of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ, in the sight of God and our Father; John 6:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent. |
||||||
57 | Is tongues a matter of fact? | 1 Cor 14:5 | Aspilos | 56079 | ||
Hello retxar, If I didn't know any better I would think you were starting to take a liking to me. Without a doubt, we are just spinning our wheels now. Without scripture, you're not likely to convince me that speaking with tongues is an, "evidence" and it's obvious that you're not planning on changing your view either. You ended with a good verse, but you cut it short my friend. God Bless! Aspilos I Cor. 14 21 In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord. 22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe. |
||||||
58 | Is tongues a matter of fact? | 1 Cor 14:5 | Aspilos | 55995 | ||
Again, you are wrong my friend. You say in Acts 10:47, "only those who believed and were informed were present." Fact is, as I have already told you, it is obvious that they DID NOT BELIEVE that this Gospel was for the Gentiles. You see, they were, "astonished" for that very reason. So, through the Gentiles speaking with tongues, the Holy Spirit SIGNified to them that receiving the Holy Ghost was even for the likes of a Gentile, guiding them you might say, in the right direction and shining a light upon their understanding. 1 Cor. 14:22 Wherefore tongues are for a SIGN, not to them that believe, but TO THEM THAT BELIEVE NOT: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe. Again, tongues is not an, "evidence" mainly because it is not scriptural. And as you have already acknowledged, because it can be imitated. You seem to be avoiding my quesions, so I guess I'll just have to repeat them each time. If someone is devious enough to pretend that they are speaking with tongues, does that mean they have received the Holy Ghost? I'm not accusing anyone, but we live in an evil day and it's not impossible. Don't avoid this question. It is important. Is the very sound of someone speaking in tongues, "evidence" that they have received the Holy Ghost? I think we both know the answer to that question. I Cor 14:21-22 explains clearly the purpose of speaking with tongues. That includes your example of Acts 10:47. As for you accusing me of being an accuser, if I name a denomination for you, then an accuser I would be, no? I have no desire to personally attack anyone, but I do believe in attacking a lie. God Bless! Aspilos |
||||||
59 | Is tongues a matter of fact? | 1 Cor 14:5 | Aspilos | 55971 | ||
retxar, I don't recall pointing a finger at anyone in particular. The term Pentecostal may include a number of denominations. Don't be so offensive, I believe we are on the same side after all. I must tell you though, whether you know of it or not, there are, "mainline Pentecostal churches" that teach that speaking with tongues is a prerequisite to salvation. I have a close family member who attends such a church. They base their teaching on, "tongues being the evidence of the Holy Ghost" as well as, "scriptural examples and experiences." Again, tongues is not an, "evidence" mainly because it is not scriptural. And as you have already acknowledged, because it can be imitated. If someone is devious enough to pretend that they are speaking with tongues, does that mean they have received the Holy Ghost? I'm not accusing anyone, but we live in an evil day and it's not impossible. Don't avoid this question. It is important. Is the very sound of someone speaking in tongues, "evidence" that they have received the Holy Ghost? I think we both know the answer to that question. I Cor 14:21-22 explains clearly the purpose of speaking with tongues. That includes your example of Acts 10:47. 1 Corinthians 14 21 In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord. 22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe. |
||||||
60 | Is tongues a matter of fact? | 1 Cor 14:5 | Aspilos | 55880 | ||
retxar, I was raised in a Pentecostal church from my youth and was taught, in short, that salvation came in the form of, "the evidence of speaking in tongues." Their key to supporting this false teaching is to speak of tongues as, "evidence." I have never accused anyone of imitating this gift, but I do recognize the possibility. The idea that tongues is for, "evidence" was probably not yet invented at the time Paul had written his warnings to the Corinthians, but then again, you and I both know that there are a number of false teachings in existence today that were not around at the time of the early church. It really doesn't matter that there are no warnings about someone imitating tongues, but what I find most important is scripture supporting the idea that speaking in tongues is an, "evidence" since it is an actual doctrine being taught to new converts every day. You acknowledge the fact that it can be imitated and to that we agree. You must also know that actual, "evidence" can not be. Did you know that there are churches that teach the followers to speak with tongues. God Bless! Aspilos |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 ] Next > Last [4] >> |