Results 41 - 60 of 88
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: following him Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
41 | Study of the minor prophets? | OT general | following him | 127637 | ||
Hello DocTrinsograce; Thanks for your interest in participating in this study. Actually there is no reason once the study of Joel is formated a study for Habakkuk could also be formated. Anyone would be able to join in at any time. However studying multiple books at one time can be overwhelming. I suggest as soon as we see how the response to the study in Joel is going we can set one up for Hab. We can use Joel as a test to see if it works. My biggest concern is that the postings for the study will get all mixed up with the rest of the postings on the forum. Perhaps I will send a suggestion to the Lockman foundation about this. Blessings to you |
||||||
42 | Study of the minor prophets? | OT general | following him | 127554 | ||
I'm thinking that we can start with Joel. It's a short book that will test whatever format we use. After that we make adjustments and move on to another book. As for the format: See following outline Joel study: Background Chapter 1 Chapter 2 Chapter 3 The Background would be where anyone wanting to add any historical, social, information for the book. It would basicaly be the intro to the book. The Chapter sub streams would be where the actual studying will be happening. It may be that it will be smaller divisions based on if the chapter can be clearly divided into smaller sections or not. Anyone will be able to add their input at any point of the book under the proper sub-stream (chapter division). The difficult part would be to restrict discussion to only the passage and not get off on tangents within the study stream. Each Chapter or section stream would start with the actual Biblical text of that section. Then those who wish to add thoughts would do so under that sub-stream. This would make it easy for the entire book to be set up at one time. Does this sound feasible? |
||||||
43 | The Real stature of Satan | Is 14:16 | following him | 127035 | ||
I agree there are examples where no break is apearent when a writer may include messianic prophecies. However in this particular case I believe that the entire section of scripture I mentioned should be used to determine who is being spoken about. Even if you take verse 12 alone there is still a negative implication derived from the entire prophecy toward the king of Babylon that you cannot seperate from verse 12. So this would put the Messiah in a negative light if it truely refered to Him. As far as why this thread was restricted? I dont know. | ||||||
44 | How do you view Rev 2:1-7 | Rev 2:1 | following him | 127021 | ||
Emmaus; thanks for your response. I read views that the letters here can be applied 1. locally - to the literal churches spoken off 2. to all indivual churches - we may find elements of the letters in our churches today 3. An outline of the church history as it will unfold from John's time 4. on a personal level as we examine to see if any of these conditions are in our own heart. But I have never heard of it being applicable to the history of God's people as recorded in the OT. But as I read the part about Ephesus and compared it to your reference to Gen. I found several common lines 1. As Jesus walks through to Lampstands (His church) God walk with Adam. 2. As the church is Ephesus "Left" their first love, so Adam and Eve Left God by Choosing to ignore His Boundaries (eating the fruit) 3. As Ephesus is promised access to the tree of life if they repent. So Adam by the same means has access to Jesus (the tree of life) as He pays for the sins of the world. I believe there may be more to this tree of life here but this is enough to show I can see the merits of this view. It shows me just how intimately and minutly God was to the details of His inspired word. He can make the same scripture have reference to past, present and future at the same time. Our God truely is amazing. I look forward to continuing researching this view with the other letters to the churches. Thank you Blessings to you |
||||||
45 | How do you view Rev 2:1-7 | Rev 2:1 | following him | 127016 | ||
Thanks Kalos, the references is greatly appriciate, I bookmarked it and will be making great use of it. However; it's hard to great commentaries to answer questions I may have about what is writen in it so. I would like to ask you. What are your views of Rev 2:1-7. As I have read your posts I have come to have great respect for your views. Blessings to you |
||||||
46 | The Real stature of Satan | Is 14:16 | following him | 126965 | ||
I cannot agree with the interpretation that this verse is refering to Jesus Christ. In this case it is clear that the followings verses in this chapter should be taken along with verse 12 because there is no break indicating that the focus of the verse has changed from the "Star of the morning". So verses 13-17 should be considered when trying to pinpoint who the "Star of the morning" is refering to in this case. And all of this is showing a negative view of the person being discussed. Was the Messiah ever discussed in the scriptures in anything other than a positve light? Is 14:13 "But you said in your heart, 'I will ascend to heaven; I will raise my throne above the stars of God, And I will sit on the mount of assembly In the recesses of the north. Is 14:14 'I will ascend above the heights of the clouds;I will make myself like the Most High.' Is 14:15 "Nevertheless you will be thrust down to Sheol,To the recesses of the pit. Is 14:16 "Those who see you will gaze at you, They will ponder over you, saying, 'Is this the man who made the earth tremble, Who shook kingdoms, Is 14:17 Who made the world like a wilderness And overthrew its cities, Who did not allow his prisoners to go home?' Although up until now I have always considered these scriptures to be refering to Satan but after viewing the discussion in another thread about this verse, I may have to revised my opinion. I will, when I get more time, have to look deeper into this matter. Blessings to you |
||||||
47 | Out of curiosity? | Is 14:16 | following him | 126964 | ||
Please excuss me. I must say that I agree with Stultis the Fool. I can find a "published" commentary to support any number of different sides of an issue. Gap Theory, day age theory, young earth theory. Pre-trib, mid-trib, post-trib etc. They all can't be right if they are saying the opposite of each other. Most commentaries I've read are slanted toward a particular denomination or church organization's beliefs. So how can you say that their "opinions" are worth more than someone else who has not been published. Each side of the issue always thinks they are the right one and have scriptural proof (at least in their view) to back them up. As far as I'm concerned a commentary is simply someone's elses opinion it may be in writen form (and it should be considered) but its still an opinion. | ||||||
48 | What does Genesis 3:24 mean? | Gen 3:24 | following him | 126754 | ||
Country Girl; When God gave prophecies to the OT, prophets it was in several different forms. Words were more common but there are many cases where a person’s action was the prophecy. In addition, the prophetic was given in symbolisms such as the sacrifices in the OT were prophetic symbols of Christ. Here in Gen we have the tree of life, which is a foreshadowing of Jesus Christ, Him being our source of eternal life. It is through no other name that we be saved than His. How the angels guarding the way to the tree of life can be seen as prophetic is that the lineage of Jesus Christ has from the very beginning been the target of Satan to destroy the promise of redemption and his destruction. Here are a few examples: 1. Cain and Able – Cain as the firstborn should have had the messianic line through him yet because of his murder of his brother he forfeits all to Seth. Your can see the same principle in the sons of Jacob. Rueben, Simeon and Levi, forfeit their rights because of the sins they committed. The next one in line was Judah through which the messianic line came. I find it also interesting that Cain killed the one who was offering the blood sacrifice. 2. By the time of Noah, the world had become so corrupt that God destroyed all that had the breath of life all except Noah. The plan for redemption is still on. 3. When Israel went into Egypt, they became their slaves. At the time of Moses, the Pharaoh had decided to destroy all male children. This was an attempt at genocide. The seed was considered to come through males to kill all the males were to wipe out the race and the messianic line. This failed when God raised up Moses and delivered Israel. 4. The Ruler ship of Judah often went through times when much of the house was destroyed in an attempt to usurp the throne. 2 Chr. 22 tells of how all of the children of the king were murdered by an evil woman trying to take control. Unknown to her one of the children was hidden by the priests in the temple until he was about six or seven years old when they put him on the throne. This was king Joash. And so once again, the line is protected from being wiped out. 5. During the reign of Hezekiah, the king of Assyria came and laid siege to Jerusalem. Their intent was to destroy the city and the rulers in it. If they had succeeded, Hezekiah would have been killed and the messianic line ended. God sent one angel who killed 185,000 Assyrians. (If one angel could do that, why would God need to put two to guard the way to the tree of life?) 6. The genealogy of Jesus, as shown in Matt 1, records His ancestors back to Abraham. One man mentioned is Jehoiachin. He is interesting because he was the last king before Israel was taken to Babylon. It is also on him that God placed a blood (generational) curse in that no descendant of his would ever sit on the throne again see Jer. 22:24-30. This means that Joseph (of Joseph and Mary fame) had the legal right to the throne but could not rule because he was Jehoiachin descendant. So that ends the messianic line through the legal rulers of Israel because the messiah was to rule on David’s throne, or so it appears. Jesus is Joseph’s son but only by adoption. Jesus did not carry any of Joseph’s genes and could inherit the throne. This is why in Gen. it mentions the seed of the woman not the seed of the man. However, here we have another problem Jesus in order to sit on the throne of David, which the Messiah was to do; He had to be of David’s blood. Here we go to the genealogy in Luke. This genealogy follows Jesus ancestry back to Adam. Here it mentions Joseph son of Heli. Joseph was actually Heli’s son in law. This is actually Mary’s line and it goes back to David. Not through Solomon, but through another one of David’s sons, Nathan. Jesus had the legal right to the throne through Joseph and the blood right through Mary. Both of these conditions had to have been met in the savior of the world. Satan’s attempt to eliminate the Messianic line through the sins of his ancestors again fails. 7. Herod’s attempt to murder the King of the Jews is another attempt by Satan to destroy the way to the Tree of Life. All these are examples of how the way to the Tree (Jesus) was threatened by direct and indirect means to eliminate it. Yet when God placed the angels to guard the way to the Tree of Life in Gen. He promised and foretold that the way to the real Tree of Life (Jesus) would be protected. Blessings to you |
||||||
49 | Acts 5-7 just looking for opinions | Acts | following him | 126071 | ||
Thank you for responding Emmaus; I appriciate it. I looked up the references in Ex. and Deut. you gave and I hope I'm seeing the same connection you are 1. As the signs and wonders Moses performed were used by God to lead Israel out of Egypt so the signs and wonders through Peter and the other apostles were used by God to lead them out of sin. Egypt is often used Biblically as a symbol of sin. 2. As Pharaoh leader of the Egyptian people rejected God's signs and wonders so did the leaders of Israel ie the priests, sadduces and pharisees etc. Is this right? It is interesting to note that the Bible does not record whether Jesus' shaddow healed anybody but here as you mentioned people were trying to be touched by Peters. It obviously worked otherwise they wouldn't be doing it. (Jesus said greater things than these will you do.) I'm not seeing how Stephen prefigures the second coming in his reference to Daniel 7. What do you mean by "proto-martyr". Please explain this. And if I've misunderstood in the other areas, please correct me. |
||||||
50 | Which one are we not going to keep? | Bible general Archive 2 | following him | 125898 | ||
Theo-Minor You misunderstand context of those scriptures. The context is those who practise sin. Not those who just stumble. James 3:2 For we all stumble in many ways. If anyone does not stumble in what he says, he is a perfect man, able to bridle the whole body as well. 1 John 3:6-9 No one who abides in Him sins; no one who sins has seen Him or knows Him. Little children, make sure no one deceives you; the one who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous; the one who practices sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning. The Son of God appeared for this purpose, to destroy the works of the devil. No one who is born of God practices sin, because His seed abides in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. In the previous chapter John writes, 1 John 2:1 "My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous;" He was aware that we still sin on occasions but sin is not the rule in our lives it is the exception. This book was written to the church in Ephesus. It is a book that gives the church a criterea for judging whether someone is a Christian or not. The whole book contrasts those who say they walk with God but dont and those who say they walk with God and do. 1 John 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. 1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. This was written to believers. Are you telling me that you do not sin or that you do not stumble in word, thought or deed. Your reference to Heb 6:4-6 and 10:26 is also one of "Willfully" sinning not the believer that just stumbles. And as for your reference in Luke 9:16 It has nothing to do with sinning, it is reference to priorities. What is more important to us the world or Christ. |
||||||
51 | Which one are we not going to keep? | Bible general Archive 2 | following him | 125892 | ||
Country Girl Christ has not fulfilled all the OT. There are far more prophecies in the OT about His second coming than there are of His first by about 8:1. And since He has not returned yet He has not accomplished all. The OT is still as valid and vital today as it ever was. Blessings to you |
||||||
52 | Which one are we not going to keep? | Bible general Archive 2 | following him | 125890 | ||
Country Girl; How much influence does the Law and OT have on us Christians. None of us can come to Christ without following the Law. (That will raise a few brows I bet) The law says that sin must be punished. In the law The punishment was death however; God instituted the sacrifices as a way to cover sins. So a lamb or goat or bull shed its blood for the covering of sins. Hebrews 9:22 "Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins" It is still the same today The only way we are forgiven for our sins is by sacrificing of innocent blood; Jesus' blood. This is why He is called the Lamb of God. No one can come to the Father except they come through this sacrifice. You may consider this the fulfillment of the law. But it is still the Law, mirrors it exactly. You may not receive forgiveness of your sins without the shedding of blood. Only Christ did it once for all. I hope this makes sense. It shows that all who come to christ still have to offer innocent blood Jesus' blood. Now do we still have to abide by the things written in the law? Yes! Matt 5:20 "For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven." The pharisees obeyed the letter of the law but it was not good enough. Matthew takes the next three chapters (The so-called sermon on the mount) to explain that The heart or intent of the law must be followed. Hard as you may try, you can not keep the intent of the law without keeping the letter of it. But you can keep the letter of the law without keeping the intent. This is what the pharisees were doing. Jesus said that in order for us to enter the kingdom of heaven we must go farther than just keeping the letter. Now does that mean we dont sin? No. In the law sacifices of innocent blood were offer every year for the covering of their sins that they continually committed. So do we 1 John 2:1,2 "My little children, I am writing this to you so that you may not sin; but if any one does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; and he is the expiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. When we sin we still come back to the innocent blood. Jesus' blood. Christ does not die again but His blood is still the payment for our sins. This is why John specifically mentions that He is the expiation for our sins. This is reference to His blood. We do the same thing when we sin again just as those in the OT did we go to the blood. Blessings to you. |
||||||
53 | searching for the truth | 1 Cor 11:3 | following him | 125856 | ||
Hello EdB; I've been following this thread for some time now with great interest. If we go to the book of Revelation I think we can see the answer there. In the 2nd and 3rd chapters the seven (complete church) church are been addressed by Jesus. They all have their own 1. name 2. praise from Christ 3. rebuke from Christ 4. exhortation from Christ 5. promise from Christ etc. They are all different but all part of the body but of the two things I would like to point out that thaey have in common is 1. They all were given a revelation of Christ. not the complete one found in chapter one just what pertained to their own situation. We are no different. None of us have a complete picture of Christ. The Holy Spirit has given each of us enough revelation, understanding etc. of Christ that we need for our situation. But 2. Each of the addresses to the churches contian the phrase "He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches" I have ears so this pertains to me. The churches is plural I need to hear what the Spirit says to other churches not just mine. Does this mean that I should adopt their views? I dont think so but in order to get a clearer picture of who Jesus is I need to see and accept (as long as it does not contradict the basic foundations of our faith as found in the scriptures) the revelation they have received by the Spirit of Christ. It will be different than what I received. If we are to believe that the Holy Spirit was given to guide us into all the truth we must believe that he is able to give Different but complementary revelations of Christ to us so that inorder for us to have a complete view of Christ we have to come together to compare notes you might say. |
||||||
54 | speaking in tongue | 1 Cor 12:13 | following him | 125352 | ||
Just another thought Country Girl; The abscence of other examples may also indicate that it may have been more of a common occurance and so would not merit more examples. Just a thought. |
||||||
55 | speaking in tongue | 1 Cor 12:13 | following him | 125349 | ||
Hello Country Girl; The fact that there is even one example of the gift being given without the laying on of hands by the apostles indicates that it can happen that way. Just because there are very few other examples of it happening that way does not indicate it doesn't happen or that God has stopped doing it that way. The Bible is a very small book to contain the ways of a Very big God. Just because something is not repeated over and over and over again it does not void an issue. Blessing to you. |
||||||
56 | Biblical - women preachers/teachers??? | 1 Tim 2:12 | following him | 123560 | ||
Hello Zsuzsi; I must say you do inspire me. It is very refreshing to see someone as young as yourself with such a deep hunger for Jesus. I must also say that I agree with you entirely on this issue. Just a couple scriptures to note. Col 4:15 Greet the brethren who are in Laodicea and also Nympha and the church that is in her house. This greeting is addressed to Nympha and the church in her house. Everybody except the pastor. I find it hard to believe the Paul would send greetings to a particular church and snub the pastor unless in this case the pastor was Nympha. Although this verse does not indicate she is. Most would say that she was only the host. But it doesn't say that either. All it shows is that everybody is mentioned except the pastor. Paul could have sent greetings to John Doe leader of the church that meets in Nympha's house. Rom 16:7 Greet Andronicus and Junias, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners, who are outstanding among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me. Junias was a woman, yet Paul here states that she was "outstading among the Apostles" Some may say that the word for apostle has means messanger, sent out. That is true but it means that everywhere the word apostle is used. It is the same word. Paul considered her to be an apostle. God bless |
||||||
57 | So what do we do with Josh 5 Ch | Leviticus | following him | 123509 | ||
Perhaps he ment the first Passover. Of course that would be incorrect because the first passover has observed right before Israel left Egypt. Although this would be the first passover in the promised land. | ||||||
58 | What is the answer to this question? | Luke 20:4 | following him | 123351 | ||
Sorry, got carried away with the double negatives in my sentances. I never did well in English class. Let me rephase that fist comment I do not believe that someone who does not speak in tongues is not filled with the Holy Spirit. I hope this clears up my comments | ||||||
59 | What is the answer to this question? | Luke 20:4 | following him | 123350 | ||
I must say as one of those "Tongue speakers" that I in no way believe that not speaking in tongues does not indicate that the person is not filled with the Holy Spirit. It is only one of many evidences that would indicate someone filled with the Spirit. It is one of many gifts anyone of which would be evidence. If that the person you spoke of and taught things contrary to the diety of Christ or the word of God Preached a different gospel than what we have recieved I would say yes that person is not filled with the Holy Spirit. I as one of the "Tongue Speakers" was filled with the Holy Spirit long before I was given that specific gift. I also do not believe that you can learn to speak in tongues by repeating someone else. This is a gift from the Lord not an acquired talent. | ||||||
60 | God and gods? | Matt 11:11 | following him | 123341 | ||
I had been intending to fill it out but haven't figured out what to include. I will do so now but will probably update it later. Thank you for your patience with me. I appriciate it. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 ] Next > Last [5] >> |