Results 41 - 60 of 88
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: following him Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
41 | Hades shall not overpower the church? | Matthew | following him | 123180 | ||
Yes Rowdy it does help thank you. But do you know if there are any other scriptures that refer to Hades as representing the kingdom of Satan? | ||||||
42 | Hades shall not overpower the church? | Matthew | following him | 123181 | ||
Thank you for responding Truth31. I can see the point you are making. I have never heard this particular interpretation of this verse. But I believe the principle is sound nothing can stop God from building His church, however I will have to think about this idea a bit more. | ||||||
43 | Hades shall not overpower the church? | Matthew | following him | 123221 | ||
Thank you angle, You are so right. It is To Jesus's name that all will bow their knee, not ours. And it is through Him that we overwhelming conquer. But my original question was does this verse refer to that or to the truth that hades no longer is an issue for us? Or both? If this verse is refering to or spiritual warfar with the devil and his minions is there another verse that shows hades as representing his kingdom? Or is this the only verse and we have used it to support this truth even when it realy doesn't mention the devil? Please I'm am not suggesting that we have no authority there are plenty of scriptures that say that we do. But is this one realy one of them? I hope I'm making sense. | ||||||
44 | Rowdy, NO, Answer my question first | Matt 5:17 | following him | 121823 | ||
Hello all: I don't realy know where to get into this discussion, but I would like to toss in my two cents. This is what I see (which may or may not raise a few eyebrows). First the idea that the OT is not on a par with the NT I find hard to believe since Paul himself said in 2 Tim 3:16-17 that "All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work." The scriptures he was refering to was the OT. Sounds to me like this was refering to religious issues. But how much influence does the Law and OT have on us Christians. None of of 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 keen 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 offer the innocent blood. Jesus' blood. Christ does not die again but He does present His blood agsin 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 teh OT did we go to the blood. Now to the idea that the old testament does not have authority. Because it is not the words of Christ. We do know that John 5:9 says "You search the scriptures, because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness to me." The OT speaks and points forward to Christ. And Luke 24:44 "Then he said to them, 'These are my words which I spoke to you, while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the law of Moses and the prophets and the psalms must be fulfilled.'" that He must fulfill all of it. And we know that in Matt 24:35 He says "Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away." So does the OT contain Jesus' words. John 8:58 Jesus said to them, "Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM." the jews knew exactly that jesus was claiming to be the speaker from the burning bush; they tried to stone Him, the punishment for blaspemy. Ex 3:14 "God said to Moses, 'I AM WHO I AM.' And he said, 'Say this to the people of Israel, "I AM has sent me to you."’" The interesting part of this is this is the same person who gave Moses the Law. The law was Jesus' own words. Will they pass away. No. If only the words of Jesus have authority over us then it apears the the Law does have authority because they are His words. Has the OT been fulfilled in Jesus? No. At least not all of it. Just the parts regarding His first coming. But the parts concerning His second coming have yet to be fulfilled and for every one verse predicting the first coming of Christ there are approximately eight concerning His second. Far more of the OT has not been fulfilled than has. And since it has not been fulfilled yet it is still applicable today. Does this all make sense or am I just off the wall? |
||||||
45 | Rowdy, NO, Answer my question first | Matt 5:17 | following him | 121840 | ||
How old are you Rowdy? | ||||||
46 | Rowdy, NO, Answer my question first | Matt 5:17 | following him | 121845 | ||
I am 41 you are old therefore obsolete according to your own standard. You have nothing to add to my spiritual development. You claim you want a biblical discussion on this subject yet your whole foundation for you belief is the title of the book not the scriptures contained it. Even when we give you scriptures which you yourself say supports our view you reject them only to fall back on the OT is called Old therefore it is obsolete idea. You toss away God's written word because its called old. The division of the bible was based on time diffences. And the establishment of the new covenent (Jesus Blood as opposed to animal sacrifice) Faith has always been the issued where righteousness before God has been concerned consider Abraham. And is not a new covenant idea. But thank God that age does not matter with God the old are still vitally important to the body of Christ as John points out in his firt epistle when he writes to the fathers, young men and little children. | ||||||
47 | Denounce militant Islam? | Matt 5:44 | following him | 131618 | ||
Hello Norrie We are to hate all evil or is it just the evil done by terrorists. Does that refer to your neighbor who not being a Christians does bad things? Or do we love the sinner and hate the sin. You say, “They are behind every terrorist action anywhere in the world today.” I take it you are refering to Muslems. There are many other terrorist around the world today that are not Muslems I'm sure you have heard of the IRA in Ireland? Or do you count those gang members here who rule their neighborhoods and communities by terror, intimidation and violence if their will is opposed? Do take into account the school yard bully that does the same thing, as he rules the playground by threats intimidation and violence upon those smaller and weaker than himself (the innocent and weak)? We tend to think only those not of our nationality as terrorists. Are we to hate all these as well or do we love, them pray for them and try to reach them? I do not condone any of the actions of any of these different types of terrorists. But Jesus does call us to love them because He want them saved. 1 Tim 2:4 "who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth." Aaron |
||||||
48 | Denounce militant Islam? | Matt 5:44 | following him | 131621 | ||
Hello Norrie; If they kill me because I wont convert. Then I guess I will be in good company, i.e. Paul, Peter, Ignatius, Polycarp, and millions of other Christians who died because they would not bow their knee to anyone but God. The odd thing is that it was and is in this type of persecution that Christianity flurished and grew. This is a historical fact. And a current one taking place in areas like China. In every age there seems to be one group or another that is the main source of terrorism. The Pharisees and religious leaders (see Acts), Ganguis Khan, Attila the Hun, Rome, Hitler etc. Truely there is nothing new under the sun. We live in an age where it is the Muslems for the most part. Nothing has changed except the technology they use to do their evil. But if they come for you, will you bow your knee to their god or as they execute you will you say, "Father, forgive them for they know not what they do." |
||||||
49 | Denounce militant Islam? | Matt 5:44 | following him | 132188 | ||
Hello Alienresident; Just a quick question. In a nation where the people are free to chose their leader is it realy God who selects the leader or does man? Where the people have the right to select their leader I believe that the authority is not in the individual but in the office the person holds. The person we have placed in that office recieves and excersises the authority that God gives to that office or position. If we have the right to put a person of our chosing in a position where they can excersise the authority that God gives to that position. I would say that we should excersise our right to put the person we believe would be less likely to abuse that authority. And if we have the opertunity to put a person in there who would excersise it in a Godly way so much the better. |
||||||
50 | What is willing? | Matt 8:2 | following him | 131504 | ||
Hello Tim; yes it does help thank you. Although I must have crossed my references because somehow I thought that the term in 1 Tim 2:4 was another word for desire. I cant recall at the moment what it was but it meant desire but not followed up by action. I think the word started with a "B". And I'm not sure where I got it either. I'll have to go back through my notes and find it. I certainly do appriciate your help. Blessing to you Aaron |
||||||
51 | What is willing? | Matt 8:2 | following him | 131505 | ||
Hello CDBJ; I looked up the commentary you suggested; and it did indeed; help clarify things. Thanks Blessing to you Aaron |
||||||
52 | God and gods? | Matt 11:11 | following him | 123264 | ||
I'm not so sure about this. As I watched the barrage (spelling?) toward ralph2. He obviously began to claim it as persecution and it only solidified in his heart he was right. The thing about being decieved is that the person being decieved doesn't know that he is. He truely believes he is right and blasting him just doesn't bring wisdom. It may be that more JW's will come on thinking they can get a little persecution and thereby moving themselves up the ranks closer to being one of the 144,000. What I think is that there is a time for everything under heaven. There is a time to cast your pearls and a time not to cast your pearls or stop casting your pearls. It is wisdom (form the Holy Spirit) that determines what to do. But whatever we do when they go away they should be going away thinking that we still loved them. Just a thought |
||||||
53 | God and gods? | Matt 11:11 | following him | 123314 | ||
Hello Tim; I've prayed and thought hard about responding to your note. For some reason it has desturbed me greatly. Please don't take this wrong. I sat on the outside and watched this whole episode of "Pointing him to the truth." I did not say that you should let them have free reign to say or teach whatever they want. My concern was how the forum responded to him. Since Bradk mentioned it here is one of the rules of the forum, " You agree to interact with each other in a Christian spirit, with respect and grace." Does this just pertaint to belivers or is everyone who logs on entitled the same respect and grace? Perhaps you should go back and reread ALL the posting toward ralph2 forget the ones he sent just look how the forum responded. If all that was pointed in my direction there is no way I would consider it love. Put yourself in his place would you consider it love. Would you consider it "pointing him to the truth." When a JW has the boldness to come to a forum like this and "strut his stuff" he is not looking to convert anyone, and the chance of converting him are practically non existent. He is only here to puff himself up and walk away with thoughts of "I did battle with the forces of darkness and have prevailed. I have come away still holding to the truth" And that is exactly what happened. The forum gave him what he wanted. He went away victorious while the christians showed themselves to be unloving and intolerant. At least thats his view. And from my vantage point he would have been right. I am not saying that you should let such a major error go unchallenged or maybe I should say unanswered or that we should tolerate false doctrine. But there has got to be a better way of responding to these guys than what I saw here. Perhaps when a JW surfaces the forum could designate one maybe two at the most people to enlighten him without drowning him in a sea of posts showing him how his beliefs are heretical etc. Perhaps you could do it, out of all the posting yours and Zsuzi's were the most curtious and respectful inspite of what ralph2 said. I have gained a great deal of respect for both of you because of this. Sincerely in love |
||||||
54 | 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. |
||||||
55 | Matt 16:28 "some" and "see" | Matt 16:28 | following him | 127874 | ||
hello Tim Moran; Thank you for the insight. As you mentioned that the Kingdom was a present reality, I was reminded that many times as Jesus walked along He said that the kingdom of God was at hand and even demonstrated that same kingdom through the miracles He performed. The desciples although given authority to do many things while Jesus was with them; really received power when the Holy Spirit came upon them in Acts. This could not have happened unless Jesus had gone to be with the father. So many of those standing there not only saw the kingdom coming in power but also became the avenue through which God exercised that power to the people around them. I greatly appriciate your help brother Blessing to you. |
||||||
56 | God can't die or look on sin! | Matt 27:46 | following him | 225418 | ||
Hello CDBJ; It's been years since I have posted, and have recently started looking in again and saw your posting here. In response to your question, I think it may be important to look at whose sin it was. The sin He became was not His it was ours. On the cross while dieing for our sins and taking them on Himself He was still Holy, blameless and without sin of His own. He has never committed sin and therefore is uncontaminated by carring and suffering for ours. Does this sound reasonable? God Bless Aaron Erberich |
||||||
57 | Roman guard myth? | Matt 28:11 | following him | 122191 | ||
Hello again Norrie; along with what JCrichton explained; much of our idea that the guards were temple guards comes from how we interpret Matt 27:65 Pilate said to them, "You have a guard; go, make it as secure as you know how." We can either say Pilot was saying that they have their own guards so use them or; to use idioms of today "you want them you've got them" meaning you asked for them I will give them. The Hebrews may have had a guard for the temple to keep order there but JCrichton is correct that they certainly would not have had authority anywhere outside the temple. The Romans held absolute authority every where else. The only reason they would not interfere with the temple is because that would certainly cause dissention and possibly rebellion among the Jews. | ||||||
58 | Roman guard myth? | Matt 28:11 | following him | 122246 | ||
If it was a Roman guard they may not have reported back to Pilot because of the punishment they would face due to their failing to guard the tomb as they were supposed to and so went to the priest to insure their own survival. It is also conceivable that they would report first to the priests because it was priests who received the guards from Pilot. | ||||||
59 | Jesus waited until 30 to minister | Luke 3:23 | following him | 121571 | ||
The reference you gave in Numbers refers to the levites not the actual priest. The priesthood is from the house of Aaron not the house Kohath. Both are from the tribe Levi, but only Aaron and his sons can hold the priesthood. Besides Jesus is not a priest after the order of Aaron but after the order of Melchizedech. There is great deal of difference between the two. See Heb. 5:6, 8-10; and especailly Heb 7:11-28. | ||||||
60 | What is the answer to this question? | Luke 20:4 | following him | 123340 | ||
Hello Rowdy; Baptism began in the Tabernacle that Moses set up in the wilderness (at God's direction). The priests were required to wash with water from the laver prior to putting on their priestly garments and entering into the Tabernacle. It was a requirement for them to do this before they entered into the service of God. This "maybe" what Jesus was talking about when he told John to baptise Him to fulfill all righteousness, John's baptism was one of repentance, Jesus had no sins to repent of but He was preparing to enter into the service of God and redeem man and become our high priest. The baptism of John being one of repentance was for the people a preperation for them to have their hearts turned back to God. Wasn't that his ministry, to prepare the way of the Lord? So I would have to say John's baptism was from heaven God bless |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 ] Next > Last [5] >> |