Results 41 - 43 of 43
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: tomsweetstir Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
41 | Is the End Times here | Matt 24:3 | tomsweetstir | 79444 | ||
Checkout Crosswalk.com’s site for reading on the rapture. Especially check out everything that was written pre 1830’s. John Wesley Explanatory Notes. 1599 Geneva Study Bible. Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the whole Bible. People’s New Testament. Especially check out what it says on Matthew 24, and where available, Daniel 9. |
||||||
42 | Does most of the Gospel say women teach? | 1 Cor 11:5 | tomsweetstir | 79442 | ||
Sir, please note Acts 2:16 for the time period this happened in. Peter, under the influence of the Holy Spirit declared, “BUT THIS IS WHAT WAS SPOKEN THROUGH THE PROPHET JOEL: it will be in the last days.” In effect, Peter was saying what so many said in those last days. “What Joel talked about – is now here.” You don’t have to think we are “in the last days” yet. We aren’t. Peter WAS. And just as foretold, Acts 21:9 mentions the four daughters who prophesied. You mentioned that the Eph list is “all male”. So what? In every language, words are either male, female or neuter. Do you know which of God’s “names” are feminine? 1 Cor 14:24 says “Therefore if the WHOLE CHURCH assembles together and ALL speak in tongues.” “Church” IS feminine. “All” means everybody, male and female. Verse 24, “But if ‘ALL’ prophesy” also goes to both sexes. |
||||||
43 | I would like to learn more about this! | Acts 1:11 | tomsweetstir | 79201 | ||
Taleb is so right. I love church history too. From what I remember about the origin of the teaching of the “rapture” it began after some lady had a dream in the 1800’s. Some have told me they believe Jesus made some kind of transition in Matthew 24 from the destruction of Jerusalem in 67-70 A.D. to the second coming 1000’s of years later. But Luke instantly cancels any such notion. Have you ever noticed how they don’t line up? It's important because it proves any "transitional period" can't be. By comparing Matthew 24:17-18 with Luke 17:31. and Matthew 24:26-27 with Luke 17:23-24, and Matthew 24:28 with Luke 17:37 and Matthew 24:37-39 with Luke 17:26-27 and Matthew 24:40-41 with Luke 17:35-36, it sort of puts a huge hole in the “transition” theory. You would have to ignore Luke’s to make a transition of time work. In my Bible Matthew 24:36 “that day” is the same “that day” as Luke 17:31. So it means one period of time rather than 2,000 years of in between. May I suggest you read what Albert Barnes wrote about these things in his excellant volumns of "Notes on the Old and New Testaments." Perhaps your public library, or church has them. Tom |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 ] |