|
| |
What is Pentecost and its significance? |
|
|
|
Acts 2:1
|
| |
Acts 1:8 says,"But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Spirit is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto Me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth."
Jesus had told them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father,which ye have heard of me.
For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days heance. Acts 1:4-5
Pentecost was this baptism of the Holy Spirit on the ones that it had been promised.
It's significance was to spread the Gospel to everyone that was in Jerusalem on that day, for they all heard in their own language.
This caused the Gospel of Jesus Christ to be spread abroad very quickly. |
| |
One Place, Seeking The Fatther's Heart |
|
|
|
Acts 2:1
|
| |
The day of Pentecost was fully come not only because of the pre-existing chronological plan of God, but because the disciples were all in one place and one accord. They were in Jerusalem of course, but they were really in the Spirit and they were in one accord because they were seeking the heart of Father God. (See the verses leading up to ch. 2) This was the most fragile component of the birth of the church A reference verse that points to the imperative of accord can be found in Zeph. 3:9. |
| |
Can anyone give me more reasons? |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
More Reasons .. ok
1.Not one of the apocryphal books is written in the Hebrew language, which was alone used by the inspired historians and poets of the Old Testament. All Apocryphal books are in Greek, except one which is only in Latin.
2.None of the apocryphal writers laid claim to inspiration.
3.The apocryphal books were never acknowledged as sacred scriptures by the Jews, custodians of the Hebrew scriptures (the apocrypha was written prior to the New Testament). In fact, the Jewish people rejected and destroyed the apocrypha after the overthow of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.
4.The apocryphal books were not permitted among the sacred books during the first four centuries of the real Christian church.
5.The Apocrypha contains statements which not only contradict
the "canonical" scriptures but themselves. For example, in the two Books of Maccabees, Antiochus Epiphanes is made to die three different deaths in three different places.
6.The Apocrypha includes doctrines in variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection. The following verses are taken from the Apocrypha translation by Ronald Knox dated 1954:
Basis for the doctrine of purgatory:
(2Maccabees 12:43-45), 2.000 pieces of silver were sent to Jerusalem for a sin-offering...Whereupon he made reconciliation for the dead, that they might be delivered from sin.
Salvation by works:
(Ecclesiasticus 3:30), Water will quench a flaming fire, and alms maketh atonement for sin.
(Tobit 12:8-9, 17), It is better to give alms than to lay up gold; for alms doth deliver from death, and shall purge away all sin.
Magic:
(Tobit 6:5-8), If the Devil, or an evil spirit troubles anyone, they can be driven away by making a smoke of the heart, liver, and gall of a fish...and the Devil will smell it, and flee away, and never come again anymore.
Mary was born sinless (immaculate conception):
(Wisdom 8:19-20), And I was a witty child and had received a good soul. And whereas I was more good, I came to a body undefiled.
It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assasination and magical incantation.
No apocryphal book is referred to in the New Testament whereas the Old Testament is referred to hundreds of times.
Because of these and other reasons, the apocryphal books are only valuable as ancient documents illustrative of the manners, language, opinions and history of the East.
|
| |
Is this |
|
|
|
Rom 6:3
|
| |
No, you do not need to be "water" baptized to be saved. The word translated "baptized" (in most texts) literally translates as "immersed" which is to "completely dip, plunge under".
The 1 Peter 3:21 here equates “baptism now saves you” to “but an appeal to God for a good conscience - through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”. This word appeal is the action word in the phrase and has nothing to do with “water baptism (immersion)”. Baptism here is the same as the Romans 6 comments below.
Some Jews of that day "water baptized (immersed)" themselves as an act of spiritual cleansing, purification. This was a normal thing for a religious person to do. Sometimes this was done more than once a day. Note that the Ethiopian is likely Jewish: for he worships at Jerusalem. Nothing is said in the Acts passage that “water baptism” is required for salvation. This was not the message Philip preached. The Ethiopian requests to be baptized. Baptism was something a repentant person did, so this is completely normal for the day.
As for Romans chapter 6: This speaks about believers being "buried with Him through baptism into death". One needs to read the context of this passage to understand what Paul meant by this. I think it is clear that believers are alive in Christ through His death and through His death we are saved. The baptism or immersion here is a reference to being immersed in His death, not a water baptism. Reason being that if we are in Him, we will also be raised up from the dead just as He was. Paul is using a logical argument in this chapter speaking about the believer and sin. Notice how Paul connects the points of his argument throughout the whole chapter, too.
Also note that, in the gospels, John baptized with (in) water but Jesus baptized with the Spirit. See: Matt. 3:11-12; John 1:32-34; Luke 3:16.
|
| |
What does this mean? |
|
|
|
Mark 6:5
|
| |
"Mark 6:5 '...He could do no mighty work there...' Compare Matt 13:58. This is not to suggest that His power was somehow diminished by their unbelief. It may suggest that because of their unbelief people were not coming to Him for healing or miracles the way they did in Capernaum and Jerusalem. Or, more importantly, it may signify that Christ limited His ministry both as an act of mercy, so that the exposure to greater light would not result in a worse hardening that would only subject them to greater condemnation, and a judgment on their unbelief. He had the power to do more miracles, but not the will, because they rejected Him. Miracles belonged among those who were ready to believe." (MacArthur Study Bible, p. 1470) |
| |
Should Paul haver gone to Jerusalem? |
|
|
|
Acts
|
| |
Should the apostle Paul have returned to Jerusalem for his last visit? |
| |
Would you please give scripture evidence |
|
|
|
1 Cor 13:12
|
| |
An indication of continuity between our present bodies and the bodies that we will have is seen in the fact that those believers who remain alive on the day Christ returns will "be changed" - yet their bodies will not be replaced: 1 Cor. 15:51-53.
Jesus says that people will come from East and West and "sit at the table with Abraham, Issac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven": Matt. 8:11.
Matthew also tells us that when Jesus died, "the tombs also were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised,and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many": Matt. 27:52-53. The fact that these people's actual bodies were raised, and the fact that they appeared to many in Jerusalem,indicates again that there was some continuity between their dead bodies that were in the graves and the bodies that were raised up. Since they came out of the tombs "after his resurrection" we may assume that these also were saints who had recieved resurrection bodies as a kind of foretaste of the final day of glorification when Christ returns. The fact that these people "appeared to many" suggests that they were recognizable - that the people knew who they were.
The evidence is suggestive rather than conclusive, yet it points in the direction of continuity between the body that existed before the resurrection and the one that existed after it. When Elijah appears on the Mount he is recognised. Also significant continuity between Jesus' body before and after the resurrection is seen in the fact that even the nail prints in his hands and feet and the wound in his side remained in his resurrection body. John 20:20, 27. |
| |
Should Paul haver gone to Jerusalem? |
|
|
|
Acts
|
| |
How do we know Paul was crrying a message from God? Jesus had told him to flee from Jerusalem but he insisted on returning. Was he bound by his own spirit to go there or the Holy Spirit? It's not as simple as it looks! |
| |
Isai 41:2 referring to Christ or Cyrus? |
|
|
|
Isaiah
|
| |
Is 41:2 NASB "Who has aroused one from the east
Whom He calls in righteousness to His feet?
He delivers up nations before him
And subdues kings.
He makes them like dust with his sword,
As the wind-driven chaff with his bow." . . . The "man from the east" refers to Cyrus, not Christ.
. . . "one from the east. The Lord anointed Cyrus the Great, king of Persia, to accomplish His righteous will by conquering Babylon in 539 B.C. and allowing some of the Jewish exiles to return to Jerusalem . . . He founded the Persian Empire and ruled from ca. 550 to 530 B.C." . . . (MacArthur Study Bible, p. 1015) |
| |
What does Matt 24:34 mean? |
|
|
|
Matt 24:34
|
| |
Most people want to make this apply to the end of the world but a better view is looking at the fall of Jerusalem which did happen before that generation passed away. |
| |
Sabbath laws....do? or don't? |
|
|
|
Col 2:16
|
| |
Are the Sabbath laws binding on Christians today?
. . . We believe the Old Testament regulations governing Sabbath observances are ceremonial, not moral, aspects of the law. As such, they are no longer in force, but have passed away along with the sacrificial system, the Levitical priesthood, and all other aspects of Moses' law that prefigured Christ. . . . Here are the reasons we hold this view.
. . . In Colossians 2:16-17, Paul explicitly refers to the Sabbath as a shadow of Christ, which is no longer binding since the substance (Christ) has come. It is quite clear in those verses that the weekly Sabbath is in view. The phrase "a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day" refers to the annual, monthly, and weekly holy days of the Jewish calendar (cf. 1 Chronicles 23:31; 2 Chronicles 2:4; 31:3; Ezekiel 45:17; Hosea 2:11). If Paul were referring to special ceremonial dates of rest in that passage, why would he have used the word "Sabbath?" He had already mentioned the ceremonial dates when he spoke of festivals and new moons.
. . . The Sabbath was the sign to Israel of the Mosaic Covenant (Exodus 31:16-17; Ezekiel 20:12; Nehemiah 9:14). Since we are now under the New Covenant (Hebrews 8), we are no longer required to observe the sign of the Mosaic Covenant.
. . . The New Testament never commands Christians to observe the Sabbath.
. . . In our only glimpse of an early church worship service in the New Testament, the church met on the first day of the week (Acts 20:7).
. . . Nowhere in the Old Testament are the Gentile nations commanded to observe the Sabbath or condemned for failing to do so. That is certainly strange if Sabbath observance were meant to be an eternal moral principle.
. . . There is no evidence in the Bible of anyone keeping the Sabbath before the time of Moses, nor are there any commands in the Bible to keep the Sabbath before the giving of the law at Mt. Sinai.
. . . When the Apostles met at the Jerusalem council (Acts 15), they did not impose Sabbath keeping on the Gentile believers.
. . . The apostle Paul warned the Gentiles about many different sins in his epistles, but breaking the Sabbath was never one of them.
. . . In Galatians 4:10-11, Paul rebukes the Galatians for thinking God expected them to observe special days (including the Sabbath).
. . . In Romans 14:5, Paul forbids those who observe the Sabbath (these were no doubt Jewish believers) to condemn those who do not (Gentile believers).
. . . The early church fathers, from Ignatius to Augustine, taught that the Old Testament Sabbath had been abolished and that the first day of the week (Sunday) was the day when Christians should meet for worship (contrary to the claim of many seventh-day sabbatarians who claim that Sunday worship was not instituted until the fourth century).
. . . Sunday has not replaced Saturday as the Sabbath. Rather the Lord's Day is a time when believers gather to commemorate His resurrection, which occurred on the first day of the week. Every day to the believer is one of Sabbath rest, since we have ceased from our spiritual labor and are resting in the salvation of the Lord (Hebrews 4:9-11).
. . . So while we still follow the pattern of designating one day of the week a day for the Lord's people to gather in worship, we do not refer to this as "the Sabbath."
. . . (www.gty.org Click on Issues and Answers. Click on Previous Topics) |
| |
Who else besides Cain, Adam, and Eve? |
|
|
|
Genesis
|
| |
Oops! Found David's son Nathan in 2 Samuel 5:14 -- but just the mention of his being born in Jerusalem. Bad choice of examples, but I'm sure you get the point. |
| |
Was Paul right to have gone to Jerusalem |
|
|
|
Acts 21:4
|
| |
It has been asked if Paul should have gone to Jerusalem or whether he was acting on his own will. I think we might question the spirit of the people who were telling him not to set foot in Jerusalem. We might question also if the Holy Spirit said His alleged message. But in any case it was decided, "The will of the Lord be done."
Thus, I would not capitalize the Spirit of Acts 21:4 and would cast doubt on the words of the prophet Agabus in verse ll. |
| |
Baptism question in Acts 2 and John 3 |
|
|
|
Not Specified
|
| |
1.
Acts 2: 37-39
Now when they heard they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Brethren, what shall we do?" Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. "For the promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call to Himself."
Does the order that Peter is mentioning here, i.e. repent, be baptize and receive the Holy Spirit, only apply to the Jews at that time in Jerusalem? Or for all of us for all times?
2.
John 3:4 – 6
Nicodemus said to Him, "How can a man be born when he is old? He cannot enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born, can he?" Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
Is the water that Jesus is speaking about the water baptism or the water from the womb?
(I don’t mean to pull these out of their context but I wanted to make is simple. There’s a lot that goes into the background of what is being said and to whom it is being said to. Please fell free to reference other verses for me to look at based upon your response.)
|
| |
Baptism question in Acts 2 and John 3 |
|
|
|
Acts 2:39
|
| |
1.
Acts 2: 37-39
Now when they heard they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Brethren, what shall we do?" Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. "For the promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call to Himself."
Does the order that Peter is mentioning here, i.e. repent, be baptize and receive the Holy Spirit, only apply to the Jews at that time in Jerusalem? Or for all of us for all times?
2.
John 3:4 – 6
Nicodemus said to Him, "How can a man be born when he is old? He cannot enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born, can he?" Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
Is the water that Jesus is speaking about the water baptism or the water from the womb?
(I don’t mean to pull these out of their context but I wanted to make is simple. There’s a lot that goes into the background of what is being said and to whom it is being said to. Please fell free to reference other verses for me to look at based upon your response.)
|
| |
Baptism question in Acts 2 and John 3 |
|
|
|
Acts 2:39
|
| |
Dear Bereian, A lot of people from various backgrounds heard Peter preach these words. True, most were Jews. However, suppose it were only for Jews. Then it would only be the Old Testament-Part 2. The fact that we have the rest of the New Testament proves that these words were for all who hear and believe. The alternative is ludicrous. As to the words of Jesus in the book of John, I believe the Lord was speaking clearly about water baptism and the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Apparently, thinking of 'water' as being water from the womb is trying to legitimatize the idea that we no longer need water baptism. I think the book of Acts is pretty clear that water baptism is a valid act of faith, a cleansing and a strength to all believers in Jesus. See Acts 8:26-38, 10:44-47, 19:1-5 I pray that these will help you. In Jesus' name. |
| |
What is the point? |
|
|
|
1 Thessalonians
|
| |
Good morning and good night, EveryHome :-) I am centrist in doctrine, in that I desire to be unaffected by the swinging, swaying and bobbing of the 'plumb bob.' I am centralist in that I believe that all authority should rest on one Entity, Jesus Christ. I don't want to be 'of Apollos' or 'of Paul,' (or of Arminus, Calvin, the Pope, etc.) but of Jesus Christ. A thought (with a touch of irony): "...the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch." Acts 11:26 Could it be that the belivers in Antioch were the first to be free from denominationalism? You know, the 'Reformed Pharisees Fellowship,' the 'Church of the Circumcision Plus,' the 'Resurrection Sadducees,' and the 'First Temple of the Forgiven Tax-men' factions that were popular in Jerusalem. I agree with you that evangelism is paramount. Preaching the Good News to all the earth is a command to all believers, and leading the church to live the Good News is the responsibility of those called to serve as ministers. This would include the 'enlightened' U.S.A. Many 'enlightened' missionaries are more worried about making disciples of their thinking than disciples of Christ. Here is where we can be strengthened against the 'wiles of the devil.' Preaching Jesus, rather than doctrine, we will not be overcome by Satan.
In Christ Jesus.
|
| |
God can use woman in the ministry? |
|
|
|
Gal 3:28
|
| |
These scriptures have been change in every Bible that I know of, but one, they were change to look as though they were speaking of Jerusalem.
This was done through Satins religions as an attempt to keep the women from knowing what they must do and what has to take place just before the end.
Ps68:11
11 Jehovah himself gives the saying;
The women telling the good news are a large army.
Isa40:9
9 Make your way up even onto a high mountain, you woman bringing good news for Zion. Raise your voice even with power, you woman bringing good news for Jerusalem. Raise [it]. Do not be afraid. Say to the cities of Judah: "Here is YOUR God."
Isa60:1
1 "Arise, O woman, shed forth light, for your light has come and upon you the very glory of Jehovah has shone forth.
Isa60:2
2 For, look! darkness itself will cover the earth, and thick gloom the national groups; but upon you Jehovah will shine forth, and upon you his own glory will be seen.
Isa60:3
3 And nations will certainly go to your light, and kings to the brightness of your shining forth.
|
| |
Is astrology forbidden? |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
Jeremiah 8:1 " At that time, declares the LORD, the bones of the kings and officials of Judah, the bones of the priests and prophets, and the bones of the people of Jerusalem will be removed from their graves. 2 They will be exposed to the sun and the moon and all the stars of the heavens, which they have loved and served and which they have followed and consulted and worshiped. They will not be gathered up or buried, but will be like refuse lying on the ground. 3 Wherever I banish them, all the survivors of this evil nation will prefer death to life, declares the LORD Almighty. (NIV) |
| |
Why do we not keep the 7th day Sabbath |
|
|
|
Col 2:16
|
| |
Are the Sabbath laws binding on Christians today?
. . . We believe the Old Testament regulations governing Sabbath observances are ceremonial, not moral, aspects of the law. As such, they are no longer in force, but have passed away along with the sacrificial system, the Levitical priesthood, and all other aspects of Moses' law that prefigured Christ. . . . Here are the reasons we hold this view.
. . . In Colossians 2:16-17, Paul explicitly refers to the Sabbath as a shadow of Christ, which is no longer binding since the substance (Christ) has come. It is quite clear in those verses that the weekly Sabbath is in view. The phrase "a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day" refers to the annual, monthly, and weekly holy days of the Jewish calendar (cf. 1 Chronicles 23:31; 2 Chronicles 2:4; 31:3; Ezekiel 45:17; Hosea 2:11). If Paul were referring to special ceremonial dates of rest in that passage, why would he have used the word "Sabbath?" He had already mentioned the ceremonial dates when he spoke of festivals and new moons.
. . . The Sabbath was the sign to Israel of the Mosaic Covenant (Exodus 31:16-17; Ezekiel 20:12; Nehemiah 9:14). Since we are now under the New Covenant (Hebrews 8), we are no longer required to observe the sign of the Mosaic Covenant.
. . . The New Testament never commands Christians to observe the Sabbath.
. . . In our only glimpse of an early church worship service in the New Testament, the church met on the first day of the week (Acts 20:7).
. . . Nowhere in the Old Testament are the Gentile nations commanded to observe the Sabbath or condemned for failing to do so. That is certainly strange if Sabbath observance were meant to be an eternal moral principle.
. . . There is no evidence in the Bible of anyone keeping the Sabbath before the time of Moses, nor are there any commands in the Bible to keep the Sabbath before the giving of the law at Mt. Sinai.
. . . When the Apostles met at the Jerusalem council (Acts 15), they did not impose Sabbath keeping on the Gentile believers.
. . . The apostle Paul warned the Gentiles about many different sins in his epistles, but breaking the Sabbath was never one of them.
. . . In Galatians 4:10-11, Paul rebukes the Galatians for thinking God expected them to observe special days (including the Sabbath).
. . . In Romans 14:5, Paul forbids those who observe the Sabbath (these were no doubt Jewish believers) to condemn those who do not (Gentile believers).
. . . The early church fathers, from Ignatius to Augustine, taught that the Old Testament Sabbath had been abolished and that the first day of the week (Sunday) was the day when Christians should meet for worship (contrary to the claim of many seventh-day sabbatarians who claim that Sunday worship was not instituted until the fourth century).
. . . Sunday has not replaced Saturday as the Sabbath. Rather the Lord's Day is a time when believers gather to commemorate His resurrection, which occurred on the first day of the week. Every day to the believer is one of Sabbath rest, since we have ceased from our spiritual labor and are resting in the salvation of the Lord (Hebrews 4:9-11).
. . . So while we still follow the pattern of designating one day of the week a day for the Lord's people to gather in worship, we do not refer to this as "the Sabbath."
. . . (www.gty.org Click on Issues and Answers. Click on Previous Topics) |
| |
Did Jesus cleanse the temple more than o |
|
|
|
NT general
|
| |
And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves,
Matt 21:12 (KJV)
And they come to Jerusalem: and Jesus went into the temple, and began to cast out them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves;
And would not suffer that any man should carry any vessel through the temple.
Mark 11:15-16 (KJV)
And he went into the temple, and began to cast out them that sold therein, and them that bought;
Saying unto them, It is written, My house is the house of prayer: but ye have made it a den of thieves.
Luke 19:45-46 (KJV)
And the Jews' passover was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem,
And the Jews' passover was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem,
And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting:
And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables;
And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father's house an house of merchandise.
John 2:13-16 (KJV)
And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting:
And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables;
And the Jews' passover was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem,
And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting:
And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables;
And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father's house an house of merchandise.
John 2:13-16 (KJV)
And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father's house an house of merchandise.
John 2:13-16 (KJV) These are all the same account, different people seeing same thing, so we have four diff points of veiw,if you put them all together they will give you a combined story revealing more information. love in Christ RCSCROLL P.S. only one time ,If you and I would see a car accident we would have diff info from a diff point of view.But both would be true.
|
| |
When was the Holy Spirit first given? |
|
|
|
Acts 2:1
|
| |
Thanks, prayon, for a well-thought-out response. In light of these passages, this seems logical.
However, in another passage, Acts 1:1-8, Jesus was speaking specifically to the apostles when he "commanded them not to leave Jerusalem" (v.4) but wait until "you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you" (v.8) -- which would indicate that the apostles still needed the power that the Holy Spirit would give in order to be effective in spreading the Gospel: "and you shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth" (v.8).
Clearly their empowerment was not yet complete. Either they hadn't yet received the Spirit, or there was additional empowerment needed for them specifically. |
| |
When was the Holy Spirit first given? |
|
|
|
John 20:22
|
| |
Let me begin by saying that nothing I write in this reply is intended in any way to appear argumentative. I very much respect your interpretation. I present my understanding of the verses for your consideration.
. . . You write: "MacArthur is convinced that the Holy Spirit was not actually given until Pentecost." May I point out a couple of things to take into account?
. . . Luke 24:49 ASV "And behold, I send forth the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city, until ye be clothed with power from on high." In 24:33 the text makes it clear that in v. 49 Jesus is adressing "the eleven [apostles] and those who were with them gathered together." Question: If the Apostles had previously received the Holy Spirit (John 22), then why does Jesus command them "tarry ye in the city, until ye be clothed with power from on high"?
. . . Acts 1:8 ASV "But ye shall receive power, when the Holy Spirit is come upon you: and ye shall be my witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea and Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth." Question: Again why say "ye shall receive [future tense] power, when the Holy Spirit is come upon you," if the Holy Spirit had already come upon them in the past?
. . . It is generally understood that the church was born on Pentecost Sunday when, for the first time, believers were filled with the Holy Spirit.
. . . Let me clarify something. The Bible in 1 Cor 12:13 says: "By one Spirit we were all baptized into one body..." This is how we were initially placed into the body of Christ. It occurred when we received Christ as Savior and were born again. If we were "baptized by one Spirit" when we were placed into the body of Christ, then what else could the baptism in or of the Holy Spirit be? Surely there are not 2 or more different kinds of Holy Spirit baptism, are there?
. . . Also note that in Acts 2:4, the text there does not say: "And they were all baptized with the Holy Spirit." It uses the word "filled". "And they were all FILLED (emphasis mine) with the Holy Spirit." Filled, not baptized. Not according to the plain text of the Scripture.
. . . Don't misunderstand me. I have not taken a stand for or against the gift of tongues. So far I have not said one thing about tongues. What I am talking about is, as you picked up on, the difference between "baptized" and "filled."
. . . Then you state: "I'm not convinced that the term "filled" with the Spirit isn't used in two distinct ways -- one referring to a temporary condition of supernatural empowerment (as in Acts 2:4; 4:8,31; 7:55; 13:9 etc.) and another one describing an ongoing condition (Acts 6:3,5; 11:24; 13:52; etc.). " I don't see how any reasonable Bible student could not agree with you on this. It seems quite plain from the Scritpures you cited that, indeed, the Holy Spirit comes upon people at different times to empower them to perform certain ministires or specific tasks. Good point!
. . . Surely extremists from one side or the other (tongues speakers or non-tongues speakers) will deliver a tirade against one or both of us telling us how wrong, confused, and inept we are for not taking their side. If I understand you correctly, your aim is the same as mine. I want to base my beliefs on the clear teachings of Scripture and not just blindly accept the teacings, leanings, biases, or filters of any church, denomination, doctrine of men, or alleged teaching ministry. (On the other hand God did give gifted people to the church, including teachers. Let's all use a little common sense and realize that somewhere there may be someone who's studied the Bible a little longer, deeper, and more intensively than we have.)
For example, John MacArthur does not claim infallibility for himself. But the fact that he has studied the Bible 30 hours a week for 30 years in the original languages -- that fact may prompt us to consider the possibility, however slight, that just MAYBE he has a better background and skill in interpreting the Bible than most of us do. I know Americans in general and fundamentalists in particular have a distrust of formal education. Except of course when they need a physician or an attorney. Then forget self-taught practitioners. They want a "real" doctor or a "real" attorney. Funny how there's a double standard there. It seems that who handles their body or their financial interests is more important than who shepherds their souls and breaks to them the bread of life.
Much more could be said on this topic. And I'm sure it will be. But I'll reserve any further comments until another day.
Thanks for your posting, your interest, and the care you've taken to post a reply that is well worth reading. ---JVH0212 |
| |
healing the man who was born blind by Je |
|
|
|
John
|
| |
Hi bjanko, The thought had occured to me but I'm afraid I tend to use a mistake like that to express my obsession with capitalization. Please excuse me, I'll try to control myself. I think that sometimes a person can use many translations in study and writing, and it could be very easy to slip back to the lower case pronouns. Just call me "shifty" because I'll be using it and backspacing if I miss it. God is great.
You did have a good writing there. You mentioned John 20:31, "but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in (His) name." The other reason for the writing of John was to downplay the importance of John the baptizer. John 1:19 "This is the testimony of John, when the Jews sent to him priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, "Who are you?" And he confessed, "I am not the Christ." They asked him, "What then? Are you Elijah?" And he said, "I am not." Are you the (Prophet?)" And he answered, "No."
In the first chapter John the baptist says "This was He of whom I said, "He who comes after me has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me." (The Word became flesh) In verse 29 (The Lamb of God),"This is (He) on behalf of whom I said, 'After me comes a Man who has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me.' "I did not recognize Him, but so that He might be manifested to Israel, I came baptizing in water."
John was quoted to get the facts straight about who he was and what he came to do. He was the older cousin of Jesus and he knew who this Man was. He deserved a higher rank. I would say He deserved a higher letter.:-) This was (He), the (Prophet) "For of (His) fullness we have all received, and grace upon grace." And then going back to the Light of the beginning, "But as many as received Him to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in (His) name.verse 12, parentheses mine.
What's the bottom linem, then? I praise God that there are people like you who honor the name of Jesus and show it in their capitalization. Thanks for hearing me. Ray V.H. |
| |
3 days and 3 nights and Sabbaths |
|
|
|
Matt 12:40
|
| |
There is still a minor problem. Lev. 23:5 defines the Passover. It also defines Sabbaths or other Holy Convocations. From reading this we can see that the Passover is called a Holy Convocation or day of rest. Also note the day after the Passover which is the Feast of Unleaven bread is also a Holy convocation or day of rest.
For Jesus to be crucified on Friday and buried and have the women go to the grave on Sunday would mean that Jesus was crucified on a Holy Convocation Day or Jewish Day of rest. Could the Sabbath talked about in the scriptures really be the Feast of the Unleaven Bread a Holy Convocation?
Jesus is a fullfillment of OT designs. I believe Jesus' trimphal entry into Jerusalem was on the 10th of Nisan, or the day of the "Selection of the Passover Lamb". I believe his death was on 14th of Nisan, the day the Passover Lamb is killed. At twilight of that day begins Passover. Jewish days run from 6pm to 6pm.
Let's place Jesus' trimphal entry on 10th of Nisan or our Sunday (Palm Sunday). Then the 14th of Nisan would span our Wed and Thru. I submit Jesus was really crucified on Thrusday right before the begining of Passover, the following day was a Holy Convocation or Sabbath the "Feast of Unleaven Bread", the next day would be the weekly Sabbath. Therefore the first day the Women could get to the tomb was the first day of the week Sunday. (You really need to plot this out on paper overlaying our days over the Jewish days)
Placing Jesus' death on Thursday would eliminate the problem of the 3 days and three nights. Also the fulfillment of the feast would be accomplished. But one problem remains the scriptures say Jesus celebrated the Passover with His disciples. There is two explainations for this none of which I can document.
The first, I'm told there was conflict between the Jews as to when months started. Some would go up on to high places to see the new moon others would wait in front of the temple. I'm told the ones that used the high places were a day ahead of the ones that didn't.
The second, I'm told there is a Jewish provision for travelers to celebrate Passover on the eve before passover so that they could arrive at their distination before the Holy convocation of Passover and Unleaven bread came into effect.
While I admit both of these are reaching I still have to believe Jesus' death coincided with the killing of the "Passover Lamb" and that was right before twilight on the 14th of Nisan. And since all of these days are Holy Convocations or Sabbaths, I maintain we are confused by the term Sabbath Day in the crucifixion story.
Looking for your thoughts. |
| |
Using magic in church, is it sorcery? |
|
|
|
Deut 18:10
|
| |
Job 38:32 Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons? Mazzaroth. or, the twelve signs. the twelve signs are the "zodiac signs" Probably the same as (Mazzaloth) 2Ki 23:5 And he put down (caused to cease) the idolatrous priests, whom the kings of Judah had ordained to burn incense in the high places round about Jerusalem; them also that burned incense unto Baal, to the sun, and to the moon, and to the planets, and to all the host of heaven.
Sorcery: Deu 18:10 There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his dauthter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an exchanter, or a witch (that goes for wizards too.)verse 11 Or a charmer or a consulter with fmailiar spirits (phychics), or a wizard, or a necromancer (phyichics. verse 12 For all that do these things ae an abomination unto the LORD: and because of these abominations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee. May the Lord bless the hearing, believing, and doing of His word. If you want more informantion my email address is ministerhudson@hotmail.com God Bless, Amen |
| |
Did I offend you? |
|
|
|
Matt 12:40
|
| |
EdB wrote:
I realize this issue has been a topic of
many ongoing debates and will probably not
be settled until Jesus Himself sets the
record clear. Men far wiser and more
learned than I have taken both sides of
the discussion and it truly doesn’t effect
our salvation one way or the other.
_____________________
Hello EdB,
I appreciate your "tone of voice" here, so I will relax a bit. Messiah Jesus is our Passover, and in Him, days, months, and years are irrelevant. So let's see how far I can travel this road in agreement with you.
Inasmuch as Dec. 21 is the longest day of the year in Jerusalem, after Mar. 22, evening begins no earlier than 6PM and the morning no later than 6AM. But for the sake of convenience, we will agree on 6PM and 6AM. Then the first hour is from 6AM to 7AM, and the ninth hour, when Jesus died, from 2PM to 3PM. That gives Joseph of Arimathea from at least 3 hours to a little over 4 hours to complete Jesus' burial.
Thursday crucifixion matches the 3 days and 3 nights of Mt 12:40 perfectly:
until 6PM Thursday - one day
until 6AM Friday - one night
until 6PM Friday - one day
until 6AM Saturday - one night
until 6PM Saturday - one day
until sometime before dawn Sunday - one night.
On the first day of the week, the women came early to the tomb, while it was still dark (Mt 28:1; Jo 20:1), and found that He had risen.
We agree so far.
BUT... He was raised on the third day. To nail down the meaning of "the third day," we need to look at other occurrences of this phrase. Be persuaded that it does not mean, "three days later."
"And there was evening and there was morning, one day... a second day... a third day." (Gen 1:5, 8, and 13).
"Come, let us return to the Lord. For He has torn us, but He will heal us; He has wounded us, but He will bandage us. He will revive us after two days; He will raise us up on the third day that we may live before Him." (Hos 6:1-2).
So "day one" is the day of the event, and the "third day" is two days later.
"The third day" is used similarly in:
Gen 42:17-18
Ex 19:10-11
Lev 7:16-17
Lev 19:6-7
Num 29:12,17,20
Judg 20:21,24,30
I Sa 20:12
II Sa 1:1-2
Esth 4:16 and 5:1
Mt 16:21
Mt 17:23
Mt 27:64
Mk 9:31
Mk 10:34
Lu 9:22
Lu 13:32
Lu 18:33
Lu 24:7
Lu 24:21
Lu 24:46
Ac 10:40
Ac 27:17-19
I Co 15:3-4
If you want a contrary interpretation of "the third day," look at Gen 40:13,20 and I Ki 12:5,12 (II Ch 10:5,12). But with these two exceptions, "the third day" is idiomatic in the scriptures, meaning, "the day after tomorrow."
Therefore, my never-humble opinion is that Jesus died between 2 and 3PM on Friday, and He rose again before dawn on Sunday, "the day after tomorrow," or "the third day." I base this on the context of all the rest of scripture, excluding Mt 12:40 (plus Gen 40:13,20 and I Ki 12:5,12, if you wish).
So what are we to do with this pesky prophecy from the Messiah Himself? I prefer to leave it as one of those unanswerable conundrums, a paradox we will have to wait until that Day to understand. Any human interpretation will never settle this debate, any more than man can establish peace in Jerusalem.
If that won't satisfy the western mind, which demands closure on every issue and an answer for every riddle, the best I know is to use the Hebrew idiom, "an evening and a morning," meaning a day or a part of a day. Then, "3 days and 3 nights" can be s-t-r-e-t-c-h-e-d to mean three 24-hour days or parts of a 24-hour day. Friday until sunset, Saturday until sunset, and thereafter until His resurrection satisfies that definition.
But I'm not sure about that, either. It appears to be a question to hold on to until Jesus comes. |
| |
when is prophecy near or far? |
|
|
|
Isaiah
|
| |
The passage in Ezekiel 12:21-28 is concerning them at that specfic time. Some of the people were already in captivity in Babylonia and those that were still Jerusalem were only there because the king of Babylonia, Nebuchadnezzar, let them stay. 2 Kings 25 bears all this out. The prophecy was that the entire city would be destroyed and the rest of the people would be go into captivity also. But those left in Jerusalem said it would not happen becuase it it had taken so long. So God said since they doubted His word, He would bring that specfic prophecy to pass right then. And so He did. Many prophicies are given that have no date or time limit set on them, such as about the end days. Some of Daniels, Ezekiel, and the book of Revelation have not been fulfilled yet and we don't know when they will be. But God knows and has set the time for them to come to pass. It is for us to believe His Word, watch and be ready. The 2 Kings 10:30 prophecy was fulfilled in the kings that followed Jehu. They are found in 2 Kings 10:35; 13:1,10; 14:23; 15:8,12. It gets confusing when you try to sort all of the kings out, they did not follow strict geneology rules, but they are all there, some of the kings of Isreal and Judah had the same names and so forth. Hope this helps.
later...wdc
|
| |
What was the Lord's expectation? |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
I believe that God operates on a different time table than we do. See the following passages from Second Peter.
2PE 3:4 and saying, "Where is the promise of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation."
2PE 3:5 For when they maintain this, it escapes their notice that by the word of God the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of water and by water,
2PE 3:6 through which the world at that time was destroyed, being flooded with water.
2PE 3:7 But the present heavens and earth by His word are being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.
2PE 3:8 ¶ But do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, THAT WITH THE LORD ONE DAY IS AS A THOUSAND YEARS, AND A THOUSAND YEARS AS ONE DAY. NASB (Caps mine)
I believe that the very words of scripture are Divinely Inspired. As such I cannot believe that God would make a statement in Scripture that would be misleading.
We do have a sure thing that Christ will return, rest in that irregardless of when He returns. As far as eschatology is concerned we would do well to follow the instructions of our Lord in Acts 1:7-8
"It is not for you to know times or epochs which the Father has fixed by His own authority; but you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth. " NASB
There will be a generation that will "remain alive" when the Lord returns for that generation His return will be imminent. I do however believe for us to say that we are that generation would be presumptuous at best.
Mike Piles
|
| |
| To See More, Click Here... |
|
|
