|
| |
Who wet Jesus feet with her tears? |
|
|
|
Luke 7:44
|
| |
A good case could be made as to Mary, the sister of Martha and Lazarus, being the woman in Luke who wet Jesus' feet with her tears but a stronger case could probably be made against it. There are enough similarities to the three accounts of Matthew, Mark and John to leave little doubt that Mary is the same woman spoken of in each who annoints Jesus (the woman is called Mary in John 12:3 and Martha and Lazarus are there also). I am inclined to say that the woman in Luke is unknown to us but I can't help part of me wanting to believe that Mary is the woman of all four Gospels. Jesus did say that "wherever this gospel is preached in the whole world, what this woman has done will also be spoken of in memory of her." That would lead me to think that each Gospel was to tell of this woman's sacrificial act.
The portions of Luke that are also in the other Gospels include:
1. Jesus "reclined at the table" (v 36) see Mt 26:7, Mk 14:3 and Jn 12:2
2. the woman "brought an alabaster vial of perfume" (v 37) see Mt 26:7, Mk 14:3 and Jn 12:3
3. She wiped His feet "with the hair of her head" (v38) see Jn 12:3
4. She annointed His feet with perfume (v38) see Jn 12:3
5. They were at the house of "Simon" (v39-40) Simon the Pharisee in Luke, Simon the leper in Matt 26:6 and Mark 14:3
In His Name, Phil
|
| |
Who wet Jesus feet with her tears? |
|
|
|
Luke 7:44
|
| |
Thanks Phil for your input. However the woman can not be Mary, sister of Lazarus. Both incidents did happen in the house of Simon the Pharisee, if Simon the leper and Simon the Pharisee are indeed the same person, but the woman in Luke was a sinner whom the diciples believed was not worthy of touching the feet of Jesus. Mary would never fit into that description. Also Luke says that the women poured a jar of ointment on His feet whereas Mary poured a jar of perfume on Jesus head. One was done early in Jesus' ministry and the other done during the Passover time. |
| |
Christ 'made Himself nothing'? |
|
|
|
Phil 2:6
|
| |
Nolan, Jesus said in John 10:30 "I and my Father are one." He emptied Himself of His divine privileges, but not of His attributes
He went from …
… Creator to a creature, who was despised by His creation
… Mansion in glory to a manger and grime, and no place to lay His head
… Fellowship with the Father, the Holy Spirit, and the heavenly hosts of angels to friendship with prosititutes, theives, lepers, and outcasts
… Directing to being directed - by His Father and men … to the death on the cross.
|
| |
What if a leper begs? |
|
|
|
Not Specified
|
| |
Any comments on this devotional reading from Forward Day By Day? MONDAY, July16
Mark 1:29-45. A leper came to him begging him, “If you choose, you can make me clean.”
He was supposed to stay in the shadows. He was supposed to be resigned to his situation, accepting whatever the locals chose to give. He was supposed to keep his ravaged face and hands hidden beneath the rags that were left of his clothing. But he planted himself smack in front of this man who was said to heal the sick and cast out demons. He made sure that this Jesus could see him, and Jesus saw beneath the rags and the sores through to the person beneath. A person who had not known a human touch for years was touched by Jesus, and made clean.
Most of us long for someone who will look beneath the surface. To see beneath the façade we've wrapped around ourselves and the labels others stick on us: hippie, geek, redneck, loser, winner, jock, leper, other. It can be hard to lose the labels and even harder to drop the façades, those masks that hide our true selves and protect us. There is one who sees beneath, Jesus Christ. He won't intrude where he is not invited. But if we plant ourselves before him in prayer and worship, he will touch us, and we will be made whole.
Ps 25; 1 Samuel 18:5-16; 27b-30; Acts 11:19-30
|
| |
Was Abraham a Muslim? |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
Questioner, the Quran tells us much about Christ.
In Quran 7:158, Muhammad asked people to follow him. Elsewhere in the Quran, Muhammad testified that Jesus was among those nearest to God, held in honor in this world and the hereafter (Quran 3:45). Muslims understand this to mean that Jesus was sinless and all-righteous, something that the early Muslims never claimed for Muhammad. In fact, in several Quranic passages (16:61; 40:55; 42:5, 30; 47:19; 48:1-2) we read that Muhammad was exhorted to seek forgiveness for his faults, that not a single living creature would be left on earth if God punished everyone for their wrongdoing, and that one of Muhammad's military victories served as an assurance of forgiveness of his sins, past and future. It is pointless for Muslims to argue for Muhammad's sinlessness or to compare him to Jesus, whom Muslims consider to be both sinless and alive in heaven, near to God right now. The contrast could be more sharply drawn by pointing out that Muhammad's grave is in Medina today, whereas Christ is alive in heaven with God.
In the Quran (2:253; 3:45-49; 4:158, 171; 5:49; 19:33; 89:22) it is noted that Jesus was called the Messiah; He was born of a virgin; He was among the righteous ones - those nearest to God; He received strength from the Holy Spirit; He could give sight to the blind, cure lepers, and raise the dead; He prophesied His own death and resurrection; He was called a Word from God and a Spirit from God; and finally, He is coming back with thousands of angels to judge the world. All these characterizations add up to a powerful picture of a Christ who was more than a prophet, and - on Quranic terms alone - superior to Muhammad.
What do you think?
Are you a member of the Sunnis, Shias or some other sect?
Steve |
| |
What if a leper begs? |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
Any comments on this devotional reading from Forward Day By Day? MONDAY, July16
Mark 1:29-45. A leper came to him begging him, “If you choose, you can make me clean.”
He was supposed to stay in the shadows. He was supposed to be resigned to his situation, accepting whatever the locals chose to give. He was supposed to keep his ravaged face and hands hidden beneath the rags that were left of his clothing. But he planted himself smack in front of this man who was said to heal the sick and cast out demons. He made sure that this Jesus could see him, and Jesus saw beneath the rags and the sores through to the person beneath. A person who had not known a human touch for years was touched by Jesus, and made clean.
Most of us long for someone who will look beneath the surface. To see beneath the façade we've wrapped around ourselves and the labels others stick on us: hippie, geek, redneck, loser, winner, jock, leper, other. It can be hard to lose the labels and even harder to drop the façades, those masks that hide our true selves and protect us. There is one who sees beneath, Jesus Christ. He won't intrude where he is not invited. But if we plant ourselves before him in prayer and worship, he will touch us, and we will be made whole.
Ps 25; 1 Samuel 18:5-16; 27b-30; Acts 11:19-30
|
| |
What if a leper begs? |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
wist ye not: Thank you for sharing with us this inspirational thought. |
| |
Martha's life and meaning |
|
|
|
Luke 10:38
|
| |
Good question, Karima678!
Here's what Easton's Bible Dictionary states about 'Martha', "Martha, the sister of Lazarus and Mary, and probably the eldest of the family, who all resided at Bethany (Luke 10:38, 40, 41; John 11:1-39). From the residence being called “her house,” some have supposed that she was a widow, and that her brother and sister lodged with her. She seems to have been of an anxious, bustling spirit, anxious to be helpful in providing the best things for the Master’s use, in contrast to the quiet earnestness of Mary, who was more concerned to avail herself of the opportunity of sitting at his feet and learning of him. Afterwards at a supper given to Christ and his disciples in her house “Martha served.” Nothing further is known of her.
“Mary and Martha are representatives of two orders of human character. One was absorbed, preoccupied, abstracted; the other was concentrated and single-hearted. Her own world was the all of Martha; Christ was the first thought with Mary. To Martha life was ‘a succession of particular businesses;’ to Mary life ‘was rather the flow of one spirit.’ Martha was Petrine, Mary was Johannine. The one was a well-meaning, bustling busybody; the other was a reverent disciple, a wistful listener.” Paul had such a picture as that of Martha in his mind when he spoke of serving the Lord “without distraction” (1 Cor. 7:35)."
The Holman Bible Dictionary states, "MARTHA (Mahr' thuh) Personal name meaning “lady [of the house]” or “mistress.” Sister of Mary and Lazarus of Bethany and one of Jesus’ best-loved disciples. True to her name, Martha is portrayed as a person in charge: she welcomed Jesus as a guest in her home (Luke 10:38); she was concerned with meeting the obligations of a hostess, whether preparing food (Luke 10:40; John 12:2) or greeting guests (John 11:20). Together with Mary, she sent for Jesus when Lazarus was ill (John 11:3). Luke 10:38-42 contrasts Martha’s activist discipleship with Mary’s contemplative discipleship. The church cannot minister without “Marthas” who are willing to serve alone. Jesus’ gentle rebuke serves as a perpetual reminder not to major on minor matters. Jesus must not be neglected in the name of service. In John 11:21-27, Jesus led Martha from an inadequate to a lofty confession. Faced with the realities of death, Martha, however, later doubted (John 11:39). Some interpreters identify Martha as the wife (widow) or daughter of Simon the leper on the basis of harmonization with Matthew 26:6-13 and Mark 14:3-9. The three traditions which involve anointing of Jesus (1. Matt. 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9; 2. Luke 7:37-39, 44-50; 3. John 21:1-8) present a nearly insurmountable challenge to a harmonizer. A more sound approach is to appreciate each tradition within the context of the Gospel of which it is a part."
|
| |
"Eloi" or "Eli"? |
|
|
|
Mark 15:34
|
| |
Hello again, Tim!
And my friend continues on the origin of Mark..
"Historic Evidence
Gregory Of Nazianzus (A.D. 329) claimed Matthew was originally written in Hebrew, that Mark "wrote for the Italians and Luke for the Greeks", indicating Mark was originally written in Latin and Luke in Greek. This would make some sense since Mark was a translator for Peter after Peter moved to Rome. Mark translated for him into the Latin of the citizens there. So Gregory's statement is plausible.
The Church of Syria claimed Mark was written in Aramaic. Much of the current Catholic west currently believes in a Greek primacy of Mark, but Gregory was part of that tradition and he didn't. I know of no writer before Gregory who
specifically comments on what language Mark used.
Shimon the "Leper"??? - or "Jar Maker"?
Mark 14:3 says, "And when Jesus was in Bethany at the house of Simon the leper", As any Bible student knows, lepers were not permitted to live in the city (see Lev. 13:46). Since ancient Hebrew and Aramaic were written without vowels, there was no distinction between the Aramaic words GAR'BA (leper) and GARABA (jar maker or jar merchant). Since in this story a woman pours oil from a jar it is apparent that Simon was a jar merchant or jar maker and not a leper.
Now if Simon was a leper, we have several serious problems. Simon was living in the city of Bethany, but lepers weren't allowed to live in a city according to the Mosaic Law (See Lev 13-16). Lev 13:46 says "He [the leper] must live alone - he must live outside the camp." So he was not only not "outside the camp", but Simon was not living alone but had Jesus as his guest. Lepers were suppose to warn people who came near them that they were unclean. Lev 13:45 says a leper must "wear torn clothes, let his hair be unkempt, cover the lower part of his face and cry out, 'Unclean! Unclean!'" so that others would not inadvertantly be made unclean by coming into contact with them by accident.
But Jesus did come into contact with Simon the "leper/jar maker" - and only a few days before Passover - a time when people did not want to become unclean since it would prevent them from celebrating Passover. How could all these things be if Simon were a leper? But if Simon was a jar maker, then we have no problem here.
So it would seem that the Greek Mark 14:3 was a mistranslation of the Aramaic Mark 14:3. This account also appears in Matthew 26, and the same translation problems exist there, since we know Matthew was originally written in Hebrew.
The Resurrection
There are four accounts that talk about the visit of the women to the tomb of Jesus. Luke 24:1 and John 20:1 both give the timing of this visit before sunrise. Luke 24:1 says "early morning" and John 20:1 says "at dawn, while still dark". The Greek version of Mark says "after the sun had risen", disagreeing with Luke 24:1 and John 20:1. The Aramaic version gives it as during sunrise, agreeing with Luke and John. Since there's only a
conflict with the Greek Mark, it would be reasonable to conclude that Greek wasn't the original language of Mark, thus explaining why it conflicts with the other gospel accounts. the original inspired writing did not conflict.
Errors in Greek Mark not in the Aramaic Version of Mark
The Greek version of Mark 2:26 says, "while Abiathar was high priest," though the high priest at the time was was Ahimelech (1 Sam. 21:1), the father of Abiathar (1 Sam. 22:20) and NOT Abiathar. But the Oldest Aramaic manuscripts of Mark 2:26 (The Old Syriac) does not have the phrase "while Abiathar was high priest", so this error only appears in the Greek text, not the Aramaic. If Greek was likely a translation, they may not have thought much of adding an interpolated piece of information to the text. But if Greek was the original language of Mark, we have a problem here.
My Conclusion
I think the evidence is rather strong that the Greek version was translated from the Aramaic. The way it quotes the "Eli, Eli..." phrase indicates Aramaic may not have been the original language as well. So was the original Latin? Was Gregory right? But personally, I'd say the possibility of a Latin origin is plausible. A
Greek origin does not seem plausible at all."
Interesting stuff!
Nolan
|
| |
Luke written in Aramaic or Greek? |
|
|
|
Luke
|
| |
"Some have attacked the credibility of the gospel of Luke, saying there's an error in the geneology of Luke 3:36. The problem isn't with the gospel of Luke, but with the assumption that this gospel was originally written in Greek, because the Aramaic version of Luke does not have this error.
BACKGROUND
Luke is the only gentile writer among the writers of the scriptures. We're told in Colossians 4:11-14 that he is a gentile, whom Paul mentions in 3 of his letters. Serveral historians tell us he was born in Antioch. Among them was Jerome, who at
http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-06/Npnf2-06-23.htm#P8102_2630446 says "third is Luke, the physician, by birth a native of Antioch, in Syria, whose praise is in the Gospel. He was himself a disciple of the Apostle Paul, and composed his book in Achaia and Boeotia."
Luke is also creditted by several people as having translated the Book of Hebrews into Greek. Clement of Alexandria, indeed, assumes a Hebrew original of Hebrews, which was translated into Greek by Luke. (see Bk. VI. chap. 14), but Eusebius disagreed, saying it was Clement of Rome who translated the Book of Hebrews into Greek. One early writer advocated Luke as the translator of the book of Hebrews based on the idea that the style of the Greek versions of Hebrews and the gospel of Luke was so similar.
All of these writers seem to believe Luke knew both Aramaic and Greek. The common language of Syria was Aramaic, but the language of the government was Greek. There's a letter at http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-08/anf08-159.htm by Mara, son of Serapion (c 200-300 AD) in which he talks about how the governmental language in Syria was Greek, but most people there spoke Aramaic, which resulted in their recieving tombstones that they themselves would never be able to read. As a well educated man, there would be a high probability Luke would know both.
HISTORIC EVIDENCE
* The Syrian Church has traditionally maintained that the gospel of Luke was written in Aramaic.
* Origen (c 210 AD) believed Luke to have been written in Greek (See Preface to Translation of Origen on St. Luke , Addressed to Paula and
Eustochium at
http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-06/Npnf2-06-23.htm#P8110_2634554 ). Origen also testified to a Hebrew origin to Matthew, so he's not a biased
anti-semitic source.
* Jerome (c 4th century) also believed in a Greek origin of Luke, calling Luke "competent in Greek".
EVIDENCE OF TRANSLATION FROM ARAMAIC TO GREEK
In Acts 8:27, there is a man who is called a M'HAIMNA, which can mean one of two things. It can be translated "believer" or "eunuch". The Greek text calls him a eunuch, but "believer" makes more sense given the context. This is a strong sign that the manuscript was translated from Aramaic to Greek, and that the Greek translators picked the wrong choice between the two possibilities.
In Acts 11:28 it says...
The Greek version says, "a great famine would spread throughout all the WORLD"
The Aramaic version says, "a great famine would spread throughout the LAND"
The Greek text says the famine was in "all the world". The Aramaic text just says "the land", which could be a local reference to the land of Israel. The context suggests the Aramaic text is the correct reading, since people from one part of the world were able to send help. If the famine were "throughout all the world", as the Greek text says, help could not be sent because everyone would be in trouble.
Luke has the same problem as Mark in calling Simon a "leper". Also, the next section deals with Aramaic poetry found in the Aramaic version of Luke not present in the Greek version.
Luke 18:25 in the KJV says,
"For it is easier for a CAMEL to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God"
The word "camel" here appears in the Greek as kamelon and in the Aramaic as GAMLA. The Aramaic word can refer to a camel or it can refer to a large rope. Now if we replace "large rope" in this verse we have,
"For it is easier for a LARGE ROPE to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God"
which makes a lot more sense and probably what Jesus was REALLY communicating. The Greek text does not try to translate this word, but only transliterates it as "kamelon". Perhaps when it was translated into Greek, they weren't sure which meaning to use, so they simply transliterated it."
Part 1 of 2 |
| |
On what day was Jesus crucified? |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
Greetings Norrie!
Here is the text of the letter from Pilate to Tiberius! I will have to post it in two parts.
******************************
"The Report of Pontius Pilate, Procurator of Judaea Sent to Rome to Tiberius Caesar.
SECOND GREEK FORM.
To the most mighty, venerable, awful, most divine, the august,--Pilatus Pontius, the governor of the East: I have to report to thy reverence, through this writing of mine, being seized with great trembling and fear, O most mighty emperor, the conjuncture of the present times, as the end of these things has shown. For while I, my lord, according to the commandment of thy clemency, was discharging the duties of my government, which is one of the cities of the East, Jerusalem by name, in which is built the temple of the Jewish nation, all the multitude of the Jews came together, and delivered to me a certain man named Jesus, bringing against him many and groundless charges; and they were not able to convict him in anything. And one heresy of theirs against him was, that he said that the Sabbath was not their right rest. And that man wrought many cures, in addition to good works. He made the blind see; he cleansed lepers; he raised the dead; he healed paralytics who could not move at all, except that they only had their voice, and the joining of their bones; and he gave them the power of walking about and running, commanding them by a single word. And another mightier work he did, which was strange even with our gods: he raised up a dead man, Lazarus, who had been dead four days, by a single word ordering the dead man to be raised, although his body was already corrupted by the worms that grow in wounds; and that ill-smelling body lying in the tomb he ordered to run; and as a bridegroom from the bridal chamber, so he came forth out of the tomb, filled with exceeding fragrance. And some that were cruelly vexed by demons, and had their dwellings in deserts, and ate the flesh of their own limbs, and lived along with reptiles and wild beasts, he made to be dwellers in cities in their own houses, and by a word he rendered them sound-minded; and he made those that were troubled by unclean spirits to be intelligent and reputable; and sending away the demons in them into a herd of swine, he suffocated them in the sea.
Another man, again, who had a withered hand, and lived in sorrow, and had not even the half of his body sound, he rendered sound by a single word. And a woman that had a flow of blood for many years, so that, in consequence of the flowing of her blood, all the joinings of her bones appeared, and were transparent like glass; and assuredly all the physicians had left her without hope, and had not cleansed her, for there was not in her a single hope of health: once, then, as Jesus was passing by, she took hold of the fringe of his clothes behind, and that same hour the power of her body was completely restored, and she became whole, as if nothing were the matter with her, and she began to run swiftly to her own city Paneas.
|
| |
Sin and the Flesh, How are they related? |
|
|
|
NT general
|
| |
Lionstrong, Remember that the English is not inspired, the original is. Even so, the Gospel writers use different words to describe the same scene. Mark 1:40, uses the word gonupeteo, while Matthew 8:2 uses proskuneo. This is where a leper asks to be made clean.
Using the NASB, I see the flesh and sin can be related, in Romans 7
-For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions (vs. 5)
-For we know that the Law is spiritual, but I am of flesh, sold into bondage to sin (vs. 14)
-For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not (vs. 18)
- Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin (vs. 25).
Romans 8:3 says, For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh … then Paul continues to compare the fleas with the Spirit.
Steve |
| |
Divine Healing, True or False? |
|
|
|
Matthew
|
| |
Dearest Kimberly,
Blessings in Christ Jesus!
Indeed, God is already doing a Big Thing, it is called the combined lives of His faithful servants. That is all He ever asks of us.
In my church, we see salvation, family, healing, worship and fellowship. This is much more than the way you despitefully say 'getting by.' John's disciples asked Jesus if He was the Expected One. They wanted to see a Humungous Warrior King-Boss-Conqueror. What they saw was a Wimp. But Jesus said,
'And Jesus answered and said to them, "Go and report to John what you hear and see: the blind receive sight and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them. And blessed is he who keeps from stumbling over Me."' Matthew 11:4-6 NASB.
Jesus is more than a Conqueror! But He doesn't have to stoop to cheap antics and firecracker noise! (the kind that is explosive, but only for a moment!)
However you put it, your attitude is one of expecting a Huge Spiritual Handout in exchange for your Bribe-giving to everyone who promises you a Huge Spiritual Handout. The Bible says apply yourself diligently to His service, AND be responsible in your life. Did it ever occur to you that working and saving diligently might be sowing for the harvest?
You say your church is 'already 2 years old.' :-) What is your rush! Jesus told us not to be anxious, but your postings just drip with anxiety, disatisfaction, and delusion.
My friend and forum colleague, I detect great faith and anticipation in your spirit. But your efforts are misguided, and your expectations are for a Jesus not spoken of in the Word. He is the Expected One. Be at peace! True, many churches and Christians are complacent, but your radicalism is the opposite pendulum swing, and equally far from God's holy intentions.
'Fruit or vegetables, the Word, or money... we need all these things to survive.' Please, don't put these together, as you mix apples and oranges. God has promised all that you need. What you WANT seems to be the same as the Gentiles.
I write this in love, and sincerely pray that it is received in love.
In Jesus' name, charis
|
| |
how far ever direction did jesus travel |
|
|
|
NT general
|
| |
2. Second Journey.
Passover, A.U.C. 779 - about Pentecost, 780. (Cf. John, ii-v; Mark, i-iii; Luke, iv-vii; Matt., iv-ix.)
Jesus goes from Capharnaum to Jerusalem for the Feast of the Passover; here he expels the buyers and sellers from the Temple, and is questioned by the Jewish authorities. Many believed in Jesus, and Nicodemus came to converse with Him during the night. After the festival days He remained in Judea till about the following December, during which period He received the fourth testimony from John who was baptizing at Ennon (A.V. Aenon). When the Baptist had been imprisoned in Machaerus, Jesus returned to Galilee by way of Samaria where He met the Samaritan woman at Jacob's well near Sichar; He delayed two days in this place, and many believed in Him. Soon after His return into Galilee we find Jesus again in Cana, where He heard the prayer who pleaded for the recovery of his dying son in Capharnaum. The rejection of Jesus by the people of Nazareth, whether at this time as, St. Luke intimates, or at a later period, as St. Mark seems to demand, or again both now and about eight months later, is an exegetical problem we cannot solve here. At any rate, shortly afterwards Jesus is mostly actively engaged in Capharnaum in teaching and healing the sick, restoring among others Peter's mother-in-law and a demoniac. On this occasion He called Peter and Andrew, James and John. Then followed a missionary tour through Galilee during which Jesus cured a leper; soon he again taught in Capharnaum, and was surrounded by such a multitude that a man sick of the palsy had to be let down through the roof in order to reach the Sacred Presence. After calling Matthew to the Apostleship, He went to Jerusalem for the second pasch occurring during His public life, it was on this occasion that He healed the man who been sick for thirty-eight years near the pool at Jerusalem. The charge of violating the Sabbath and Christ's answer were the natural effects of the miracle. The same charge is repeated shortly after the pasch; Jesus had returned to Galilee, and the disciples plucked some ripe ears in the corn fields. The question became more acute in the immediate future; Jesus had returned to Capharnaum, and there healed on the Sabbath day a man who had a withered hand. The Pharisees now make common cause with the Herodians in order to "destroy him". Jesus withdraws first to the Sea of Galilee, where He teaches and performs numerous miracles; then retires to the Mountain of Beatitudes, where He prays during the night, chooses His Twelve Apostles in the morning, and preaches the Sermon on the Mount. He is brought back to Capharnaum by the prayers of the centurion who asks and obtains the of his servant.
|
| |
how far ever direction did jesus travel |
|
|
|
NT general
|
| |
9. Ninth Journey.
February, A.U.C. 782- Passover, 782. (Cf. Luke, xvii-xxii; Mark., x, xiv; Matt., xix-xxvi; John, xi, xii.)
This last journey took Jesus from Ephrem northward through Samaria, then eastward along the border of Galilee into Peraea, then southward through Peraea, westward across the Jordan, through Jericho, Bethania on Mt. Olivet, Bethphage, and finally to Jerusalem. While in the most northern part of the journey, He cured ten lepers; a little later, He answered the questions raised by the Pharisees concerning the kingdom of God. Then He urged the need of incessant prayer by proposing the parable of the unjust judge; here too belong the parable of the Pharisee and Publican, the discourse on marriage, on the attitude of the Church towards the children, on the right use of riches as illustrated by the story of the rich young ruler, and the parable of the labourers in the vineyard. After beginning His route towards Jerusalem, He predicted His Passion for the third time; James and John betray their ambition, but they are taught the true standard of greatness in the Church. At Jericho Jesus heals two blind men, and receives the repentance of Zacheus the publican; here He proposed also the parable of the pounds entrusted to the servants by the master. Six days before the pasch we find Jesus at Bethania on Mt. Olivet, as the guest of Simon the leper; Mary anoints His feet, and the disciples at the instigation of Judas are indignant at this seeming waste of ointment. A great multitude assembles at Bethania, not to see Jesus only but also Lazarus; hence the chief priests think of killing Lazarus too. On the following day Jesus solemnly entered Jerusalem and was received by the Hosanna cries of all classes of people. In the afternoon He met a delegation of Gentiles in the court of the Temple. On Monday Jesus curses the barren fig tree, and during the morning He drives the buyers and sellers from the Temple. On Tuesday the wonder of the disciples at the sudden withering of the fig tree provokes their Master's instruction on the efficacy of faith. Jesus answers the enemies' questions as to His authority; then He proposes the parable of the two sons, of the wicked husbandmen, and of the marriage feast. Next follows a triple snare: the politicians ask whether it is lawful to pay tribute to Caesar; the scoffers inquire whose wife a woman, who has had several husbands, will be after ressurection; the Jewish theologians propose the question: Which is the first commandment, the great commandment of the law? Then Jesus proposes His last question to the Jews: "What think you of Christ? whose son is he?" This is followed by the eightfold woe against the Scribes and Pharisees, and by the denunciation of Jerusalem. The last words of Christ in the Temple were expressions of praise for the poor widow who had made an offering of two mites in spite of her poverty. Jesus ended this day by uttering the prophecies concerning the destruction of Jerusalem, His second coming, and the future judgement; these predictions are interrupted by the parable of the ten virgins and the talents. On Wednesday Jesus again predicted His Passion; probably it was on the same day that Judas made his agreement with the Jews to betray Jesus.
|
| |
Ritually unclean? |
|
|
|
Luke 7:14
|
| |
Jatfla, Let's say He did become unclean.
Numbers 19:11-13 says if anyone touches a dead person they are unclean for seven days and must purify himself with water on the third and seventh.
Hebrews 4:15 says He never sinned. It was not a sin to be unclean. Jesus also touched dead people, lepers and other causes of uncleanness. However, Jesus fulfilled the purpose of the purity laws -- He was morally and spiritually pure.
Steve
|
| |
Ritually unclean? |
|
|
|
Luke 7:14
|
| |
Touching a leper was unclean too so He had to go theu the purifying after that too. |
| |
Only seal and horse in same verse Rev6:5 |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
Sorry for making you wait, thanks for being patient!
Matt 10:7 And as ye go, preach saying," The kingdom of heaven is at hand."
Matt 10:8 Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give.
The Revelation
Revelation, the word itself means, the unveiling, to reveal. Most churches do not teach revelations because they are already gone or raptured out. The material I will be using , The King James Bible, Nestle Testus Receptus which is the oldest translations of new testament in the world, The Interlinear bible, Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, The Massorah which is the fence or footnotes used in the writing of the King James Bible, but taken out by man and also there was a letter from the translators of the King James to the reader which states, if there is anything confusing or contraversial, go back to the original language because they were in a hurry the Catholics were going to kill them. They did not want the common person to be able to study for him or herself. If you look around today nothing has changed.
Now let us go to Rev 13:18 Six Hundred threescore and six. The six hundred in the strongs is number 1812 hexakosioi, hex-ak-os-ee-oy, plur. Ordinai from 1803 and 1540 six hundred:- six hundred strongs 1803 six in the strongs is hex, a prim. numeral , six 1540: hekaton, hek-at-on; of uncert. affin; a hundred: the threescore is number 1835 in the strongs; hexekonta, hex-ay'-kon-tah, the tenth multiple of 1803, six;-six -fold, threescore. The last six would eem to be number 1803 but is not, in fact it is all wrong.
The correct way to translate is greek number 5516, for this is the way it is originally written and translated. Strongs 5516 chi xi stigma, khee-xee-stig'-ma, the 22nd, 14th, and an obsolete letter 4742 as a cross of the greek alphabet, intermediate between the 5th and 6th, used as numbers: denoting respectively 600,60 and 6. 666 as a numeral:-six hundred threescore and six. Strongs 4742 stigma, stig-mah; from a prim. Size to stick, i.e. prick; a mark incised or punched for recognition of ownership, i.e. fig., scar of service: -mark.
The key to this verse, Rev 13:18, is the words wisdom, reason and count. In the strongs wisdom is 4678: sophia, saf-ee-ah from 4680; wisdom , higher or lower, worldly or spiritual; -wisdom, 4680 sophos sof; akin to saphes,clear; wise, in a most gen. application:-wise compare 5429, 5424 the word reason in the strongs number 3563 none, noace; prob. from the base of 1097, the intellect, i.e. mind, divine or human, in thought, feeling,or will; by impl. meaning: -mind, understanding, cpmp. 5590. Strongs 1097 ginosko, ghin-oce'-ko; a prol. from a prim. verb, to know ,absol., in a great variety of applications and with many impl., as follow with others not thus clearly expressed: -allow, be aware of, feel, have known, perceive, be reserved, can speak, be sure, understand. The strongs number 5590 psuche, psoo-khay'; from 5594; breath i.e.by impl. spirit, abstr. or con., the animal sentient principle only, thus distinguished on the one hand from 4151, which is the rational and immortal soul; and on the other from 2222, which is mere vitality, even plants: these terms thus exactly correspond respectively to the Hebrew 5315, 7307 and 2416: heart,-ily, life, mind, soul, -us, -you. Strongs 5594 psucho, ploo'-kho; a prim. verb to breathe, voluntarily but gently, thus differing on the one hand from 4154, which denotes prop. a forcible respiration, and on the other from the base of number 109 which refers prop. to an inanimate breeze, i.e. by impl. fo reduction of temperature by evaporation, to chill,fig.; wax cold.
Count, the last of the key words. The word count in the Strongs is 5585 psephizo, psay-fid'-zo, from 5586 to use pebbles in enumeration, i.e., gen., to compute. Count number 5586 psephos, psay'-fos' from the same as 5584, a pebble, as worn smooth by handling, i.e. by impl. of use as a counter or ballot, a verdict of acquittal or ticket, of admission, a vote: -stone, voice 5584 pselaphao, psay-laf-ah'-a from the base of 5567, compare 5586, to manipulate, i.e. verify by contact, fig. to search for:-feel after, handle, touch.
To put it in easy terms, we are to count as stones in a stream worn over a long period of time.
How many books are in the Bible? There are 66 books worn over a period of time, before the cross and after the cross, all prophecy must be fulfilled for mankind and also for satan,old serpent,devil,the morning star, the dragon,serpent,appolyon. He plays many roles towards mankind on earth and in heaven. The bool of revelation is a book of symbollism. Take Rev 1:20, the mystery of the seven stars which thou sawest in My right hand and the seven golden candlesticks, The seven stars are the angels to the seven churches and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches. Stars are angels and candlesticks are 7 churches |
| |
Bible and evolution both? |
|
|
|
Gen 1:1
|
| |
Thanks for the welcome.
As I said before, my view is that the Genesis accounts of creation constitute a parable that informs us of God's transendence, power, and sovereignty. It also tells us that humans are unique in all creation, having been imbued with God's own spirit. Finally, it explains Satan and the existence of evil in God's perfect creation and confirms our depraved state in need of a savior. So I don't think it's a "make-believe story" at all. Jesus taught in parables; I think he got it from his father....
And I think is is worthwhile to reconcile the Bible with the natural world. First, the Bible tells us that the Creation testifies to the Creator (Psalms 8 and 19, for example, and Romans 1:20). Second, all truth is from God, including scientific truth. The traditional goal of science is to "think God's thoughts after him" (although many modern scientists reject the notion). Darwinian evolution fails becuase it contradicts the spiritual truths that God has revealed. Theistic evolution as I understand it only contracts the "science" of the Bible. Please keep in mind that if we accepted the Bible's teaching on leprosy as the final scientific word, the leper colony in Hawaii would still be in business.
Again, this is an interesting topic but a non-essential one.
Peace and grace,
Steve |
| |
Bible and evolution both? |
|
|
|
Gen 1:1
|
| |
Good points. I would just repeat something I said earlier - if everyone believed that the Bible was the last word on leprosy, we'd still have leper colonies. Science found a different explanation and a cure. Nonetheless, all true paths lead to God where all truth originates.
Peace and grace,
Steve |
| |
Compare the annointings of Jesus? |
|
|
|
NT general
|
| |
Good afternoon!
To answer your questions:
Yes, the gospel writers were using polite terms for prostitution.
The woman could have been anybody. We just do not know.
I'm not sure one can say Mary followed the example, but rather that they both had the same great idea.
As a side note, a comparison of the two anointings is an interesting study.
Both hosted by Simon--one an outcast, the other a dignitary.
At the Pharisee's house one went away righteous. At the leper's house, one went away condemned.
Comparisons of the places Jesus was anointed--head and feet.
Responses by the attendees of the action.
Great stuff!
Steve |
| |
do we have any free will? |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
I believe God's will for us is different than what actually takes place in our lives. I don't believe anyone has fulfilled God's will in their life completely, but only made attempts to. In Mark 1:39-42, the notion of something being "willed" into being is shown by Jesus healing the leper. That is God's will being fully exploited in a man's life. God wills for us to have life, and life more abundantly, but if he does not will it, it does not happen. We have free will, and God also has a plan for our lives. If these two intermingle once in a while, we say "Praise God for blessing me!" but that has always been his will for our lives. Blessings, life, health. Our actions sometimes move us out of his will, which is opposite of blessings....aka curses. If God's will was forced upon us, there would be no sin, but that sin already has been established in this world, and though he does not like it, i don't think He "liked" seeing his only begotten son die the most painful death known to man on the cross, while being humiliated in front of his "children." |
| |
"ONCE SAVED ALWAYS SAVED"!!! |
|
|
|
Matt 22:37
|
| |
I do not believed in "Once save always save".
It was happened to Judas. He is one of the twelve but then fall.:
Mt 10:1
¶ And when he had called unto him his twelve
disciples, he gave them power against unclean spirits,
to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness
and all manner of disease.
1. MHCC
Mt 10:2
Now the names of the twelve apostles are these; The
first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his
brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his
brother;
Mt 10:3
Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the
publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus,
whose surname was Thaddaeus;
Mt 10:4
Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also
betrayed him.
Mt 10:5
¶ These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded
them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and
into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
Mt 10:6
But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Mt 10:7
And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven
is at hand.
Mt 10:8
Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast
out devils: freely ye have received, freely give.
If it is happened to him to fall, it can happen to anyone if we are not be vigilant:
1Pe 5:8
¶ Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the
devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom
he may devour:
If once save is always save, why be vigilant? why Peter warn us that devil is like a roaring lion? walketh about, seeking whom he may devour: Meaning there are chance of falling.
I before belongs to the congregation that has that believed "Once Save is Always Save" but we have backslider we have members that back to thier habit and worsen than before. We do ex-communicated members because of some terrible situations. If Once Save id always save? how could church ex-communicates members.
Man had freed in his past life can be worsen if He is not being vigilant and watchfull:
Lu 11:24
When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he
walketh through dry places, seeking rest; and finding
none, he saith, I will return unto my house whence I
came out.
Lu 11:25
And when he cometh, he findeth it swept and
garnished.
Lu 11:26
Then goeth he, and taketh to him seven other spirits
more wicked than himself; and they enter in, and dwell
there: and the last state of that man is worse than the
first.
God bless,
Johnny
|
| |
Whole or Well? |
|
|
|
Luke 17:19
|
| |
GOOD DAY FORUM! I hope all is well with everyone!
Luke 17:12-19 speaks of 10 lepers calling to Jesus for healing and only one of them, a foreigner, returning to Thank him.
I'm having difficulty with one word in verse 19. Spending most all of my Christian life in the Old King James version of the Bible, which reads this way "And he said unto him, Arise, go thy way: thy faith hath made thee WHOLE." I had always thought maybe, (since leprosy can result in severe disfigurment, especially of the feet, hands, and face), that this one that returned to Jesus to thank him was made whole again. Meaning that any disfigurment was restored to it's original shape. I had thought that the others were healed but maybe not made whole. In the NASB and the New King James version the last word in verse 19 is WELL. I looked up the definitions of both words and the meaning of both of them are different: WHOLE meaning complete, WELL meaning in good health.
Any thoughts, facts, and/or Spiritual guidance on this?
THANK YOU Brothers and Sisters.
Cyclist |
| |
Raven and John Reformed, Baptism? |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
Why does the majority of the religous world deny the scriptures concerning baptism? When it is so clear that a person would have to be blind not to see it and read it. The entire bible centers around mans obediance to the will of God. Obediance, does this word give you a sick feeling? Is it hard for a person of your status to humble himself to be obedient to the word of God? Lets look at examples in the Old Testament first of obediance to Gods will. Gen 6 we read that God was sorry that He ever made man and was going to destroy them. But Noah verse 8 found grace in the eyes of the Lord. Noah was commanded to build an ark that would hold his family food and the animals 7 clean and 2 unclean. But Noah was also commanded to use only Gopher wood. And we should thank God that he did or we might not be here today. And so you know the rest of the story. But the key word obediance is specefied in verses 6:22, 7:5, 7:9 and 7:16. Noah did as God commanded.
Moveing on to Moses briefly, the construction of the tabernacle was extremly intricate. From Exodus 25-Exodus 31 the patteren for the tabernacle and priesthood was established. And God told Moses in verse 25:9 according to all that I show you, just so you make it. And from Ch. 35-39 the priesthood clothes and tabernacle funiture was made. And in Ch.39 it says concerning the construction of the tabernacle and all that was in them, ten times, Moses did according to all that the Lord had commanded him. Obediance to God is the only way to show our belief. And obediance is demanded of us.
You say that we are given our salvation by grace through faith. Eph 2:8 Well I submit to you that God give Jericho to Joshua and and the people of Israel, but they still had to march around the city once for six days and seven times on the seventh. Obediance to God is what give them this victory.
You remember the story of Naaman? He was commander of the army of the king of Syria. It says he was a great and honorable man and a mighty man of valor, but a leper. He went to see Elisha to be cleansed of the leprosy. He was told by a mesenger to go an wash in the river Jordan seven times. But wanting to have his way instead of Gods way, he wanted to substitute the rivers Abanah and Pharpar. He was furious because on the way to see Elisha he already had it figured out in his mind how he would make him well. He said, "Behold I thought". And then something was said to him by his servants, "My father, if the prophet had told you to do something great, would you not have done it?" So Naaman rethought his position, went and washed and was cleansed. We have to do as we are told when concerning the will of God. There can be no man made substitutions. Obediance to the will of God is the only way.
By these few examples can you not see that we must do all that the Lord has commanded us. And it doesn't matter if it is only spoken one time. If it was not something that God did not want us to do or to know it wouldn't be in the bible.
The sad thing about most denominational churches is according to their creed book one is saved by accepting or believing in Christ, nothing more, but to become a member of the their church they require baptism. Thus requiring more for one to become a member of their church than God requires of us to be saved! Its just not right! In Proverbs 14:12 we read:
Proverbs 14
12There is a way that seems right to a man,
But its end is the way of death.
And if we look at the example of Nanab and Abihu we can see that only death can result in not doing as the Lord has commanded.
Leviticus 10
2So fire went out from the LORD and devoured them, and they died before the LORD.
Also Moses who struck the rock instead of speak to it was told he would not enter the promised land.
Numbers 20
12Then the LORD spoke to Moses and Aaron, "Because you did not believe Me, to hallow Me in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore you shall not bring this assembly into the land which I have given them
to be continued....
Raven |
| |
Raven and John Reformed, Baptism? |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
I sent the same message to Tim.
Why does the majority of the religous world deny the scriptures concerning baptism? When it is so clear that a person would have to be blind not to see it and read it. The entire bible centers around mans obediance to the will of God. Obediance, does this word give you a sick feeling? Is it hard for a person of your status to humble himself to be obedient to the word of God? Lets look at examples in the Old Testament first of obediance to Gods will. Gen 6 we read that God was sorry that He ever made man and was going to destroy them. But Noah verse 8 found grace in the eyes of the Lord. Noah was commanded to build an ark that would hold his family food and the animals 7 clean and 2 unclean. But Noah was also commanded to use only Gopher wood. And we should thank God that he did or we might not be here today. And so you know the rest of the story. But the key word obediance is specefied in verses 6:22, 7:5, 7:9 and 7:16. Noah did as God commanded.
Moveing on to Moses briefly, the construction of the tabernacle was extremly intricate. From Exodus 25-Exodus 31 the patteren for the tabernacle and priesthood was established. And God told Moses in verse 25:9 according to all that I show you, just so you make it. And from Ch. 35-39 the priesthood clothes and tabernacle funiture was made. And in Ch.39 it says concerning the construction of the tabernacle and all that was in them, ten times, Moses did according to all that the Lord had commanded him. Obediance to God is the only way to show our belief. And obediance is demanded of us.
You say that we are given our salvation by grace through faith. Eph 2:8 Well I submit to you that God give Jericho to Joshua and and the people of Israel, but they still had to march around the city once for six days and seven times on the seventh. Obediance to God is what give them this victory.
You remember the story of Naaman? He was commander of the army of the king of Syria. It says he was a great and honorable man and a mighty man of valor, but a leper. He went to see Elisha to be cleansed of the leprosy. He was told by a mesenger to go an wash in the river Jordan seven times. But wanting to have his way instead of Gods way, he wanted to substitute the rivers Abanah and Pharpar. He was furious because on the way to see Elisha he already had it figured out in his mind how he would make him well. He said, "Behold I thought". And then something was said to him by his servants, "My father, if the prophet had told you to do something great, would you not have done it?" So Naaman rethought his position, went and washed and was cleansed. We have to do as we are told when concerning the will of God. There can be no man made substitutions. Obediance to the will of God is the only way.
By these few examples can you not see that we must do all that the Lord has commanded us. And it doesn't matter if it is only spoken one time. If it was not something that God did not want us to do or to know it wouldn't be in the bible.
The sad thing about most denominational churches is according to their creed book one is saved by accepting or believing in Christ, nothing more, but to become a member of the their church they require baptism. Thus requiring more for one to become a member of their church than God requires of us to be saved! Its just not right! In Proverbs 14:12 we read:
Proverbs 14
12There is a way that seems right to a man,
But its end is the way of death.
And if we look at the example of Nanab and Abihu we can see that only death can result in not doing as the Lord has commanded.
Leviticus 10
2So fire went out from the LORD and devoured them, and they died before the LORD.
Also Moses who struck the rock instead of speak to it was told he would not enter the promised land.
Numbers 20
12Then the LORD spoke to Moses and Aaron, "Because you did not believe Me, to hallow Me in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore you shall not bring this assembly into the land which I have given them
to be continued......
Raven |
| |
Saved by belief or belief and baptism? |
|
|
|
NT general
|
| |
Believing and faith go hand in hand. Mark 16:16 "He who believes and is baptized will be saved, but he who does not believe will be condemned" So there HAS to be a belief system inside you to be baptized, otherwise baptism will do you no good. Belief has to come first. The writer above has it correct by quoting Rom 3:28, but on the flip-side of the coin, James 2:24 says EXPLICITLY that "... a man is justified by works and not by faith alone" There is a huge difference between being justified by faith and being justified by faith ALONE. Use this analogy when making a cake for example: You can say that "you can make a cake by using cake mix" which is true. But can you say "you can bake a cake by using cake mix only"? Of course not, you need an oven, flour, water, etc.... to make that cake. But its a true statement that you can make a cake by using cake mix, but its not true to say that you can make a cake by using cake mix only. It cannot be done. I believe we can understand that simple analogy. The same goes for baptism. We are saved by baptism and not by baptism only. We are saved by faith but not by faith only. We are saved by confession (Rom 10:10) but not by confession only. We are saved by repentence (Acts 2:38) but not by repentence only. So its the combination of all these together that saves us. It is correct as the above writer said that its not water that saves us, but it is the obedience to God that does. Think of the story of Naaman in 2 Kings 5 where Naaman was a leper. He wanted to be healed of his leprosy. He was told by the man of God to go to the Jordan river and dip 7 times to be cleansed. Naaman question that like people question baptism today, "why do I have to be baptized?" why can't I just believe?". Naaman questioned it too! "Whats wrong with the rivers of Damascus?" he asked. But it wasn't til he went to the Jordan River and dipped 7 times that he was cleansed. Was it something in the water? Not at all. It was OBEDIENCE. It was the faith and the belief that cleansed him, not the water. Do you think that he would have cleansed if just dipped once or twice? Not at all, but he did what was asked of him to be cleansed, he obeyed it, and believed that doing what he was told would cleanse him and he it did. I hope this helps in trying to make sense of the "baptism" issue. |
| |
The Ten Commandments |
|
|
|
Ex 20:1
|
| |
False gods in the Old Testament
***************************************
1. Rachel's household gods (Gen. 31:19)
2. The golden calf at Sinai (Ex. 32)
3. Nanna, the moon god of Ur, worshiped by Abraham before his salvation (Josh. 24:2)
4. Asherah, or Ashtaroth, the chief goddess of Tyre, referred to as the lady of the sea (Judg. 6:24-32)
5. Dagon, the chief Philistine agriculture and sea god and father of Baal (Judg. 16:23-30; 1 Sam. 5:1-7)
6. Ashtoreth, a Canaanite goddess, another consort of Baal (1 Sam. 7:3,4)
7. Molech, the god of the Ammonites and the most horrible idol in the Scriptures (1 Kings 11:7; 2 Chr. 28:14; 33:6)
8. The two golden images made by King Jeroboam, set up at the shrines of Dan and Bethel (1 Kings 12:28-31)
9. Baal, the chief deity of Canaan (1 Kings 18:17-40; 2 Kings 10:28; 11:18)
10. Rimmon, the Syrian god of Naaman the leper (2 Kings 5:15-19)
11. Nishroch, the Assyrian god of Sennacherib (2 Kings 19:37)
12. Nebo, the Babylonian god of wisdom and literature (Isaiah 46:1)
13. Merodach, also called Marduk, the chief god of the Babylonian pantheon (Jer. 50:2)
14. Tammuz, the husband and brother of Ishtar (Asherah), goddess of fertility (Ezek. 8:14)
15. The golden image in the plain of Dura (Dan. 2)
[Taken from page 61 of the MacArthur Study Bible, 1997, Word Publishing, John MacArthur, Author and General Editor, http://www.gty.org]
Grace to you,
Makarios |
| |
Do you forgive Judas? |
|
|
|
John 13:11
|
| |
Mommapbs, forgiveness is always in order. But that is not the same thing as approbation. Jesus' pattern prayer teaches us to "forgive our debtors." This does not mean that Christians cannot and should not speak out clearly and forcefully against "inane and inept texts" or against any form of false or frivolous statements on this forum or anywhere else. 2 Timothy 3:16 uses, among others, the words 'reprove' and 'correction.' There is a growing battle cry in our culture for 'tolerance.' But the definition that is attached to the word generally means something like 'tacit approval' -- approval and acceptance of other religious views and teachings that are different from and often inimical to the teachings of Christianity. We are being taught and asked to believe that one religious faith is as good as another. We are fed the lie that even in Christendom, one church -- no matter what its adherents teach -- is just as true as any other. Christians who stand firm in their faith and oppose these views are often branded as bigots and troublemakers and treated as spiritual lepers. Mommapbs, your words to me, "I forgive you," sound magnanimous enough on the surface but carry the clear implication that some word or deed calling for forgiveness must have preceded them. So for what, may I ask, do you feel moved to come forward and announce that you forgive me? Wherein have I trespassed against you? --Hank |
| |
| To See More, Click Here... |
|
|
