|
| |
Are we all descendants of Adam and Eve? |
|
|
|
Genesis
|
| |
YES, WE ARE ALL DESCENDANTS OF ADAM AND EVE. WE ARE THEIR OFF SPRING.GOD ONLY CREATED THEM AND ONLY THEM. WE HAVE THE DESCENDANTS OF CAIN (UNCHOSEN SEED) AND THE DESCENDANTS OF SETH (THE CHOSEN SEED)GEN4:25 OF WHOM THE MESSIAH WILL COME. |
| |
HOW COULD JESUS BE A DESCENDANT OF DAVID |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
Jesus, the Messiah, Deliverer, Son of God and King of Kings, was concieved by the Holy Spirit and born of a virgin. The fullness of the Godhead dwelt bodily in Jesus while he was in every way a human being. Jesus was not fathered by any man, since no man had been with Mary (Luke 1:34). And Joseph, Mary's betrothed husband, at first struggled to accept this fact but later accepted it (Matthew 1:19-25). But Jesus had to be 'brought up' or 'brought forth' from the line of David; he Himself had to find his earthly beginnings and achieve his earthly ministry while being of the Kingly heritage of David. God's promise to David is ultimately fulfilled by Jesus as David's 'descendant' of whom it was promised in 2 Samuel 7:16, and in the line of Judah in Genesis 49:10: both fulfilled by the Lord Jesus Christ! And Luke 3:23-38 shows the 'direct line' genealogy from Mary, the vessel in which God used to deliver His only Son into this world, all the way down to David, and it even goes from David to Adam! And if you look in Matthew 1:1-17, you can see how Joseph, who was the step-father of Jesus, was also in the Kingly heritage, being a descendant of King David. So Jesus was in fact a descendant of David as well as being part of the royal heritage as promised by God. Now you ask: "What do you think about the Christ, whose son is He?" (Matthew 22:41-46) They said to Him, "The son of David." Jesus said to them, "Then how does David in the Spirit call him 'Lord', saying, "THE LORD SAID TO MY LORD, 'SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND, UNTIL I PUT YOUR ENEMIES BENEATH YOUR FEET' '? If David then calls him 'Lord', how is He his son?" Very good question! Here is the answer: Jesus was a descendant of David while he dwelt upon this earth, but He has always been and has always existed as God. He was never created by God but has always existed as part of the Godhead with His Father and the Holy Spirit. In this passage (Matthew 22:41-46), David called upon the Lord during his life, even the Lord Jesus! Now he says, 'THE LORD SAID TO MY LORD'.. This is God the Father in heaven saying to God the Son, "SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND UNTIL I PUT YOUR ENEMIES BENEATH YOUR FEET." So God the Son ascended into heaven to assume His Lordship at God the Father's right hand until the time when Jesus will return to earth in the Second Coming of Christ. So this is how the Lord Jesus is David's Lord (whom David called upon) and also David's son, or descendant, at the same time. I hope that this explanation helps. I use the New American Standard Bible ('95), which is my very favorite translation! |
| |
Saved by belief or belief and baptism? |
|
|
|
NT general
|
| |
Prehaps if you look at baptism as an outward act which manifests the faith you have in the Messiah Yahoshua, rather than a requirement, you would ask this question: Why would you not want to be baptized if you have faith in Messiah? I can see no reason; but, if your faith was not from the heart, then it may not be true faith; and, thus, it may not move you to do so! I see true faith as a force, and it moves those who have it to act; so, the world can't talk itself into that faith (noone ever could).
I am not trying to say you do not have faith. I am saying that I do not see any place in Acts where those who had the true faith refusing to be baptized. They were more than willing to do it to show that faith in Him that was working in them (for it moved them to do so). That faith is of His Holy Spirit (Gal. 5:22,23; Eph. 5:9; and I Cor. 13:13) in us as it was in them. Same faith, which is, of the one and the self same Spirit.
I mention the passage in Ephesians only to point out this: there are 12 fruits of the Spirit, and faith is one of them (so are righteousness, truth, and hope - these are the three that are not mentioned in the book of Galatians). And, we all know that the greatest of these is the love of "God" which casts out fear and by which we are made perfect in Him; for He is love (I John 4:7-18). |
| |
Was Jesus Christ circumsized? |
|
|
|
NT general
|
| |
Yahoshua could not come to Him own people, come to them as one of them, if He were not circumsized. The word says that Messiah would come of the tribe of Judah, so that told us He would be a Jew, and thus He came as a Jew. Note His name: Yah means "Yahveh", and oshua means "our Saviour", so His name of Yah-oshua means "Yahveh our Saviour". In the KJV it says His name was called JESUS, but, this was never the case. It is like the 6,000 plus times the word YHVH is incorrectly rendered "the LORD".
YHVH came to fulfill the Torah in their sight and purchase them unto Himself by His death on the cross for their (and our) sins. One day they will see Him as YHVH their Saviour, and, in that day I will rejoice - may it come quickly. |
| |
Does the Bible contradict itself? |
|
|
|
James 2:1
|
| |
True faith is a fruit of the living and powerful Holy Spirit of Messiah in a man, which moves that man to act, so Paul and James are not contradicting each other at all.
These works of faith we are doing are not the strict observance of the Torah some to, doing so to be justified by those deeds of the law in the sight of YHVH; instead, they are those good works He has prepared (ordained) for us, in Him, that we should walk in them.
Faith that does not compel you, that does not move you, that is not the faith of the Holy Spirit; but, it is a faith of the flesh (and, it is dead). I have seen people trying to talk up, or build up, their own faith; yes they say that they believe, but they do not act like believers. So, we say, if the Holy Spirit is moving you then it will be your actions (and not your words) that will show that living faith is in you.
The Anti-Christ is a religious man, who walks in a carnal understanding of the scriptures, but who never will have the manifestation of the living faith of the Holy Spirit in his life (his power is of the Devil, who encourages him to walk in the vanity of his own mind). He is a carnal man, walking in a carnal mind and a dead faith, who leads all who follow him in the way of destruction. A pretender! A make believer! He is not compelled by the Spirit, but by the flesh, and he is doing the works of the flesh (Gal. 5:19-21). His power to do witchcraft (the miracles he does) is of the Devil (HaSatan). |
| |
What I am asking is baptism a requiement |
|
|
|
NT general
|
| |
I do not think I misinterpreted your question. I simply stated that looking at baptism (a mikvah - ritual bath) as some sort of requirement for salvation is viewing it in the wrong way.
The baptism (mikvah) can not be done on an infant; for, it is an outward work done by faith, and how can an infant do a work of faith (or even have faith, see Romans 10:17). It is an immersion, as the word shows clearly, which in done with both those who are being baptized and those who are baptizing in the water. It is not a sprinkling of water on someone who has not professed a faith in Messiah (that is a baptism of the Roman Catholics, it is not the baptism of the Church of Yahoshua the Messiah).
Now, the Jews did the mikvah in living (running) water. That is how "John" the baptist baptized, it is how Philip (in Acts 8:36,37) baptized the Ethiopian Eunuch, and it is how may Messianiac Jews baptize today (not all). Notice, the faith of the Eunuch, that was in him, was moving him to be baptized by Philip; he did not ask Philip if being baptized was a requirement for him to be saved. So, I repeat, when a man is looking at the mikvah (baptism) as an act required to be preformed in order to be saved, that man is looking at it in the wrong light. Water baptism is a work of faith and not a "requirement", the baptism of the Spirit of Holiness of Yahoshua is a "requirement" (John 3 speaks of this very clearly, as does I Corinthians 12:13). |
| |
ISREAL'S REJECTION OF THE MESSIAH |
|
|
|
Not Specified
|
| |
SINCE ISREAL HAS REJECTED THE MESSIAH AND HAS BEEN CONTINUALLY DISOBEDIENT TO GOD, DOES THEIR WILLFUL REJECTION OF THE SAVIOR NULIFY THEIR RIGHTS TO THE LAND OF CANNAN ( ISREAL) ? |
| |
ISREAL'S REJECTION OF THE MESSIAH |
|
|
|
Romans
|
| |
SINCE ISREAL HAS REJECTED THE MESSIAH AND HAS BEEN CONTINUALLY DISOBEDIENT TO GOD, DOES THEIR WILLFUL REJECTION OF THE SAVIOR NULIFY THEIR RIGHTS TO THE LAND OF CANNAN ( ISREAL) ? |
| |
ISREAL'S REJECTION OF THE MESSIAH |
|
|
|
Romans
|
| |
God makes it pretty clear in ROM 11:1-2 "I say then, God has not rejected His people, has He? May it never be! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not rejected His people whom He foreknew."
God's promises to Israel are based upon God's faithfulness not Israel's. |
| |
Saved by belief or belief and baptism? |
|
|
|
NT general
|
| |
BELIEVE ON THE LORD JESUS CHRIST AND YOU SHALL BE SAVED,ACTS 16:31.BAPTISM IS AN ACT OF OBEDIENCE THAT ONE CHOOSES TO DO WHEN THEY ARE BORN AGAIN.FOR INSTANCE THE THEIF ON THE CROSS WAS NOT BAPTIZED HOW EVER CHRIST TOLD HIM THAT THIS DAY YOU SHALL BE WITH ME IN PARADISE. ACTS 2:38 IS TELLING THE JEWS WE USED TO BE BAPTIZED IN THE NAME OF YAHWEH. NOW RECONIZE CHRIST AS MESSIAH AND BE BAPTIZED IN HIS NAME.LOVE RC.SCROLL |
| |
Acts 2:38 not water baptism? |
|
|
|
Col 3:17
|
| |
ACTS 2:38 IS ABOUT WATER BUT IS ALSO A SCRIPTURE THAT RECONIZES JESUS AS MESSIAH. REMEMBER OF EVERYONE THERE,THEY WERE ALL JEWS.TO BECOME A JEW IN THE OLD WAYS WAS TO BE BAPTIZED IN THE NAME OF YAHWEY, PETER IS JUST CLARIFYING THAT CHRIST JESUS IS THE ANOINTED , AND THAT THE NAME OF THE SON OF GOD IS JESUS. THESE JEWS WOULD ALLTIMATLY GIVE THEIR VERY LIFE TO DENOUNCE THE LAW AND JUDAISM.LOVE YOUR BROTHER IN CHRIST RCSCROLL |
| |
any comments are welcome on this book |
|
|
|
Haggai
|
| |
Dear melchizedekau, OK, I'll bite. I believe that the Lord wants His people to build His church in the pattern first given, that of simplicity and obedience and faith. Israel wanted to build their religion of self-righteousness and earthly glory. That is why they could not recognize Jesus as the Messiah. He spoke of faith, obedience, and simplicity. I believe that this book represents to us a call to return to the Lord in repentance. Our ways are petty and legalistic, the church is divided in much the same manner as the days of Christ, all believing their complicated sets of rules and doctrines to be superior to all the others. None are willing to receive a suggestion that God's will is simpler than 'their way,' bringing all to an impass. "Let's agree to disagree" is a code for "Let's keep on in the status quo, and stick to our own camps."
"'The latter glory of this house will be greater than the former,' says the Lord of hosts,' and in this place I shall give peace,' declares the Lord of hosts."Haggai 2:9 I believe this passage says to us today that the coming age will have more glory (faith, unity, fellowship) than the early church. In Christ Jesus.
|
| |
What is the point? |
|
|
|
1 Thessalonians
|
| |
Dear JVH0212...In the KJV Matthew 24:24 the words "if it" are italicized. I think a clearer translation of the verse is..."For false messiahs and false prophets will rise up and perform great miraculous signs and wonders so as to deceive, if possible, even God's chosen ones. Matt 24:24 (NLT)... John 6:37 says Jesus will never reject us... not that apostasy is not possible. Likwise, Romans 8:28 is speaking... "of those who love God and are called according to his purpose for them." (NLT)... not to those who are about to become apostate. Please understand that I am speaking from an Arminian perspective, which in addition to personally believing is correct, I think it is best supported by Scripture. Therefore... would you be so kind as to comment on the following Scriptures from your perspective: "Anyone who parts from me is thrown away like a useless branch and withers. Such branches are gathered into a pile to be burned." John 15:6 (NLT) "Notice how God is both kind and severe. He is severe to those who disobeyed, but kind to you as you continue to trust in his kindness. But if you stop trusting, you also will be cut off." Romans 11:22 (NLT) "For it is impossible to restore to repentance those who were once enlightened--those who have experienced the good things of heaven and shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the power of the age to come-- and who then turn away from God. It is impossible to bring such people to repentance again because they are nailing the Son of God to the cross again by rejecting him, holding him up to public shame.Heb 6:4-6 (NLT) Thanks for your response. Let's talk more. Blessings to you!
|
| |
what were the 7 Messianic signs |
|
|
|
Not Specified
|
| |
What were the 7 signs/miracles that only the Messiah could fulfil |
| |
what were the 7 Messianic signs |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
What were the 7 signs/miracles that only the Messiah could fulfil |
| |
what were the 7 Messianic signs |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
When you say "the 7 Messianic signs," to what are you referring? Jesus did many signs and the OT contains hundreds of prophecies pertaining to the Messiah. I'm not sure there are 7 and only 7 Messianic signs that only the Messiah could fulfill. Could you please elaborate on your question? |
| |
what were the 7 Messianic signs |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
Sorry I didn't clarify that - I meant what were the 7 signs/miracles that the Jews looked for that would prove the Messiah had come itis possibly a rabbinical question. |
| |
what were the 7 Messianic signs |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
Do the Scriptures clearly indicate somewhere that there were precisely 7 Messianic signs or miracles that only the Messiah could fulfill? This is the first I've heard of such a Biblical prophecy of 7 signs, but I'm interested in hearing what Bible passage you may be referring to.
The only reference to 7 signs I'm aware of was a movie called, "The Seventh Sign," which I was unfortunate enough to see a few years ago. That movie had virtually nothing to do with the Scriptures. Please tell me this isn't what you're referring to. |
| |
WHY DOSE IT HAVE TO BE MOSSES AND ELIJAH |
|
|
|
Revelation
|
| |
Remember when the disciples asked Jesus why does scribes say Elijah must come first and Jesus said, Elijah is coming, but than he goes on to say, but I tell you that he has also come and they did to him as they wanted. If you notice in (NKJ) Mark 9:12 Jesus said, Elijah is coming, speaking of the future, but in 9:13, he says, Elijah has also come, speaking of John the Baptist, and they did to him whatever they wished.
What Jesus is talking about, is the difference between John the Baptist (Elijah than) and Elijah of are day Here’s the difference, John the Baptist did come with the spirit and power of Elijah, but John’s power was in speaking and so they did to him as they wanted, they beheaded him and also, he didn’t set all things straight, he just opened the way for the coming of the messiah (Jesus).
The Elijah of are day also comes with the spirit and power of Elijah, but his power is not just in speaking, he comes in power literally and they don’t do to him as they want and he sets all things straight and opens the way for the second coming of the messiah
|
| |
What makes John the Baptist greater ? |
|
|
|
Luke 7:27
|
| |
1 Peter 1:10-12, 17-21 and Col 1:26-2:3
This is probably one of those "hard sayings of Jesus" in the book by the same name. I don't have it in front of me (and don't remember exactly what that author(s) wrote about this, but I would strongly recommend the book as a reference (particularly for questions of this type) I believe F.F. Bruce is the writer, but there is a series of "Hard Sayings" books by several solid authors.
Anyway, one sense in which I believe John the Baptist would be considered "greater" than all previous prophets and saints was that he was able to look into the fulfilment of his prophecies and understand the identity of the Messiah that he was proclaiming (at least to a certain degree). John recognized Jesus when the Holy Spirit descended on him (although he had some uncertainty later), but the prophets of the Old Testament longed to look into the secrets they were foretelling about the Messiah and the salvation of Israel and the nations; those secrets were hidden until their revelation in Jesus the Christ. All believers who came after him have access to these (but not all) mysteries and can thus more fully rejoice (in this life) in the hope and salvation that God has given us. (See 1 Peter 1 and Colossians 1.) |
| |
Invalid 'gifts?' |
|
|
|
Eph 4:11
|
| |
remeber you the words that were spoken before of the Apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ.Jude 1:17 past tense.Peter said that you may _(remember) what was said before of the prophets,and of the commandments of us the Apostles .past tense and we can remember thank God we have the word.Why would we have to remember if we still had them to warn us in person. The office of an apostle maybe could be described as a church planter today but they would not be doing miricles, for I have yet to see a blind man healed instantly or a dead man raised from dead,you only here you dont see . If an Apostle was walking the face of this earth he would only have to remain in one place all manner of sickness and deformaties would be healed.And we could have a news crew there 24-7 for all would be healed. Prophets told of the messiah coming,the office of a prophet to day tells of what he did and can do for them. one foretells of future events concerning Christ, and the one for today gos forthtelling of the events that took place. jeremiah 23 discribes what people who say they speak for God are verse20 and on. Love RCSCROLL |
| |
Why was Abraham called the friend of God |
|
|
|
James 2:23
|
| |
Matt. 1:1 "The record of the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham:NASB Why was Jesus called the son of Abraham? |
| |
what was Mary's geneology |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
Jesus Himself was... being, as was supposed, the son of Joseph, the son of Eli, the son of.... (Luke 3:23f, NASB)
Thank you for your gracious response, Ray. I'd like to add some additional explanation as to why I'm convinced that Luke gave the genealogy of Jesus through Mary's father rather than through Joseph. After this posting, I'll be taking at least a week off from the list. I hope to get back on and read any responses at that time.
Luke deliberately added the phrase, "... being as was supposed, the son of Joseph," to the beginning of this lineage. It would seem pointless, immediately after pointing out that Joseph was not actually Jesus father, for Luke to proceed with Joseph's lineage. Therefore, it's most reasonable to presume that he will proceed with a different lineage. Perhaps Matthew's account, giving Jesus' royal ancestry as the adopted son of Joseph, was already printed. Even if not printed yet, the lineage was almost definitely available in circulation for a historian such as Luke to use, yet he gave a different version. I believe Luke did this in order to demonstrate that Jesus the Messiah was not only the adopted heir to the throne of David but also the natural blood descendant of David according to prophecy.
It's my understanding that New Testament Greek had no punctuation, and that translators seek to use punctuation that expresses the ideas while avoiding interpretation as much as possible. However, since I do not claim the authority of a translator, I will have the audacity to simply add punctuation to the NIV translation. Version 1 is the Luke 3:23b from the NIV with punctuation removed, and version 2 has what I feel is the appropriate punctuation added. Version 3 is as it appears in the actual NIV.
1) He was the son so it was thought of Joseph the son of Heli,...
2) He was (the son, so it was thought, of Joseph) the son of Heli,...
3) He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph, the son of Heli,...
Thanks for your patience. |
| |
Can man refuse God's invitation? |
|
|
|
Luke 14:16
|
| |
You are right. The parable refers to God offering His kingdom and the gift of salvation to the Jewish people 2000 years ago. The Jewish people refused not believing that Christ was the true Messiah. This refussal is the gift of God called free will. In Genesis 2:15-16 it tells us that God gave Adam the responsibility of caring for the Garden of Eden and told him not to eat of the fruit rather than physically preventing him from doing so. In other words God gave Adam the choice of eating the fruit or not eating the fruit. Throughout the bible are countless stories when man went against God's wishes and chose to do what God commanded them not to do.
The Luke parable is just another example of man not choosing God's way.
God's call is irresistable. If it were not there would be no evil in the world. Man would not be able to refuse God if His call was indeed irresistable.
(When the Jewish people refused the invitation God then extended that invitation to the Gentiles).
|
| |
Timing 1st mtg between John TB and Jesus |
|
|
|
John 1:33
|
| |
If you examine the context of when John said that he, “did not know Him [Jesus]” (Jn 1:33), you would find that his statement went quite a bit deeper. In fact, John makes an even more profound statement in verse 30. “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’ (NAS).” Later Jesus Himself makes a similar statement to the Pharisees in 8:58, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.” With that, we see that the Apostle John, the writer, plays on the word “know” (Greek word, oida). It could also be translated as recognize, acknowledge, understand. But the writer also uses this word prior in verse 26, “I baptize in water, but among you stands One whom you do not know.” The people all knew who Jesus was; to them, He was the carpenter, He was Mary and Joseph’s son (John 6:42), to John the Baptist, he was just a cousin, but like John the Baptist, they all didn’t really know who He really was and is – as Messiah, as King, as Lord, as God. It wasn’t until then that John the Baptist had a “revelation” of who Jesus is. The Pharisees didn’t know who He was, and yet He walked among them all. “None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory” (1Cor 2:8). Even today, Jesus is walking among us and so many claim to “know” Him, but they really don’t. Over 80 percent of the people in America claim to be Christians, yet America is one of the most wicked and sinful nations in the world. “Christianity” has become just a “religion,” a tradition, and “church” has become a business machine and another big money-corporation. We need CHANGE, we need a Jesus REVOLUTION in America. We NEED a revelation of who Jesus really IS. Let’s really pursue Jesus and know Him.
Jesus Liberation,
nameless |
| |
Can angels have human babies? |
|
|
|
Gen 6:4
|
| |
Conclusion Regarding Angels
The wickedness of man in the days of Noah.
Gen 6 Chapter
(1-2) Intermarriage between the sons of God and the daughters of men.
During these days of rapid population expansion especially because of long life spans in the pre-flood world, there was a problem with ungodly intermarriage between the sons of God and the daughters of men.
Many people have understood that the sons of God were those from the line of Seth, and the daughters of men were from the line of Cain, and this describes an intermarriage between the godly and ungodly - something God Specifically prohibits (Deu 7:-4; 2 Cor 6:14)
but this approach leaves many unanswered questions: Why did this make God angry enought to wipe out almost all the earth's population? Why was there something "unnatural" about the offspring of there unions?
The phrase sons of God Clearly refers The angelic creatures when it is used the three other times in the OT (Job 1:6, 2:1, and 38:7). The translators of the Septuagint translated sons of God as "angels"; they clearly thought it referred to angelic beings, not the line of Seth.
Jude 6 tells us of the angesls who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own habitation; Jude goes on (7) to tell us that they sinned in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual unnatural sexual union.
It is useless to speculate on the nature of the union. Whether it was brought about by something like demon possession, or whether angels have power permanently to assume the form of men is not revealed. But we should understand that the occult is filled with sexual associations with demonic, and there are those today who actively pursue such associations.
Jude 6 also makes it clear what God did with these wicked angels: they are reserved in everlasting chains under darkness from the judgment of the great day. By not keeping their proper place, they are now kept in chains-their sinful persuit of freedom has put them in bondage.
1 Peter 3:19-20 tells us that Jesus went to these disobedient spirits in their prison and proclaimed His victory on the cross over them.
An objection offered to theis understanding is found in Matt 22:30, Where Jesus said that angels neither marry nor given in marriage; but Jesus never said that ANGELS WERE SEXLESS, and He was also speaking about faithful angels (angels of God in heaven), not rebellious one.
From the book of 1 Enoch, which is not inspired scripture by man, but may still contain some accurate accounts: "And it came to pass the children of men had multiplied that in those days were born unto them beautiful and comely daughters. And the angels, the children of heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said one another: 'Come, let us choose for himself one, and they began to go unto them and to defile themselves with them, and they taught them charms and enchantments...And they became pregnant, and they bared great giants...And there arose much godlessness, and they commited fornication, and they were led astray, and became corrupt in all their ways."
Why would satan send his angels to intermarry(either directly or indirectly with human women?
Satan was trying to pollute the genetic "pool" of mankind with a satanic corruption; to put a genetic "virus" that would make the human race unfit for bring forth the Seed of the woman-the Messiah-promised in Gen 3:15.
"The Savior could not be born of a demon-possessed mother. So if satan could succeed in infecting the entire race, the deliverer could not could not come."
And, satan almost succeed; the race was so polluted that God found it necessary to start again with Noah and his sons, and imprison the demons who did this, so they could never do so again.
3-4 God's first promises that His Spirit shall not strive with man forever; this means that there is a point of "no return" in our rejection of God. God will not woo us forever, there is a point where He will say "no more".
Verse four refers to the unnatrual offspring of the union between the sons of God and the daughters of men; though there were people of unusual size on the earth both before and after the flood (and also afterward), these before the flood were unique because of the demonic element of their parentage-they were the might men of old, men of renown. I pray that this be a Blessing to those who are seeking of God word of truth. To who the reader may be...Study and show yourself approved unto 'God' and workman the need not to be ashame but rightly dividing the word of truth. II Tim 2:15 The reference you need is in the Word of God. My answer is "YES" angels can produce offspring if God the Father allows or permits it. But there's a price for disobedient and rebellious angels, demons, peoples, and etc.
Don't take my words, take God's word. When you study. Let your spirit lead you to the material to read or study. Ehp 4:14-15 |
| |
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. |
| |
How have the offices changed? |
|
|
|
Eph 4:11
|
| |
An apostle would be a missionary today not a foundational Apostle, prophet would be one who tells of things such as messiah Jesus Christ coming. and proclaims the word, exhort edify.love in Christ RCScroll He did tell you the foundation was completed. we are the building fitly framed together . |
| |
intro to Christ |
|
|
|
Luke 7:27
|
| |
John the baptist is fore told in malachi 3:1 he also introduced messiah.love in Christ RCScroll |
| |
| To See More, Click Here... |
|
|
