|
|
USER COMMENTS BY OBSERVER |
|
|
Page 1 | Page 2 · Found: 500 user comments posted recently. |
| | | |
|
|
1/12/18 1:13 AM |
|
Thread closed Report abuse
|
DaveSo this is the first instance of a man performing miracles and these are the lessons that we learn: 1. The Lord enabled him to perform sign miracles 2. A "sign" is a message 3. The "message" is that the person performing the sign miracles is genuinely sent by God with new revelation The Israelites became trained to expect sign miracles from all of their prophets. See Psalm 74.9a "We see not our signs: there is no more any prophet...." Why do you suppose the scribes and pharisees demanded a sign of Christ? Matthew 12:38 Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee. Or Why do you suppose that Christ is recorded to have performed so many miracles? Turn now to Heb 2. The writer is speaking of the great salvation which was first spoken of by the Lord and which was confirmed by the apostles who heard him and then verse 4 reads: God also BEARING THEM WITNESS, both with SIGNS AND WONDERS, and with DIVERS MIRACLES, and GIFTS OF THE HOLY GHOST, according to his own will Did you catch that? It's about GOD authenticating his messengers! That is what the sign miracles have always been about in the bible, unless you read the Bible with your eyes closed. OOS |
|
|
1/12/18 12:53 AM |
|
Thread closed Report abuse
|
Shane wrote: ... I just find it presumptuous to say that these things no longer exist without the scripture to back it. You think I believe what I do without scriptural warrant? Ok, Shane let's start looking at the whole issue from scratch. The law of first mention is extremely important. Who was the first recorded person to perform miracles? Why were they able to perform these miracles? Let's look, shall we? The answer is Moses, and the precise reason why he was enabled to perform miracles is plainly stated. Turn with me to Exodus 4 verse 1, where Moses expresses his concern that the Israelites may not believe him or that it was God who had really appeared to him and sent him. It is only at this point that the Lord tells him to cast the rod onto the ground etc and shows him what He is capable of and then verses 8, 9 reads "..8 And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe thee, neither hearken to the voice of the first sign, that they will believe the voice of of the latter sign 9 And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe also these two signs, neither hearken unto thy voice...." OOS |
|
|
1/11/18 5:57 PM |
|
Thread closed Report abuse
|
Chase wrote: Although most manuscripts do have this portion of Scripture, our most reliable manuscripts do not. And that is precisely the problem. You give too much credence to textual popelings! Since we don't have the autographs who is to say which are reliable and which not, leaving aside the 2 Romish corruptions, and those which are derived from areas where obvious heresy was being hatched? No one said that Mark 16 was the only place which is contorted and used to teach something that it does not support. Michael Kruger is an authority because he has written books on it?! Wow! I'm really impressed! |
|
|
1/11/18 5:15 PM |
|
Thread closed Report abuse
|
Chase wrote: .. Mark 16, specifically the longer ending of Mark, is a highly disputed text anyhow and many textual critics see it as not being written by Mark at all. Because of this we should refrain from using this section of Scripture for doctrine. ... Because some "popelings" cast doubt on it, we should all cease to use it for doctrine? Really?! Your otherwise good post was ruined by this ginormous fly in the ointment. I can accept the disputed ending of Mark as the Word of God and still use it to refute the shallow understanding of some who try and use it to argue for Charismaticism. |
|
|
1/11/18 3:36 PM |
|
Thread closed Report abuse
|
Lurker wrote: .... Prophesy, not stammer. Excellent bro! Bro James I know what you mean, but you appear to have missed the gist of my post and I can't agree about the equivalence between OT prophets and the apostles. Apostles were those who were eye-witnesses of the Lord's life, death and resurrection, and were commissioned by the Lord - Paul only being excepted in terms of witnessing the Lord's life and death because he was as one born out of due time. They had full gospel light and were promised that they would be led into all the truth, whereas the OT prophets saw vaguely, dimly and desired to know more 1 Peter 1.10,11. The apostles were the foundation of the NT, not the OT prophets. They have privileges in the kingdom not given to other. And finally even by our Lord's reckoning the greatest OT prophet viz John the Baptist was nothing compared to the least in the kingdom of heaven Matt 11.11 I agree that they all spoke God's word, but I dare not discount the huge differences otherwise. Blessings bro. Sister MS Warfield's book is a classic, but very few these days have the stomach for it. Itching ears syndrome prevents them enjoying the old paths. Delusion is preferable to truth especially to the special ones. |
|
|
1/11/18 1:09 PM |
|
Thread closed Report abuse
|
Alice wrote: ... “Jesus Christ the same yesterday, today & forever.” It’s Biblical. I come across this kind of shallow thinking all the time, that because Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever that nothing should therefore change.Well where were the apostles in the OT? Where is the gift of tongues in the OT? Why were these things introduced in the NT if Jesus Christ is the same all the time? Nothing should change, right? Jesus pre-exited his birth, so why did he need to be born if nothing needs to change because he is ever the same? Why did he have to die, if nothing ever changes? Why did he have to be resurrected, if he is always the same? |
|
|
1/11/18 12:03 PM |
|
Thread closed Report abuse
|
Nete wrote: Stop buying into this folly. He is not the only player praying to win. This is what Russia has done to change the minds of weak minded,unlearned people. It only causes confusion while the enemy takes many captive. Why the article made its way onto this board only shows how Satan attempts to keep our minds on real issues that impact souls for eternity. Care to explain how your comment is a response to mine? |
|
|
1/11/18 11:23 AM |
|
Thread closed Report abuse
|
Oops!"It answer in the nature of the thing itself" Should have read "The answer is in the nature of the thing itself" |
|
|
1/11/18 10:47 AM |
|
Thread closed Report abuse
|
Shane wrote: Scripture and verse, please, that shows that the gift pf tongues is know longer present. Good morning broWe don't need a specific verse telling us that tongues have ceased, any more than we do to tell us that there are no more apostles. It answer in the nature of the thing itself. Tongues and the other sign gifts had a specific purpose and we are told what this was in the NT. That purpose is no longer valid and therefore of necessity the thing has ceased. Same with the "apostles" who were foundational to the church. How many foundations can a building have? Happy to elaborate more if you wish me to. |
|
|
1/9/18 4:57 PM |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
[URL=https://freedomtofollowjesuschrist.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/12274621_1213752385342930_4577882618908032094_n.jpg]]] Which Jesus do you follow? [/URL] |
|
|
1/9/18 3:55 PM |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
I had not read through this thread from yesterday, so apologies that I had missed the various posts.Bro Lurker Thanks. I'm glad you agree. Bro James I know that there is a dispute over verse 21 - whether it should read within you, or among you. But I believe the AV translators got it right, and so the point you make is perfectly valid. Bro Christopher Since I don't use a phone to post I cannot tell which threads are dropping off from view. So sadly I'm not in a position to determine which would be the best one. Any help would be gratefully received Sister penned Bro Kev Good to see you posting again! And a to your post. |
|
|
1/9/18 2:05 PM |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
contd...The question to ask is, do the Scriptures tell us what this other nation is that will be given the kingdom because it brings forth fruits thereof? The answer is yes, the NT tells us precisely what this nation is. But those who don't raise the question and expect an answer will in all likelihood never see the answer and will be left to their carnal conjectures. So, what is this nation? Turn to 1 Peter 2.9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light; Who is Peter addressing? Why, its believers!! And what specifically does he tell them ... they are an HOLY NATION!! Believers are the nation to whom the kingdom is given. Are there other places in the NT which can confirm this? Sure! We considered Col 1.13 yesterday ... but think on that verse again...all the citizens of this kingdom are there by being translated spiritually from the kingdom of darkness. The same thought is echoed in John 3.5 ...Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. There are many more places but I'll stop here. Hope this is helping. |
|
|
1/9/18 12:14 PM |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
Jim Lincoln wrote: ...Frank, worldly agenda? You mean the racist GOP agenda that I detest❗ HmmmConsidering you support the party that promoted slavery, segregation, jim crow laws etc it's a bit rich for you to stand on your high horse looking down at the party that opposed all those things. Maybe a "History of the Dem party" 101 course would be a good place for your re-education? On second thoughts scrap that idea. I really do believe you are beyond being educated. You need the new birth! |
|
|
1/9/18 11:19 AM |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
Dave wrote: ..don't think I'm ignoring you .. No worries broSomething more for you to consider. Here are the words the Lord addressed to the chief priests and elders in the temple: Matthew 21 42 Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes? 43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof In these verses we have the final rejection of the nation of Israel as the kingdom of God and the announcement that it would be given to another "nation" bringing forth the fruits thereof. Now immediately the literalist with a carnal understanding will look at which nation this represents on the earth. Since it is no longer Israel, the British Israelites might suggest that it is Britain. But is that what the Lord had in mind? Because the Bible is a spiritual book and we are looking to understand the mind of God, we are taught to compare scripture with scripture because God sheds light on one passage with another and so the more we know of the Bible the more we can understand. OOS |
|
|
1/8/18 8:49 PM |
|
Add new comment Reply to comment Report abuse
|
Dave wrote: ..questions and reply will take about a year to come .. Bro you take all the time you need. As I said before this is a hugely important and vast topic, because we are dealing here with establishing the Bible's own hermeneutical rules.Rather than pile too much on your plate, I just want to address one other issue. Some suggest that Christ will establish an earthly kingdom when he returns and that his throne will then be in Jerusalem. But what saith the Scriptures? Look at 1 Cor 15.20-28 The passage teaches clearly that our Savior when he returns ends his mediatorial duties. Having subdued all other rule, authority and power, and having destroyed death he delivers the Kingdom to his Father and becomes subject to the Father. Remember that in Matt 28 he told his disciples that all power had been given him in heaven and in earth and by virtue of this he issued the great commission. He had to reign to achieve his mediatorial aims by conquering all spiritual foes, but now his people are all safe, the end has come and he must deliver up the kingdom. There is no hint anywhere in the NT of any intervening years whereby he would set up an earthly kingdom. His return marks the end of time and ushers in eternity! Lord bless |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|