|
Post by snow on Jan 18, 2020 14:21:43 GMT -5
His Kingdom is here on earth when he returns. He has not returned so his kingdom is not yet. At least not by bible standards. No, his kingdom is eternal in heaven. He WILL reign a millennial reign on earth to have righteousness on earth but his kingdom has always been in heaven. In John 18:36. He told Pilate about his kingdom. “My kingdom is not of this world: If my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. Clearly you need to interpret it that way and him not meaning what he said. Okay. Enough said. I agree to once again disagree.
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Jan 18, 2020 14:58:27 GMT -5
As all you’ve accused Paul of, and I didn’t remember all of that; I went and reread those chapters about this incident. The Jews from Asia, not from Jerusalem, accused Paul of the same thing that was accused of Stephen. “...This is the man , that teacher hall men every where against the people, and the law and this place: and further brought Greeks also into the temple, and hath polluted this Holy place.” Acts 21:28 Acts 21:29(For they had seen before with him in the CITY Trophimus an Ephesian, whom THEY SUPPOSED(ASSUMED) that Paul had brought into the temple. Even the chief captain assumed he was someone else, like the Egyptian man which had led an uproar and led some out into the wilderness, that were murderers. Paul gives an accounting to Felix in Acts 24:17-Now after many years I came to bring alms to my nation and offerings, Whereupin certain Jews from Asia found me purified in the temple, neither with multitude, nor with tumult. Who ought to have been here before thee, and object, if they had OUGHT against me. Or else let these same here say, if they have found any evidence in me, while I stood before the council. EXCEPT IT BE FOR THIS ONE VOICE, THAT I CRIED STANDING AMING THEM, TOUCHING THE TESURRECTION OF THE DEAD I AM CALLED IN QUESTION BY YOU THIS DAY. The reason they treated Paul so raw was because he was preaching about the resurrection of Jesus. Which is not adverse to what the 11 Apostles had preached. The rest of it was a BUNCH OF ASSumptions. I'm not sure what you're thinking is an assumption. He clearly had to perform the purification ritual to be safe in Jerusalem. The bible says so. I didn't. It still didn’t make him safe. They were trying anything to appease the Jews from Asia. The assumption was he was teaching against the laws and the assumption he’d taken a Greek into the temple. He didn’t do either. Their main beef was him preaching about resurrection, they were Sadducees, who don’t believe in resurrection.
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Jan 18, 2020 15:09:09 GMT -5
No, his kingdom is eternal in heaven. He WILL reign a millennial reign on earth to have righteousness on earth but his kingdom has always been in heaven. In John 18:36. He told Pilate about his kingdom. “My kingdom is not of this world: If my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. Clearly you need to interpret it that way and him not meaning what he said. Okay. Enough said. I agree to once again disagree. He still didn’t say he was “returning”. There are references that point to it wasn’t him returning to earth. But coming in his glory or kingdom can also mean the rapture as in Matthew 24:30. Why you stubbornly hold on to him returning the second time is beyond me because that’s not what he said. He didn’t speak of that until after his resurrection and he really didn’t say it then. He just told his Apostles it wasn’t for them to know the times. He told the Pharisees once that the kingdom of heaven doesn’t come with observation. Like17:20
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Jan 18, 2020 15:19:48 GMT -5
No, his kingdom is eternal in heaven. He WILL reign a millennial reign on earth to have righteousness on earth but his kingdom has always been in heaven. In John 18:36. He told Pilate about his kingdom. “My kingdom is not of this world: If my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. Clearly you need to interpret it that way and him not meaning what he said. Okay. Enough said. I agree to once again disagree. Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, (ref. John 8:52) , till they see the Son of man COMING IN HIS KINGDOM. John 8:52. Then said the Jews unto him, Now we know that thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and thou, sayest IF A MAN KEEP MY SAYING HE SHALL NEVER TASTE DEATH. Matthew 17. And after 6 days, Jesus takers Peter, James and John his brother and brings the them up into an high mountain apart. Was transfigured before them. Moses andElias appeared unto him. Jesus told the 3 Apostles not to tell what they’d seen that day. It was of importance but not to tell it until Jesus was risen again. Why? They had witnessed his majesty(coming in his kingdom) as Peter wrote in II Peter 1:16.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jan 18, 2020 15:44:32 GMT -5
It does say to go to the gentiles, preach the Gospel, heal the sick, cast out demons and so on. Miracles will follow those who believe. Why do people pray for the sick, miracles etc if they died out in the first century? That was to the 11 Apostles in Matthew 28. It seems to me, that after the 1st century there was a division of spiritual and physical healing. And as medical discoveries and treatments became more known there was a complete cessation of spiritual personnel trying to heal people. I think it was because as Nathan mentioned, the Apostles were given the gift so that they’d be known as being from him. He was after all, the Great Physician. Now we are getting to something that makes sense! "-after the 1st century there was a division of spiritual and physical healing."
"-as medical discoveries and treatments became more known there was a complete cessation of spiritual personnel trying to heal people."
Why is it so difficult to understand there NEVER was any true "spiritual " healing to begin with? That it was nothing more than what people wanted to believe!
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jan 18, 2020 15:59:42 GMT -5
Yes, he stated that some of them would still be alive when he returned. That’s not what he said. YES he did!
How is it STR, that you will insist that the bible means something different than what is printed in black & white? When someone else quotes it exactly, you tell them that they are wrong?
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jan 18, 2020 16:11:33 GMT -5
How? It clearly says they will still be alive when he returns. not really, as i have said before him saying that is like a mother telling her kids after she's punished them just wait till your father gets home then you'll really get it....I.E "taste of death" is your father coming home to give final punishment.... WOW! At least a person has to admire the ingenuity of how people can invent their own interpretation to suit what they are determined to believe!
I must not have that talent.
I have difficulty seeing a loving mother telling her child "just wait I 'til your father gets home, then you are going to get a 'taste of death' "
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Jan 18, 2020 16:55:28 GMT -5
No, his kingdom is eternal in heaven. He WILL reign a millennial reign on earth to have righteousness on earth but his kingdom has always been in heaven. In John 18:36. He told Pilate about his kingdom. “My kingdom is not of this world: If my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. Clearly you need to interpret it that way and him not meaning what he said. Okay. Enough said. I agree to once again disagree. ** Str, is correct.
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Jan 18, 2020 18:57:12 GMT -5
YES he did!
How is it STR, that you will insist that the bible means something different than what is printed in black & white? When someone else quotes it exactly, you tell them that they are wrong? He did not say he was returning. Why do you insist he said he was returning? Because you’re too stubborn to admit you’ve misinterpreted what what said? He said “coming in my kingdom.” Which the next chapter tells about him “coming in his kingdom”, his eternal kingdom. Peter, James and John saw his transfiguration and saw Esaias and Moses from eternity there with him. They were in their eternal body, , they’d been transfigured also. Jesus transfiguration gave him his eternal body, he could have gone back to heaven with Moses and Esaias to his kingdom “that is not of this world”(what he told Pilate). Peter wrote about being an eyewitness of his “majesty” in II Peter 1:16.
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Jan 18, 2020 18:59:05 GMT -5
YES he did!
How is it STR, that you will insist that the bible means something different than what is printed in black & white? When someone else quotes it exactly, you tell them that they are wrong? It is you and Snow who insist on saying Jesus said something he didn’t say!
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jan 19, 2020 0:56:07 GMT -5
History -- well articulated by the one who introduced the "christ" theology to what was to become Christianity. So you agree Jesus wanted the old law enforced? What I said had nothing whatsoever to do with what Jesus wanted. It was all about what the Roman church wanted.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jan 19, 2020 0:58:16 GMT -5
Sure they were Jews, what's your point? Paul focuses on the finished work of Christ. Are you saying the original apostles accused paul of being false? because that seem to be what you are accusing him of. What exact scripture are you refering to with Paul being hidden/protected from Christians?. And who made him repent and why? Acts talks about Paul wanting to go to Jerusalem and his followers in Tyre warning him not to go because they knew that the Jewish Christians followed the Mosaic law and Paul didn't. They knew he would be in trouble for what he was allowing and preaching among the Gentiles. And when he got to Jerusalem, sure enough, the apostles and James told him he had to prove to the masses that he did uphold the Mosaic Law by undergoing the Purification ritual even though he no longer followed the law. They hid him until it was safe, after they had seen Paul undergo the purification. The whole story is in Acts. Very well summarized.
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Jan 19, 2020 1:09:26 GMT -5
Was Paul also present at the stoning of Stephen? Done under mosaic law.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jan 19, 2020 2:52:08 GMT -5
YES he did!
How is it STR, that you will insist that the bible means something different than what is printed in black & white? When someone else quotes it exactly, you tell them that they are wrong? It is you and Snow who insist on saying Jesus said something he didn’t say! No, we did not. STR
You are the one who is constantly "interpreting" what you think Jesus "meant." Just read some of your own posts!
|
|
|
Post by maryhig on Jan 19, 2020 4:21:05 GMT -5
YES he did!
How is it STR, that you will insist that the bible means something different than what is printed in black & white? When someone else quotes it exactly, you tell them that they are wrong? He did not say he was returning. Why do you insist he said he was returning? Because you’re too stubborn to admit you’ve misinterpreted what what said? He said “coming in my kingdom.” Which the next chapter tells about him “coming in his kingdom”, his eternal kingdom. Peter, James and John saw his transfiguration and saw Esaias and Moses from eternity there with him. They were in their eternal body, , they’d been transfigured also. Jesus transfiguration gave him his eternal body, he could have gone back to heaven with Moses and Esaias to his kingdom “that is not of this world”(what he told Pilate). Peter wrote about being an eyewitness of his “majesty” in II Peter 1:16. Jesus's kingdom will never be of this world. The kingdom he is head of, is the kingdom that is within the hearts of those who belong to him, the kingdom that takes us out of the world, in the same way as he was not of the world when he was physically here. In other words, we don't care for the ways of the world and flesh anymore, because we are at one with Christ and God and our focus is on God and doing his will, not the ways of the world and lusts of the flesh, these things are of the world. And he has already returned and lives through those who have truly repented, those who truly follow him and deny themselves, take up their cross and live by the will of God in their daily lives. John 17:14 I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. 17:15 I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil. 17:16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
|
|
|
Post by mountain on Jan 19, 2020 4:42:20 GMT -5
Was Paul also present at the stoning of Stephen? Done under mosaic law. It wasn't Paul. It was Saul who was present at Stephen's stoning.
|
|
|
Post by chuck on Jan 19, 2020 5:01:55 GMT -5
So you agree Jesus wanted the old law enforced? What I said had nothing whatsoever to do with what Jesus wanted. It was all about what the Roman church wanted. Well your post implied you were in full agreement with Snow's post so unless you say otherwise I take it you agree with Snow that Jesus wanted the old law enforced!.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jan 19, 2020 5:26:55 GMT -5
Was Paul also present at the stoning of Stephen? Done under mosaic law. It wasn't Paul. It was Saul who was present at Stephen's stoning. Yeh, -right!
|
|
|
Post by chuck on Jan 19, 2020 8:24:49 GMT -5
Sure they were Jews, what's your point? Paul focuses on the finished work of Christ. Are you saying the original apostles accused paul of being false? because that seem to be what you are accusing him of. What exact scripture are you refering to with Paul being hidden/protected from Christians?. And who made him repent and why? Acts talks about Paul wanting to go to Jerusalem and his followers in Tyre warning him not to go because they knew that the Jewish Christians followed the Mosaic law and Paul didn't. They knew he would be in trouble for what he was allowing and preaching among the Gentiles. And when he got to Jerusalem, sure enough, the apostles and James told him he had to prove to the masses that he did uphold the Mosaic Law by undergoing the Purification ritual even though he no longer followed the law. They hid him until it was safe, after they had seen Paul undergo the purification. The whole story is in Acts. So where was Paul accused of false teaching?. And where did the 11 disagree with his teachings?. Do you know what the ritual was about? Im unsure what your point is?.
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Jan 19, 2020 12:02:42 GMT -5
Was Paul also present at the stoning of Stephen? Done under mosaic law. It wasn't Paul. It was Saul who was present at Stephen's stoning. I see, and what was the connection between the two?
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Jan 19, 2020 12:26:32 GMT -5
It is you and Snow who insist on saying Jesus said something he didn’t say! No, we did not. STR
You are the one who is constantly "interpreting" what you think Jesus "meant." Just read some of your own posts!What you keep saying is he said he was returning. That is NOT WHST HE SAID.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jan 19, 2020 14:01:31 GMT -5
I'm not sure what you're thinking is an assumption. He clearly had to perform the purification ritual to be safe in Jerusalem. The bible says so. I didn't. It still didn’t make him safe. They were trying anything to appease the Jews from Asia. The assumption was he was teaching against the laws and the assumption he’d taken a Greek into the temple. He didn’t do either. Their main beef was him preaching about resurrection, they were Sadducees, who don’t believe in resurrection. They were Christians that didn't believe in the resurrection for the same reason Marks original gospel didn't write about it. They didn't believe it happened and they should know since they were actually there.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jan 19, 2020 14:05:13 GMT -5
Clearly you need to interpret it that way and him not meaning what he said. Okay. Enough said. I agree to once again disagree. He still didn’t say he was “returning”. There are references that point to it wasn’t him returning to earth. But coming in his glory or kingdom can also mean the rapture as in Matthew 24:30. Why you stubbornly hold on to him returning the second time is beyond me because that’s not what he said. He didn’t speak of that until after his resurrection and he really didn’t say it then. He just told his Apostles it wasn’t for them to know the times. He told the Pharisees once that the kingdom of heaven doesn’t come with observation. Like17:20 Maybe because the Rapture hasn't happened yet? Until atheists started pointing out his second coming should have happened centuries ago, all Christians were just fine with interpreting it as when he comes back sometime in the future in the form of the rapture and him and his army riding white horses etc. Now that we have pointed out that little discrepancy, we hear that it wasn't about that at all. Again, you'll never convince me that your interpretation is the right one. So agree to disagree. I wonder what it is about white horses in religion. Mohammed is supposed to have flown on a white horse too. Interesting.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jan 19, 2020 14:07:06 GMT -5
Clearly you need to interpret it that way and him not meaning what he said. Okay. Enough said. I agree to once again disagree. ** Str, is correct. No.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jan 19, 2020 14:09:04 GMT -5
So you agree Jesus wanted the old law enforced? What I said had nothing whatsoever to do with what Jesus wanted. It was all about what the Roman church wanted. Exactly. Jesus likely would be horrified to be so misunderstood by Christians. He was a Jew. He upheld the Mosaic law and wanted to get back to a more rigid interpretation of it. He didn't think his generation were following the law to it's fullest.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jan 19, 2020 14:11:38 GMT -5
Was Paul also present at the stoning of Stephen? Done under mosaic law. It wasn't Paul. It was Saul who was present at Stephen's stoning. LOL
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jan 19, 2020 14:16:14 GMT -5
Acts talks about Paul wanting to go to Jerusalem and his followers in Tyre warning him not to go because they knew that the Jewish Christians followed the Mosaic law and Paul didn't. They knew he would be in trouble for what he was allowing and preaching among the Gentiles. And when he got to Jerusalem, sure enough, the apostles and James told him he had to prove to the masses that he did uphold the Mosaic Law by undergoing the Purification ritual even though he no longer followed the law. They hid him until it was safe, after they had seen Paul undergo the purification. The whole story is in Acts. So where was Paul accused of false teaching?. And where did the 11 disagree with his teachings?. Do you know what the ritual was about? Im unsure what your point is?. He certainly was considered to be a false teacher. He was talking about Christians that weren't Jews not needing to uphold the Mosaic Law. One of the biggest problems was he said they didn't need to be circumcised. Also, Paul taught about the Christos and the resurrection which the Jewish branch of Christians didn't believe. Mark, the first gospel, was revised at a later date to include the resurrection so the teaching lined up with the other later gospels that were written with a Gentile/Hellenistic slant.
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Jan 19, 2020 14:32:36 GMT -5
What I said had nothing whatsoever to do with what Jesus wanted. It was all about what the Roman church wanted. Exactly. Jesus likely would be horrified to be so misunderstood by Christians. He was a Jew. He upheld the Mosaic law and wanted to get back to a more rigid interpretation of it. He didn't think his generation were following the law to it's fullest. Curious . Is it your understanding or “belief” ,then , that a believer in Jesus is supposed to follow all the Old Testament laws , with rigid interpretation? Alvin
|
|