J4J The reason you have created a Jesus with which you are comfortable, is because if you were confronted with the one found in the Bible (both OT and NT) you would be just like the scribes and pharisees, angry with him, denying that he is from God, most unfair in his dealings with men. You would even go so far as to say that he had brought philosophy rather than light. You would say he had no right to quicken whomsoever he willed, no right to choose whomsoever he healed.
When it comes down to it, you are actually opposed to the Lord Jesus Christ.
This is not wise, John.
What can I say? The best thing is to point you to the word of God written and deep humility before God, asking him to open your eyes and helping you to see wondrous things from the written page.
It is all by revelation.
"Flesh and blood hath not revealed this unto thee......"
Oh and also, get far away from lol preachers, they are deceivers.
Kutilek is a deceiver, often quoted here by another deceiver. Can be ignored.
Note the truth of the matter,
"The modern versions are based mainly upon a Greek New Testament which was derived from a small handful of Greek manuscripts from the 4th century onwards. Two of these manuscripts, which many modern scholars claim to be superior to the Byzantine, are the Sinai manuscript and the Vatican manuscript (c. 4th century). These are derived from a text type known as the Alexandrian text (because of its origin in Egypt); this text type was referred to by the textual critics Westcott and Hort as the 'Neutral text'. These two manuscripts form the basis of the Greek New Testament, referred to as the Critical Text, which has been in widespread use since the late 19th century. In recent years there has been an attempt to improve this text by calling it an 'eclectic' text (meaning that many other manuscripts were consulted in its editing and evolution), but it is still a text which has as its central foundation these two manuscripts."
Chris G P wrote: As to head coverings for women during worship, I do believe that the Evangelical Protestant churches should return to this Biblical practice mandated throughout both the OT, but particularly through the NT, as laid out clearly by the Apostle Paul, and carried out for 2,000 years or so, until the 1960's, when suddenly, not only the usual liberal "Protestant" churches, and the post-Vatican 2 Western Catholic Churches abandoned this practice, but tragically multitudes of otherwise seemingly solid Evangelical Protestant churches. It is high time that the pastors preached this faithfully, and the Christian ladies returned to this Biblical mandate.
Yes, amen Chris GP. And the symbolism must also be understood and accepted, otherwise the wearing of a covering becomes a hypocritical act. But when a woman plays her role of submission, and wears a head covering to signify that, it becomes a most beautiful thing in which God is well pleased.
Let's take a Short Metre tune like Dennis, and give ourselves the option of lyrics.
1. The first option is well-known and loved, and sung by the vast majority of Christians all over the world, and it's written by a sinner called John Fawcett.
Blest be the tie that binds Our hearts in Christian love The fellowship of kindred minds Is like to that above
2. The second option is Psalm 25, hardly known by any, never ever sung by the majority, even though its author is GOD ALMIGHTY, and appointed for use in worship in both old and new testaments. As found in the 1650 Psalter.
To thee I lift my soul O Lord, I trust in thee My God, let me not be asham'd Nor foes triumph o'er me.
little missions wrote: In the Bible we had preaching and personal witness EXPLAINING, just like a pastor in the pulpit. Tracts are good. Books are probably better as can explain the terms. Many of our greatest Christians were saved reading a commentary of Galatians-Luther and Bunyan to begin with. Personal witness and a good book in your bag or a sound tract, but make sure it explains the gospel. These all scripture booklets are good also http://thelordsworktrust.org/store_booklets.php
I just love those words "hand out gospel tracts". To hand out gospel tracts is one of the best things to do in this world. It is placing the good news of salvation into the hands of men. I like to hand out gospel tracts written by J C Ryle, who greatly believed in handing out gospel tracts. We never know what God might do, when we hand someone a gospel tract. They are little printed missionaries.
Thank you bro for mentioning that. It always gives me a lift.
Adriel wrote: The 'establishment' in Britain includes the modernist Liberal and nominal churches and their "entertainments." Thus instead of praising God they entertain themselves with music and lyrics. It is noted how they reject the praise book which God Himself wrote through inspired writers. Which is called the Book of Psalms. Hymn writers/singers always seem to reject God's praise book which HE wrote for the purpose of His worship. Perhaps this is what has led to Liberals and others who have rejected other books and doctrines of the Bible too. Going to church to entertain yourself with pop songs and anecdotal and amusing "sermons" rather than the Word of God seems to be very popular today. I suppose its much more fun than nasty old sermons about sin and evil etc.
Good post Adriel. Fun and bbq's tend to be preferred today rather than discipleship, surrender to God, and serving him with a whole heart.
2 Corinthians 5:15 KJV (15)Â And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.
B. McCausland wrote: John and Penny It is relatively easy to discern that the physical places spoken in a number of OT prophecies are figurative, and are not speaking about the nation of Israel. Take for instance 'my holy mountain' in Is.65:25, "They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, says the LORD"
Yes, another one would be:
Psalms 24:3 KJV (3) Who shall ascend into the hill of the LORD? or who shall stand in his holy place?
Hebrews 10:19-22 KJV (19) Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, (20) By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh; (21) And having an high priest over the house of God; (22) Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.
Psalms 91:1 KJV (1) He that dwelleth in the secret place of the most High shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty.
The OT sure is relevant to the Christian, especially when we do not separate the two covenants but see one God, one Saviour.
B. McCausland wrote: This is why Is.65:9 can be interpreted as pointing to the consummation of the redemption in Christ, not to Israel nationally:
All input gratefully received. After decades being baffled by the "Israel Question" I am at last beginning to see some light, and it is most wonderful.
As in Isaiah 65:9, which speaks of Christ and the new wine etc.
As in Romans 10:20-21, which shows the period we are looking at.
Isaiah 65:1-5 KJV (1)Â I am sought of them that asked not for me; I am found of them that sought me not: I said, Behold me, behold me, unto a nation that was not called by my name. (2)Â I have spread out my hands all the day unto a rebellious people, which walketh in a way that was not good, after their own thoughts; (3)Â A people that provoketh me to anger continually to my face; that sacrificeth in gardens, and burneth incense upon altars of brick; (4)Â Which remain among the graves, and lodge in the monuments, which eat swine's flesh, and broth of abominable things is in their vessels; (5)Â Which say, Stand by thyself, come not near to me; for I am holier than thou. These are a smoke in my nose, a fire that burneth all the day.
B. McCausland wrote: John, UK, see what you point out God used the nation of Israel as a means to reveal himself and his plans to humanity, Yet, what he sought was not necessarily an ethnic group, but a people unto himself exemplified by the nation of Israel
Yes it is quite thrilling to look at this.
1 Peter 2:9 KJV (to the Jews) (9)Â 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:
Exodus 19:5-6 KJV (to the Jews) (5)Â Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine: (6)Â And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.
Revelation 1:6 KJV (to the Asian churches) (6)Â And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
This is why I so love singing the psalms now; there is one God, one Saviour.
"What does this mean for our understanding of the relationship between the church and Israel? It means that when true Israel was baptized by the Spirit on the day of Pentecost, true Israel became the New Testament church. Thus, there is continuity between true Israel and the church. This is why the Reformed confessions can speak of the church as existing from the beginning of the world (for example, Belgic Confession, Art. 27). Yet there is discontinuity between the church and national Israel as well, just as there was discontinuity between the faithful remnant and apostate Israel in the Old Testament."
"So, what does this mean for national Israel, the branches that have been broken off from the true Israel because of unbelief? Is God finished with this people as a covenantal entity? In order to answer this question, we must turn to Paulâ€™s argument in Romans 9â€“11."
"However, if we are talking about true Israel, there really is no distinction. The true Israel of the Old Testament became the nucleus of the true church on the day of Pentecost. Here the analogy of the olive tree that Paul uses in Romans 11 is instructive. The tree represents the covenant people of God â€” Israel. Paul compares unbelieving Israel to branches that have been broken off from the olive tree (v. 17a). Believing Gentiles are compared to branches from a wild olive tree that have been grafted in to the cultivated olive tree (vv. 17bâ€“19). The important point to notice is that God does not cut the old tree down and plant a new one (replacement theology). Neither does God plant a second new tree alongside the old tree and then graft branches from the old tree into the new tree (traditional dispensationalism). Instead, the same tree exists across the divide between Old and New Testaments. That which remains after the dead branches are removed is the true Israel. Gentile believers are now grafted into this already existing old tree (true Israel/the true church). There is only one good olive tree, and the same olive tree exists across the covenantal divide."
Shane wrote: Bro John... Seeing that the church is translated "assembly", and no matter whether jew or greek, if any believe and are saved they are one with Christ, then... yes, its one assembly. Have a blessed day in the lord brother.
Amen indeed brother.
Hebrews 8:10-11 KJV (10)Â For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: (11)Â And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.
I am happy to be in the new covenant, made with those called the **House of Israel** but who can rightly be called "the assembly" or "the body of Christ", namely, all of God's elect, born of the Spirit and washed in Christ's blood.
Dispensationalists wouldn't want anything to do with it. After all, that new covenant is only for ISRAEL. Oops.