King James Bible
King James Version (KJV)


Viewing page: 573 of 639
< Previous Discussion Page Next Discussion Page >
563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582
Posting comments is currently unavailable due to high demand on the server.
Please check back in an hour or more. Thank you for your patience!
Is this true ?
It seems clear the term used here could not be the same as John 3:16 (only begotten son) Otherwise, the Bible would be seen to contain contradictions or misguidance for all those centuries to those who had not yet heard the words of the Messiah (Christ).
I look forward for more information. Pray for us to be guided.
Strange that we are so concerned with an English translation of God's Word to mankind, don't you think?
After all, in the original this had nothing to do with what our Lord intended for us to reflect on, don't you think?
Just asking . . ?
Didn't Paul say in 1 Corthenians 10:4-5 that the rock who followed the Jews through the wilderness was Christ? Yet, in the next sentence he said the rock was God. And didn't Peter say in Acts 4:12 that "there is salvation in no one else! There is no other name in all of heaven for people to call on to save them." If David had salvation, and Peter had salvation, then it was Jesus who saved both of them.
People of God, we must be consistent in our thinking. There are not two types of salvation. And there are not two Saviors. Jesus is the Savior now just as he was the Savior in the days of old.
God bless you!
Next in Ex. 12:3-6 where it talks about the Passover lamb (which I believe represents the Messiah) and that it should be brought in on the 10th day and examined 4 days before it is sacrificed on the 14th day. And as verse 5 states without blemish (just like the Messiah). I relate this with Christ riding into Jerusalem on the donkey in Matt 11:1-11. Would this not be what we know as Psalm Sunday? So my next question is if Christ entered into Jerusalem on Sun. and was examined for 4 days as spoken of in Ex. would not that mean Christ was crucified on Wed. and rose at the end of the Sabbath and not Fri. or else we have to move Psalm Sunday to Tues. for the 4 day examination to work and get a Fri. crucifixion and a Mon resurrection if you apply the 3 day and 3 nights.
I pray Pat that you will research this more and decide one way or the other and be fully convinced in your heart and your mind. God bless.
No expectation-
No exclamation--oh job I feel so bad for your hurt
Job, examine yourself...where were you?
Every time he showed job job couldn't or didn't...he was giving job the answer--IAM the answer.
This practice helps us make sense of lots of Bible happenings. Did God really teach slavery and to dominate people, for example, or, if you are going to have slaves, and abuse them, blinding. an eye or knocking out a tooth, you will let them go free.
Did God really want Jacob to limp the rest of His life when in Acts a man was given complete wholeness. We can get in a habit of saying we like our dull, speckled axe rather than admit our failings and press in. Miriam was healed of her leprosy, but the entire camp knew it.
Oswald Chambers, an early 1900s man of God, in his daily devotional "My Utmost for His Highest" suggested this speaks to the idea that we don't want to wrestle with God, not wanting to renounce a sin , or a call to ministry?, for example, but wrestle before Him, laying of the call of Jesus Christ, doing ministry, defeating Satan, etc. I agree , which adds nothing to Brother Chambers legacy.
Seems that "unmoveable" would be a good meaning?
Compare, for instance, the use of the phrase in Matthew 26:28. In that text, Jesus declared: “For this is my blood of the covenant which is poured out for [eis] the remission of sins.”
Now here is an appropriate question: Does it matter whether or not one believes that the Lord shed his blood “to obtain” remission of sins, or if he died “because of” pardon already effected? Is what one believes regarding the efficacious nature of Christ’s death important?
How can one possibly hold the viewpoint that opposite constructions are equally valid? Such is a wholly illogical position. How can one conscientiously ignore inspired grammatical forms that were designed to convey precise religious ideas?
Unfortunately, this is the extreme to which some appear to be driven in their irresponsible attempts to extend Christian fellowship across the borders of modern denominationalism.
Underline the phrase “for the remission of sins” in Acts 2:38, and in your margin make this notation: See Matthew 26:28 — same purpose phrase
If David here is talking about the Father, then we have two Saviors. And this cannot be so. The Scripture is very clear, Jesus is our Savior. The Scripture says, "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever." That is, he was the one who saved people in David's time, and he is the one who saves us now. All we have to do is put our trust in him, and we will see that it is so.
But what about the Father? The Father is the way God makes decisions. But Jesus is the way God saves us!
May God bless you!
So verse 17 says, "As for me, I am poor and needy, but the Lord is thinking about me right now. You are my helper and my Savior. Do not dalay, O my God."
"How do I build my faith?"
Pray for it and read the scriptures through the written Word in the King James Bible.
1 Peter 4:17.
"For the remission of sins" means [because of the remission of sins] When you take medicine (for) a headache, is it in order (to get) a headache? Water Baptism necessary? Yes! In obedience to Christ {BECAUSE WE ARE SAVED} NOT TO BE Saved. What can wash away my sin??? Nothing but the blood of Jesus! Romans 10:9-13 2Cor 13:14 The Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Love of God, and the Communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all. Amen.