'These are they that testify of Me'

[complete]

Hi,

Having looked at the book of Joshua, in reply#29, I am now looking at 'Judges', which tells of 'The Covenant Angel' whose name is 'Secret',( i.e., 'Wonderful') in Judges 13:18: in Isaiah 9:6 we have the same word used, translated 'Wonderful'

'And the angel of the LORD said unto him,
Why askest thou thus after my name,
seeing it is secret?'
(Jdg 13:18)

* Strong's concordance tells us that the word translated 'secret' (H6383 ) here is also translated 'wonderful', but it's meaning is, 'remarkable'. It is translated 'wonderful' in Psalm 139:6:- 'Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high, I cannot attain unto it.' The same as in Isaiah 9:6:-

'For unto us a child is born,
unto us a son is given:
and the government shall be upon His shoulder:
and His name shall be called Wonderful, ( H8382 (Peh-leh) = 'a miracle')
Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
Of the increase of His government and peace there shall be no end,
upon the throne of David,
and upon His kingdom,
to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice
from henceforth even for ever.
The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.'
(Isa 9:6-7)

* This, as we all will know very well is quoted in Luke 2:11 of the Lord Jesus Christ. Where He was made ' ... a little lower that the angels' (Hebrews 2:7 & 9) for the suffering of death for all mankind.

* In, Judges 13, is the record of the appearing of, 'The angel of the Lord'., to the parents of Samson. Manoah and his wife, of the tribe of Dan (v.v. 3,18,19,22). The same that appeared unto Gideon in Judges 6:12. This was Elohim (the name for God as Creator) working a miracle for His Creatures.

* The record of both events needs to be read to fully appreciate this of course, but I am not able to record it here at the moment.

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[complete]

Hi

In the book of Ruth, the type of our Kinsman-Redeemer is seen, the true Boaz; and she asks a question of Boaz, in Ruth 2:10:-

' Then she fell on her face,
and bowed herself to the ground,
and said unto him, (Boaz)
Why have I found grace in thine eyes,
that thou shouldest take knowledge of me,
seeing I am a stranger?'

* Which is answered in Proverbs 11:15:-

'He that is surety for a stranger shall smart for it: (or 'be sore broken')
and he that hateth suretiship is sure.'

* Christ became surety for His People, and they were, 'strangers', (Ephesians 2:12) ; and He 'smarted' for it (or'was - 'sore broken') (see Psalm 38:8 & Psalm 69:20).

' I am feeble and sore broken:
I have roared by reason of the disquietness of My heart.'
(Psa 38:8)

'Reproach hath broken My heart;
and I am full of heaviness:
and I looked for some to take pity,
but there was none;
and for comforters,
but I found none.
They gave me also gall for my meat;
and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink.'
(Psa 69:20-21)

* Fulfilled in Matthew 27:33-35:-

'And when they were come unto a place called Golgotha, that is to say, a place of a skull,
They gave Him vinegar to drink mingled with gall:
and when He had tasted thereof, He would not drink.
And they crucified Him, and parted His garments,
casting lots:
that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet,
"They parted My garments among them,
and upon My vesture did they cast lots."'
(Mat 27:33-35)

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[2BeholdHisGlory]

Complete, oh no no no you did not hurt me at all Sis, God bless you. And yes I wanted to let you know I did know the contexts (as you had brought up in post #34)
I was just comparing between them even as we taught to compare spiritual things with spiritual, we often need to move around to do so. So I pulled from Genesis itself
speaking of the bruising there in respects to the Serpent but in other places where similar comparisons can be made. You can do that without violating
the context when trying to show examples of other things that are similar. So that I was looking at in these various places pertaining more to the Serpent and the heel or
mention of the treading of serpents (whether in Genesis or later, whether singular or plural). That would be my context regardless of the immediate context which I am not trying
to ignore or invalidate while comparing these things in them.

When you had pointed out what the seventy were given power to do (to tread upon serpents) by Jesus while he still with them (who would be following after them)
I agree with that context. But that wasn't where I was remaining, because I suppose one could argue that if only 70 were given that power over serpents (or evil spirits)
and no others (if limited in that reasoning). Paul could also be considered the 71-st given the same seeing he had been given a commision (even after Jesus was no longer with them
in the flesh following after). Paul also says unto the people (who only had known only Johns baptism) that they too should believe on him which should come after him also,
that is, on Christ Jesus (In Acts 19:4) Same thing just not Jesus in the flesh following after in Paul's account)

And on another point, just because Paul might be addressing someone in one letter and not naming everyone else (more specifically) doesn't mean his letters
are not be read to the churches and not be put into practice the actual instruction in many things.

You written,

"Paul was an Apostle, and was equipped by God with the power and authority that went with the position.
He was skilled in the use of the Spirit's sword, and could use it with good effect, against the enemies who strove to withstand his ministry."


Me,

Who would even argue with this? Certainly not me, I have not made a case against Paul. Both skilled and unskiled are mentioned in the scriptures,
for example that which is contrarywise is mentioned here

Heb 5:13-14 or every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe. But strong meat belongeth to them
that are of full age, even those who (( by reason of use )) have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

So Paul might be skilled in the use of the Spirit's swordas you put it but as Peter instructs these babes he writes,

1 Peter 2:2 As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby

They are to grow up in Him not stay babes.

As Hebrews says, those who are full age, are those who "by reason of use" have their senses exercised
to discern both good and evil

You also stated,

"Looking at this verse in it's context, I see that Paul is referring to Himself and His fellow Apostles here, and not to the Corinthian believers whom he was addressing."

Okay, so before we look at 2Cr 10:5 in context lets look at how letter begins

2Cr 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timothy our brother, unto the church of God which is at Corinth,
with all the saints which are in all Achaia (just to get that out of the way)

I have no debate on things that directed to certain people in the letters, thats a given, to overseers to those teaching what they ought not, specific people named etc

Paul to Timothy writes the following,

1 Tim 4:6 Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee

But does that mean that Timothy's instruction would not apply to anyone else? Others don't have to take heed unto the doctrine or continue in them?
I think we both know that would be absurd.

So you believe that instuction fully belongs only to whom the letter is addressed and more directly on a personal basis (in its context regardless),
and to that I would say fine I certainly wouldn't argue with you because as you can see the line by line back and forths have a tendency to drag on and on while
the initial points often get lost in the shuffle and new points of contention arise and discussions can sometimes end up being a drag.
(Not with you, I am speaking in general)

But I cannot understand your point on 2 Cr 10:4 where it speaks of the weapons of their warfare there which are mighty through God Paul write in
(and in v. 5) it continues,

"Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that
exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ"

That the above (as you seem to imply) is something the apostles did back then, not anything we need to worry about (so to speak)

This is a little hard for me understand why you might believe that doing that a weapon of warfare that "brings into captivity every thought to
the obedience of Christ" is just something only the apostles did. And I would be tempted to ask why you have never practiced bringing into captivity
every thought to the obedience of Christ as is mentioned there and why we shouldnt do this. It just appears as something we should all do, but you do not believe this
(if I am understanding you correctly?)


This reply is somewhat of an example of why I will often avoid doing these line by line back and forths because the initial point becomes lost and its so tedious.
But I did want to answer once only and leave well enough alone.

The post was in comparing taken the brusing under the heel mentioned in Genesis 3:15 and trying to showit in the correct figure. Paul shows it belonging to the God of peace
even through the church (shortly) not as by Mary (in the past). We could better argue over the "his heel" part even as God has put all things under his (Christ's feet)
he also gives us (the church) victory. The church is also compared to a woman (we being the body of Christ). We also know not everyone is a foot, so that could have actually made
for an interesting starting point while keeping with the particular context I was looking at (regardless of where I comparing these things). So whether the same can be seen in
the wording in Genesis 3:15, borrowed from by Paul in Romans 16:20 written in an epistle to the church or where Jesus shows the fall of Satan from
heaven and the power given to them to do the treading upon serpents in Luke 10:18- 19 etc). These are common sense comparisons.

And so whether it is she/Mary (as some might argue, which it is not, even as you might confirm so much by the Latin Vulgate also) "or they"
(the seventy only) or whether its the church (more plurally speaking) even inclusive of those who followed after, Paul borrows the same language
and writes to them refering to the brusing of Satan (and shortly) under their feet. This obviously excludes his heel as being by Mary's own
(under whose feminine foot is always pictured upon the serpent in all of their religious art). Besides, Jesus says to them (plurally) in Luke 10:18-19
"I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven before he even mentions giving them the power to tread serpents. And we know its not by their power (but His)
and we are given to see what he sees Satan falling from "in heaven" into the dust where he and his fallen ones can be tread upon by these here.
And I kid when speaking like that but we know the church is compared to a woman and the mystery of Adam and the woman pertain to Christ and the church (Ephes 5:32)
and just as Christ gave them power tread upon serpents, that picture is followed up with the God of peace brusing Satan under your feet shortly. Even from there
it removes that possibility it was Mary.

And no hard feelings at all Complete, and I am not hurt, you did me no wrong I might be perceived as being hurt if I come off as one scampering away by
not taking up my own argument over whatever thing but I cant do back and forths (or line by lines) whether someone agrees with me or not thats why I just
post a paragraph on a single post. I do not mean to appear as anti social, I have certain limitations on my own end that have nothing to do with anyone else. (just so you are aware).

And that will be my last reply, I will give you the last word if you wish to reply.

God richly bless you Complete, no hard feelings at all. Peace to you in Christ Sis

 

[Garee]

Complete, oh no no no you did not hurt me at all Sis, God bless you. And yes I wanted to let you know I did know the contexts (as you had brought up in post #34)
I was just comparing between them even as we taught to compare spiritual things with spiritual, we often need to move around to do so. So I pulled from Genesis itself
speaking of the bruising there in respects to the Serpent but in other places where similar comparisons can be made. You can do that without violating
the context when trying to show examples of other things that are similar. So that I was looking at in these various places pertaining more to the Serpent and the heel or
mention of the treading of serpents (whether in Genesis or later, whether singular or plural). That would be my context regardless of the immediate context which I am not trying
to ignore or invalidate while comparing these things in them.

When you had pointed out what the seventy were given power to do (to tread upon serpents) by Jesus while he still with them (who would be following after them)
I agree with that context. But that wasn't where I was remaining, because I suppose one could argue that if only 70 were given that power over serpents (or evil spirits)
and no others (if limited in that reasoning). Paul could also be considered the 71-st given the same seeing he had been given a commision (even after Jesus was no longer with them
in the flesh following after). Paul also says unto the people (who only had known only Johns baptism) that they too should believe on him which should come after him also,
that is, on Christ Jesus (In Acts 19:4) Same thing just not Jesus in the flesh following after in Paul's account)

And on another point, just because Paul might be addressing someone in one letter and not naming everyone else (more specifically) doesn't mean his letters
are not be read to the churches and not be put into practice the actual instruction in many things.

You written,

"Paul was an Apostle, and was equipped by God with the power and authority that went with the position.
He was skilled in the use of the Spirit's sword, and could use it with good effect, against the enemies who strove to withstand his ministry."


Me,

Who would even argue with this? Certainly not me, I have not made a case against Paul. Both skilled and unskiled are mentioned in the scriptures,
for example that which is contrarywise is mentioned here

Heb 5:13-14 or every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe. But strong meat belongeth to them
that are of full age, even those who (( by reason of use )) have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

So Paul might be skilled in the use of the Spirit's swordas you put it but as Peter instructs these babes he writes,

1 Peter 2:2 As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby

They are to grow up in Him not stay babes.

As Hebrews says, those who are full age, are those who "by reason of use" have their senses exercised
to discern both good and evil

You also stated,

"Looking at this verse in it's context, I see that Paul is referring to Himself and His fellow Apostles here, and not to the Corinthian believers whom he was addressing."

Okay, so before we look at 2Cr 10:5 in context lets look at how letter begins

2Cr 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timothy our brother, unto the church of God which is at Corinth,
with all the saints which are in all Achaia (just to get that out of the way)

I have no debate on things that directed to certain people in the letters, thats a given, to overseers to those teaching what they ought not, specific people named etc

Paul to Timothy writes the following,

1 Tim 4:6 Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee

But does that mean that Timothy's instruction would not apply to anyone else? Others don't have to take heed unto the doctrine or continue in them?
I think we both know that would be absurd.

So you believe that instuction fully belongs only to whom the letter is addressed and more directly on a personal basis (in its context regardless),
and to that I would say fine I certainly wouldn't argue with you because as you can see the line by line back and forths have a tendency to drag on and on while
the initial points often get lost in the shuffle and new points of contention arise and discussions can sometimes end up being a drag.
(Not with you, I am speaking in general)

But I cannot understand your point on 2 Cr 10:4 where it speaks of the weapons of their warfare there which are mighty through God Paul write in
(and in v. 5) it continues,

"Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that
exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ"

That the above (as you seem to imply) is something the apostles did back then, not anything we need to worry about (so to speak)

This is a little hard for me understand why you might believe that doing that a weapon of warfare that "brings into captivity every thought to
the obedience of Christ" is just something only the apostles did. And I would be tempted to ask why you have never practiced bringing into captivity
every thought to the obedience of Christ as is mentioned there and why we shouldnt do this. It just appears as something we should all do, but you do not believe this
(if I am understanding you correctly?)


This reply is somewhat of an example of why I will often avoid doing these line by line back and forths because the initial point becomes lost and its so tedious.
But I did want to answer once only and leave well enough alone.

The post was in comparing taken the brusing under the heel mentioned in Genesis 3:15 and trying to showit in the correct figure. Paul shows it belonging to the God of peace
even through the church (shortly) not as by Mary (in the past). We could better argue over the "his heel" part even as God has put all things under his (Christ's feet)
he also gives us (the church) victory. The church is also compared to a woman (we being the body of Christ). We also know not everyone is a foot, so that could have actually made
for an interesting starting point while keeping with the particular context I was looking at (regardless of where I comparing these things). So whether the same can be seen in
the wording in Genesis 3:15, borrowed from by Paul in Romans 16:20 written in an epistle to the church or where Jesus shows the fall of Satan from
heaven and the power given to them to do the treading upon serpents in Luke 10:18- 19 etc). These are common sense comparisons.

And so whether it is she/Mary (as some might argue, which it is not, even as you might confirm so much by the Latin Vulgate also) "or they"
(the seventy only) or whether its the church (more plurally speaking) even inclusive of those who followed after, Paul borrows the same language
and writes to them refering to the brusing of Satan (and shortly) under their feet. This obviously excludes his heel as being by Mary's own
(under whose feminine foot is always pictured upon the serpent in all of their religious art). Besides, Jesus says to them (plurally) in Luke 10:18-19
"I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven before he even mentions giving them the power to tread serpents. And we know its not by their power (but His)
and we are given to see what he sees Satan falling from "in heaven" into the dust where he and his fallen ones can be tread upon by these here.
And I kid when speaking like that but we know the church is compared to a woman and the mystery of Adam and the woman pertain to Christ and the church (Ephes 5:32)
and just as Christ gave them power tread upon serpents, that picture is followed up with the God of peace brusing Satan under your feet shortly. Even from there
it removes that possibility it was Mary.

And no hard feelings at all Complete, and I am not hurt, you did me no wrong I might be perceived as being hurt if I come off as one scampering away by
not taking up my own argument over whatever thing but I cant do back and forths (or line by lines) whether someone agrees with me or not thats why I just
post a paragraph on a single post. I do not mean to appear as anti social, I have certain limitations on my own end that have nothing to do with anyone else. (just so you are aware).

And that will be my last reply, I will give you the last word if you wish to reply.

God richly bless you Complete, no hard feelings at all. Peace to you in Christ Sis

Hi I would offer I agree with the comparing the spiritual unseen to the same .also called faith to faith In that way we can rightly divide the parables that hide the mysteries of faith .(the power of God)

Looking at the parable of the “bruising of the heel” the wounds we are healed. The first instance in Genesis 3 . . the father striking the Son on man Jesus, bruising his heel and crushing the head of the serpent (the father of lies . It Is testified in Isaiah 53 a demonstration of two working as one .In that way two is the witness of God (the Father and Son). No father no Son, vice versa

The promised three days and nights demonstration that seems to be offered in three parts. That demonstration came to fulfillment beginning in in the garden of Gethsemane when the father striking the son offers the cup of suffering and the Son of man, Jesus replies . . . . . .not as I will but you the one with power.

There Jesus sought the presence of strengthening prayer with the disciples There the father put them to sleep three times to verify salvation was the work of two.

Then they move on to the second part of the three part demonstration. . a crowd (two is a company) the hill, the bloody demonstration a sign to the unbelieving world.

Believer had prophecy (the work demonstrated in the garden) Then they moved on to the last the witness, of the tomb .The unseen witness of faith

It’s not that popular of an idea most focus on the work of our bloody husband (Christ because of circumcision) as that in which the eyes see and not as much as the Spirit reveals through prophecy (faith) the unseen.

I would be careful how you use the word Apostle.

God bless

 

[2BeholdHisGlory]

I would be careful how you use the word Apostle.

God bless

And I would encourage you to do the same

Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus Heb 3:1

 

[complete]

'David therefore departed thence,
and escaped to the cave Adullam:
and when his brethren and all his father's house heard it,
they went down thither to him.
And every one that was in distress,
and every one that was in debt,
and every one that was discontented,
gathered themselves unto him;
and he became a captain over them:
and there were with him about four hundred men.'
(1Samuel 22:1-2)

Hi there,

The verse above reminds me of our Lord Jesus, who was, 'a friend of publicans and sinners', they flocked to Him, as these people gathered to David.

In the book of SAMUEL we see the sufferings and rejection of David, who became a 'Saviour' and a 'Captain' of his followers (1 Samuel 22:1-2) a foreshadowing of David's 'Son' and David's 'Lord', as the 'root and offspring of David' (Revelation 22:16)

'I Jesus have sent mine angel
to testify unto you these things in the churches.
I am the root and the offspring of David,
and the bright and morning star.'
(Rev 22:16)

---------------------------

* In the book of KINGS we see the, 'glory which should follow.' Suffering and glory are found together in Scripture, You don't have the one without the other. We also see the One Who was, 'greater than Solomon.' (Matthew 12:42), the One Who was, 'greater than the Temple,' (Matthew 12:6), where everything speaks of His glory (Psalm 29:9).

----------------------------

* In CHRONICLES we see Christ as 'the King's Son', rescued, 'from among the dead,' hidden in the House of God, to be manifested in due time. "as Jehovah hath said" (2 Chronicles 22:10 -23:3). Which reminds me of God's words, spoken by Peter in Acts concerning the ascended Lord.

'Repent ye therefore, and be converted,
that your sins may be blotted out,
when the times of refreshing shall come
from the presence of the Lord;
And He shall send Jesus Christ,
which before was preached unto you:
Whom the heaven must receive
until the times of restitution of all things,
which God hath spoken
by the mouth of all His holy prophets
since the world began.'
(Act 3:19-21)

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[complete]

'For whatsoever things were written aforetime
were written for our learning,
that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures
might have hope. '
(Rom 15:4)

Praise God!

 

[Br. Bear]

Greetings Chris,

As I type, there is a man working, with helmet, harness and saw, in the branches of a very old tree on my skyline, I hope that he is just lightening it's load, and not felling it completely, for I am fond of that tree, and the birds love it. I live on top of a hill, with a breadth of sky, so this tree is an important feature: it is positioned where the sun shines at it's fullest during the day, and provides necessary shade.

I know it is slightly 'off topic' but....

is the tree still standing?


I reminded of some Scripture regarding trees and shade.

It is so refreshing to read through this thread and see the fellowship between yourself and @2BeholdHisGlory and @Garee , as you interact around the Bible!


Bless you ....><>

 

[complete]

Greetings Chris,



I know it is slightly 'off topic' but....

is the tree still standing?


I reminded of some Scripture regarding trees and shade.

It is so refreshing to read through this thread and see the fellowship between yourself and @2BeholdHisGlory and @Garee , as you interact around the Bible!

Bless you ....><>

Hi @Br. Bear,

Ha! Yes it is, Praise God! It has been pruned and cleaned up, and is standing proud on my limited horizon as before, home for the birds, for the wood pigeons, and night owls which hoot in it's branches.

Yes, I have enjoyed having @2BeholdHisGlory and @Garee on board. All input is gratefully received.

Thank you
Within the love of Christ our Saviour,
our risen and glorified Lord and Head.
Chris

 

[complete]

Complete, oh no no no you did not hurt me at all Sis, God bless you. And yes I wanted to let you know I did know the contexts (as you had brought up in post #34)
I was just comparing between them even as we taught to compare spiritual things with spiritual, we often need to move around to do so. So I pulled from Genesis itself
speaking of the bruising there in respects to the Serpent but in other places where similar comparisons can be made. You can do that without violating
the context when trying to show examples of other things that are similar. So that I was looking at in these various places pertaining more to the Serpent and the heel or
mention of the treading of serpents (whether in Genesis or later, whether singular or plural). That would be my context regardless of the immediate context which I am not trying
to ignore or invalidate while comparing these things in them.

When you had pointed out what the seventy were given power to do (to tread upon serpents) by Jesus while he still with them (who would be following after them)
I agree with that context. But that wasn't where I was remaining, because I suppose one could argue that if only 70 were given that power over serpents (or evil spirits)
and no others (if limited in that reasoning). Paul could also be considered the 71-st given the same seeing he had been given a commission (even after Jesus was no longer with them
in the flesh following after). Paul also says unto the people (who only had known only Johns baptism) that they too should believe on him which should come after him also,
that is, on Christ Jesus (In Acts 19:4) Same thing just not Jesus in the flesh following after in Paul's account

And on another point, just because Paul might be addressing someone in one letter and not naming everyone else (more specifically) doesn't mean his letters
are not be read to the churches and not be put into practice the actual instruction in many things.

You written,

"Paul was an Apostle, and was equipped by God with the power and authority that went with the position.
He was skilled in the use of the Spirit's sword, and could use it with good effect, against the enemies who strove to withstand his ministry."


Me,

Who would even argue with this? Certainly not me, I have not made a case against Paul. Both skilled and unskiled are mentioned in the scriptures,
for example that which is contrarywise is mentioned here

Heb 5:13-14 or every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe. But strong meat belongeth to them
that are of full age, even those who (( by reason of use )) have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

So Paul might be skilled in the use of the Spirit's swordas you put it but as Peter instructs these babes he writes,

1 Peter 2:2 As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby

They are to grow up in Him not stay babes.

As Hebrews says, those who are full age, are those who "by reason of use" have their senses exercised
to discern both good and evil

You also stated,

"Looking at this verse in it's context, I see that Paul is referring to Himself and His fellow Apostles here, and not to the Corinthian believers whom he was addressing."

Okay, so before we look at 2Cr 10:5 in context lets look at how letter begins

2Cr 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timothy our brother, unto the church of God which is at Corinth,
with all the saints which are in all Achaia (just to get that out of the way)

I have no debate on things that directed to certain people in the letters, thats a given, to overseers to those teaching what they ought not, specific people named etc

Paul to Timothy writes the following,

1 Tim 4:6 Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee

But does that mean that Timothy's instruction would not apply to anyone else? Others don't have to take heed unto the doctrine or continue in them?
I think we both know that would be absurd.

So you believe that instuction fully belongs only to whom the letter is addressed and more directly on a personal basis (in its context regardless),
and to that I would say fine I certainly wouldn't argue with you because as you can see the line by line back and forths have a tendency to drag on and on while
the initial points often get lost in the shuffle and new points of contention arise and discussions can sometimes end up being a drag.
(Not with you, I am speaking in general)

But I cannot understand your point on 2 Cr 10:4 where it speaks of the weapons of their warfare there which are mighty through God Paul write in
(and in v. 5) it continues,

"Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that
exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ"

That the above (as you seem to imply) is something the apostles did back then, not anything we need to worry about (so to speak)

This is a little hard for me understand why you might believe that doing that a weapon of warfare that "brings into captivity every thought to
the obedience of Christ" is just something only the apostles did. And I would be tempted to ask why you have never practiced bringing into captivity
every thought to the obedience of Christ as is mentioned there and why we shouldnt do this. It just appears as something we should all do, but you do not believe this
(if I am understanding you correctly?)


This reply is somewhat of an example of why I will often avoid doing these line by line back and forths because the initial point becomes lost and its so tedious.
But I did want to answer once only and leave well enough alone.

The post was in comparing taken the brusing under the heel mentioned in Genesis 3:15 and trying to showit in the correct figure. Paul shows it belonging to the God of peace
even through the church (shortly) not as by Mary (in the past). We could better argue over the "his heel" part even as God has put all things under his (Christ's feet)
he also gives us (the church) victory. The church is also compared to a woman (we being the body of Christ). We also know not everyone is a foot, so that could have actually made
for an interesting starting point while keeping with the particular context I was looking at (regardless of where I comparing these things). So whether the same can be seen in
the wording in Genesis 3:15, borrowed from by Paul in Romans 16:20 written in an epistle to the church or where Jesus shows the fall of Satan from
heaven and the power given to them to do the treading upon serpents in Luke 10:18- 19 etc). These are common sense comparisons.

And so whether it is she/Mary (as some might argue, which it is not, even as you might confirm so much by the Latin Vulgate also) "or they"
(the seventy only) or whether its the church (more plurally speaking) even inclusive of those who followed after, Paul borrows the same language
and writes to them refering to the brusing of Satan (and shortly) under their feet. This obviously excludes his heel as being by Mary's own
(under whose feminine foot is always pictured upon the serpent in all of their religious art). Besides, Jesus says to them (plurally) in Luke 10:18-19
"I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven before he even mentions giving them the power to tread serpents. And we know its not by their power (but His)
and we are given to see what he sees Satan falling from "in heaven" into the dust where he and his fallen ones can be tread upon by these here.
And I kid when speaking like that but we know the church is compared to a woman and the mystery of Adam and the woman pertain to Christ and the church (Ephes 5:32)
and just as Christ gave them power tread upon serpents, that picture is followed up with the God of peace brusing Satan under your feet shortly. Even from there
it removes that possibility it was Mary.

And no hard feelings at all Complete, and I am not hurt, you did me no wrong I might be perceived as being hurt if I come off as one scampering away by
not taking up my own argument over whatever thing but I cant do back and forths (or line by lines) whether someone agrees with me or not thats why I just
post a paragraph on a single post. I do not mean to appear as anti social, I have certain limitations on my own end that have nothing to do with anyone else. (just so you are aware).

And that will be my last reply, I will give you the last word if you wish to reply.

God richly bless you Complete, no hard feelings at all. Peace to you in Christ Sis

Hi @BeholdHisGlory,

I understand your reluctance to get into a 'back and fore' situation, so I will not engage with any of your comments: but just want to say that if we were able to sit at your table with our Bibles open, and discuss these points you have made, face to face, we would find that there is very little that we disagree on.

Thank you for your input, it has been appreciated.
Within the love of Christ our Saviour,
our Lord and Head.
Chris

 

[2BeholdHisGlory]

Hi @BeholdHisGlory,

I understand your reluctance to get into a 'back and fore' situation, so I will not engage with any of your comments: but just want to say that if we were able to sit at your table with our Bibles open, and discuss these points you have made, face to face, we would find that there is very little that we disagree on.

Thank you for your input, it has been appreciated.
Within the love of Christ our Saviour,
our Lord and Head.
Chris

Complete I don't think we disagree on much at all and where we might its minor. And even if we did and wanted to hash it out together I would probably prefer that table discussion you mention or a face to face versus the typing back and forth type of discussions.

You know I used to go back and forth on points (whether I agreed or disagreed with anyone) I actually enjoyed it regardless, but I cant do it anymore being a little more physically disadvantaged when it come to sitting. I have a messed up S-I joint (affects lower back, sitting and standing). My pain increases in either position too long, makes it hard to relax and enjoy the discussion. So I try to keep it short as far as my time in front of the keyboard, and pretty much copy paste older studies interjecting a bit. I am used to dealing with this, had it for what seems like forever but as you progress in age those things do as well. So it actually takes a great deal of effort for me to just type things out especially given the actual position I need to be in in order type, and get up and down several times during a post. it can be royal pain the yuhoo.

I bet you would have never guessed that that last chicken scratch of a post mine to you took me over 5 hours to type. But then again who would ever know this unless I specifically told them, its sort of a weird thing to have to deal with and explain, I mean how hard can sitting and typing actually be for someone?

I'm more of a copy paster poster and less of a debater these days, and not so much by my choice.

You are a pleasure my Sister and if you/me/we ever disagree, I am fine by that and I wont wrangle with you over it, I will likely answer once (maybe not line upon line) but I will try to hit each point if not too much and allow you the last word even if you still disagree, that is never problem for me.

Peace to you in Christ

 

[complete]

Hi @2BeholdHisGlory,

Thank you very much for sharing this. I understand perfectly. I, Praise God! That He has given you the desire to take part as you do, and enables you to do it, in the face of these difficulties.

Within the love of Christ
our Saviour, Lord and Head.
Chris

 

[complete]

EZRA,

Hi there,

In Ezra the reference to the Lord Jesus comes in a strange little verse, in chapter 9:8,

'And now for a little space
grace hath been shewed
from the LORD our God,
to leave us a remnant to escape,
and to give us a nail in His holy place,
that our God may lighten our eyes,
and give us a little reviving
in our bondage.'
(Ezra 9:8)

* In Isiah 22:23, it is used of Eliakim, who typifies Christ. This whole passage in Isaiah 22, speaks of Jerusalem, foretelling an invasion by the Assyrians. It was the Lord's judgement upon it's inhabitants. Yet in the day that this prophecy is fulfilled, God sets up a man called Eliakim (Hezekiah's minister)

'And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will call my servant Eliakim the son of Hilkiah:
.. And I will clothe him with thy robe,
.... and strengthen him with thy girdle,
...... and I will commit thy government into his hand:
........ and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem,
.......... and to the house of Judah.
............ And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder;
.................. so he shall open, and none shall shut;
.................. and he shall shut, and none shall open.
.............. And I will fasten him as a nail in a sure place;
................ and he shall be for a glorious throne to his father's house.
................... And they shall hang upon him all the glory of his father's house,
the offspring and the issue,
all vessels of small quantity,
from the vessels of cups,
even to all the vessels of flagons.
In that day, saith the LORD of hosts,
shall the nail that is fastened in the sure place be removed,
and be cut down, and fall;
and the burden that was upon it shall be cut off:
for the LORD hath spoken it.'
(Isa 22:20-25 )

* The words:-
'And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder;
so he shall open, and none shall shut;
and he shall shut, and none shall open.'
(Isaiah 22:22)

... refer to the Messiah, to Whom will be given full power of Administration. See Revelation 3:7:-

'And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write;
These things saith He that is holy, He that is true,
He that hath the key of David,
He that openeth, and no man shutteth;
and shutteth, and no man openeth;'
(Rev 3:7)

... encompassing also His entire kindred.

* The 'Nail', which Jehovah declares Eliakim to be, prophetically refers to the two men to whom it is addressed, Shebna and Eliakim, but the application refers to the two parties in Jerusalem, and to the Messiah, in Whom the prophecy will be exhausted.

* That took longer than I thought.

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris



PS:- I love the figure of speech which is seen in the reference from Isaiah, which relates to the use of the word, 'and'. If there are many 'ands' as here, each section preceded by the word, 'and' is important, and must be considered point by point. Another figure in which there are no 'ands' directs the eye to the conclusion, instead of each individual point, thereby showing that it is the conclusion which is the important part of the section, and not the points themselves.

 

[Garee]

And I would encourage you to do the same

Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus Heb 3:1

According to the scriptures would you be considered as a apostle?

Is not Abel the first listed also as the first martyr? ?

 

[complete]

According to the scriptures would you be considered as a apostle?

Is not Abel the first listed also as the first martyr?

Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling,
consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession,
Christ Jesus;
Who was faithful to Him that appointed Him,
as also Moses was faithful in all his house.
For This Man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses,
inasmuch as He who hath builded the house
hath more honour than the house.
For every house is builded by some man;
but He that built all things is God.'
(Heb 3:1-4)

Hello @Garee,

As you know, during the gospels, the Apostles were 'called', 'chosen' and 'commissioned' by the Lord during His earthly ministry: there were others also chosen by the ascended Lord for this role too, which we read of in the epistles. An Apostle is one who is 'sent' and is essentially a 'messenger': but the fact that they are 'chosen' and 'commissioned' by the Lord is important (Galatians 1:1). They were identifiable by the, 'signs of an apostle', that they performed,' by signs, wonders and mighty deeds' (2 Corinthians 12:12). In the verse quoted at the beginning (Hebrews 3:1-4) we see that the Lord Jesus Christ was also an Apostle, a 'sent one', having been 'sent' by God the Father.

This is no self-chosen appointment, and certainly not one we can adopt for ourselves.

Thank you,
In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[complete]

NEHEMIAH

Hi there,

In this book we read of the, 'bread from Heaven,' and, 'water out of the Rock', (Nehemiah 9:15,20):-

'And gavest them bread from heaven for their hunger,
and broughtest forth water for them out of the rock for their thirst,
and promisedst them that they should go in to possess the land
which Thou hadst sworn to give them.'
(Neh 9:15)

' Thou gavest also Thy good spirit to instruct them,
and withheldest not Thy manna from their mouth,
and gavest them water for their thirst.'
(Neh 9:20)

* Both of these we are familiar with as typical of the Lord Jesus Christ. (John 6:57-58) (1 Corinthians 10:4).

'As the living Father hath sent Me,
and I live by the Father:
so he that eateth Me, even he shall live by Me.
This is that bread which came down from heaven:
not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead:
he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.'
(Joh 6:57-58)

'And did all drink the same spiritual drink:
for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them:
and that Rock was Christ.'
(1Cor. 10:4)

Praise God!

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[complete]

ESTHER

Hi there

In Esther we can see how the 'seed' is preserved, which will in God's time be born into the world as the Messiah, in the person of the Lord Jesus Christ. God's name is not mentioned in this book, not visibly in the written text, but it is there, conceiled, in the form of acrostics. The Name of Jehovah in the Book of Esther. - Appendix to the Companion Bible

Satan was at work in an attempt to wipe out the 'seed (Genesis 3:15), but God was working for them. For His council must stand, His word fulfilled. He worked under cover, secretly overturning the works of the enemy, in such a way that His People could see, but the enemy could not.

Praise God!

In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[Garee]

Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling,
consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession,
Christ Jesus;
Who was faithful to Him that appointed Him,
as also Moses was faithful in all his house.
For This Man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses,
inasmuch as He who hath builded the house
hath more honour than the house.
For every house is builded by some man;
but He that built all things is God.'
(Heb 3:1-4)

Hello @Garee,

As you know, during the gospels, the Apostles were 'called', 'chosen' and 'commissioned' by the Lord during His earthly ministry: there were others also chosen by the ascended Lord for this role too, which we read of in the epistles. An Apostle is one who is 'sent' and is essentially a 'messenger': but the fact that they are 'chosen' and 'commissioned' by the Lord is important (Galatians 1:1). They were identifiable by the, 'signs of an apostle', that they performed,' by signs, wonders and mighty deeds' (2 Corinthians 12:12). In the verse quoted at the beginning (Hebrews 3:1-4) we see that the Lord Jesus Christ was also an Apostle, a 'sent one', having been 'sent' by God the Father.

This is no self-chosen appointment, and certainly not one we can adopt for ourselves.

Thank you,
In Christ Jesus
Chris

Hi thanks for the reply .


I would offer. . it’s a must to look to the foundation of the word (apostle) with no other meaning added it can change from “sent ones” to “venerable ones” as a wile of the father of lies . .It (venerable one) is needed to support the law of men as oral traditions .

Apostle . . "sent one" Sent with prophecy as messengers (the Greek Angelos ) How beautiful are their feet shod with the gospel of peace .

I agree they must be sent unlike the many in Mathew 7 that did offer the wonder works of God but they were not moved by God . They were moved by self-pride they receive their reward of self- edification

He called them workers of iniquity as false apostles

True apostles are defined as those who plant the born again seed and another sent one water it with the water of the word The doctrines that fall like rain . But they are considered as profiting nothing. If the Spirit of Christ does not apply his Spirit to their new born- again heart . . . it adds nothing. He causes the increase if any.

1 Corinthians 3:7 -8So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase. Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour.

Ultimately teaches us he in not served by the dying hands as a will of mankind in any way shape or form .

It would seem Christ set aside a ceremonial law used to preach the gospel in respect to the suffering of Christ beforehand (1Peter1.)

There he used what he called unclean animals to represent the unconverted and the clean as those born again by the washing of the water of the word. The renewing work of Christ.

Exodus 13:13 And every firstling of an ass thou shalt redeem with a lamb; and if thou wilt not redeem it, then thou shalt break his neck: and all the firstborn of man among thy children shalt thou redeem.

I am reminded of the law of faith “Let there be” and the testimony seen “it was good . God in Christ seal of approval

To the law above (ceremonial Exodus 13:13) and its testimony Numbers 22:28 . . . below . if mankind does not look to both as one word then Isaiah 8 informs us there is no lma as a light punto their feet (false apostles)

Again revealing God is not served by the dying hands as a will of mankind .

Numbers 22:28 And the Lord opened the mouth of the ass, and she said unto Balaam, What have I done unto thee, that thou hast smitten me these three times? stoping the madness of that false prophet false apostles .

it I believe teaches us he can use a unbeliever like a Ass sent by his power as easily as one who does believe as a anchor to the new soul


Simuilar to the fall parable . The father of lies as a false prophet giving false prophecy saying “You shall not surely die”. Using the most beautiful creature in the garden. . Cut of his legs he could no longer walk with God.

All prophets are sent with prophecy as apostles .beginning g with Abel .

Either Christ does all the work of creating new creatures or he does nothing .

Acts 25 Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;

 

[complete]

'These are they that testify of ME'

JOB

Job reveals the Lord Jesus Christ as His 'Daysman' or 'Mediator' (Job 9:33), and as his, 'Redeemer' coming again to the earth (Job 19:25-27).

Speaking of God Job says:-

'For He is not a man, as I am,
that I should answer Him,
and we should come together in judgment.
Neither is there any days-man betwixt us,
that might lay His hand upon us both.
Let Him take His rod away from me,
and let not his fear terrify me:
Then would I speak, and not fear Him;
but it is not so with me.'
(Job 9:32-35)

'For I know that my Redeemer liveth,
and that He shall stand at the latter day upon the earth:
And though after my skin worms destroy this body,
yet in my flesh shall I see God:
Whom I shall see for myself,
and mine eyes shall behold, and not another;
though my reins be consumed within me.'
(Job 19:25-27)

* Praise God! Job believed in the resurrection from the dead, and believed that he would be a partaker in it, that in his flesh he would see God: that his Redeemer will stand upon the earth in resurrection glory, and that he (Job) will see Him with his own eyes.

Praise God for His faithfulness!

In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[complete]

Reply #58

Thank you, @Garee,
for sharing the product of your own study here. Interesting points raised.
I must leave it with you, but you have given food for thought.

Within the love of Christ our Saviour,
our Lord and Head.
Chris