Quote:
Originally Posted by donfriesen1
About what?
Here's evidence about something. 11 Jesus answered and said to them, “Indeed, Elijah is coming first and will restore all things. 12 But I say to you that Elijah has come already, and they did not know him but did to him whatever they wished. Likewise the Son of Man is also about to suffer at their hands.” 13 Then the disciples understood that He spoke to them of John the Baptist.
Hmmmm. Imagine that! The Apostles are actually seen reading between the lines.
Jesus never used words to say that Elijah was John Baptist, but that is exactly what the disciples understood.
|
You like to leave out context, I guess you don't really take into consideration that the Bible is taught in its entirety to understand what is going on. The scribes taught that Elijah must come first, and Jesus confirms this to His followers. Jesus agreed with the teachers of the Law that they got the order right in
Malachi 4:5-6. There was no reading between the lines or that Jesus laid out some sort of ecclesiastical subtextual psychobabble for His followers to wrack their brains to figure out. Jesus simply pointed out that Elijah did come first to set things in order. Some of Jesus' followers actually heard John quote
Isaiah 40:3-8. Therefore they understood that John was the precursor to the Christ. Jesus' followers must of also heard about the prophecy spoken by the Angel to John the Baptist's father Zechariah. How that he was to be a Nazerite, filled with the Holy Ghost before his birth, he will turn many of the children of Israel to the Lord their God. But,
Luke 1:17 is the kicker, because it comes right out and says that John the Baptist's ministry would be with the spirit and power of Elijah. Yet, you specifically have Jesus’ own words in
Matthew 11:14, identifying John as the prophetic forerunner prophesied in
Malachi 3:1 and 4:5-6. The scribes were interpreting
Malachi 4:5-6, expecting a literal return of Elijah to prepare the way before the "great and dreadful day of the LORD". Jesus corrected that only issue, by pointing it out that John was Elijah. Still the followers of John, and Jesus would've known John's origin story. The only reason we today know that John was the Elijah to come, is because we are introduced to the idea in
Luke 1:17, and Jesus confirms it for us
Matthew 11:14. Way before we get to
Matthew 17:10-13. No reading between the lines, no need to decipher the words of Mithraic teacher. Jesus made sure to explain Himself to His followers. If they didn't understand a parable, He would later explain it to them. Because they were His sheep, they were His students. They would have the job of preaching His message to Israel for 40 years before Judea and Jerusalem would be laid even with the ground
Luke 19:44.
Again, you are wrong, and Jesus is right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by donfriesen1
Dom would not have caught the drift. Dom doesn't read between the lines. He has not yet caught up to Apostolic methods.
|
I don't believe you even know what Apostolic means.
Quote:
Originally Posted by donfriesen1
But that's ok, Dom. We understand that even though you say that you don't read between the lines, that you actually do.
|
Who is we? Who are the "we" who understand? Can you produce this "we?" Can we meet this "we?" Do these "we" have names? Are they imaginary friends? Don, no one has come forward to side with you. You are alone Mr Potato Head. You see this is why I HIGHLY doubt you are currently in a church. Because for you to survive in a church setting, most of the church family would have to buy into the gnostic antinomian mess you teach. Or on the flipside you are an ecclesiastical secret Santa. Who doesn't say a peep about this goofball nonsense, because you got your ears slapped back by not only the ministry, but the well read saints. So, you came here, lurked around and then thought it was fine and dandy to ram and spam this ecclesiastical fabrication down our throats. Because after all no one wants what you are selling. Unless you are teaching this to a bunch of dirty feet naked hippies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by donfriesen1
Reader, arguing against 'reading between the lines' is just a distraction tactic Dom and votivesoul and Bowas use when they have nothing else to say, in using Biblical arguments against my views. Shame on you, you who have such great reserves of knowledge, that instead of digging deep, you resort to such tactics.
|
Bowas? How'd did he get thrown under the bus with Votivesoul and myself?
Don, this is one reason you never got that word serving position. You would take a home Bible study and turn it into a hair pulling contest. But then again, I would guess that in a real life sit down with you, you would puppy down pretty quick. Or maybe you are a real religious psychopath who sees himself as an avenging angel equipped with flaming pen knife.
Quote:
Originally Posted by donfriesen1
Reader, don't be fooled by Dom's distraction methods. Keep your nose in the Book to see if the points I make are actually scripturally based or not.
|
And Reader, please post your thoughts here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by donfriesen1
Following Dom's 'not-reading between the lines method' would see you missing revelations like the disciples got from using it. You don't want to be a Dom, do you?
|
The followers of Jesus had "information" plus Jesus clueing them in on anything difficult.
Quote:
Originally Posted by donfriesen1
If you are alive in Jesus, Dom, there is yet hope for you. "Where there's life there's hope."
|
More of your weird, passive aggressive pandering? Don, this is more evidence to me that you don't even fear God. You let this roll right off your tongue when you don't even believe words you speak. You showed me no indication that you are sincere, and you ever wanted to make peace, or bring peace. You just see yourself as some leader of the blind dwarfs in Apostolic Pentecost. You know full well what I'm talking about. You been shut down before by others, and my boy, it shows. It is crystal clear, no one has to read between the lines to see your deal.
Linear Mode
