Skip to comments.
"Jesus Answers a Gotcha Question" (Sermon on Matthew 22:15-22)
stmatthewbt.org ^
| October 18, 2020
| The Rev. Charles Henrickson
Posted on 10/17/2020 6:56:36 PM PDT by Charles Henrickson
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-33 last
To: UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide
On the one hand there might be a degree of truth in that statement, but overall, it might cause one to lump the entire offspring of Israel into the Jewish pot which is far from the truth. There were 12 Tribes each with a name, Ten are considered lost. The return of the lost Ten Tribes is one of the crowning events of the last days. Not to mention Jews are mostly not Christian, and the Children of Israel were the true believers that is how and why they are the Covenant people. Abraham was a believer and taught his offspring. Like all of us, they could choose for themselves and ultimately chose apostasy over remaining in the fold. For as long as it lasts, these are the days of the Gentiles, but ultimately the twelve tribes will again resume their earlier status as the chosen and covenant people.
21
posted on
10/19/2020 1:17:47 PM PDT
by
wita
(Always and forever, under oath in defense of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.)
To: wita
Therefor I have to ask how you managed to reach your conclusion that the covenant is with Jews only?Everyone who lives in an area with a HOA knows that the covenant that THEY have to obey does NOT apply to the guy in the next housing development.
It's in the Quad:
Galatians 3:15
Brothers, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man cancels, or adds thereto.
The D&C speaks of an EVERLASTING covenant; but that doesn't seem to be followed much by mainstream Mormons any more.
The Doctrine and Covenants
Section 132
Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Nauvoo, Illinois, recorded 12 July 1843, relating to the new and everlasting covenant, including the eternity of the marriage covenant, and also the plurality of wives (see History of the Church, 5:501 - 7). Although the revelation was recorded in 1843, it is evident from the historical records that the doctrines and principles involved in this revelation had been known by the Prophet since 1831.
.
.
.
58 - 66, Laws governing the plurality of wives are set forth.
58 Now, as touching the law of the a, there are many things pertaining thereunto.
59 Verily, if a man be called of my Father, as was a, by mine own voice, and by the voice of him that b me, and I have endowed him with the c of the power of this priesthood, if he do anything in my name, and according to my law and by my word, he will not commit d, and I will justify him.
60 Let no one, therefore, set on my servant Joseph; for I will justify him; for he shall do the sacrifice which I require at his hands for his transgressions, saith the Lord your God.
61 And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood: "if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse a, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else.
62 And if he have a virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified.
63 But if one or either of the ten virgins, after she is espoused, shall be with another man, she has committed adultery, and shall be destroyed; for they are given unto him to a and replenish the earth, according to my commandment, and to fulfil the promise which was given by my Father before the foundation of the world, and for their exaltation in the eternal worlds, that they may bear the souls of men; for herein is the work of my Father continued, that he may be b.
64 And again, verily, verily, I say unto you, if any man have a wife, who holds the keys of this power, and he teaches unto her the law of my priesthood, as pertaining to these things, then shall she believe and administer unto him, or she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord your God; for I will destroy her; for I will magnify my name upon all those who receive and abide in my law.
65 Therefore, it shall be lawful in me, if she receive not this law, for him to receive all things whatsoever I, the Lord his God, will give unto him, because she did not believe and administer unto him according to my word; and she then becomes the transgressor; and he is exempt from the law of Sarah, who administered unto Abraham according to the law when I commanded Abraham to take a to wife.
66 And now, as pertaining to this law, verily, verily, I say unto you, I will reveal more unto you, hereafter; therefore, let this suffice for the present. Behold, I am Alpha and Omega. Amen.
22
posted on
10/20/2020 3:55:14 AM PDT
by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
To: Elsie
Repetition again?
“The D&C speaks of an EVERLASTING covenant; but that doesn’t seem to be followed much by mainstream Mormons any more.”
Firstly, your come back IMHO is unrelated to the Abrahamic Covenant I was discussing.
and lastly, you are well aware of why the subject you brought up is not being lived. It is against the law of the land. It does however address issues at the highest levels of our Government. The idea of freedom of religion as enumerated in the First Amendment to the Constitution, particularly the “free exercise thereof”. One can only wonder where we might be now had the congress not started bending the Constitution in the eighteen hundreds to right the perceived wrongs of the Church of Jesus Christ at that time.
It would be difficult to prove things could be any worse now that Supreme Court has joined in the activism by giving us unlimited baby killing, Government ordained marriage of the same sex kind, elimination of sodomy laws, removing prayer from public education, threats by the IRS against religious leaders and their congregations to remove the tax exempt status they now enjoy, and who knows what’s next.
Have I left out any other Government trampling of enumerated rights of the Freedom of Religion clause? My hope is we will all appreciate learning and living under God’s Government. It is a clear why a cleansing of this world is a necessity prior to the return of the Savior. We might agree that were he to return as he came the first time, “the world” would again fail to recognize him and seek his life.
23
posted on
10/20/2020 8:00:27 AM PDT
by
wita
(Always and forever, under oath in defense of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.)
To: wita
Firstly, your come back IMHO is unrelated to the Abrahamic Covenant I was discussing.No; it wasn't. You brought up 'covenant' and I POSTED one from one of your religious books; that mainstream MormonISM no longer obeys.
. and lastly, you are well aware of why the subject you brought up is not being lived. It is against the law of the land.
And your Quad says...
Acts 5:29 KJV Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.
24
posted on
10/21/2020 4:31:06 AM PDT
by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
To: wita
25
posted on
10/21/2020 4:35:26 AM PDT
by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
To: wita
Responses showed significant emotional distress, dramatic loss of trust in Church leaders,
and a dramatic decline in Church Activity as a result of the policy.
Individual stories help us to understand where and how different LGBT Mormons find hope,
and why discussion about the Church can be so polarizing.
26
posted on
10/21/2020 4:36:33 AM PDT
by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
To: wita
It is a clear why a cleansing of this world is a necessity prior to the return of the Savior. Oh?
Got Scripture on that?
Will that thread our Constitution hangs by, be snapped or fixed by then?
27
posted on
10/21/2020 4:43:19 AM PDT
by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
To: wita
We might agree that were he to return as he came the first time, the world would again fail to recognize him and seek his life. Why would we agree to this; since Scripture is quite plain:
Acts 1:11 King James Version ...Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.
28
posted on
10/21/2020 4:47:26 AM PDT
by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
To: Elsie
“Got Scripture on that?”
“Will that thread our Constitution hangs by, be snapped or fixed by then?”
Just as many scriptures as you. To point one.
Who knows? I don’t believe there is a timeline attached. To point two.
29
posted on
10/21/2020 4:26:46 PM PDT
by
wita
(Always and forever, under oath in defense of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.)
To: Elsie
Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.
I can only see what the result was. The Jews killed their King, and the Romans finished off eleven of the twelve apostles, which pretty much lead to the dark ages, total apostasy, and the death of the Church. The leaders gave it their best shot while they were alive, but the world quite obviously was poorly prepared for sustaining the Church as founded in the New Testament despite the Apostles and other leaders protestations and efforts to the contrary.
We learn from latter day revelation, that only the Jews...
Remaining comments self censored.
30
posted on
10/22/2020 12:40:40 AM PDT
by
wita
(Always and forever, under oath in defense of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.)
To: Charles Henrickson
Dear Reverend,
The phrases are indeed syntactically parallel, but the distinction is captured in the semantics: ‘Apodate’, “give back”. You can give *back* to somebody only what is already theirs. Which of course is why Jesus asked to be shown the tribute money, because it identified itself as Caesar’s, who had ordered it coined. (And why my original post pointed out that this was contingent). So it is lawful to give back to Caesar what is his.
What does one give back to God? Everything, of course, because everything was originally his, and will eventually again also be his, as Revelation i:8 says.
The Authorised version makes the same point in a different way, but the version you quoted does not. I reaffirm that it is therefore false to the textus receptus, and, by seeming to place Caesar and God on an equal footing, it is false also to the depositum fidei.
To: wita
Well; at least you read my questions.
32
posted on
10/22/2020 4:45:49 AM PDT
by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
To: wita
Remaining comments self censored.You are a wise man.
33
posted on
10/22/2020 4:47:41 AM PDT
by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-33 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson