Posted on 04/17/2018 8:56:07 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
.
The “Old Testament” is precisely what Yeshua and his apostles preached.
Its what they all grew up hearing read in their synagogue.
The “New Covenant” is exactly the Old Covenant perfected by a perfect sinless human sacrifice.
That is what Jeremiah said. The covenant was renewed with the very same “people” that made the old covenant.
It was not made with an immaginary “church.” Yeshua’s Kehillah is not a church; it is the sum of his remnant through the ages from beginning to end.
.
RE: It would seem so, but I will not take up snakes, or drink poison.
well, assume that the longer ending is inspired, the next question to ask is this -— does this refer to ALL believers at ALL times, or does this refer to believers at certain times and certain places?
1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. 2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. 3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. [The believers were touched by the Holy Spirit and began speaking a Heavenly language, including Peter. This was in the place where the BELIEVERS were gathered. This phenomenon drew a crowd. So what does THE TEXT say happened next, to the ones who were not yet believers?]5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. 6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. 7 And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? 8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? ... we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God. 12 And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this?
You do not teach sound teaching. You presume and alter the actual Word to fit your mindset. What did the listeners say? They gave witness that each heard the Galileans in their tongues, the tongues of their origins. The Holy Spirit interpreted what Peter was saying, so that it came into the mind of the listener in the tongue of that hearer.
The presumption is that Peter was speaking in a Heavenly language, a language that entered the minds of the listeners such that they heard not a Heavenly language but every man in his own native language. BUT the text does not say that. The opening text says the believers spoke in other tongues. The Believers.
Try reading Acts 2 starting at verse 5, rather than verse 1. The original texts were not divided as we get it today. But Truth remains Truth even if you start at a different passage. Take the context as given. Then go back and atart at verse 1, to see if your mind catches a different emphasis after the exercise. Think of what happens at conversion. Who must call you to be born again? Was He calling these men of many nations to be born again? Does the Holy Spirit speak into the dead spirit of those to be born again? Think, don't add to the Word that which fits your mindset, let this mind be in you that was also in Christ Jesus.
The presumption is that Peter spoke a Heavenly language. BUT THE TEXT does not say that. It does give us the pattern which is present even today when someone is wooed by The Holy Spirit to be born again. Regardless of the nation of origin, the hearer is hearing the still small voice calling them to believe, to believe in the One Whom God has sent for their salvation, to be born again, born from above.
The emphasis is not on the spectacle of Heavenly language, of 'many tongues' speaking in tongues, it is on believing in The One Whom God has sent for our salvation. The text does not say Peter spoke in a 'tongue of Heaven', it emphasizes instead that every one being wooed by The Holy Spirit heard The Gospel in their own tongue.
.
>> “Christians do not see the OT as history. The OT is the living Word of God just as is the NT. God is the same OT and NT. In fact the entire OT points to and testifies about Jesus Christ the messiah. OT and NT are all about Jesus” <<
Absolutely!
There is no division.
Everyone that is fighting to assert their owm little domain without recognizing the eternal Kehillah is lost.
If you think “rightly dividing the word” means cancelling the original covenant, you are without hope.
.
Mark, I gave a very quick look at Dr. Thomas Constable’s Bible Commentary (one of my seminary profs) and here is what he wrote...
Mark 16:8 (TCENB): Many evangelicals believe that the present ending is the inspired one, and for reasons presently unknown to us it was not a part of existing copies of some very old manuscripts. Another evangelical view is that Mark ended his Gospel with verse 8, or his ending beyond verse 8 was lost. Someone else or others compiled an ending out of accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances under divine inspiration and added them to form an appropriate ending to Mark’s Gospel. I favor the former evangelical view, though the more basic issue is the inspiration of verses 9–20. I believe these verse are divinely inspired.
BTW, you reveal the spirit within you when you put false meaning into what I write to you. I did not say Peter did not speak with tongues of fire. I did not deny Mary received this gift when the believers were seated together. Putting false words into someone elses offering is a stark revelation of the spirit impelling your ‘teaching’. Conflating passages of The Word so they say what you want them to say not what they actually say is another telling sign ...
NO! It was not the speaking in a language they all could understand that converted these many nationalities. Read further. Once the Holy Spirit had their attention, Peter preached THE GOSPEL OF GRACE to them and THEN more than three thousand were born again and baptized into the family.
Forgive me, but no, I don't think you do. A publisher or editor does not have the liberty of changing the text of what an author has written, or even even the spelling or a malapropism, without some kind of a marginal notation that the printer/publisher has done this without the author's permission. That principle is even stricter as applied to the copyist in transmitting the text of a Holy Weitings.
However, translating the text into another language of another time and/or another culture may require some interpretive input. To maintain a literal, grammatical, syntactical equivalence, the interpretive portion is held to an absolute minimum, and a notation of some kind made when such a deviation is made.
But when the rendition into another language takes the "dynamic equivalency" tack, the renderer is likely to wander quite a ways from what the original author intended, claiming to have the goal of putting into the reader's mind (or idiom) that which was in the author's mind (or idiom).
So, the look that the little girl has might be her response to what Daddy said when he interprets in other terms what Mommy has said. But if he misquotes Mommy's words, the little girl will beetle her brows and say, "No! that's not what Mommy said!"
Got it?
Ok, I am just bewildered by the snakes and drinking poison. I am not planning on doing either one. 🙃😁🤔 Anyway, it’s after midnight where I am, so it’s time to bow out for a bit. 😴
By the way, since I am a faithful fanboi, I am having fun playing with my new IPhone X. 👍😂
The TRUTH is not in you. Acts 2:22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: 23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: 24 Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.
37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? 38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. 39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. 40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. 41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.
Salvation cometh by hearing and HEARING by the Word of God. Peter preached the Gospel of Grace in Christ, not the law of Moses. Get thee behind us, servant of the lies, the Michael Rood lies.
“They will” may mean it did happen in history, as the Gospel spread... as opposed to a continuing blanket promise of some type.
Mark, catch this rattler and see if he be holy!!!!!
And isn’t it interesting that God included the scene where Paul was reaching for fire wood and a deadly viper bit him but he just shook the snake off, astonishing the none believing onlookers who were moved to share the spectacle, no doubt preparing some hearts to receive the Gospel thereafter?
kerping
Not necessarily. the translation has three substantive clauses:
(1) And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost,
and
(2) (they) began to speak with other tongues,
(3) aswhen the Spirit gave them utterance.
The text of (3) above is grammatically conditional, and allows for the possibility that the Spirit did not give one or more individuals utterance capability.
Your wrong supposition that it was ALL that spoke destroys the conclusion that you make concerning Peter's participation in the utterings of another language. Orr he might have been uttering Greek, when his birth language might have been Aramaic. To wit.
(Fixed that.)
Oldest was not necessarily best, as many wrongly presume. Oldest may mean the text was so unreliable that it was just left on the shelf, never got used amd worn out/recopied, and so survived simply because it was such a poor reference. And since the passage was one selected by a great plurality of the churches across the Christian population, one may assume rightly that the oldest was the worst according to a plurality of scholarly readers, not the best.
This does ot say 'a heavenly language'. It does say 'other tongues according as the Spirit was giving them. We should not presume then that Peter spoke in a Heavenly tongue.
Imagine the scene: "each one hearing them speaking in his proper dialect" ... aside from the confusion it must have appeared, so many languages and dialects all spoken at the same time, yet each man heard the one dialect he understood out of all the noise of so many dialects being spoken simultaneously by those believers.
RE: Oldest was not necessarily best, as many wrongly presume. Oldest may mean the text was so unreliable that it was just left on the shelf, never got used amd worn out/recopied, and so survived simply because it was such a poor reference.
Now that for me, is a very good and plausible explanation. Thanks.
The next question then becomes — if we accept the majority of the manuscripts, which DO have the longer ending of Mark to be the inspired one, what are we to make of Mark 16:17-18?
RE: “They will” may mean it did happen in history, as the Gospel spread
If I recall correctly, in the end of the Book of Acts, St. Paul actually had a snake hanging on his hand ( did it bite him?), anyway, he shook it off and did not suffer any ill effects.
THAT was one incident where Mark 16:18 was relevant. Not sure if that is to be made normative for all Christians.
Paul spoke with the tongues of men and angels as we found out in 1 Corinthians 13 but regarded love as the greatest of all fruits...”1If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a ringing gong or a clanging cymbal. 2If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have absolute faith so as to move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.…”
The entire chapter of Corinthians 14 lays down as to how tongues should be used in church and in privates meditation.
19 And it happened, while Apollos was at Corinth, that Paul, having passed through the upper regions, came to Ephesus. And finding some disciples 2 he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?”
So they said to him, “We have not so much as heard whether there is a Holy Spirit.”
3 And he said to them, “Into what then were you baptized?”
So they said, “Into John’s baptism.”
4 Then Paul said, “John indeed baptized with a baptism of repentance, saying to the people that they should believe on Him who would come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.”
5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 6 And when Paul had laid hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied. 7 Now the men were about twelve in all.
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.