Behold
Well-Known Member
The Cross is for everyone.
John 3:16 says that ALL (whosoever) believe...........God will save them and give them eternal life.
WHen the Trib starts, God resumes His dealing with the Jew.
WHO IS THE ROCK? JESUS OR PETER
- Thread starter Doug
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The Cross is for everyone.
John 3:16 says that ALL (whosoever) believe...........God will save them and give them eternal life.
WHen the Trib starts, God resumes His dealing with the Jew.
Behold
Well-Known Member
The Cross of Christ is the sacrifice of Christ, and its by this Sacrifice that all who believe are redeemed.
So, when we say "The Cross of Christ"......we mean ... the finished work of Jesus on The Cross .....that is the blood atonment, that is the New Covenant.
What was revealed to Paul is the Gospel and Church Doctrine.
However, when you have believers, you find salvation.
So, this is why you had Jews being born again and gentiles born again.....once the Cross was raised.... even before Paul's Gospel was delivered.
As soon as you have believers, you have Faith.
So, as soon as the Pentecost Jews understood they killed their MESSIAH....then that proves they believed He was......so, that is FAITH.
And that is why God saved them.. its because "our FAITH is counted by God"......and they had faith, so God saved them.
3000 of them.
Bladerunner
Active Member
That should have been Prophets were ended with John. We have many prophecies from that time and most of them are false.
John 3:16-17 (WEB):
(16) For God so loved the world, that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
(17) For God didn’t send his Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world should be saved through him.
Everybody is redeemed by Jesus' sacrifice, whether they believe or not. Some will have never heard of YHVH and Jesus, but Jesus was sent not to judge them but to save them. Being redeemed from the penalty for sin (death), God is then justified in restoring everyone to life (resurrection). After their resurrection, then they have a trial and judgement for eternal life - Hebrews 9:27 (WEB):
(27) Inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once, and after this, judgment,
Acts 24:15 (WEB):
(15) having hope toward God, which these also themselves look for, that there will be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust.
Jesus will establish God's Kingdom on the earth, and teach the truth to everyone, and there wlll be a 1,000 years trial (Satan, the liar and deceiver, will be bound up to restrain him from deceiving people during that time). Then those that believe and remain faithful and obedient throughout the trial, including the strong testing at the end when Satan is released, will be rewarded with eternal life, but those that are unfaithful or disobedient will be punished with the second death - they will perish (be destroyed):
Romans 6:23 (WEB):
(23) For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Revelation 20:7-8 (WEB):
(7) And after the thousand years, Satan will be released from his prison,
(8) and he will come out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to the war; the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.
Revelation 20:12-15 (WEB):
(12) I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and they opened books. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged out of the things which were written in the books, according to their works.
(13) The sea gave up the dead who were in it. Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them. They were judged, each one according to his works.
(14) Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire.
(15) If anyone was not found written in the book of life, he was cast into the lake of fire.
Christians are on a different path and have their trial starting after they are begotten again, before they are resurrected:
1 Peter 1:3 (KJV):
(3) Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,
Galatians 2:20 (WEB):
(20) I have been crucified with Christ, and it is no longer I that live, but Christ lives in me. That life which I now live in the flesh, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself up for me.
Colossians 1:24-29 (WEB):
(24) Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and fill up on my part that which is lacking of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body’s sake, which is the assembly;
(25) of which I was made a servant, according to the stewardship of God which was given me toward you, to fulfill the word of God,
(26) the mystery which has been hidden for ages and generations. But now it has been revealed to his saints,
(27) to whom God was pleased to make known what are the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory;
(28) whom we proclaim, admonishing every man and teaching every man in all wisdom, that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus;
(29) for which I also labor, striving according to his working, which works in me mightily.
Behold
Well-Known Member
Here is how to understand the dead, as unjust and just.
1.) The "dead in Christ"... who are the Christians.......are the JUSTIFIED, and born again, and enjoy God as their Eternal Father.
2.) The dead who were never born again, are still unjustified, "died in their sins" not forgiven, and will face God as Eternal Judge.
You didnt address all I wrote...........................
John 3:16 is a wonderful verse. We are to believe in him as well as Israel. There is no cross in this verse however. read it again to see we know about the cross and therefore insert it when it isn't there.
Israel had to believe in his name for eternal life. They had to believe he was Christ, the Son of God not the cross Look at John 3:18 and read that they had to believe on his name.
Israel didnt have to believe in the cross.........it wasnt revealed to them during Jesus's time on earth
The cross is implied by Jesus in the preceeding 2 verses - John 3:14-15 (WEB):
(14) As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up,
(15) that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
Verse 14 is referring to Numbers 21:8-9 (WEB):
(8) Yahweh said to Moses, “Make a venomous snake, and set it on a pole. It shall happen, that everyone who is bitten, when he sees it, shall live.”
(9) Moses made a serpent of brass, and set it on the pole. If a serpent had bitten any man, when he looked at the serpent of brass, he lived.
Jesus was saying that in like manner to Moses lifting up the brass serpent (representing judged sin) on a pole, Jesus would be lifted up on a crucifixion pole/cross, and those that look at Jesus in faith will not perish. Barnes' Notes on John 3:14 says:
Even so - In a similar manner and with a similar design. He here refers, doubtless, to his own death. Compare John_12:32; John_8:28. The points of resemblance between his being lifted up and that of the brass serpent seem to be these:
1. In each case those who are to be benefited can he aided in no other way. The bite of the serpent was deadly, and could be healed only by looking on the brass serpent; and sin is deadly in its nature, and can be removed only by looking on the cross.
2. The mode of their being lifted up. The brass serpent was in the sight of the people. So Jesus was exalted from the earth raised on a tree or cross.
3. The design was similar. The one was to save the life, the other the soul; the one to save from temporal, the other from eternal death.
4. The manner of the cure was similar. The people of Israel were to look on the serpent and be healed, and so sinners are to look on the Lord Jesus that they may be saved.
Last edited:
Webers_Home
Well-Known Member
.
I was a die-hard Roman Catholic for 24 years and attended enough
catechism to complete First Holy Communion and Confirmation, and was
firmly convinced that Rome's church is the "my church" that Jesus spoke of.
However it dawned on me one day that there are no guarantees in
Catholicism. It's a very strict religion, and adherents need leave this life with
but one unabsolved mortal sin on the books to be sent directly to hell, viz: it's
a direct flight, i.e. no stop-over in a purgatory.
Well; I think it safe to assume that the gates of hell have been prevailing against
individual members of the Catholic Church; and if so, then I think we need to find
out whether Jesus was talking about his church as followers, or was he talking
about his church as an institution?
_
I was a die-hard Roman Catholic for 24 years and attended enough
catechism to complete First Holy Communion and Confirmation, and was
firmly convinced that Rome's church is the "my church" that Jesus spoke of.
However it dawned on me one day that there are no guarantees in
Catholicism. It's a very strict religion, and adherents need leave this life with
but one unabsolved mortal sin on the books to be sent directly to hell, viz: it's
a direct flight, i.e. no stop-over in a purgatory.
Well; I think it safe to assume that the gates of hell have been prevailing against
individual members of the Catholic Church; and if so, then I think we need to find
out whether Jesus was talking about his church as followers, or was he talking
about his church as an institution?
_
Last edited:
Behold
Well-Known Member
Did you read John 3:17?
Its the verse next to John 3:16, where it Says that GOD gave His Son to the World..
So, God gave His Son to the world, ON THE CROSS., and now read John 3:17.
The passage in John 3 is about believing on Jesus
Look at v18
[Jhn 3:18 KJV] 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
Israel had eternal life by believing on his NAME as read in v18
To believe on his name was to believe he was Christ, the Son of God
[Jhn 3:18 KJV] 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
Israel had eternal life by believing on his NAME........they had to believe he was Christ, the Son of God
Israel thought that they could gain eternal life by keeping the Law, but Jesus taught them that the Scriptures pointed to him as the only way to obtain eternal life:
John 5:39-40 (WEB):
(39) “You search the Scriptures, because you think that in them you have eternal life; and these are they which testify about me.
(40) Yet you will not come to me, that you may have life.
John 5:24 (WEB):
(24) “Most certainly I tell you, he who hears my word, and believes him who sent me, has eternal life, and doesn’t come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.
Barnes' Notes on John 3:18 says:
The verse may be thus paraphrased: “All people are by nature condemned. There is but one way of being delivered from this state by believing on the Son of God. They who do not believe or remain in that state are still condemned, for they have not embraced the only way in which they can be freed from it. Nevertheless, those to whom the gospel comes greatly heighten their guilt and condemnation by rejecting the offers of mercy, and trampling under foot the blood of the Son of God."
John 3:19 (WEB):
(19) This is the judgment, that the light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the light; for their works were evil.
Behold
Well-Known Member
You also have to belied that Jesus is the Messiah..... are you a Jew?
Nortice...
When Jesus was in His Ministey, He was not yet "Offered to the world".......as He came for the House of Israel, (The Jews).
Once He was sacrificed on The Cross, this this OFFER.....of His Blood and Death, is : John 3:16/17.
This is why both John 3:16, and 17, say that Jesus came to/for "the World"........so, that is the gentiles, specifically.
Hello Doug,
When Jesus spoke to Peter in Matthew 16:18, He said:
“And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.”
Here Jesus makes a wordplay. The name Peter (Petros) means “stone” or “small rock,” but the word Jesus uses for rock(Petra) means a massive rock, a great foundation stone. The difference is important. Peter is only a stone, but the foundation rock is something far greater.
The Bible makes very clear who that great Rock is:
- Jesus said of Himself: “Whoever falls on this stone will be broken; but on whomever it falls, it will grind him to powder.” (Matthew 21:44)
- Peter himself later preached: “This is the ‘stone which was rejected by you builders, which has become the chief cornerstone.’ Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.” (Acts 4:11–12)
- The Psalms prophesy about Jesus: “The stone which the builders rejected has become the chief cornerstone.”(Psalm 118:22)
- Isaiah also points to Him: “Behold, I lay in Zion a stone for a foundation, a tried stone, a precious cornerstone, a sure foundation.” (Isaiah 28:16)
-So while Peter was a disciple, a faithful servant, and part of the spiritual house, the true Rock—the strong, unshakable foundation of God’s church—is Jesus Himself.
Peter himself did not claim to be the foundation. Instead, he pointed to Jesus. When he preached before the rulers he said in Acts 4:11–12, “This is the ‘stone which was rejected by you builders, which has become the chief cornerstone.’ Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.” Later he wrote in his letter, “Behold, I lay in Zion a chief cornerstone, elect, precious, and he who believes on Him will by no means be put to shame. Therefore, to you who believe, He is precious; but to those who are disobedient, the stone which the builders rejected has become the chief cornerstone” (1 Peter 2:6–7).
In simple words: Peter is a stone, but Jesus is the Rock. I am in agreement what what you wrote.
To answer the last question of your opening post, I would say based on scripture that Jesus did tell Peter in Matthew 16:19, “And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” But later, He gave the very same authority to all the apostles, not only to Peter. In Matthew 18:18, He said to them, “Assuredly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” So this power was not unique to Peter but was shared among the original disciples.
In John 20:23, Jesus again spoke to them after His resurrection, saying, “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” This was not Peter alone, but all of the disciples together, and it was only through the authority of Jesus. They were not acting as judges by their own will, but as messengers of Christ who proclaimed forgiveness to those who believed and repented, and who warned of judgment to those who refused.
This shows that the authority to “bind and loose” sins was connected to the preaching of the gospel and the work of the Holy Spirit. When someone believed in Jesus, repented, and obeyed His word, the apostles could declare that person forgiven, not by their own power, but by the authority of Christ. When someone rejected Jesus, they could also declare that person still in sin.
As for your question, this was not about an earthly kingdom of power or government. Jesus made it clear in John 18:36, “My kingdom is not of this world.” The apostles were not rulers of an earthly state, but servants building a spiritual kingdom in the hearts of men and women. The “keys” and the “binding and loosing” were about opening the way of salvation and showing clearly who was forgiven and who was not, all according to the words of Jesus.
So in simple truth: Peter was not given a unique rule to bind and loose sins for the kingdom on earth. Jesus gave the same authority to all the apostles, and it was always tied to His own name and His own kingdom, which is not of this world but is eternal and spiritual.
Blessings
Some Jews did believe Jesus then but some did not and had Jesus crucified. It is the same today some Jews do believe Christ is the messiah and have received His words but some still reject him today, they prefer darkness to the Light.
Blessings.
I am not sure if Peter;s binding and losing is the same as Matthew
[Mat 18:17-18 KJV] 17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell [it] unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. 18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
This is connected to the church
I am not saying you are wrong .....just saying Peter;s losing and binding isnt specific
Believers in the personal preexistence of Christ often appeal to the words of the apostle Paul in I Cor 10:4 where he says of the Israelites in the wilderness, that they all drank "the same spiritual drink for they drank of that spiritual rock that followed them; and that rock was Christ." It is argued from this that Christ Himself personally accompanied the people of Israel as they journeyed through the wilderness to the promised land. The verse is often tied in with several Old Testament texts which describe Yahweh as a Rock (Deut 32:4; Ps 18:2,31).
Since Yahweh is the rock, and Christ is also the rock who accompanied Israel, Christ must therefore be Yahweh, it is believed. This interpretation, common though it is, suffers from a number of serious defects. The first of these concerns the meaning of the term "Christ". Too often we use it simply as a proper name for Jesus as if it were His surname. "Christos" is the Greek form of the Hebrew word "Messiah", meaning "the anointed one". It was a title given to the Kings of Israel. David was a "messiah" and was a type, or forerunner, of the one who would deliver the people of Israel and establish the Kingdom of God. the coming of the Messiah is a common theme of OT prophecy. He was to be the "seed of Abraham" Gen 3:15; Gal 3:8,16, "the seed of Judah" Gen49:10; I Chron. 5:2, and the "seed of David" II Sam &:12~14; Isa 11:1,10;Rom.1:3;II Tim2:8. "Seed" in all these scriptures means "descendant" This points to the fact that the Messiah was prophesied to arise from the human race.
Nothing in the OT suggests that the promised seed was already in existence in another form. For Paul to have taught that the Messiah was personally present with Israel would have been a staggering contradiction of the words of the prophets. The second major objection to this theory is the fact that God used angels to minister to Israel.
The NT declares in three places that the law was given by angels, Acts7:38,53, Gal 3:9 & Heb2:2. In each of these passages the angelic giving of the Law forms an important part of the debate. Study each in its context with care and you will see that the common theme is the superiority of the Gospel to the Law. The Law was given only by angels but the Gospel was brought by the Son of God and is therefore vastly superior to it. Christ could not have had any part, therefore, either in giving the Law to Israel, or in ministering to the Israelites in the wilderness. Since the Messiah could not have been present personally in the wilderness, Paul's statement must mean that the Rock represented or typified Christ in some way. It is not uncommon for Scripture to use the verb "to be" in a representational sense. Jesus said "I am the Door" Jn 10:7, "I am the true Vine" Jn 15:1. In the instution of the Lord's supper he said that the bread "is my body" and the cup "is my blood" I Cor11:24,25, clearly meant that they symbolized his broken body and shed blood.
This interpretation is strengthened by a close study of the whole passage from verse 1 to verse 11 of 1 Corinthians 10. Twice Paul states that the experiences of Israel were examples for us (vv.6,11). the Greek word used here actually means "types". The passing of the Israelites through the cloud and through the Red Sea was a type of Christian baptism. They were baptized "into Moses" (v. 2, NASB) as we are baptized "into Christ" (Rom. 6:3; 1 Cor. 12:13; Gal. 3:27). Verses 3 and 4 continue the typological parallel by referring to the incidents of the giving of the manna in Exodus 16, and the incidents at Rephidim and Kadesh when God miraculously supplied water out of a rock (Ex. 17:1-7; Num. 20: 1-13). The "spiritual" food mentioned in verse 3 is clearly the manna miraculously given daily to Israel over a period of 40 years. The giving of the manna is recorded in Exodus 16 and forms the background to John 6.
There are two incidents involving a rock recorded during the wilderness wanderings of the Israelites and it is important to notice the difference between them. The first incident occurred just after the miraculous giving of the manna. Israel arrived at Rephidim (Ex. 17:1) and immediately began to complain about lack of water, whereupon God commanded Moses to strike the rock. Water gushed out and the people's thirst was satisfied. The striking of the rock typifies the fact that Christ our Rock was smitten for us. The miraculous giving of the water typifies the giving of the Holy Spirit, the water of Life (John 7:37-39).
The second incident occurred toward the end of the wandering in the wilderness. Again, Israel complained for lack of water and again God provided for their needs. This time, however, he clearly instructed Moses to speak to the rock, but in his anger Moses disobeyed and struck the rock twice (Num. 20: 1-12). In smiting the rock instead of speaking to it Moses was guilty of destroying the type. The rock in Exodus 17 typified Christ in the flesh, smitten to give to us the water of life while the rock in Numbers 20 typified Christ our High Priest, not to be smitten twice (cp. Heb. 6:6), but only to be spoken to to supply the water of life.
The first incident occurred at the beginning of the wanderings, the second at the end; both incidents thus form a parable of Christ's continuous presence with his people during their "wilderness wanderings." The two incidents we have looked at took place in entirely different locations and there is a different Hebrew word for "rock" used in each place. In Exodus 17 the word is tsur and in Numbers 20 it is sela.
So what does Paul mean when he states that "they drank of that spiritual rock which followed them"? Obviously, a literal rock did not accompany Israel through the wilderness and many feel that this is proof that Christ himself went with them. The answer is that Paul is using the language of Christian experience and reading it back into the Old Testament type. This is shown clearly by his reference to baptism in verses 1 and 2. The Israelites were not literally "baptized". In fact, we are told that the water did not come near them; they walked dryshod through the Red Sea. But their experience is a close enough parallel for Paul to say they were baptized "into Moses". Likewise the rock did not literally follow them. It was simply a type of Christ accompanying us through life.
Well, this is about the best I can do to help you understand this topic. I hope it helps. Peter Please.....
Since Yahweh is the rock, and Christ is also the rock who accompanied Israel, Christ must therefore be Yahweh, it is believed. This interpretation, common though it is, suffers from a number of serious defects. The first of these concerns the meaning of the term "Christ". Too often we use it simply as a proper name for Jesus as if it were His surname. "Christos" is the Greek form of the Hebrew word "Messiah", meaning "the anointed one". It was a title given to the Kings of Israel. David was a "messiah" and was a type, or forerunner, of the one who would deliver the people of Israel and establish the Kingdom of God. the coming of the Messiah is a common theme of OT prophecy. He was to be the "seed of Abraham" Gen 3:15; Gal 3:8,16, "the seed of Judah" Gen49:10; I Chron. 5:2, and the "seed of David" II Sam &:12~14; Isa 11:1,10;Rom.1:3;II Tim2:8. "Seed" in all these scriptures means "descendant" This points to the fact that the Messiah was prophesied to arise from the human race.
Nothing in the OT suggests that the promised seed was already in existence in another form. For Paul to have taught that the Messiah was personally present with Israel would have been a staggering contradiction of the words of the prophets. The second major objection to this theory is the fact that God used angels to minister to Israel.
The NT declares in three places that the law was given by angels, Acts7:38,53, Gal 3:9 & Heb2:2. In each of these passages the angelic giving of the Law forms an important part of the debate. Study each in its context with care and you will see that the common theme is the superiority of the Gospel to the Law. The Law was given only by angels but the Gospel was brought by the Son of God and is therefore vastly superior to it. Christ could not have had any part, therefore, either in giving the Law to Israel, or in ministering to the Israelites in the wilderness. Since the Messiah could not have been present personally in the wilderness, Paul's statement must mean that the Rock represented or typified Christ in some way. It is not uncommon for Scripture to use the verb "to be" in a representational sense. Jesus said "I am the Door" Jn 10:7, "I am the true Vine" Jn 15:1. In the instution of the Lord's supper he said that the bread "is my body" and the cup "is my blood" I Cor11:24,25, clearly meant that they symbolized his broken body and shed blood.
This interpretation is strengthened by a close study of the whole passage from verse 1 to verse 11 of 1 Corinthians 10. Twice Paul states that the experiences of Israel were examples for us (vv.6,11). the Greek word used here actually means "types". The passing of the Israelites through the cloud and through the Red Sea was a type of Christian baptism. They were baptized "into Moses" (v. 2, NASB) as we are baptized "into Christ" (Rom. 6:3; 1 Cor. 12:13; Gal. 3:27). Verses 3 and 4 continue the typological parallel by referring to the incidents of the giving of the manna in Exodus 16, and the incidents at Rephidim and Kadesh when God miraculously supplied water out of a rock (Ex. 17:1-7; Num. 20: 1-13). The "spiritual" food mentioned in verse 3 is clearly the manna miraculously given daily to Israel over a period of 40 years. The giving of the manna is recorded in Exodus 16 and forms the background to John 6.
There are two incidents involving a rock recorded during the wilderness wanderings of the Israelites and it is important to notice the difference between them. The first incident occurred just after the miraculous giving of the manna. Israel arrived at Rephidim (Ex. 17:1) and immediately began to complain about lack of water, whereupon God commanded Moses to strike the rock. Water gushed out and the people's thirst was satisfied. The striking of the rock typifies the fact that Christ our Rock was smitten for us. The miraculous giving of the water typifies the giving of the Holy Spirit, the water of Life (John 7:37-39).
The second incident occurred toward the end of the wandering in the wilderness. Again, Israel complained for lack of water and again God provided for their needs. This time, however, he clearly instructed Moses to speak to the rock, but in his anger Moses disobeyed and struck the rock twice (Num. 20: 1-12). In smiting the rock instead of speaking to it Moses was guilty of destroying the type. The rock in Exodus 17 typified Christ in the flesh, smitten to give to us the water of life while the rock in Numbers 20 typified Christ our High Priest, not to be smitten twice (cp. Heb. 6:6), but only to be spoken to to supply the water of life.
The first incident occurred at the beginning of the wanderings, the second at the end; both incidents thus form a parable of Christ's continuous presence with his people during their "wilderness wanderings." The two incidents we have looked at took place in entirely different locations and there is a different Hebrew word for "rock" used in each place. In Exodus 17 the word is tsur and in Numbers 20 it is sela.
So what does Paul mean when he states that "they drank of that spiritual rock which followed them"? Obviously, a literal rock did not accompany Israel through the wilderness and many feel that this is proof that Christ himself went with them. The answer is that Paul is using the language of Christian experience and reading it back into the Old Testament type. This is shown clearly by his reference to baptism in verses 1 and 2. The Israelites were not literally "baptized". In fact, we are told that the water did not come near them; they walked dryshod through the Red Sea. But their experience is a close enough parallel for Paul to say they were baptized "into Moses". Likewise the rock did not literally follow them. It was simply a type of Christ accompanying us through life.
Well, this is about the best I can do to help you understand this topic. I hope it helps. Peter Please.....
Webers_Home
Well-Known Member
.
● John 3:17-18 . . For God sent not His son into the world to condemn the
world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on
him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already,
because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
That's a tough requirement because the first eighteen verses of the first
chapter kick off John's gospel by declaring that the Word's incarnation is the
supreme being's one and only direct descendant.
Now were I a Jew, I would have to seriously question whether the supreme
being was actually able to reproduce and beget offspring because that would
have a marked effect upon my opinions about Jesus' name, to wit: rank and
file born-again Christians are in the supreme being's family circle by means
of adoption whereas the Word's incarnation would be in the supreme being's
family circle by means of heredity.
_
● John 3:17-18 . . For God sent not His son into the world to condemn the
world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on
him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already,
because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
That's a tough requirement because the first eighteen verses of the first
chapter kick off John's gospel by declaring that the Word's incarnation is the
supreme being's one and only direct descendant.
Now were I a Jew, I would have to seriously question whether the supreme
being was actually able to reproduce and beget offspring because that would
have a marked effect upon my opinions about Jesus' name, to wit: rank and
file born-again Christians are in the supreme being's family circle by means
of adoption whereas the Word's incarnation would be in the supreme being's
family circle by means of heredity.
_
Similar threads
