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!
Re Matt 18:20 = is this out of bounds to all except mainstream Protestants - twinc
That would be a new one, even for twinc.maybe we're just all on ignore? :)
what does "the name" mean to you guys? Jesus came in "the name", the temple was built to house "the name", nimrod and the nations were struck down trying to make "a name" for themselves.
ya! "A rose by any other name" is kind of a pointer there, iow the literal name is irrelevant, it is the concept, or the spirit, that is being ref'ed imowhat does "the name" mean to you guys? Jesus came in "the name", the temple was built to house "the name", nimrod and the nations were struck down trying to make "a name" for themselves.
wherein i could point out that these 2 or 3 might not necessarily be talking about Jesus, or even religious at all, for that matter. Wherever two or three gather in service to someone, there is Christ. Even if one of them is drunk, and the other a whoreThat would depend on how it's used.
Here we can see that Jesus is making reference to Himself.
Matthew 18
20 For where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them.
.
The "name" is important to the whole of scripture, which means ultimately to the Word of God [in spite of differences in belief about that].what does "the name" mean to you guys? Jesus came in "the name", the temple was built to house "the name", nimrod and the nations were struck down trying to make "a name" for themselves.
seems kinda odd the way the term "the name" is used. the Most High doesnt say build a temple for Him, for His people, build it to house "the name"? why say it like that?
and nimrod and the tower, we really dont know what they were up to (according to the official books) other than they were making a name. that could mean anything.
imo because God had already made plain that He did not care about a Temple built with hands, but the people wanted it like they wanted a king, so God let 'em have it--so to speak. The language "to house the Name" is maybe a good way of characterizing that people generally regarded the Temple as being "the house of YHWH," even though you know better, just like they should have known better.seems kinda odd the way the term "the name" is used. the Most High doesnt say build a temple for Him, for His people, build it to house "the name"? why say it like that?
well, might be a "pride going before a fall" thing there, ppl "making a name for themselves" has...certain connotations that illuminate that, imoand nimrod and the tower, we really dont know what they were up to (according to the official books) other than they were making a name. that could mean anything.
Seemingly Twinc wants no Catholics and nor on the fringe Protestants to use that verse in this discussion. That means me and probably many of the other more active participants on the forum.
Either that or he does not even want us to participate in the discussion at all.
Eh what say you, friend, Twinc? Am I even close?
Sorry twinc, but I do not believe that anyone told Jesus that. They certainly did not tell me because I have been using it as it applies to me and mine or those others who would for quite a few years now with what I would describe as favorable results. All I did was obey. He showed up as He said He would and we were blessed by His presence.all I am really asking is that lets not add confusion to already existing confusion and error - that verse does not apply to us - nor does verse 18 - twinc
Sorry twinc, but I do not believe that anyone told Jesus that. They certainly did not tell me because I have been using it as it applies to me and mine or those others who would for quite a few years now with what I would describe as favorable results. All I did was obey. He showed up as He said He would and we were blessed by His presence.
ah, ok
ya! "A rose by any other name" is kind of a pointer there, iow the literal name is irrelevant, it is the concept, or the spirit, that is being ref'ed imo