Search results

I think so, although I'll be quick to say that it's very rare. There isn't a prophet or apostle in every church, or even in every major city.

I'm open to talking about it, but I'm pretty happy with my current view. While it's irregular, it doesn't make God into a devil, and it doesn't require me to explain away some bits of Scripture in favor of others. I guess I don't know where to start. Should I critique your view? Give my own...

I agree on all this. The water is a symbol to show the other people in the church that the person has been adopted. They are "one of us." Uhhhh... who are you talking to? Not me, I guess. I'm not Catholic. Although, I'm also not anti-Catholic, like you appear to be.

The sentence is a little confusing, but... no? Everyone sent to proclaim the good news - that's an evangelist. An apostle is a different thing than an evangelist. An apostle has a writ of authority to speak/act on behalf of the person who sent them. An evangelist just delivers a message...

I can think of a very long answer to this question that examines a couple possible ways to read the verse in the context of other parts of the Bible. But nobody wants to read all that, so instead I'll attempt a simple answer. Practically, it means that The Church exists and acts as a...

For most people, probably. "Broad is the way that leads to..." Kinda? I know the basic idea behind it, but I wouldn't say I've spent much time thinking about it or discussing it.

Water doesn't cause births. But water IS a part of birth, and so it is an important symbol of such. I read John 3 as being about adoption, which is a sort of re-birth. The water there doesn't cause re-birth either, but it remains an important symbol.

Why? It doesn't say. Everything beyond that is speculation.

Is that how you interpret the first half of the verse in John 3? "You must be born of water..." It's grammatically plausible, but it seems like something one wouldn't specifically point out. We're all born that way. Everyone meets the criteria, so why point it out?

Chkl: The Book (as I read it) has 4 judgments/rewards for the departed: 1) For Martyrs - a physical resurrection followed by an eternity with God in the hereafter 2) For Abraham's children (including those adopted in Christ) - an eternity with God in the hereafter 3) For those-outside-the-fold...

The grammar in the verse dictates that the apostles and prophets are the foundation.

:tiphat:Howdy

I think that the idea that all babies go to heaven is based mostly in a moral objection to the idea of babies going to hell.

I wonder what you think of David? On the one hand, David does not claim to be a prophet and rarely mentions "the Word of the Lord" in his writings. But on the other hand, the New Testament (and Luke in particular) seems to make a point of singling out his Psalms as being both prophetic and...

Relying on capitalization in the Bible is usually a bad idea. Capitalization isn't a thing in Greek, ya know? Better to rely on the presence (or lack) of the definite article ("THE"). This verse refers to THE Apostles, and (some) prophets. Which is to say, Paul has certain apostles in mind -...

I have a similar view. I don't view every bit of the Bible as inspired - just the parts that say they are. Turns out that's basically the books of prophecy plus David's Psalms and Deuteronomy in the Old Testament, and Jesus' words in the New. Also, having taken that view, I find that the...

I do have something against the NIV. It's not missing verses or some kind of theological bias... those are small issues that exist in EVERY Bible. It's HOW the NIV is translated. The KJV (and YLT and many others) are word-for-word translations. There's basically a 1-to-1 correspondence...

How about the prophets? You know... "This is the Word of the Lord that came to the prophet such-and-such during the reign of king whats-is-name."

Yes, I do that. Well... I'm not a KJO guy. I do like and use the KJV, mostly because that's what they made us memorize growing up. I like the ESV and RSV. Good Bibles. But the NIV?!? I'm pretty sure it stands for Nearly Inspired Version.

I almost mentioned that in my last post, but decided against it because (a) Rome doesn't really come into its own until the Iron Age is over, and (b) most of the people living under Roman rule still used the 7-day week. I believe even Rome itself eventually abandoned their nindunal cycle in...