|
|
Post by uscgvet on Dec 21, 2018 8:21:53 GMT -6
To me, Matt. 15:21-28 & Mark 7:24-30 make perfect since with how the whole scene plays out with Jesus and the gentile woman due to what I see played out with Acts 10 and 11 and Galatians 2. Jews are dismissive of gentiles at this time. Gentiles are unclean people, common people, to the Jews. Jesus' comment of gentiles as dogs isn't out of the line with Acts 10 and 11 in mind. And it certainly has the same feel with Galatians 2 when Peter was eating with gentiles and then all of a sudden gets up to eat with the Jewish believers. It makes since to me. I don't know about everyone else here. :-D It appears to be a contextual problem. Lord Jesus traveled outside the boundaries of Judah "into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon." When confronted by the woman who was not of the ten lost tribes, he tells her that he was sent out of Judah to the lost ten tribes, and not to other peoples. She in turn responds as discussed previously. She was not of the ten lost tribes of Israel; nevertheless, she did receive a blessing for her daughter. Had the Savior been sent into Greece, Assyria, or any other place and been approached by anyone there, he would have said the same thing. The Father sent him to that area for a specific purpose and that was to the lost sheep of Israel. So it is with the apostles that went outside Judah or taught people other than the Jews. Lord Jesus simply directed them to do as he was directed to do. Go to the lost sheep of Israel and it has been the case to this very day. In the Savior's mission to Tyre and Sidon the woman was excluded because he was not sent to her. Thus, the conversation about the dogs pertained to those not of the tribes of Israel. Since the Jews regarded all who were not Jewish as gentiles, then to say that "dogs" in the conversation referred to all gentiles is incorrect. "Dogs" only refers to the gentiles who were not of the lost sheep of the house of Israel. That is, "dogs" did not include Samaritans. The greater meaning of this is that Lord Jesus was sent to the lost sheep of Israel as in all his people Israel, and not only to Judah. He was sent to all Christians and those to whom he was not sent will benefit as well. I think you and I are actually on the same page. The woman wasn't a child from the bloodline of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob. The "dog" is referring to those not of that bloodline, unclean, common gentiles. In this, we agree 100%! But He was sent to the Jews, preaching the Kingdom to the Jews. Not his death, burial, and Resurrection (the Gospel) to everyone (Jews first then gentiles) as we see from Paul. |
|
|
|
Post by boraddict on Dec 21, 2018 8:39:31 GMT -6
Further to my post above Paul tells more about this "division" of the gospel in Galatians. The apostles had a message for an audience of Jews as Pauls audience was to the Gentiles and therefore spoken in a different manner of understanding Gal 1:3 Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ, 4 Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father: 5 To whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.
6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: 7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Gal 2:7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter; 8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:) 9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision. I hadn't noticed it before (and this is a bit off-topic), but Gal 2:7 kinda puts the nail in the coffin of "Peter was the first pope" stuff. Do you think Peter was the first pope of the Jews? Yardstick has an interesting point. Paul is clearly saying that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto him and it was he and Barnabas that went to the heathen via the hands of fellowship from James, Cephas, and John. Thus, if there is a Papa to the heathen it is not Peter but Paul, and if there is a Papa to the Jews it must be Peter. It is interesting that the heathen wanted Peter as their Papa and not Paul. Like children of a dysfunctional family not wanting their birth father but his older brother for a greater prize at the table. They do not realize that it is in humility that the prize is won and not via the trappings of grandeur. You know, the fish head hat and all the symbols of purity; white robes, incense in the swinging censer. I get a glimpse of it on TV and that is all I can bear; perhaps 30 seconds and it is enough. |
|
|
|
Post by Natalie on Dec 21, 2018 8:47:42 GMT -6
Here's a question that came to mind. Why would the way of salvation change when John (the Baptist) and then Jesus came? And then change again after the Resurrection? In Genesis 15:6 we are told "And [Abraham] believed the LORD, and He counted it to him as righteousness." And in Habakkuk 2:4 that "the righteous shall live by faith." Why change it to the righteous must have repentance, baptism, and works?
And we are told the reason for the Law: "the Law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith" (Gal 3:24) Faith alone, for Jews and Gentiles. We have to take the whole of Scripture, and Scripture does not separate the two.
My thoughts: faith produces repentance which leads to baptism and good works. Faith is all that is needed. The others flow from faith and are not works needed for salvation. They are works of obedience (as John says, "fruits in keeping with repentance.") In the OT, faith would lead to repentance and sacrifices from a right heart and right relationship with God.
|
|
|
|
Post by uscgvet on Dec 21, 2018 9:16:48 GMT -6
Paul is the apostle to the Jew FIRST then the Gentiles. This is in Acts, Romans, and other places I think. I think everyone here agrees with this...? When sharing the gospel (since we are after Acts 10 with Peter's vision that gentiles are no longer unclean or common (Acts 11)... like dogs....hint hint...), for both Jew and Gentile, before the Rapture occurs, we follow Paul's letters of 1 Corinthians 15 of Faith alone in Christ's death, burial, and resurrection. After Rapture, when the body of Christ is gone, it's the Gospels in relation to the Jews and Hebrews -> Revelation. Faith + Works (Don't take the mark of the beast, don't worship the beast, survive to the end, beheading, etc...) That's my understanding so far. It seems many here may disagree on some of it? So if I'm understanding your above post correctly, what would happen to a Gentile who are here during the Trib? My assumption is they reject the mark of the beast, and have faith? Is it just that or something else (more) required, like baptism (again)? Wouldn't this be a change in requirement for salvation for a Gentile now from before the rapture? The way i'm understanding you is that since the age of grace is over at the rapture, anyone who realizes they missed it will now require more than just faith? Which works would be required for either a Jew or Gentile? Are they different now or the same? I see what you are saying about beheading and refusing the mark, but isnt that just 'evidence' of the faith someone now has? Why consider either of those things a work? I have thought of myself in that possible scenario and honestly cant even imagine what kind of belief that would require. We have brothers & sisters today and throughout the ages that have had this kind of faith today and lose their lives over it. Is that works or just faith? Humor me here, but what happens to the very few who will refuse the mark, escape beheading and continue to reject the gospel? Would they be saved because they reject the mark and theoretically make it until the end? To answer your question - Yes it does seem many here disagree with some of it. I wont speak for others though, but can say that (for me) it is possible the venue we have here and communication between us leaves some room for error in understanding. Now I havent watched the Breaker videos and won't. I have watched a few of his some time ago and something about his style really sits wrong with me. Not saying he's all bad but, he comes across as very "churched" to me, but is a brother and leave it at that...point being some things are much more understandable in a video or spoken and written they lose some value. As a Christian I am asking more questions to gain understanding of your viewpoint as I do not see/understand the topic the way you seem to. As a moderator here I want to ensure this dialogue continues in the manner of us (all of us) trying to understand each other with respect. Sometimes we are wrong in our views and need each other to help us. I had struggled with the need to evidence works + faith as my understanding of James was askew. Too many verses were taught to me out of context and doctrines were built on those causing my understanding to be incorrect. Only when some folks here helped my understanding that faith alone is the requirement were my eyes opened. The last chapters of Revelation talks about what happens to those who survive, reject the mark, and still don't believe Christ is the King. The last few paragraphs of Rev 19 paints a gruesome picture. "and the flesh of all people, free and slave, both small and great." are all killed by the sword! But I don't know if this is locally to just where the battle was, or the entire planet? I know we will be judging people and angels with Christ. So there are survivors, I think they are all surviving believers at the point in the Mill Kingdom at the end of Rev 19. But then Rev 22:14-15 talks about "dogs, sorcerers and sexually immoral and murders and idolators" being outside of the gates into the city. So maybe new born people fall back into sin during the 1000 year reign? We know Satan is released to deceive again at the end of the 1000 so that makes since. As for videos and your comment of spoken vs written, yes, that's why I watch them. His whiteboard approach appeals to me as a useful tool for understanding his point. And as for James, I also struggled with evidence works + faith. And Revelations works, and Peter works, and John works. I struggled with works + faith until I figured out Acts. Acts truly was a transition from works + faith to faith alone. From Peter to Paul. Act was the first part. Also, on top of that, a few years ago I started to read the Bible by starting with the very first verse of each book and not stopping until I finished the book. When I did that, I discovered the audiences of the letters and scrolls. Everything was written for edification, study, etc.. yes. But not everything was written to me as the destination audience. James flat out tells you in his first verse who he sent the letter to... the 12 tribes of Israel. Do you ignore this fact? So does Peter. And cryptically so do John and Jude. You have to pay attention to see their audiences. And Jesus Himself tells you with his own words He came for the lost sheep of Israel in the Gospels. The last paragraph of Acts 10 is the nail to the transition of Faith + water baptism + repentance to just Faith alone. A bunch of gentiles hear the Word Peter spoke, instantly receive the H.S. and then Peter says ok... now lets go get you guys baptized ( with or without water, let the reader understand) Where was the repentance? Why get baptized in water (or the Name of the Lord) when they just got baptized in the Holy Spirit? Why 2 baptisims? I don't think the second one was necessary. And in Acts 11, Peter figures this out... |
|
|
|
Post by uscgvet on Dec 21, 2018 9:43:42 GMT -6
Here's a question that came to mind. Why would the way of salvation change when John (the Baptist) and then Jesus came? And then change again after the Resurrection? In Genesis 15:6 we are told "And [Abraham] believed the LORD, and He counted it to him as righteousness." And in Habakkuk 2:4 that "the righteous shall live by faith." Why change it to the righteous must have repentance, baptism, and works? And we are told the reason for the Law: "the Law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith" (Gal 3:24) Faith alone, for Jews and Gentiles. We have to take the whole of Scripture, and Scripture does not separate the two. My thoughts: faith produces repentance which leads to baptism and good works. Faith is all that is needed. The others flow from faith and are not works needed for salvation. They are works of obedience (as John says, "fruits in keeping with repentance.") In the OT, faith would lead to repentance and sacrifices from a right heart and right relationship with God. In the OT, people didn't believe but still performed sacrifices and were covered by the blood of the sacrifice for that time. They worshiped other false gods all while at the same time performed the law rituals. But God doesn't want sacrifices, he want's your faith, like Abraham, David, and many others provided. Faith makes my sin, which was made visible by the law, nailed to the cross. Chuck Missler made good lectures on this topic. |
|
|
|
Post by kjs on Dec 21, 2018 10:05:57 GMT -6
OK, I feel I must apologize -- because there have been to many frustrated Posters on this thread -- so for that I do Apologize!!!!
Let's clear up a few items .........
First - this entire thread is in response to the article that Stephanie Dawn wrote for Unsealed.org (or the main website) called "Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth" after reading it, I felt she was a bit to "strict" or "bias" in describing the "other side" of the topic. Namely; getting into the discussion of the various groups who share the belief in Dispensationalism.
There are MANY types such as : Classical dispensationalism; Traditional (4) dispensationalism (Four dispensational periods); Traditional (7) dispensationalism (Seven dispensational periods);
Hyper-dispensationalism; Ultra-dispensationalism
And possibly many groups in between.... (feel free to look up each of these groups to find out what their views are)
As I already stated I grew up Traditional 7 dispensationalism but ran into some Hyper-dispensationalism (that seemed to have a lot of valid points). His name was Les Feldick and you can see his teachings Through the Bible with Les Feldick here.... BUT WARNING he is more of a part of Hyper-dispensationalism than of the Traditional dispensationalism side of things. I still think he is a very good teacher; and he is the first one I heard talk of the "two gospels" -- which was the first time I heard of it. Later I came across Don Samdahl's website (That I shared earlier). Don is a gifted writer and I thought he presented the basic gist of the two gospel debate ... so I linked to it. Since most people apparently have never heard of this debate between Dispensationalist.
This debate between Dispensationalist -- is just that -- various ways on how people interpret the Bible. Each side has valid points with scripture backing up their points.
While some of these concepts may be new to some people -- they are not heretical -- (in my opinion - those who throw that term about are closer to the old Pharisees tradition and need to reevaluate their own faith)
The Christian Life - is continuous growth -- and if you fail to grow you stagnate and develop ridged doctrines.
BUT these debates are NOT for Baby Believers! If fact some of them may be dangerous.
Therefore, it might be better to close this thread...........
|
|
|
|
Post by uscgvet on Dec 21, 2018 10:15:57 GMT -6
Well said kjs.
Edit:
And now Scott Clarke just released a new video on RD.
LOL
I'm watching it now. So far it's a good presentation.
Edit2: Watched it. I though it was good. Excellent in fact.
|
|
|
|
Post by boraddict on Dec 21, 2018 13:22:42 GMT -6
OK, I feel I must apologize -- because there have been to many frustrated Posters on this thread -- so for that I do Apologize!!!!
Let's clear up a few items .........
First - this entire thread is in response to the article that Stephanie Dawn wrote for Unsealed.org (or the main website) called "Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth" after reading it, I felt she was a bit to "strict" or "bias" in describing the "other side" of the topic. Namely; getting into the discussion of the various groups who share the belief in Dispensationalism.
There are MANY types such as : Classical dispensationalism; Traditional (4) dispensationalism (Four dispensational periods); Traditional (7) dispensationalism (Seven dispensational periods);
Hyper-dispensationalism; Ultra-dispensationalism
And possibly many groups in between.... (feel free to look up each of these groups to find out what their views are)
As I already stated I grew up Traditional 7 dispensationalism but ran into some Hyper-dispensationalism (that seemed to have a lot of valid points). His name was Les Feldick and you can see his teachings Through the Bible with Les Feldick here.... BUT WARNING he is more of a part of Hyper-dispensationalism than of the Traditional dispensationalism side of things. I still think he is a very good teacher; and he is the first one I heard talk of the "two gospels" -- which was the first time I heard of it. Later I came across Don Samdahl's website (That I shared earlier). Don is a gifted writer and I thought he presented the basic gist of the two gospel debate ... so I linked to it. Since most people apparently have never heard of this debate between Dispensationalist.
This debate between Dispensationalist -- is just that -- various ways on how people interpret the Bible. Each side has valid points with scripture backing up their points.
While some of these concepts may be new to some people -- they are not heretical -- (in my opinion - those who throw that term about are closer to the old Pharisees tradition and need to reevaluate their own faith)
The Christian Life - is continuous growth -- and if you fail to grow you stagnate and develop ridged doctrines.
BUT these debates are NOT for Baby Believers! If fact some of them may be dangerous.
Therefore, it might be better to close this thread...........
Kjs, don't be that way.  This is too much fun. To close this thread is like taking candy from a child. I would never take candy from a child on the playground. |
|
|
|
Post by kjs on Dec 21, 2018 13:30:12 GMT -6
uscgvet shared SCOTT CLARKE - ETERNAL RHYTHM FLOW -- Latest video (who is on this websites - main page under LINKS)
and - wow look at the topic.........
Here are a few comments about video
Thank you for this wonderful video! I really got a lot of understanding about dispensation from the examples that yall gave. I didn't understand the term that well, but now I do. Thanks again.
100% agree. .love Robert Breaker...he uses his blackboard and explains rightly divided in such an easy way to comprehend ...☺Scottie Clarke you do an amazing Job..Trey smith included..love and blessings to all you guys..
Thank you both for an outstanding teaching! I thought the information was clearly presented and I am thankful that I grasp, agree, and understand rightly dividing. To me it is what eliminates all confusion. I hope and pray that other viewers will get a hold of the truths presented here and understand God's Word with more clarity than ever before.
Thank you Scottie, I have been watching Rodney's videos and have learned so much. I have been a Christian for 31 years and have learned more in the past two months than I did in all the years I went to church. God bless. 🙂
I have been a Christian for 37 years. Since I started watching Pastor Rodney on YT all confusion I experienced concerning the Bible has evaporated. Now I KNOW what is written to me and what is not. Everything else in scripture from Genesis to the cross clarifies why the cross was absolutely necessary for the salvation of all the world.
Awesome video! 😄 🙌I am so grateful I discovered rightly dividing, or else I'd probably still be SO CONFUSED about so many things! 🕆 I am so grateful for God's amazing GRACE and for his written word, rightly divided! 😄😀
|
|
|
|
Post by boraddict on Dec 21, 2018 15:25:30 GMT -6
uscgvet shared SCOTT CLARKE - ETERNAL RHYTHM FLOW -- Latest video (who is on this websites - main page under LINKS)
and - wow look at the topic.........
Here are a few comments about video
Thank you for this wonderful video! I really got a lot of understanding about dispensation from the examples that yall gave. I didn't understand the term that well, but now I do. Thanks again.
100% agree. .love Robert Breaker...he uses his blackboard and explains rightly divided in such an easy way to comprehend ...☺Scottie Clarke you do an amazing Job..Trey smith included..love and blessings to all you guys..
Thank you both for an outstanding teaching! I thought the information was clearly presented and I am thankful that I grasp, agree, and understand rightly dividing. To me it is what eliminates all confusion. I hope and pray that other viewers will get a hold of the truths presented here and understand God's Word with more clarity than ever before.
Thank you Scottie, I have been watching Rodney's videos and have learned so much. I have been a Christian for 31 years and have learned more in the past two months than I did in all the years I went to church. God bless. 🙂
I have been a Christian for 37 years. Since I started watching Pastor Rodney on YT all confusion I experienced concerning the Bible has evaporated. Now I KNOW what is written to me and what is not. Everything else in scripture from Genesis to the cross clarifies why the cross was absolutely necessary for the salvation of all the world.
Awesome video! 😄 🙌I am so grateful I discovered rightly dividing, or else I'd probably still be SO CONFUSED about so many things! 🕆 I am so grateful for God's amazing GRACE and for his written word, rightly divided! 😄😀
I watched the video as well and it is excellent. There are however some technical errors and the largest of these is perhaps the lost ten tribes. We all know that the Assyrians (@650+ BC) moved some of the exiled northern tribes back to the land of Israel and they became known as the Samaritans. Even today Samaritans live in the land of Israel and they are not Jews. So, in referencing the gentiles it should be known that some gentiles are the lost tribes of Israel and this includes the Samaritans. Thus, when speaking of the house of Israel there are twelve tribes. I do not understand why this history is repeatedly overlooked. That is, to simply say that the gospel went first to the Jews and then to the gentiles means that the gospel went to the Jews and then to the 1) lost tribes of Israel and 2) others. My point is that the group "gentiles" includes 1) the lost tribes of Israel and 2) people that are not of the house of Israel. Although this technical error may seem insignificant it is important in understanding the larger picture. Thus: 1) the Assyrians conquered the northern ten tribes 2) some of the conquered ten tribes were moved back by the Assyrians 3) the Babylonians conquered the lower two tribes 4) some of the lower two tribes were moved back by the Persians 5) In the land of Israel, those of the northern ten tribes are called Samaritans and those of the southern two tribes are called Jews. 6) both groups existed when Christ was upon the earth and he taught both groups In the video I was most impressed with the conclusion of multiple gospels. For instance, scripturally speaking, a Davidic payment is different than an eternal payment. That is, a temporal payment is different than an eternal payment. So, while it is reasonable to say there are distinct gospels, it is not reasonable to equate these different gospels to the one eternal gospel; although they may be similar. Thus, the gospel to the Jews may have overtones that are unique to the Jews, and the gospel to the gentiles may have overtones that are unique to the gentiles; they both have their foundation in the eternal gospel of Jesus Christ. Additionally, there is the gospel of Abraham that pertains to his sacrifice of Issac and there are Davidic King sacrifices/gospels. Thus, Paul made a payment and his gospel message is Pauline. Nevertheless, these gospels branches are founded in the one eternal Gospel of Jesus Christ. Rightly dividing is an exciting educational method. |
|
|
|
Post by kjs on Dec 21, 2018 15:46:16 GMT -6
Sorry boraddict going to have to disagree with you here...
There is no ten lost tribes.....
Even James (Jesus Brother and writer of a book in the Bible)
If there were ten lost tribes -- wouldn't he have indicated in some way?
Notice He calls it a myth........
============= This video says there are five gospels ...........
I still think it is more a matter of semantics -- but the video was very good -- and did a good job describing their position........
|
|
|
|
Post by Natalie on Dec 21, 2018 16:27:58 GMT -6
Here is what Jesus told Nicodemus:
No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven. And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. (John 3:13-16)
No mention of repentance, baptism, works. Just to believe in Him who was going to be lifted up and who would also ascend to heaven. And being a teacher of Israel, I bet Nicodemus was very familiar with Moses and with Isaiah (53, although no chapter breaks in his time). Now of course it probably didn't all make sense until after the resurrection, but that's the Gospel right there. The same one that goes out to the Gentiles.
|
|
|
|
Post by Natalie on Dec 21, 2018 16:34:54 GMT -6
I found this interesting: How were people saved before Jesus died for our sins? www.gotquestions.org/before-Jesus.htmlAdam did not have as much information as Abraham who did not have as much information as Moses, etc. All they needed was faith that God was going to deal with their sin. We can now look back and see how God did just that. In faith. |
|
|
|
Post by fitz on Dec 21, 2018 17:04:36 GMT -6
Faith in Jesus saved the old testament believers as it does the New Testament believers. They looked forward to the coming Redeemer that was promised, and we look back to the cross, knowing that He has come.
|
|
|
|
Post by fitz on Dec 21, 2018 17:20:55 GMT -6
Luke 18 King James Version (KJV)
18 And he spake a parable unto them to this end, that men ought always to pray, and not to faint;
2 Saying, There was in a city a judge, which feared not God, neither regarded man:
3 And there was a widow in that city; and she came unto him, saying, Avenge me of mine adversary.
4 And he would not for a while: but afterward he said within himself, Though I fear not God, nor regard man;
5 Yet because this widow troubleth me, I will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she weary me.
6 And the Lord said, Hear what the unjust judge saith.
7 And shall not God avenge his own elect, which cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with them?
8 I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?
9 And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others:
10 Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican.
11 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.
12 I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.
13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.
14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.
15 And they brought unto him also infants, that he would touch them: but when his disciples saw it, they rebuked them.
16 But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.
17 Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein.
18 And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
20 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother.
21 And he said, All these have I kept from my youth up.
22 Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto him, Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.
23 And when he heard this, he was very sorrowful: for he was very rich.
24 And when Jesus saw that he was very sorrowful, he said, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!
25 For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
26 And they that heard it said, Who then can be saved?
27 And he said, The things which are impossible with men are possible with God.
28 Then Peter said, Lo, we have left all, and followed thee.
29 And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or parents, or brethren, or wife, or children, for the kingdom of God's sake,
30 Who shall not receive manifold more in this present time, and in the world to come life everlasting.
31 Then he took unto him the twelve, and said unto them, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and all things that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of man shall be accomplished.
32 For he shall be delivered unto the Gentiles, and shall be mocked, and spitefully entreated, and spitted on:
33 And they shall scourge him, and put him to death: and the third day he shall rise again.
34 And they understood none of these things: and this saying was hid from them, neither knew they the things which were spoken.
35 And it came to pass, that as he was come nigh unto Jericho, a certain blind man sat by the way side begging:
36 And hearing the multitude pass by, he asked what it meant.
37 And they told him, that Jesus of Nazareth passeth by.
38 And he cried, saying, Jesus, thou son of David, have mercy on me.
39 And they which went before rebuked him, that he should hold his peace: but he cried so much the more, Thou son of David, have mercy on me.
40 And Jesus stood, and commanded him to be brought unto him: and when he was come near, he asked him,
41 Saying, What wilt thou that I shall do unto thee? And he said, Lord, that I may receive my sight.
42 And Jesus said unto him, Receive thy sight: thy faith hath saved thee.
43 And immediately he received his sight, and followed him, glorifying God: and all the people, when they saw it, gave praise unto God.
|
|
This is too much fun. To close this thread is like taking candy from a child. I would never take candy from a child on the playground.