Christian Topics

[Landlord]

Is a prophet someone who predicts the future or delivers God's word?

 

 

I'm far from being an expert on the gifts and especially prophecy, but in response to this, it depends on your timeline. Prophets were people that made proclamations about the future (I don't think calling them predictions would be accurate), but with Jesus being the fulfillment of the OT and the exact representation of the Father, and with the new covenant being made complete, prophecy is no longer a future-tense sort of deal.

[NUance]

Is a prophet someone who predicts the future or delivers God's word?

 

 

I'm far from being an expert on the gifts and especially prophecy, but in response to this, it depends on your timeline. Prophets were people that made proclamations about the future (I don't think calling them predictions would be accurate), but with Jesus being the fulfillment of the OT and the exact representation of the Father, and with the new covenant being made complete, prophecy is no longer a future-tense sort of deal.

One dictionary definition of "prophet" is: a person who speaks for God by divine inspiration. So, could there be prophets today? I get the impression that the Seventh Day Advents and Latter Day Saints both believe their founders may have been prophets. But I think most other religions might disagree. Me--I'm not sure I know enough about SDA and/or LDS teachings to form a valid opinion. I'm not necessarily ruling out the possibility of there being a modern day prophet. But even if you studied the teachings of a purported prophet (and perhaps found them to be consistent with the bible), how could you ever really know?

[Landlord]

One dictionary definition of "prophet" is: a person who speaks for God by divine inspiration. So, could there be prophets today? I get the impression that the Seventh Day Advents and Latter Day Saints both believe their founders may have been prophets.

 

 

Seventh Day Adventists and Latter Day Saints aren't Christians, so they can believe what they want but it's a different faith basis.

 

Anyways, like I said I'm not very well studied in the area of prophecy. With God's revelation being completed in Scripture and in Christ there are no Prophets with a capital P that are going to be revealing anything new or previously unknown about God, so I would say Prophets no longer exist, but the gift of prophecy still does.

[NUance]

One dictionary definition of "prophet" is: a person who speaks for God by divine inspiration. So, could there be prophets today? I get the impression that the Seventh Day Advents and Latter Day Saints both believe their founders may have been prophets.

 

 

Seventh Day Adventists and Latter Day Saints aren't Christians, so they can believe what they want but it's a different faith basis.

 

Anyways, like I said I'm not very well studied in the area of prophecy. With God's revelation being completed in Scripture and in Christ there are no Prophets with a capital P that are going to be revealing anything new or previously unknown about God, so I would say Prophets no longer exist, but the gift of prophecy still does.

Ha ha! That raises another question. What's the difference between a prophet and someone with the gift of prophecy?

 

This *always* happens. When I delve into a question I'm interested in, it raises yet more questions.

[Landlord]

Ha ha! That raises another question. What's the difference between a prophet and someone with the gift of prophecy?

 

This *always* happens. When I delve into a question I'm interested in, it raises yet more questions.

 

 

A prophet would be someone that God called forth for the specific calling to prophecy His truth - like...that is their identity. The gift of prophecy, as I understand gifts to go, would be a temporary outpouring of the Spirit on any person called to any calling, allowing them to prophecy over a situation or a person as the need arises.

[NUance]

**BUMP**

 

Lately I've decided to delve a bit deeper into the book of Mark. (I picked Mark because it was the first NT book written.) I read a book called "Discovering Mark" that provided quite a few insights. Then I reread the book of Mark again, NIV version. As I encountered difficult passages while reading Mark, I referred to the volume for Mark from "The Complete Bible Library" for explanations. And now I'm working my way through the 40 page Overview section of Mark in that same "Complete Bible Library" volume. Despite all of this, there is a passage of Mark that I just can't make heads or tails of. It has to do with the metaphors using salt in chapter 9. I even went to my minister to ask him about it, but I still don't understand the meaning. The verses I can't figure out are Mark 9:47-50:

 

47 And if your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, 48 where “‘the worms that eat them do not die, and the fire is not quenched.’49 Everyone will be salted with fire. 50 “Salt is good, but if it loses its saltiness, how can you make it salty again? Have salt among yourselves, and be at peace with each other.”

 

In 9:49 it sounds like salt is bad, based on the prior verses. But in 9:50 it's clearly saying salt is good. Me no comprende.

 

Anyone got any ideas as to what this means? (I have a theory, but I want to hear what others have to say.)

[funhusker]

 

wow, this discussion went way over my head. Can someone in two sentences or less tell me how not to go to hell but still enjoy life?

The path to Heaven is not in the works. Meaning that we as Christians believe (because Jesus said so) that if we accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior and recognize that He died for our sins, we will be granted the gift of eternal life in Heaven.

 

Now here is where I disagree with a lot of my fellow Christians. Take for example a man who has accepted Jesus as his Lord and Savior but rapes and murders people. Based on those beliefs alone, he should be granted with eternal life. But I have read in the Bible a couple passages (can't remember what or where) that talk about this very issue. We as people could make the case that if this man were committing these horrible acts against others, that he has not truly accepted Jesus. I feel that God most likely views this situation in the same light.

 

So on one side, the path to Heaven is not in the works, but on the other hand, it is a little bit. How you as an individual feel is the best way of going about your life while still accepting Jesus is essentially up to you, and there is not one concrete way of going about it. In many cases/situations, you kind of should ask yourself the old cliche, "What would Jesus do?" Yes, it's very cheesy, but the idea of a true Christian who has truly accepted Jesus as his/her Lord and Savior is to live his/her life as an example of God's word. In other words, love others more than you love yourself and "doing the right thing."

 

That is the path to Heaven according to the Bible.

 

I just finished reading "Zealot" by Reza Aslan, and there was a section that discussed the disappointment and "disgust" that James (the Church leader in Jerusalem) had for Paul for spreading the message that "only belief was required". Aslan mentioned in the book how James sent his own ministers to Rome and other places that Paul preached to with the intention of circumventing Paul's message.

 

As a Christian, I thought the book was very interesting. It never said "Jesus is NOT the Messiah", but it did go into detail about the politics and history of the region around Jesus' time. And painted a good picture of the broken system that Jesus preached against.

[TGHusker]

Let's break it down by thought/phrase:

 

 

47 And if your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, 48 where “‘the worms that eat them do not die, and the fire is not quenched.’49 Everyone will be salted with fire.

 

As we know Jesus used various methods of teaching, parables, stories, referring to actual events, quoting OT, using natural events/places/experiences that his disciples could see, feel or know of. In vs 47 - he isn't literally telling his hearers to pluck the eyes out but that in comparison it is better to enter God's kingdom with handicaps, pain, etc than not to enter it as a fully whole person. vs 49 - Salted with fire reference. Salt is used as both a preservative and a purifier in ancient days. In this case the salt reference is as a 'purifier'. Thus as a reference to hell - the fire will purify the sinner who willingly choose keeps his eye in tact (so he can habitually lust as a life style - lust being one of the 3 general categories of sin as described in 1 John 2 - lust, pride, greed) Thus her Salt = Purifier

 

50 “Salt is good, but if it loses its saltiness, how can you make it salty again? Have salt among yourselves, and be at peace with each other.”

 

Salt is good as a preservative. Meats were preserved by salting. However, if the meat was washed and looses it saltiness - the preservative affect of the salt is lost and the meat spoils - not too many electric refrigerators back in those days. Therefore as believers, we are to have the preservative of God's word working in our lives - preserving us - keeping our life style pure so that we can also be a 'preservative' to the world. If we loose our saltiness - become just like the world in thought, word and deed we are no different and cannot influence the world towards a higher path. Think of the preacher who 'falls from grace' due to sin (can happen to each of us too), He has lost not only his reputation but also his 'saltiness' - ability to influence and preserve the society from falling into decay. So we are to be 'salt' towards each other - helping each other to preserve the good in each other and in our faith and in society.

 

Hope this helps.

[NUance]

 

 

wow, this discussion went way over my head. Can someone in two sentences or less tell me how not to go to hell but still enjoy life?

The path to Heaven is not in the works. Meaning that we as Christians believe (because Jesus said so) that if we accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior and recognize that He died for our sins, we will be granted the gift of eternal life in Heaven.

 

Now here is where I disagree with a lot of my fellow Christians. Take for example a man who has accepted Jesus as his Lord and Savior but rapes and murders people. Based on those beliefs alone, he should be granted with eternal life. But I have read in the Bible a couple passages (can't remember what or where) that talk about this very issue. We as people could make the case that if this man were committing these horrible acts against others, that he has not truly accepted Jesus. I feel that God most likely views this situation in the same light.

 

So on one side, the path to Heaven is not in the works, but on the other hand, it is a little bit. How you as an individual feel is the best way of going about your life while still accepting Jesus is essentially up to you, and there is not one concrete way of going about it. In many cases/situations, you kind of should ask yourself the old cliche, "What would Jesus do?" Yes, it's very cheesy, but the idea of a true Christian who has truly accepted Jesus as his/her Lord and Savior is to live his/her life as an example of God's word. In other words, love others more than you love yourself and "doing the right thing."

 

That is the path to Heaven according to the Bible.

 

I just finished reading "Zealot" by Reza Aslan, and there was a section that discussed the disappointment and "disgust" that James (the Church leader in Jerusalem) had for Paul for spreading the message that "only belief was required". Aslan mentioned in the book how James sent his own ministers to Rome and other places that Paul preached to with the intention of circumventing Paul's message.

 

As a Christian, I thought the book was very interesting. It never said "Jesus is NOT the Messiah", but it did go into detail about the politics and history of the region around Jesus' time. And painted a good picture of the broken system that Jesus preached against.

 

 

What did James say was required over and above belief?

 

=================

 

As a general comment, it seems like the "issues" with Christianity began as soon as Jesus ascended. Different groups had varying interpretations and agendas, leading to Christianity being splintered into the great number of factions we have today. In other words, once Christ left it didn't take long for man to f#*k things up again.

[funhusker]

 

 

 

wow, this discussion went way over my head. Can someone in two sentences or less tell me how not to go to hell but still enjoy life?

The path to Heaven is not in the works. Meaning that we as Christians believe (because Jesus said so) that if we accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior and recognize that He died for our sins, we will be granted the gift of eternal life in Heaven.

 

Now here is where I disagree with a lot of my fellow Christians. Take for example a man who has accepted Jesus as his Lord and Savior but rapes and murders people. Based on those beliefs alone, he should be granted with eternal life. But I have read in the Bible a couple passages (can't remember what or where) that talk about this very issue. We as people could make the case that if this man were committing these horrible acts against others, that he has not truly accepted Jesus. I feel that God most likely views this situation in the same light.

 

So on one side, the path to Heaven is not in the works, but on the other hand, it is a little bit. How you as an individual feel is the best way of going about your life while still accepting Jesus is essentially up to you, and there is not one concrete way of going about it. In many cases/situations, you kind of should ask yourself the old cliche, "What would Jesus do?" Yes, it's very cheesy, but the idea of a true Christian who has truly accepted Jesus as his/her Lord and Savior is to live his/her life as an example of God's word. In other words, love others more than you love yourself and "doing the right thing."

 

That is the path to Heaven according to the Bible.

 

I just finished reading "Zealot" by Reza Aslan, and there was a section that discussed the disappointment and "disgust" that James (the Church leader in Jerusalem) had for Paul for spreading the message that "only belief was required". Aslan mentioned in the book how James sent his own ministers to Rome and other places that Paul preached to with the intention of circumventing Paul's message.

 

As a Christian, I thought the book was very interesting. It never said "Jesus is NOT the Messiah", but it did go into detail about the politics and history of the region around Jesus' time. And painted a good picture of the broken system that Jesus preached against.

 

 

What did James say was required over and above belief?

 

=================

 

As a general comment, it seems like the "issues" with Christianity began as soon as Jesus ascended. Different groups had varying interpretations and agendas, leading to Christianity being splintered into the great number of factions we have today. In other words, once Christ left it didn't take long for man to f#*k things up again.

 

James actually felt following the Laws of Moses was very important along with helping needy. That was one of the reasons Azlan felt he was able to stay in Jerusalem and be accepted by the Jews.

[NUance]

Let's break it down by thought/phrase:

 

 

47 And if your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, 48 where “‘the worms that eat them do not die, and the fire is not quenched.’49 Everyone will be salted with fire.

 

As we know Jesus used various methods of teaching, parables, stories, referring to actual events, quoting OT, using natural events/places/experiences that his disciples could see, feel or know of. In vs 47 - he isn't literally telling his hearers to pluck the eyes out but that in comparison it is better to enter God's kingdom with handicaps, pain, etc than not to enter it as a fully whole person. vs 49 - Salted with fire reference. Salt is used as both a preservative and a purifier in ancient days. In this case the salt reference is as a 'purifier'. Thus as a reference to hell - the fire will purify the sinner who willingly choose keeps his eye in tact (so he can habitually lust as a life style - lust being one of the 3 general categories of sin as described in 1 John 2 - lust, pride, greed) Thus her Salt = Purifier

 

50 “Salt is good, but if it loses its saltiness, how can you make it salty again? Have salt among yourselves, and be at peace with each other.”

 

Salt is good as a preservative. Meats were preserved by salting. However, if the meat was washed and looses it saltiness - the preservative affect of the salt is lost and the meat spoils - not too many electric refrigerators back in those days. Therefore as believers, we are to have the preservative of God's word working in our lives - preserving us - keeping our life style pure so that we can also be a 'preservative' to the world. If we loose our saltiness - become just like the world in thought, word and deed we are no different and cannot influence the world towards a higher path. Think of the preacher who 'falls from grace' due to sin (can happen to each of us too), He has lost not only his reputation but also his 'saltiness' - ability to influence and preserve the society from falling into decay. So we are to be 'salt' towards each other - helping each other to preserve the good in each other and in our faith and in society.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Very helpful. +1. Although I still have questions. You say, "Thus as a reference to hell - the fire will purify the sinner who willingly choose keeps his eye in tact." This seems to say that in verse 49, being salted (burning in hell fire) is bad. With this I'm still not sure whether salt is good or bad in these verses. Or both.

 

Here's a theory I'm mulling over. It's a bit out there, so bear with me. What if "the fire is not quenched" in verse 48 has a double meaning? It could mean hell fires that are not extinguished. And it could also mean the holy spirit that is not satisfied (not quenched). Given this, verses 49-50 makes sense. Verse 49 could have a double meaning too. "49 Everyone will be salted with fire" could mean that everyone who doesn't believe damns themselves to hell fire. Verse 49 could also mean that that believers are "salted with fire" in the sense of being imbued with the holy spirit. (Acts describes the holy spirit as tongues of flame.) Like I said, I'm still mulling over this theory. But considering "the fire is not quenched" to have a double meaning does sort of act as a segue to the discussion of saltiness.

 

==================

 

Trivia: btw, There was a good discussion of salt losing its saltiness in the volume for Mark from "The Complete Bible Library." The Sea of Salt (Dead Sea) has a lot of gypsum deposits. In harvesting salt they sometimes would get various amounts of gypsum mixed in, causing the salt to lose its saltiness.

[NUance]

James actually felt following the Laws of Moses was very important along with helping needy. That was one of the reasons Azlan felt he was able to stay in Jerusalem and be accepted by the Jews.

Sounds like an interesting book. :

[GBRedneck]

 

wow, this discussion went way over my head. Can someone in two sentences or less tell me how not to go to hell but still enjoy life?

The path to Heaven is not in the works. Meaning that we as Christians believe (because Jesus said so) that if we accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior and recognize that He died for our sins, we will be granted the gift of eternal life in Heaven.

 

 

 

I realize I'm responding to a really old post, but where did Jesus say this?

[HuskerShark]

 

 

wow, this discussion went way over my head. Can someone in two sentences or less tell me how not to go to hell but still enjoy life?

The path to Heaven is not in the works. Meaning that we as Christians believe (because Jesus said so) that if we accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior and recognize that He died for our sins, we will be granted the gift of eternal life in Heaven.

 

 

 

I realize I'm responding to a really old post, but where did Jesus say this?

 

 

John 11:25 Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in me will live, even though they die;..."

 

 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

As a side note, has anyone ever read the book "Outwitting the Devil" by Napoleon Hill? It's somewhat 'out there' but gives a pretty interesting take on who God is.

[funhusker]

 

James actually felt following the Laws of Moses was very important along with helping needy. That was one of the reasons Azlan felt he was able to stay in Jerusalem and be accepted by the Jews.

Sounds like an interesting book. :

 

It is very interesting viewpoints. Just be sure not to go in with a "defensive' mindset. Some of the things he talks about would easily get some people worked up. For example, he explains that the Christmas story more than likely didn't happen citing historical evidence about Herod's rule and what the census would have been used for.

 

The writer focuses on the "historical" Jesus, and admits that the followers "saw something" after Jesus' death. But he didn't want to cross into realms of "faith".

 

I'd recommend.