Friendly Bible Study - participants must agree to Nicene Creed.

[Carl Emerson]

Exactly. So in the context of today's spiritual milieu, and much of the Christian world now forming into a similar counterfeit church in the form of a politically engineered union of church and state, there are several deeply important prophetic implications tied in with current developments. Trusting in one's experience, friends, church, traditions, etc I don't think are going to cut it when choosing a side to sit on in the coming crisis. We will all need to read very carefully and not trust our senses when it comes to discerning truth and error. As I said previously, Elijah proved the validity of his message on Mt Carmel by calling fire down from heaven. That trick in the future will be in the hands of the false prophet. I suggest that won't be the only trick in his arsenal to coerce or convince the world, including the church world, into accepting, even welcoming, the mark of the beast. How many people in your church can name the beast, or explain its mark?

Mmmm... end times is not my strength or calling.

My hope is to be found doing what He asked at His coming or my going.

Yes, some churches are loosing their way but at judgement it will be all about me not the state of the church.

I remember a dream I had years ago arguing in the city square with a man of the cloth who was passing the time o day with folks and showing no urgency. I was indignant - "If the world ended tomorrow would you be saying anything different to these people?" I said... and in my hand I had a handful of seed which I threw in His face in distain...

And the Lord said - the people have still not been fed...

I had wasted the seed of the Word.

I knew He was saying to take my focus off arguing about the state of the church and spread the good Word with the spiritually needy.

So that is my focus.

 

[Brakelite]

Mmmm... end times is not my strength or calling.

My hope is to be found doing what He asked at His coming or my going.

Yes, some churches are loosing their way but at judgement it will be all about me not the state of the church.

I remember a dream I had years ago arguing in the city square with a man of the cloth who was passing the time o day with folks and showing no urgency. I was indignant - "If the world ended tomorrow would you be saying anything different to these people?" I said... and in my hand I had a handful of seed which I threw in His face in distain...

And the Lord said - the people have still not been fed...

I had wasted the seed of the Word.

I knew He was saying to take my focus off arguing about the state of the church and spread the good Word with the spiritually needy.

So that is my focus.

Amen. Wherever we are, and whoever we are with, the focus of our message must always be Jesus and Him crucified, salted however in the context of the last days. Or church as you may be aware has as a "mission statement" Revelation 14: 6-12.
Those 3 angels messages give the gospel context, urgency, and motivation.

 

[Brakelite]

As for Acts 10, wonderful story. I was reminded of that other centurion, a story a good partaker to this, who after abusing, insulting, and physically assaulting Jesus for many hours, and then helped kill Him, had his eyes opened even after Christ's death, confessing that Jesus was indeed the Son of God. What a confession that was, in an environment that brooked no other profession other than that Caesar alone was the son of the gods, and to believe otherwise was treason. This showed that no-one is beyond redemption, and that we are never to judge anyone more or less worthy of salvation. To be a respecter of persons is a grave mistake, and we could be found guilty of the blood of another by refusing to share the gospel with others, thinking they are "common or unclean".

 

[Carl Emerson]

@Brakelite @amadeus @Azim @Pearl @Rita @Ritajanice @APAK @MA2444 @faithfulness @GTW27 @Berean @rockytopva @quietthinker @ScottA @Hidden In Him @grace @Oneoff @Hillsage @VictoryinJesus @Angelina @seatts79 @GodsGrace

OK Acts 10...

Cornelius - what a saint...

In Acts 9 we heard of Ananias an otherwise unknown Saint - and now Cornelius - there is a pattern here - The 12 were wonderfully used but here we see the 'common faithful' singled out for divine attention and wonderfully become part of the action. Be patient - your time will come.

Notice how visions and dreams were central to guidance - such experiences have had too much bad press in modern times. Better to gather together and invite the sharing of dreams and visions which are a lot more common than you might think. Who knows - after prayer and careful 'weighing' the gathered might be receiving specific strategy by this means.

I find it interesting that the great commission was already given to go out and preach the Gospel to the whole world (Matt 28: 19-20)
Yet Peter still needed a direct Word to bring this 'Great Commission' to his attention again. He was looking at God's Harvest with Jewish eyes and missing the enormous breadth of compassion released through the Cross. The 'New Jew' which we all become in Him has His heart for the whole world.

Notice how Peter denied Jesus three times was singled out by the risen Jesus to confess Love for Jesus three times and now he was shown Gods purpose three times (verse 16) Somehow the repeat of three is part of establishing deep agreement.

Peter took some time to shake off Jewish tradition - Paul however had such an encounter with the living God that his whole world view was changed forever in an instant. So it is today - some folks have a long journey to seeing the world as Jesus does, and some have a radical encounter and their eyes are opened in an instant.

I visited the house of Simon the Tanner and asked the guide how we could be sure it was the same house. My Jewish guide replied "why would it not be..."

It is interesting that the first gentile believers were indwelled and gifted by the Holy Spirit like at Pentecost - Then they were baptised. For this reason it is hard to hold the theology that Baptism is needed for Salvation or is the time the Spirit is received.

Hey - a great chapter - comments most welcome.

 

[RedFan]

@Brakelite @amadeus @Azim @Pearl @Rita @Ritajanice @APAK @MA2444 @faithfulness @GTW27 @Berean @rockytopva @quietthinker @ScottA @Hidden In Him @grace @Oneoff @Hillsage @VictoryinJesus @Angelina @seatts79 @GodsGrace

OK Acts 10...

Cornelius - what a saint...

In Acts 9 we heard of Ananias an otherwise unknown Saint - and now Cornelius - there is a pattern here - The 12 were wonderfully used but here we see the 'common faithful' singled out for divine attention and wonderfully become part of the action. Be patient - your time will come.

Notice how visions and dreams were central to guidance - such experiences have had too much bad press in modern times. Better to gather together and invite the sharing of dreams and visions which are a lot more common than you might think. Who knows - after prayer and careful 'weighing' the gathered might be receiving specific strategy by this means.

I find it interesting that the great commission was already given to go out and preach the Gospel to the whole world (Matt 28: 19-20)
Yet Peter still needed a direct Word to bring this 'Great Commission' to his attention again. He was looking at God's Harvest with Jewish eyes and missing the enormous breadth of compassion released through the Cross. The 'New Jew' which we all become in Him has His heart for the whole world.

Notice how Peter denied Jesus three times was singled out by the risen Jesus to confess Love for Jesus three times and now he was shown Gods purpose three times (verse 16) Somehow the repeat of three is part of establishing deep agreement.

Peter took some time to shake off Jewish tradition - Paul however had such an encounter with the living God that his whole world view was changed forever in an instant. So it is today - some folks have a long journey to seeing the world as Jesus does, and some have a radical encounter and their eyes are opened in an instant.

I visited the house of Simon the Tanner and asked the guide how we could be sure it was the same house. My Jewish guide replied "why would it not be..."

It is interesting that the first gentile believers were indwelled and gifted by the Holy Spirit like at Pentecost - Then they were baptised. For this reason it is hard to hold the theology that Baptism is needed for Salvation or is the time the Spirit is received.

Hey - a great chapter - comments most welcome.

Indeed. In Matt. 28:19 and in Luke 24:47, Christ reportedly commissions his apostles to spread the gospel to “all the nations.” The Greek word ethnē translated as “nations” in these verses surely includes Gentiles―making it a complete reversal of Christ’s earlier instruction to the apostles to reach out only to the Jews (Matt. 10:5-6) and of his prediction that the apostles won’t complete their mission to the Jews before his return (Matt. 10:23).

It strains logic to assume that his disciples understood Jesus’ last words to refer to other than Gentiles. But if Christ truly commissioned an outreach to the Gentiles, how are we to make sense of Acts 10? Peter encounters Cornelius, a Gentile, and through a dream concludes that the gospel is not to be restricted to Jews. He reports this to the brethren in Jerusalem, who at first are quite critical of Peter, but then come to accept his explanation.

If Christ’s parting words to his disciples before His ascension instructed them to spread the gospel to the Gentiles, wouldn’t you think they’d remember it? Wouldn’t you think that Peter and the brethren in Jerusalem would have embraced rather than questioned the practice of reaching out to the Gentiles? Why, then, their surprise? It’s mystifying. I can’t make sense out of it if the Great Commission was given precisely as rendered.

And I question whether it was. Adding the Great Commission makes sense when we consider that the tradition of outreach to the Gentiles was so well established by the time that Matthew and Luke-Acts were penned that it would be almost unthinkable not to enshrine the mission with Jesus’ own directive. Mark 13:10 tells us that before the end arrives “The gospel must first be preached to all the nations,” while Mark 14:9 concludes the story of the anointing at Bethany with “Wherever this gospel shall be preached throughout the whole world, what this woman hath done shall be also told, in memory of her,” and it seems unlikely in the extreme that the author intended only a world-wide outreach to Jews. By the time of John’s gospel, the issue is settled: John 1:29 has the Baptist saying “Behold the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world;” John 3:16 admonishes that “God so loved the world that he sent his only begotten Son;” John 10:16 quotes Jesus as desiring to bring the “other sheep” into the one flock; John 12:20-21 has Greeks asking after Jesus; and so on. These authors are solicitous of a universal religion.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Indeed. In Matt. 28:19 and in Luke 24:47, Christ reportedly commissions his apostles to spread the gospel to “all the nations.” The Greek word ethnē translated as “nations” in these verses surely includes Gentiles―making it a complete reversal of Christ’s earlier instruction to the apostles to reach out only to the Jews (Matt. 10:5-6) and of his prediction that the apostles won’t complete their mission to the Jews before his return (Matt. 10:23).

It strains logic to assume that his disciples understood Jesus’ last words to refer to other than Gentiles. But if Christ truly commissioned an outreach to the Gentiles, how are we to make sense of Acts 10? Peter encounters Cornelius, a Gentile, and through a dream concludes that the gospel is not to be restricted to Jews. He reports this to the brethren in Jerusalem, who at first are quite critical of Peter, but then come to accept his explanation.

If Christ’s parting words to his disciples before His ascension instructed them to spread the gospel to the Gentiles, wouldn’t you think they’d remember it? Wouldn’t you think that Peter and the brethren in Jerusalem would have embraced rather than questioned the practice of reaching out to the Gentiles? Why, then, their surprise? It’s mystifying. I can’t make sense out of it if the Great Commission was given precisely as rendered.

And I question whether it was. Adding the Great Commission makes sense when we consider that the tradition of outreach to the Gentiles was so well established by the time that Matthew and Luke-Acts were penned that it would be almost unthinkable not to enshrine the mission with Jesus’ own directive. Mark 13:10 tells us that before the end arrives “The gospel must first be preached to all the nations,” while Mark 14:9 concludes the story of the anointing at Bethany with “Wherever this gospel shall be preached throughout the whole world, what this woman hath done shall be also told, in memory of her,” and it seems unlikely in the extreme that the author intended only a world-wide outreach to Jews. By the time of John’s gospel, the issue is settled: John 1:29 has the Baptist saying “Behold the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world;” John 3:16 admonishes that “God so loved the world that he sent his only begotten Son;” John 10:16 quotes Jesus as desiring to bring the “other sheep” into the one flock; John 12:20-21 has Greeks asking after Jesus; and so on. These authors are solicitous of a universal religion.

Hello @RedFan I notice this is your first post - do you agree with the Nicene Creed ? The mod's have allowed us a safe space to fellowship and share in His Word together here, free from the tedious matter of endlessly debating fundamentals of the faith. You are most welcome to post here if agreeing to the Nicene Creed is not a problem for you.

 

[RedFan]

Hello @RedFan I notice this is your first post - do you agree with the Nicene Creed ? The mod's have allowed us a safe space to fellowship and share in His Word together here, free from the tedious matter of endlessly debating fundamentals of the faith. You are most welcome to post here if agreeing to the Nicene Creed is not a problem for you.

I do agree with the Nicene Creed.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Indeed. In Matt. 28:19 and in Luke 24:47, Christ reportedly commissions his apostles to spread the gospel to “all the nations.” The Greek word ethnē translated as “nations” in these verses surely includes Gentiles―making it a complete reversal of Christ’s earlier instruction to the apostles to reach out only to the Jews (Matt. 10:5-6) and of his prediction that the apostles won’t complete their mission to the Jews before his return (Matt. 10:23).

It strains logic to assume that his disciples understood Jesus’ last words to refer to other than Gentiles. But if Christ truly commissioned an outreach to the Gentiles, how are we to make sense of Acts 10? Peter encounters Cornelius, a Gentile, and through a dream concludes that the gospel is not to be restricted to Jews. He reports this to the brethren in Jerusalem, who at first are quite critical of Peter, but then come to accept his explanation.

If Christ’s parting words to his disciples before His ascension instructed them to spread the gospel to the Gentiles, wouldn’t you think they’d remember it? Wouldn’t you think that Peter and the brethren in Jerusalem would have embraced rather than questioned the practice of reaching out to the Gentiles? Why, then, their surprise? It’s mystifying. I can’t make sense out of it if the Great Commission was given precisely as rendered.

And I question whether it was. Adding the Great Commission makes sense when we consider that the tradition of outreach to the Gentiles was so well established by the time that Matthew and Luke-Acts were penned that it would be almost unthinkable not to enshrine the mission with Jesus’ own directive. Mark 13:10 tells us that before the end arrives “The gospel must first be preached to all the nations,” while Mark 14:9 concludes the story of the anointing at Bethany with “Wherever this gospel shall be preached throughout the whole world, what this woman hath done shall be also told, in memory of her,” and it seems unlikely in the extreme that the author intended only a world-wide outreach to Jews. By the time of John’s gospel, the issue is settled: John 1:29 has the Baptist saying “Behold the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world;” John 3:16 admonishes that “God so loved the world that he sent his only begotten Son;” John 10:16 quotes Jesus as desiring to bring the “other sheep” into the one flock; John 12:20-21 has Greeks asking after Jesus; and so on. These authors are solicitous of a universal religion.

However you raise a fair question - this is how I see it...

Firstly - Peter was particularly steeped in Jewish tradition and had an 'old covenant mind' we know this because several times he made suggestions or took actions that were not in sympathetic with the Spirit of Christ. For example - at the Transfiguration suggesting building tabernacles, cutting off the soldiers ear, favouring the Jews at tables, rebuking Jesus for going to the Cross. Jesus plainly told him a couple of times that he did not know what spirit he was of.
Peter, even after Pentecost, needed a direct Word to deviate from his familiar Jewishness.

Secondly the sending out of the 12 and 72 was in the period before the authority was removed from the Jewish Priesthood terminated by the ripping of the temple curtain. So the Kingdom reign that He gave them the authority to minister in was for when He was present with them and before the New Covenant authority was given.


This explains the limitation first given to share the good news within the Jewish world before Jesus was crucified and the susequent commission to take the Gospel globally.

 

[Carl Emerson]

I do agree with the Nicene Creed.

Great - I look forward to your participation...

 

[Carl Emerson]

@Brakelite @amadeus @Azim @Pearl @Rita @Ritajanice @APAK @MA2444 @faithfulness @GTW27 @Berean @rockytopva @quietthinker @ScottA @Hidden In Him @grace @Oneoff @Hillsage @VictoryinJesus @Angelina @seatts79 @GodsGrace @RedFan

Hello all,

We have arrived at the busy season and we fly out to Melbourne for a wedding in a few days. We will be away for 12 days.

We had our 40th wedding anniversary on Sunday - it was a blast - we held it in the church hall where we cut the cake those years ago and folks that attended then came again.

We are up to Acts 11 and I think it best to pick up on it again in January.

Feedback on how we are going would be appreciated.

Are we on a good track - what can be improved?

Have a great Christmas everyone, great to have your participation, it has been a blessing to mine the Word with you all.

 

[Brakelite]

Let me know when you get here when you have some free time Carl. Would like to meet.

 

[Brakelite]

Oh, and happy anniversary. Congratulations.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Oh, and happy anniversary. Congratulations.

Thanks - and I will see what I can do about a meet.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Mmmm...

Melbourne was flat tack with the wedding and all - just had no time to fit anything else in.

However we are planning 8 weeks in April so that will work.

Meantime after Christmas we could catch up on Zoom or teams if that works for you ???

 

[Carl Emerson]

@Brakelite @amadeus @Azim @Pearl @Rita @Ritajanice @APAK @MA2444 @faithfulness @GTW27 @Berean @rockytopva @quietthinker @ScottA @Hidden In Him @grace @Oneoff @Hillsage @VictoryinJesus @Angelina @seatts79 @GodsGrace @RedFan

Hello everyone, welcome to the New Year.

We are working through Acts and it is time to pick it up again.

This is a team effort and all are invited to input their insights.

Let's read Acts 11 over the next few days and get ready to share with each other.

I will kick it off on Feb 1.

 

[Berean]

... participants must agree to Nicene Creed.​

Which Nicene Creed, as there are several, Catholic or Protestant?

No offense, but why must we believe in the creeds of man, should we not instead use scripture to share the hope that is within us? (1 Peter 3:15)

 

[quietthinker]

Which Nicene Creed, as there are several, Catholic or Protestant?

No offense, but why must we believe in the creeds of man, should we not instead use scripture to share the hope that is within us? (1 Peter 3:15)

ahhhh, I have some creds, I mean creeds.

I believe a man shall be hungry if he doesn't eat breakfast.
I believe if breakfast is not eaten a man shall be hungry.
I believe a man who eats breakfast, particularly oats with bananas, shall be strengthened at least till lunch time.
I also believe that it is critical to believe these otherwise non believer status will be prescribed to you.....and non believers will not be allowed to enter into the hallowed courts of particular forums as they might pollute the atmosphere of the saints.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Which Nicene Creed, as there are several, Catholic or Protestant?

No offense, but why must we believe in the creeds of man, should we not instead use scripture to share the hope that is within us? (1 Peter 3:15)

The Nicene Creed is supported by Scripture.

ahhhh, I have some creds, I mean creeds.

I believe a man shall be hungry if he doesn't eat breakfast.
I believe if breakfast is not eaten a man shall be hungry.
I believe a man who eats breakfast, particularly oats with bananas, shall be strengthened at least till lunch time.
I also believe that it is critical to believe these otherwise non believer status will be prescribed to you.....and non believers will not be allowed to enter into the hallowed courts of particular forums as they might pollute the atmosphere of the saints.

Enjoy your breakfast mate...

 

[Berean]

ahhhh, I have some creds, I mean creeds.

I believe a man shall be hungry if he doesn't eat breakfast.
I believe if breakfast is not eaten a man shall be hungry.
I believe a man who eats breakfast, particularly oats with bananas, shall be strengthened at least till lunch time.
I also believe that it is critical to believe these otherwise non believer status will be prescribed to you.....and non believers will not be allowed to enter into the hallowed courts of particular forums as they might pollute the atmosphere of the saints.

I NEVER eat breakfast

 

[quietthinker]

I NEVER eat breakfast

ahhhh, If I have it right, you must belong to the never eating breakfast collective. I wonder what that means? Cheaper grocery bills? Less wear and tear on shoe leather? Less toilet paper? More for lunch? ....and last but not least, a third as much farting?