SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Did Jesus come already?

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 Next Page )
PosterThread
humblyD
Member



Joined: 2009/5/14
Posts: 17


 Re:

I merely had a moment of weakness and let slip what we all wanted to say.....................................my bad.

 2009/9/21 16:33Profile
Miccah
Member



Joined: 2007/9/13
Posts: 1752
Wisconsin

 Re:

waltern wrote:

Quote:




Matthew 16:28 states, "Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." Parallel passages are found in Mark 9:1 and Luke 9:27.

The key to having a clear understanding of this is found in what immediately follows each of these verses. Jesus calls Peter, James, and John, takes them up to a high mountain and is transfigured before them while Moses and Elijah come down to discuss His coming death. Consider the things that point to this being the event Jesus referred to in Matthew 16:28.

Jesus "was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light" (Matthew 17:2). This matches the glorified appearance of Christ in Revelation 1:13-18 where "his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength" (Revelation 1:16).

Of Moses and Elijah, the Bible says that they "appeared in glory" (Luke 9:31). They did not just appear in a natural way but "in glory." Colossians 3:4 states, "When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory." This points directly to the coming of Christ in glory (Matthew 24:30).

When the disciples awoke, they looked at Christ and "saw his glory" (Luke 9:32). This is a very powerful statement. They saw the glorified Christ. They saw Him as King of Kings.

A cloud overshadowed them and the Father said, "This is my beloved Son: hear him" (Luke 9:34-35). This too points to the presence and glory of God in fullness and power.

Jesus told them not to tell of the vision until He had risen from the dead (Matthew 17:9). Ths vision was not for the time that Jesus walked on the earth before His crucifixion. It was a glimpse of His coming kingdom.

[color=990000][b]Peter, James, and John received a vision of the future kingdom and glory of Christ. They saw Him coming in His kingdom. It was to this event that Peter referred when he said, "For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount." (2 Peter 1:16-18).

These three men were eyewitnesses of the majesty of "the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." What a glorious opportunity they had! What a glorious testimony they give!

His actual physical return in Glory is very near![/color][/b]

Sincerely,

Walter




Great post Walter. :-)


_________________
Christiaan

 2009/9/21 16:34Profile
Lysa
Member



Joined: 2008/10/25
Posts: 3420
This world is not my home anymore.

 Re: Walter

Walter,

I'm wondering if you EVER write anything yourself? You always demand that everyone support their disagreements scripturally. Well, how about you respond with your own thoughts throughout one whole thread?

Without plagiarizing other people or websites. Because all of what you wrote came from the following website... except for a few words in your second paragraph, it matches this website word for word.


[url=http://www.learnthebible.org/matthew-1628.html]Learn the Bible: Matthew 16.28[/url]


_________________
Lisa

 2009/9/21 16:42Profile
Heydave
Member



Joined: 2008/4/12
Posts: 1306
Hampshire, UK

 Re:

Quote:
Great post Walter.



Yes, Thanks Waltern. I think this makes a lot of sense seeing the verses immediately after the one questioned tells us about the transfiguration.

So 'DeepThinker', please tell us how you interpret this and what point you want to make.


_________________
Dave

 2009/9/21 16:50Profile









 Re:



Dear Lysa:

The "teaching" that I posted represents my own personal understanding of the Scripture that Deepthinker referred to.

If you disagree with the message, then please say something to me, because I stand behind it.

If you are trying to crucify the messenger (me) because I used anothers study that agrees with my beliefs, but you can find nothing wrong with the message that I quoted, then you are intent on shooting the messenger (me), rather than attacking the message.

That takes place very often on Sermonidex, doesn’t it?

I surely have no problems with anyone posting anything from anyone, as long as they stand behind what they post. How about you?

Sincerely,

Walter

Quote:

Lysa wrote:
Walter,

I'm wondering if you EVER write anything yourself? You always demand that everyone support their disagreements scripturally. Well, how about you respond with your own thoughts throughout one whole thread?

Without plagiarizing other people or websites. Because all of what you wrote came from the following website... except for a few words in your second paragraph, it matches this website word for word.


[url=http://www.learnthebible.org/matthew-1628.html]Learn the Bible: Matthew 16.28[/url]

 2009/9/21 16:58
ADisciple
Member



Joined: 2007/2/3
Posts: 835
Alberta, Canada

 Re:

Quote:
Great post Walter.



I thought so too. :-)

AD


_________________
Allan Halton

 2009/9/21 20:17Profile
Lysa
Member



Joined: 2008/10/25
Posts: 3420
This world is not my home anymore.

 Re: Did Jesus come already?

Quote:
waltern wrote:
If you are trying to crucify the messenger (me) because I used anothers study that agrees with my beliefs, but you can find nothing wrong with the message that I quoted, then you are intent on shooting the messenger (me), rather than attacking the message.


Walter,

No, I am not trying to crucify you the messenger; I am just trying to get the messenger to see that by using references even a simple, [i]"I didn't write this but it represents my own personal understanding of the Scripture that you referred to Deepthinker...."[/i] [b]only strengthens[/b] his or her position.


_________________
Lisa

 2009/9/21 21:07Profile









 Re:



Dear Lysa:

What on earth are talking about? The teaching that I posted is taught by Dr. David Hocking, by Dr. Adrian Rogers, by Pastor Chuck Smith, by Ray Stedman, J. Vernon Magee, Dr. Michael Youssef and many, many other Pastors and men of God. It is not a “new” teaching. It is not "copyrighted". I could have posted Rogers teaching, or any of the others, and it would still be the same teaching, and the same meaning of what I have already posted. This is nothing new. Why is that? Because it is sound Bible Doctrine that has been taught since the beginning.


We have the Gnostics with us today, the same type of Gnostics that we had in the beginning. Men and women who have special “knowledge and revelation” and "understanding", something very "special", something “new” and something "deep". These Gnostics are more than happy to draw others into their lair, to share their special “knowlege” and “gifts” of prophecy and understanding with them. The problem is that once you come into their lair, you will no longer want to have a Bible. Why is that? Because now the words you hear and rely on are the Gnostics twisted words. You no longer have a hunger and a thirst for the Word of God, God's Spirit breated Word, that is only found in the Bible.


I choose to post the tried and the true. If you find fault with it, then respond with Scripture, to prove that what was posted is not accurate. Then we will have something to talk about. What you have done so far is throw stones at me, the Messenger.

You are upset at my post because it does not agree with Deepthinkers analysis.

Post what you think it should be and support it with Scripture. I will look forward to your doing that. Attack the message, not the messenger.


Sincerely,

Walter

Quote:

Lysa wrote:
Quote:
waltern wrote:
If you are trying to crucify the messenger (me) because I used anothers study that agrees with my beliefs, but you can find nothing wrong with the message that I quoted, then you are intent on shooting the messenger (me), rather than attacking the message.


Walter,

No, I am not trying to crucify you the messenger; I am just trying to get the messenger to see that by using references even a simple, [i]"I didn't write this but it represents my own personal understanding of the Scripture that you referred to Deepthinker...."[/i] [b]only strengthens[/b] his or her position.

 2009/9/21 21:27
ADisciple
Member



Joined: 2007/2/3
Posts: 835
Alberta, Canada

 Re:

Quote:
I choose to post the tried and the true.



That's fine, Walter, but Lysa is right. Whenever someone else's material is being used or quoted in a post-- or in anything for that matter-- it should be properly referenced.

It's a matter of respect and common courtesy... toward the person who authored the material, and toward those reading it.

...Unless, surely there isn't a hidden motive, and we are trying to get the glory and the credit ourselves for something that is another's?

AD


_________________
Allan Halton

 2009/9/21 23:36Profile









 Re: Sound Doctrine, Solo Scriptura



To ADisciple:

I only post for one reason on the Sermonindex website. What is that reason? [b]To post Sound Doctrine—that’s it.[/b] I am not taking “credit” for anything. How can I? It is God’s Spirit breathed Word!

The things that I post are found in the Bible (and the many notes that I have throughout my own Bibles), as well as my Bible study notes that I have kept over the past 40 years. Today much of this same information is found on the internet. If the information is copyrighted, then I site the source.

Sincerely,

Walter

Quote:

ADisciple wrote:
Quote:
I choose to post the tried and the true.



That's fine, Walter, but Lysa is right. Whenever someone else's material is being used or quoted in a post-- or in anything for that matter-- it should be properly referenced.

It's a matter of respect and common courtesy... toward the person who authored the material, and toward those reading it.

...Unless, surely there isn't a hidden motive, and we are trying to get the glory and the credit ourselves for something that is another's?

AD

 2009/9/22 0:28





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy