Comments - bible RecentComments

kjv@Galatians:2:14 @ @ RandyP comments: Peter received correction. Had he been the first Pope and had the Pope been given immutable divine interpretation as supposed by Roman Catholic doctrine, he would not have needed correction. Paul would have shamefully exceeded his lesser authority. Their doctrine follows from a possible misinterpretation on the proclamation Jesus made that on 'this Rock' He would build His church. Rock more likely meaning the divinely revealed faith and not just Cephas 'the rock' personally kjv@Matthew:16:17-20 (literally - You are 'piece of rock' and upon this 'massive Rock' (which flesh and blood have not revealed) I build my church).

kjv@Colossians:4:16 @ @ RandyP comments: There are other epistles that Paul wrote. Perhaps several. Perhaps daily. Paul was not attempting to write for inclusion into some soon to be published New Testament collection. He was not seeking to dominate the other writers with his massive content. He was addressing the needs of the people and congregations that he was placed directly over (Romans possibly being the exception - perhaps planted by acquaintances that he had discipled). His letters were treasured enough that people kept hold of them. By the time the Testament was canonized several years after his death there were enough of these verifiable copies still circulated for them to be included into what we hold today as scripture. Many of these other letters, though I am sure were treasured have either been lost or cannot be accurately verified as there were many plagiarizers of his name and authority even yet today.

kjv@1Timothy:2 @ @ RandyP comments: Hard as it is to understand, Paul's restrictions upon women teaching were not because of some hatred or prejudice he had upon women. We see from his letters that many women loved him and that they held important positions in his ministry team. Paul honestly expresses his reasoning, a fact that cannot be denied, Eve was the one deceived not Adam. How that further plays out in the daughters of Eve is not so clear but, it must be considered. To inflame one's self, to jump hastily to the womans defense can be just as much a proof of what Paul is cautious of as it is proof against. One must also consider the types of women drawn to a woman pastor, who might see her position for something she does not intend, and what the make up of the church then becomes. The verse actually does not forbid women from teaching per se, it forbids a teaching that gives an feminist impression or that could be percieved to be in conjunction/tainted with usurping authority over men.

kjv@Zechariah:3 @ @ RandyP comments: The Angel of the Lord and Satan stand near Joshua the high priest. The Angel intends to change the filthy clothes of the priest (cleansing) and alter his mitre (position of authority). The Branch (Messiah) will remove the iniquity of the land in one day. Satan not only knows the plan but, is powerless to stop it. (some details as to the stone tsk@Zechariah:3:9)

kjv@Exodus:15 @ @ RandyP comments: In this the Song of Moses it is easy to see the overwhelming jubilation and sense of God being able to do absolutely anything for the Israelites. In the very same chapter however we see that there yet remains a work that the Lord will have to do on them. Having the knowledge and the experience and the faith exhibited in this jubilation is one thing, having the heart to change from one's sinful nature and the heart to submit to His authority and obey quite another. The fact that it will take another 1500+ years before Christ arrives testifies to the gravity of the sin nature we possess to be exposed. We will see many a revival (many in recollection of this singular event) and we will see many similar jubilations, but, the weight of sin will in every case quickly blanket the spiritual exhilaration with grieving and bondage. Thus the need for Christ.