If the analogy of Asilious Aviola (? spelling) ,at time mark 49:51, does not touch a man's fear of life after death eternal, whether he lives in paradise or hell, then that man has no hope.
Psalm 26:3 CHS titled…Think we'll and Do Well….GC titled… Training Our Thoughts.. .7:00–9:00…Spurgeon appeals for true prophetic exegesis.
The synopsis of this title suggests at 27:16 the term "essential nucleus" as indicative of DNA.
Early in my search for understanding the Bible, 2018 likely, a search found preacher Mike Hoggard of Festus, Missouri. In general he did a lot of 'interpretation'. At Hebrews 10:7 Paul refers to Psalm 40:7 and Mike interpreted the phrase, "volume of the book" at those passages as referring to DNA.
Considering the above a Bible search led me to Psalm 139:16 and the commentary of Barnes ' Notes on the Bible
Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect – This whole verse is very obscure, but the "idea" in this expression clearly is, "Before I had shape or form thou didst see what I was to be." The single word in the original translated "my substance, yet being unperfect," is גלם gôlem. It occurs only in this place, though the verb – גלם gâlam – is found in 2 Kings 2:8, where it is used in reference to the mantle of Elijah: And Elijah took his mantle, and "wrapped it together," etc. That is, he rolled it up, or he folded it. The noun, then, means that which "is" rolled or wrapped together; that which is folded up, and hence, is applicable to anything folded up or undeveloped; and would thus most aptly denote the embryo, or the foetus, where all the members of the body are as yet folded up, or undeveloped; that is, before they have assumed their distinct form and proportions. This is undoubtedly the idea here. Before the embryo had any such form that its future size, shape, or proportions could be marked by the eye of man, it was clearly and distinctly known by God.
10:48–11:30…"…identity is not the same as absolute sameness of substance and continuance of atoms." Spurgeon was never intimidated by the advance of scientific 'speculation' and 'understanding' in the 19th century which was progressing rapidly.
My 'speculation'…..Risen Jesus was able to 'interact with the material world in a new way'. The following passage, John 20:19, seems to indicate he could now 'appear spontaneously'. 19On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being locked where the disciples were for fear of the Jews,c Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, “Peace be with you.”
Not sure, but it seems the Bible does not specify that the 'body' at this time is Jesus' 'glorified body'.
This teaching is directed to people who have doubts, maybe like Thomas, about the resurrection and at the time the Sadducees.
For me it was, and still is at times, a matter of accepting that the Bible is Gods' Word. And with the constant in your face 'scientific' misinformation today the true scientific information is obscured or difficult to discern. At times I fall prey to doubt.
This teaching may be helpful for some 'doubters' as possibly Paul had the Sadducees in mind while delivering this address to Agrippa and Festus and observers.
Spurgeon on another teaching did not recognize the pernicious persistence of the 'scientific' misinformation of Darwin's work which is today accepted as 'theoretically' proven. I am almost certain that a 'workable' theory MUST be testable and it seems that there IS NOT any method given to test Darwin's proposed writing.
Like Darwin's writings there is another 'untestable' work which is equally pernicious and was even given a name in jest due to the preposterous implications it presented. The originator, Georges Lemaitre, called it the 'primeval atom' and it is now known as the big bang. My guess is the only reason even the Roman Ccatholic church supports the work is that Lemaitre was a Jesuit priest.
Today John Lennox and James Tour are having some impact on this flawed science.
It does not take too long to read in the book of The Revelation about the coming renewing of the heavens and the earth and that such renewing has occurred at least once before as recorded at Psalm 104:30. The Psalmist gives a lot of information in that Psalm.
The Bible does explain itself in some ways but it is necessary to read from Genesis to the end of The Revelaton to have any hope of knowing what God is telling us.
As for me some of the chapters I read in the KJV around 1972 and so they were poorly understood and now I find the NLT to be hel pful in getting the gist and then go from there to other translations on the web and often commentaries.
V." As the manner of the composition of these books is excellent, and very proper to engage the attention, move the affections, and fix them in the memory, so the matter is highly useful, and such as will be every way serviceable to us."
The passage is of Matthew Henry's commentary introduction to volume three, starting with the book of Job.
Seems a bit audacious to me.
Beginning of 18th century and the Bible was more readily available in vulgar translations and here the elite are likely putting forth erudition rather than explaining simply what is of importance.
🙏♥️🙏
Amen ✝️❤️
If the analogy of Asilious Aviola (? spelling) ,at time mark 49:51, does not touch a man's fear of life after death eternal, whether he lives in paradise or hell, then that man has no hope.
Psalm 26:3 CHS titled…Think we'll and Do Well….GC titled… Training Our Thoughts.. .7:00–9:00…Spurgeon appeals for true prophetic exegesis.
The synopsis of this title suggests at 27:16 the term "essential nucleus" as indicative of DNA.
Early in my search for understanding the Bible, 2018 likely, a search found preacher Mike Hoggard of Festus, Missouri. In general he did a lot of 'interpretation'. At Hebrews 10:7 Paul refers to Psalm 40:7 and Mike interpreted the phrase, "volume of the book" at those passages as referring to DNA.
Considering the above a Bible search led me to Psalm 139:16 and the commentary of Barnes ' Notes on the Bible
Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect – This whole verse is very obscure, but the "idea" in this expression clearly is, "Before I had shape or form thou didst see what I was to be." The single word in the original translated "my substance, yet being unperfect," is גלם gôlem. It occurs only in this place, though the verb – גלם gâlam – is found in 2 Kings 2:8, where it is used in reference to the mantle of Elijah: And Elijah took his mantle, and "wrapped it together," etc. That is, he rolled it up, or he folded it. The noun, then, means that which "is" rolled or wrapped together; that which is folded up, and hence, is applicable to anything folded up or undeveloped; and would thus most aptly denote the embryo, or the foetus, where all the members of the body are as yet folded up, or undeveloped; that is, before they have assumed their distinct form and proportions. This is undoubtedly the idea here. Before the embryo had any such form that its future size, shape, or proportions could be marked by the eye of man, it was clearly and distinctly known by God.
10:48–11:30…"…identity is not the same as absolute sameness of substance and continuance of atoms." Spurgeon was never intimidated by the advance of scientific 'speculation' and 'understanding' in the 19th century which was progressing rapidly.
My 'speculation'…..Risen Jesus was able to 'interact with the material world in a new way'. The following passage, John 20:19, seems to indicate he could now 'appear spontaneously'.
19On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being locked where the disciples were for fear of the Jews,c Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, “Peace be with you.”
Not sure, but it seems the Bible does not specify that the 'body' at this time is Jesus' 'glorified body'.
This teaching is directed to people who have doubts, maybe like Thomas, about the resurrection and at the time the Sadducees.
For me it was, and still is at times, a matter of accepting that the Bible is Gods' Word. And with the constant in your face 'scientific' misinformation today the true scientific information is obscured or difficult to discern. At times I fall prey to doubt.
A wonderful sermon. I look forward to shaking Spurgeon's hand.
Maranatha.
This teaching may be helpful for some 'doubters' as possibly Paul had the Sadducees in mind while delivering this address to Agrippa and Festus and observers.
Spurgeon on another teaching did not recognize the pernicious persistence of the 'scientific' misinformation of Darwin's work which is today accepted as 'theoretically' proven. I am almost certain that a 'workable' theory MUST be testable and it seems that there IS NOT any method given to test Darwin's proposed writing.
Like Darwin's writings there is another 'untestable' work which is equally pernicious and was even given a name in jest due to the preposterous implications it presented. The originator, Georges Lemaitre, called it the 'primeval atom' and it is now known as the big bang. My guess is the only reason even the Roman Ccatholic church supports the work is that Lemaitre was a Jesuit priest.
Today John Lennox and James Tour are having some impact on this flawed science.
It does not take too long to read in the book of The Revelation about the coming renewing of the heavens and the earth and that such renewing has occurred at least once before as recorded at Psalm 104:30. The Psalmist gives a lot of information in that Psalm.
The Bible does explain itself in some ways but it is necessary to read from Genesis to the end of The Revelaton to have any hope of knowing what God is telling us.
As for me some of the chapters I read in the KJV around 1972 and so they were poorly understood and now I find the NLT to be hel pful in getting the gist and then go from there to other translations on the web and often commentaries.
Amen. God bless Pastor.
Amen. Hallelujah.
V." As the manner of the composition of these books is excellent, and very proper to engage the attention, move the affections, and fix them in the memory, so the matter is highly useful, and such as will be every way serviceable to us."
The passage is of Matthew Henry's commentary introduction to volume three, starting with the book of Job.
Seems a bit audacious to me.
Beginning of 18th century and the Bible was more readily available in vulgar translations and here the elite are likely putting forth erudition rather than explaining simply what is of importance.