Does "all things" mean everything?

[razzelflabben]

I guess this means you don't have any understanding of it either. Look it up it's in the bible. Clue it means all in all.

look, you have done all kinds of things here, many showing a lack of the Holy Spirit within...what you have not done is explain what you think we're missing when we look at the word all. In fact, there have been two sides presented. 1. all is a figure of speech, and 2. all means everything that is in accordance with God's will.

You come and say, wrong, all means all...if you can't do any better than that, all I know to say to you is, how sad...the forum is about communication and yet you are hear but refuse to communicate. When God says all does that include sprouting wings and flying?

 

[DeborahsSong]

look, you have done all kinds of things here, many showing a lack of the Holy Spirit within...what you have not done is explain what you think we're missing when we look at the word all. In fact, there have been two sides presented. 1. all is a figure of speech, and 2. all means everything that is in accordance with God's will.

You come and say, wrong, all means all...if you can't do any better than that, all I know to say to you is, how sad...the forum is about communication and yet you are hear but refuse to communicate. When God says all does that include sprouting wings and flying?

If you wish to insult Enoch Son, go ahead. (Although, attacking ideas or arguments seem a better route to me) however, your remark about a "lack of the Holy Spirit within" is insulting to the Lord.

 

[razzelflabben]

If you wish to insult Enoch Son, go ahead. (Although, attacking ideas or arguments seem a better route to me) however, your remark about a "lack of the Holy Spirit within" is insulting to the Lord.

have you seen any of the fruit of the Spirit in the insults and false accusations he has hurled? He was simply asked to explain himself and his posts so that we could understand his point and he levied insults and attacks and false accusations of which he was not called into accountability on. All I did was observe that his behavior was not evidence of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit as we are told in Gal. 5. If that is offensive, so be it, it is the measure God gives us by which we know who is speaking with the authority of God and who is not.

 

[enoch son]

look, you have done all kinds of things here, many showing a lack of the Holy Spirit within...what you have not done is explain what you think we're missing when we look at the word all. In fact, there have been two sides presented. 1. all is a figure of speech, and 2. all means everything that is in accordance with God's will.

You come and say, wrong, all means all...if you can't do any better than that, all I know to say to you is, how sad...the forum is about communication and yet you are hear but refuse to communicate. When God says all does that include sprouting wings and flying?

Chapther and ver. please! Talking about thinking one is god.

 

[enoch son]

have you seen any of the fruit of the Spirit in the insults and false accusations he has hurled? He was simply asked to explain himself and his posts so that we could understand his point and he levied insults and attacks and false accusations of which he was not called into accountability on. All I did was observe that his behavior was not evidence of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit as we are told in Gal. 5. If that is offensive, so be it, it is the measure God gives us by which we know who is speaking with the authority of God and who is not.

I guess by taking a stand and saying GOD IS MY ALL AND ALL (MY WHOLE OF EVERTHING OH BY THE WAY THAT'S WHAT THE GREEK SAYS IT MEANS ) Is and insult then call me guiltly.

 

[enoch son]

Woh... things are a bit to violent in here for me.
Later.

You know when Jesus said "I AM" to the jews they pick up stones also. TO MAKE A STAND THAT GOD IS ALL IN ALL SEEMS LIKE SUCH A LITTLE THING TO DO. I ask a simple question about a word and still haven't goten and answer.

 

[JimB]

You know when Jesus said "I AM" to the jews they pick up stones also. TO MAKE A STAND THAT GOD IS ALL IN ALL SEEMS LIKE SUCH A LITTLE THING TO DO. I ask a simple question about a word and still haven't goten and answer.

Are we under some kind of obligation to answer every question you pose?

Do not answer foolish arguments … or you will become as foolish as they are. (Prov. 26.4)

~Al O'Mooney
“Tennis wouldn’t be tennis if I didn’t have someone to beat me every now and then.” ~Marina Navratalova

​

 

[razzelflabben]

Chapther and ver. please! Talking about thinking one is god.

chapter and verse for what? Gal. 5:
19Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
22But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
23Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.
24And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.
25If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.
26Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one another.

 

[razzelflabben]

I guess by taking a stand and saying GOD IS MY ALL AND ALL (MY WHOLE OF EVERTHING OH BY THE WAY THAT'S WHAT THE GREEK SAYS IT MEANS ) Is and insult then call me guiltly.

Not at all, God being our all in all is a good thing, but insulting, false accusations, general hatred filled posts because you are asked to explain your post is not the fruit of the Holy Spirit, but rather the fruit of the flesh.

This is all over a simple question directed at you, not God...what are you trying to say, I don't understand what your point is, please explain...instead of simply saying, this is what I meant...and moving on, you attack with a slew of ungodly posts and call it good.

God is your all in all, what does that mean to the OP question? How does that apply?

 

[razzelflabben]

You know when Jesus said "I AM" to the jews they pick up stones also. TO MAKE A STAND THAT GOD IS ALL IN ALL SEEMS LIKE SUCH A LITTLE THING TO DO. I ask a simple question about a word and still haven't goten and answer.

What question did you ask and not get an answer for? You have been asked many times over how your comments apply to the OP and all you do is attack our relationships with God. Why not just answer the question?

 

[SavedByGrace3]

so forgetting some people, why not share with us your stand on all this dids?

The truth of any given statement is found in the context of where it is spoken. You must look at what the writer was intending to tell you, and read the statement in the light of that intention. Anyone who wants to find a verse or two of scripture to prove their particular slant or doctrine can do so. And much of the time those one or two scriptures are taken out of context. So if you are going to base an entire teaching on a selection of scriptures, you first have to make sure that they are in the proper context. That is that the speaker or writer is speaking to the topic that you are dealing with. If we want to discuss the topic of "all," here is a good example:

My favorite that uses the word "all" is Acts 10.

Act 10:
(34) Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:
(35) But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.
(36) The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (he is Lord of all
(37) That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached;
(38) How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.
(39) And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree:
(40) Him God raised up the third day, and shewed him openly;
(41) Not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before of God, even to us, who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead.
(42) And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead.

Peter is speaking to gentiles here. The meat of the passage deals with his presenting Christ and the gospel to them, and to present to them the idea that even tho Jesus is a Jewish Messiah, God in His mercy has extended salvation to the gentiles as well. So it is in this context that He speaks verse 38:

(38) How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.

Why do you suppose he includes this phrase "and healing all that were oppressed of the devil?" Remember he is persuading them that salvation through Jesus is for the gentiles also. So when he speaks this phrase it is in keeping with the above verse that says: "Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him."

You see Jesus healed gentiles also in His ministry. The gentiles present knew this. Peter was using the fact that God healed everyone by the hands of Jesus as proof that God was accepting them and not just the Jews. So in the context of the passage and what Peter was trying to say, "ALL" meant, "all people, Jews AND gentiles." That is everybody(unless you know there is another class besides Jews and gentiles). No exceptions. In the context of the passage, if Jesus turned anyone away, that would have been an indication that God was rejecting them and was in fact a respector or persons. So we know in this instance ALL meant everyone, because that is the context of the passage and that is the message that Peter was intending to put forth. He used Jesus' healing of all as proof that God was accepting all.

And there is more. In verse 36 we see Peter say this:

The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (he is Lord of all

Again, in the context of the passage and in the context of what Peter was trying to tell them, "he is Lord of all" means He is lord of both Jew and Gentiles, not just the Jews. The healing that Jesus manifested to all was manifested to all because Jesus is Lord of all. That is the correct context of the passage. If Jesus did not heal all, then there would have been a reason to think He was not Lord of all. But because He did heal all, we have that as proof that He IS Lord of all. So this is a confimation of His universal Lordship. And there is a danger here for those who suggest that Jesus did not actually heal all. To suggest that He actually did not heal all is to also suggest against what Peter was telling us here: that Jesus IS Lord of all. To take sides against that turth is a very dangerous position to take. It is not a direct denial of His Lordship... but it is very close to it. And that is an indication of the effects of mere theism on our teachings. Mere theism suggests that God does things outside of the gospel and even contray to it. IOWs God does not need Jesus to save us, heal us, or bless us. The name and lordship of Jesus is a mere suggestion to God, and not something that has and authoritative meaning.

Peace
Dids

 

[razzelflabben]

The truth of any given statement is found in the context of where it is spoken.

it's funny you said this because I was just told on another thread by someone who shares your healing theology that when it comes to God's word, context isn't important...ah well, back to what you are saying.

You must look at what the writer was intending to tell you, and read the statement in the light of that intention. Anyone who wants to find a verse or two of scripture to prove their particular slant or doctrine can do so. And much of the time those one or two scriptures are taken out of context. So if you are going to base an entire teaching on a selection of scriptures, you first have to make sure that they are in the proper context. That is that the speaker or writer is speaking to the topic that you are dealing with. If we want to discuss the topic of "all," here is a good example:

I agree totally...in fact, I say this all the time and am told I am wrong...

My favorite that uses the word "all" is Acts 10.

Act 10:
(34) Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:
(35) But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.
(36) The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (he is Lord of all
(37) That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached;
(38) How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.
(39) And we are witnesses of all things

you forgot this all...all things

which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree:

(40) Him God raised up the third day, and shewed him openly;
(41) Not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before of God, even to us, who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead.
(42) And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead.

Peter is speaking to gentiles here. The meat of the passage deals with his presenting Christ and the gospel to them, and to present to them the idea that even tho Jesus is a Jewish Messiah, God in His mercy has extended salvation to the gentiles as well. So it is in this context that He speaks verse 38:

(38) How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.

Why do you suppose he includes this phrase "and healing all that were oppressed of the devil?" Remember he is persuading them that salvation through Jesus is for the gentiles also. So when he speaks this phrase it is in keeping with the above verse that says: "Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him."

You see Jesus healed gentiles also in His ministry. The gentiles present knew this. Peter was using the fact that God healed everyone by the hands of Jesus as proof that God was accepting them and not just the Jews. So in the context of the passage and what Peter was trying to say, "ALL" meant, "all people, Jews AND gentiles." That is everybody(unless you know there is another class besides Jews and gentiles). No exceptions. In the context of the passage, if Jesus turned anyone away, that would have been an indication that God was rejecting them and was in fact a respector or persons. So we know in this instance ALL meant everyone, because that is the context of the passage and that is the message that Peter was intending to put forth. He used Jesus' healing of all as proof that God was accepting all.

so far, I'm with you, might want to be a bit careful about your healing theology, I wouldn't want to get off OP or anything. But so far as to all things mean everything, I'm with you...btw, it's nice seeing you interested in context.

And there is more. In verse 36 we see Peter say this:

The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (he is Lord of all

Again, in the context of the passage and in the context of what Peter was trying to tell them, "he is Lord of all" means He is lord of both Jew and Gentiles, not just the Jews. The healing that Jesus manifested to all was manifested to all because Jesus is Lord of all. That is the correct context of the passage. If Jesus did not heal all, then there would have been a reason to think He was not Lord of all. But because He did heal all, we have that as proof that He IS Lord of all. So this is a confimation of His universal Lordship. And there is a danger here for those who suggest that Jesus did not actually heal all. To suggest that He actually did not heal all is to also suggest against what Peter was telling us here: that Jesus IS Lord of all. To take sides against that turth is a very dangerous position to take. It is not a direct denial of His Lordship... but it is very close to it. And that is an indication of the effects of mere theism on our teachings. Mere theism suggests that God does things outside of the gospel and even contray to it. IOWs God does not need Jesus to save us, heal us, or bless us. The name and lordship of Jesus is a mere suggestion to God, and not something that has and authoritative meaning.

wow, more theism excuses...ah well, except for the healing theology you are bringing into this, nice job, now please explain how this affects the OP question...where we are told that ALL things are possible, does that include sprouting wings and flying?


btw, since I have to wait for a connection before I can post this, as you so wisely pointed out, the intent of the passage is one of inclusion not healing therefore to base a theology of healing on the passage is a misuse of scripture...the extent by which we can use the passage for understanding healing is that healing was extended to both the Jews and the Gentiles...

 

[SavedByGrace3]

I would refer you to post #2.

it's funny you said this because I was just told on another thread by someone who shares your healing theology that when it comes to God's word, context isn't important...ah well, back to what you are saying. I agree totally...in fact, I say this all the time and am told I am wrong... you forgot this all...all things so far, I'm with you, might want to be a bit careful about your healing theology, I wouldn't want to get off OP or anything. But so far as to all things mean everything, I'm with you...btw, it's nice seeing you interested in context. wow, more theism excuses...ah well, except for the healing theology you are bringing into this, nice job, now please explain how this affects the OP question...where we are told that ALL things are possible, does that include sprouting wings and flying?


btw, since I have to wait for a connection before I can post this, as you so wisely pointed out, the intent of the passage is one of inclusion not healing therefore to base a theology of healing on the passage is a misuse of scripture...the extent by which we can use the passage for understanding healing is that healing was extended to both the Jews and the Gentiles...

 

[razzelflabben]

I would refer you to post #2.

I believe all kinds of things, in fact, in my mind nothing is impossible, in fact, at the moment I am writting a book for my children, a sci fi, and everything it the book is in my mind, possible and probable, but still, I can't just sprout wings and fly, why not, what is missing...

 

[SavedByGrace3]

I believe all kinds of things, in fact, in my mind nothing is impossible, in fact, at the moment I am writting a book for my children, a sci fi, and everything it the book is in my mind, possible and probable, but still, I can't just sprout wings and fly, why not, what is missing...

I beg to differ. You do not believe all kinds of things. You THINK all kinds of things. You are convinced in your mind of all kinds of things. That is not faith. Faith is of the heart/spirit.
What Jesus said is true. IF you believed all these things you say you believe, then they would all come to pass. Jesus said so.
You are turning it around. You are claiming to believe things, and because they are not happening, you are editing what Jesus said to mean something other than what it obviously says. You are editing what Jesus said to conform to what you think.
He said if we can believe all things are possible for those that believe.
I will take Jesus as the foundational and first truth and experience as confirmation of the obvious... I must not be believing, because if I did, then what Jesus said would immediately happen... I would have what I believe and say.
My experience does not confirm or disprove what Jesus said. I test my faith by His words, I do not test His words by my experience.

 

[razzelflabben]

I beg to differ. You do not believe all kinds of things. You THINK all kinds of things. You are convinced in your mind of all kinds of things. That is not faith. Faith is of the heart/spirit.

the story has a large bias on Elijah, so are you saying that I don't have faith that God's Word as it was given about Elijah is not faith that His Word is true...wouldn't God be the only one who could judge that? Don't forget that much of the bible appears to be somewhat science fiction, and I believe without doubt every word of it. So what your saying is that that belief, that faith is not really faith at all, interesting argument.

What Jesus said is true. IF you believed all these things you say you believe, then they would all come to pass. Jesus said so.

cool, so how long must I wait to sprout wings and fly?

You are turning it around. You are claiming to believe things, and because they are not happening, you are editing what Jesus said to mean something other than what it obviously says. You are editing what Jesus said to conform to what you think.

no, actually, I am putting the text into the context of what it was given...you see, the limitations are belief (not faith) and God's purpose...we talked about this already if memory serves...so if those two requirements are met, then it is done. One is easy, I believe both in God and that all things are possible. What is left is according to God's purpose, His will.

He said if we can believe all things are possible for those that believe.
I will take Jesus as the foundational and first truth and experience as confirmation of the obvious... I must not be believing, because if I did, then what Jesus said would immediately happen... I would have what I believe and say.

if that was the only requirement, then can you imagine how many odd things would be flying around the house as our children live in their fantasy worlds...they believe, should I go into kiddie psych 101 for you...

My experience does not confirm or disprove what Jesus said. I test my faith by His words, I do not test His words by my experience.

I don't test my faith at all, life does that for me. Ah well...moving on...

 

[SavedByGrace3]

I will believe Jesus. He said that if you believe you have received, you would have it.
It I do not receive, I have no hesitancy in saying that it must mean I am not believing.

Worship Jesus, not your "faith."

the story has a large bias on Elijah, so are you saying that I don't have faith that God's Word as it was given about Elijah is not faith that His Word is true...wouldn't God be the only one who could judge that? Don't forget that much of the bible appears to be somewhat science fiction, and I believe without doubt every word of it. So what your saying is that that belief, that faith is not really faith at all, interesting argument. cool, so how long must I wait to sprout wings and fly? no, actually, I am putting the text into the context of what it was given...you see, the limitations are belief (not faith) and God's purpose...we talked about this already if memory serves...so if those two requirements are met, then it is done. One is easy, I believe both in God and that all things are possible. What is left is according to God's purpose, His will. if that was the only requirement, then can you imagine how many odd things would be flying around the house as our children live in their fantasy worlds...they believe, should I go into kiddie psych 101 for you...I don't test my faith at all, life does that for me. Ah well...moving on...

 

[razzelflabben]

I will believe Jesus. He said that if you believe you have received, you would have it.
It I do not receive, I have no hesitancy in saying that it must mean I am not believing.

Worship Jesus, not your "faith."

two threads at the same time with the same problem, amazing...I believe...I worship God as through the Lord Jesus Christ (so you can't throw your usual theistic answer to everything you don't like or know how to respond to)not faith...and still I don't grow wings and fly, why? what is missing...you can do this, it's right there in scripture you just have to read it instead of excusing it away.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

two threads at the same time with the same problem, amazing...I believe...I worship God as through the Lord Jesus Christ (so you can't throw your usual theistic answer to everything you don't like or know how to respond to)not faith...and still I don't grow wings and fly, why? what is missing...you can do this, it's right there in scripture you just have to read it instead of excusing it away.

You do not grow wings and fly because you do not believe it.
If I am forced to pick between you or Jesus....
No comparison.

 

[JimB]

You do not grow wings and fly because you do not believe it.
If I am forced to pick between you or Jesus....
No comparison.

Do you believe that Mark 11.23 is to be interpreted literally (and these are the “words of Jesus”)?

For assuredly, I say to you, whoever says to this mountain, ‘Be removed and be cast into the sea,’ and does not doubt in his heart, but believes that those things he says will be done, he will have whatever he says.
​

If you do, do you believe you can do it? Can you demonstrate your faith with signs following? Can your faith move a literal mountain? Can your faith move a one-pound rock? How about a grain of sand? Has anyone ever in all of recorded history, including Jesus and the Apostles, eve moved a literal mountain?

If you can, and I even would wish you could, I will happily change my mind and eat my (whatever) and would believe that what you tell me that you believe you really believe, and it is true, and it works for you like you say it is supposed to just as you believe it. IMO, believe the Word works and if don’t work it ain’t the Word, it’s just a theory based on a misinterpretation of the Word.

This is your golden opportunity to prove what you believe and quieten us "faithless" people once and for all. You should relish the moment.

And, yes, I /we would like answers to my questions; they are not rhetorical.

~Joe King

Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind. ~ Einstein​

​