Jump to content

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Junior Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  2
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  91
  • Content Per Day:  0.01
  • Reputation:   10
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  02/21/2005
  • Status:  Offline

Posted
In the following passage of scripture, Jesus states to the church at Laodecia that because they are neither hot nor cold but rather are lukewarm that he is about to spit them out of his mouth. What category do you believe fits your life, if you care to say, and what do you think it means to be "hot" or "lukewarm"? Without getting legalistic, what do you think are the dividing factors between a believer who is "hot" and a believer who is "lukewarm"? And, based upon the following passage, what do you think it means when he says "I am about to spit you out of my mouth"? Do you think believers today take this seriously? Do you? And, if so, what difference should it make in your life? I've been giving this a lot of thought lately:

"To the angel of the church in Laodicea write:

These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God

  • Replies 176
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  73
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,663
  • Content Per Day:  0.50
  • Reputation:   5
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  03/20/2005
  • Status:  Offline

Posted
"Because if we follow the Greek definitions for "rather" and "nor" we understand He was literally saying "I wish you were cold, or I wish you were hot, but you are neither". Thus, it doesn't matter what "cold" means....we can conclude Christ wished that we would be EITHER hot OR cold. Cold could not be "lost" or bad because He would never wish that."

You have made several major jumps here; none of them are totally supported. I agree and we don't need a Greek lexicon to understand that Christ said very specifically that He would prefer them to be hot or cold rather than lukewarm.

But I would disagree on your interpretation, there is nothing worse than a person who does not believe they need repentance, and indeed a person who is lost and feels the need for repentance, who is cold toward Christ is actually closer to Christ than a charlatan Christian. This actually fits perfectly with the teachings of Christ. Who did Christ save His most severe condemnation for? The whores, the thieves, the drunkards none of whom knew God at all, all were totally lost, BUT they felt the need for the Gospel, they knew they were sinners in need of healing, no they were not condemned by Christ because they had a chance. But the Jewish religious leaders with their theology, their pride, their loud public prayers (they probably were the first to pray at football games), their pretend piety, this is who He held his harshest condemnation for, because they were blind they didn't think they needed to repent, thus He smacked them with harsh language, because indeed He hoped for their salvation, just as He hoped for the salvation of the Church in this letter.

I think the bible uses complex language, and I think Christ provides us with interesting insights, this is one of those passages.

EXACTLY!!!!! Have you ever thought of becoming a pastor??? :emot-eek:

I have to say that I am thoroughly enjoying the thrill of searching God's word tonite with you all. And I am glad that we have managed to do it in a spirit of love. It's like a treasure hunt!

Your sister in Christ

:wub:


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  331
  • Topics Per Day:  0.04
  • Content Count:  8,713
  • Content Per Day:  1.14
  • Reputation:   21
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  07/28/2004
  • Status:  Offline

Posted

"Because if we follow the Greek definitions for "rather" and "nor" we understand He was literally saying "I wish you were cold, or I wish you were hot, but you are neither". Thus, it doesn't matter what "cold" means....we can conclude Christ wished that we would be EITHER hot OR cold. Cold could not be "lost" or bad because He would never wish that."

You have made several major jumps here; none of them are totally supported. I agree and we don't need a Greek lexicon to understand that Christ said very specifically that He would prefer them to be hot or cold rather than lukewarm.

But I would disagree on your interpretation, there is nothing worse than a person who does not believe they need repentance, and indeed a person who is lost and feels the need for repentance, who is cold toward Christ is actually closer to Christ than a charlatan Christian. This actually fits perfectly with the teachings of Christ. Who did Christ save His most severe condemnation for? The whores, the thieves, the drunkards none of whom knew God at all, all were totally lost, BUT they felt the need for the Gospel, they knew they were sinners in need of healing, no they were not condemned by Christ because they had a chance. But the Jewish religious leaders with their theology, their pride, their loud public prayers (they probably were the first to pray at football games), their pretend piety, this is who He held his harshest condemnation for, because they were blind they didn't think they needed to repent, thus He smacked them with harsh language, because indeed He hoped for their salvation, just as He hoped for the salvation of the Church in this letter.

I think the bible uses complex language, and I think Christ provides us with interesting insights, this is one of those passages.

EXACTLY!!!!! Have you ever thought of becoming a pastor??? :wub:

I have to say that I am thoroughly enjoying the thrill of searching God's word tonite with you all. And I am glad that we have managed to do it in a spirit of love. It's like a treasure hunt!

Your sister in Christ

:emot-eek:

:)

I definately give up....I use Greek, historical context, actual literal context, and geographical context, and all I get is, "I believe this..." It's just not worth it at this point.


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  73
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,663
  • Content Per Day:  0.50
  • Reputation:   5
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  03/20/2005
  • Status:  Offline

Posted

"Because if we follow the Greek definitions for "rather" and "nor" we understand He was literally saying "I wish you were cold, or I wish you were hot, but you are neither". Thus, it doesn't matter what "cold" means....we can conclude Christ wished that we would be EITHER hot OR cold. Cold could not be "lost" or bad because He would never wish that."

You have made several major jumps here; none of them are totally supported. I agree and we don't need a Greek lexicon to understand that Christ said very specifically that He would prefer them to be hot or cold rather than lukewarm.

But I would disagree on your interpretation, there is nothing worse than a person who does not believe they need repentance, and indeed a person who is lost and feels the need for repentance, who is cold toward Christ is actually closer to Christ than a charlatan Christian. This actually fits perfectly with the teachings of Christ. Who did Christ save His most severe condemnation for? The whores, the thieves, the drunkards none of whom knew God at all, all were totally lost, BUT they felt the need for the Gospel, they knew they were sinners in need of healing, no they were not condemned by Christ because they had a chance. But the Jewish religious leaders with their theology, their pride, their loud public prayers (they probably were the first to pray at football games), their pretend piety, this is who He held his harshest condemnation for, because they were blind they didn't think they needed to repent, thus He smacked them with harsh language, because indeed He hoped for their salvation, just as He hoped for the salvation of the Church in this letter.

I think the bible uses complex language, and I think Christ provides us with interesting insights, this is one of those passages.

EXACTLY!!!!! Have you ever thought of becoming a pastor??? :)

I have to say that I am thoroughly enjoying the thrill of searching God's word tonite with you all. And I am glad that we have managed to do it in a spirit of love. It's like a treasure hunt!

Your sister in Christ

:emot-eek:

:)

I definately give up....I use Greek, historical context, actual literal context, and geographical context, and all I get is, "I believe this..." It's just not worth it at this point.

LOVE the emoticon!!!! It's so you! :wub:


  • Group:  Graduated to Heaven
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  50
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  4,073
  • Content Per Day:  0.49
  • Reputation:   43
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  10/02/2002
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  08/10/1923

Posted

Quote C F S, Jan 15th 2006,

I have been thinking this through, and I still have not come to any conclusion on this, but if hot means what you say and cold means what you say, why would Christ say he would rather they be one or the other? And, just from a natural viewpoint just from basic English, if I were to speak in an English lit class about hot and cold and lukewarm or a science class, I think the understanding would be clear that cold and hot were opposites and that lukewarm was in between. So, if that is true, why would Christ say he would rather they be one or the other? I think it is because he would rather we take a stand for Christ or not stand at all. It is not that he would desire us to be cold, but in comparison to lukewarm, he would rather we either be for him or against him than to say we are for him and then not live like what we say. Like one person said, lukewarm Christians do the most damage to the name of Christianity because they proclaim one thing but live another. I'm still thinking this one through, though. I think there are good arguments on both sides. But whether you believe cold is "refreshing" or you believe it means to not be a believer, one thing is still clear. God hates lukewarmness in Christians who are the church and he will discipline the church, which is the body of believers, which is made up of individuals for their lukewarmness, and I believe this is a warning to all people who call themselves Christians to get on their knees before God in humility and repentance and to surrender to God.

--------------------

Sue

My first shot at this thread and I am going to agree with C F S as that is what I have understood from the first time I ever read Revelation. You are either for Christ and His teachings or you are againt Him and His teachings. If you talk the talk and and don't walk the walk you are useless in the body and you'll get spat out.

I, personally don't think that Jesus would castegate the whole body for the slackness of a few unworthy members of that body. JMO.

eric.

Guest shiloh357
Posted

reposting this because he gave the original word and it's meaning....but it appears it's been ignored.

You are not being ignored. We're thinking... catch you tomorrow. :)

Okay, I guess it just seems unusual to me. I mean, when someone gives you the Greek word, which has a very specific meaning...how much thinking is left? :emot-eek:

Tess,

There are varied interpretations of Greek words. My husband studied Greek in Bible college, but I did not. I can not just automatically just say because Tess said that is what it means that that obviously is what it means. I've read enough to know that. I appreciate your input and I will look into what you said and I will get back with you when I've had time to research it myself. This is not a slight of you, ok? I just like to check things out for myself. :wub:

I think this shows the hold tradition can have. Most have always taken at face value and defined for themselves, what "hot" and "cold" means. This passage has long been interpreted the absence of the metaphorical reference. It is not important what "hot" and "cold" means to us. What is important, is what it meant to author of the passage, and what it would have meant to the original hearers.

We have been inundated with the concept of "hot" and "cold" spirituality as meaning either "on fire," or "spiritually dead." In OTHER contexts, that may have value. The question is can we apply those definitions of hot and cold to this passage and not violate it context???

We have to get beyond face value and draw out the meaning that the author was intending to convey, instead of applying subjective judgements to the passage.

A.K. has already pointed out in the Greek that Jesus said wish your were "hot" or cold, but you are neither. There is NO logical, sensible reason for Jesus to say, " I wish you were hot or cold" if "cold" means that you are living in sin, apart from the Lord.

The point is, hot and cold are not being used as opposites. Hot and cold are being used as opposite of Lukewarm. Hot and cold are desirable, as opposed to lukewarm. I can be refreshed with cold water, I can cook or get clean with hot water. Lukewarm is not refreshing, nor will it kill germs or cook my food. It is useless.

Since Lukewarmness is what Jesus said that he will spew out of His mouth, what is it that is lukewarm that could be ingested and make someone sick to the point of vomiting?? As stated, it is water. Lukewarm water is where bacteria flourishes, and where parasites lay their eggs. Diseases like Malaria our found in lukewarm standing swamp water. It would have been a very colorful, meaningful, and poingnant reference to the Laodiceans. It would have gotten the point across to them due to their geographic location, and since bacteria does not grow in hot or cold water, it gives us insight into the metaphor. Jesus was comparing them to the disgusting, bacterial, parasite ridden water they had to deal with everyday. Hot or cold would have been more desirable than that.

It is lukewarm water that Christ says he detests. It has been said that "Lukewarmness" amounts to fence riding, and that is not true. Lukewarmness refers here, to apathy. They were a church in profession only. They were useless to the Kingdom of God.

It really is simple. You are holding on to traditional face value approaches, that subjectively read the meaning of "hot" and "cold" into the passage. It is quite clear from the passage, that "cold" and "hot" hold a different connotation than they might in another context.

And, just from a natural viewpoint just from basic English, if I were to speak in an English lit class about hot and cold and lukewarm or a science class, I think the understanding would be clear that cold and hot were opposites and that lukewarm was in between.

That demonstrates what I mean. You are not in an English class, or a science class. You have to use the context and the metaphor being used in the passage in order to objectively understand what it being said to the Laodiceans. You cannot use your natural viewpoint to subjectively impose what YOU want hot and cold to mean.

I have a feeling that you had a particular direction you were headed, and if we apply this passage in light of the metaphor, it kinds puts a crimp in things.

I definately give up....I use Greek, historical context, actual literal context, and geographical context, and all I get is, "I believe this..."
That is the hold that tradition has on people. Christians can be as bad as anyone when it comes to holding to their traditions.

  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  112
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,489
  • Content Per Day:  0.46
  • Reputation:   13
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  07/28/2004
  • Status:  Offline

Posted

reposting this because he gave the original word and it's meaning....but it appears it's been ignored.

You are not being ignored. We're thinking... catch you tomorrow. :)

Okay, I guess it just seems unusual to me. I mean, when someone gives you the Greek word, which has a very specific meaning...how much thinking is left? :emot-eek:

Tess,

There are varied interpretations of Greek words. My husband studied Greek in Bible college, but I did not. I can not just automatically just say because Tess said that is what it means that that obviously is what it means. I've read enough to know that. I appreciate your input and I will look into what you said and I will get back with you when I've had time to research it myself. This is not a slight of you, ok? I just like to check things out for myself. :wub:

I think this shows the hold tradition can have. Most have always taken at face value and defined for themselves, what "hot" and "cold" means. This passage has long been interpreted the absence of the metaphorical reference. It is not important what "hot" and "cold" means to us. What is important, is what it meant to author of the passage, and what it would have meant to the original hearers.

We have been inundated with the concept of "hot" and "cold" spirituality as meaning either "on fire," or "spiritually dead." In OTHER contexts, that may have value. The question is can we apply those definitions of hot and cold to this passage and not violate it context???

We have to get beyond face value and draw out the meaning that the author was intending to convey, instead of applying subjective judgements to the passage.

A.K. has already pointed out in the Greek that Jesus said wish your were "hot" or cold, but you are neither. There is NO logical, sensible reason for Jesus to say, " I wish you were hot or cold" if "cold" means that you are living in sin, apart from the Lord.

The point is, hot and cold are not being used as opposites. Hot and cold are being used as opposite of Lukewarm. Hot and cold are desirable, as opposed to lukewarm. I can be refreshed with cold water, I can cook or get clean with hot water. Lukewarm is not refreshing, nor will it kill germs or cook my food. It is useless.

Since Lukewarmness is what Jesus said that he will spew out of His mouth, what is it that is lukewarm that could be ingested and make someone sick to the point of vomiting?? As stated, it is water. Lukewarm water is where bacteria flourishes, and where parasites lay their eggs. Diseases like Malaria our found in lukewarm standing swamp water. It would have been a very colorful, meaningful, and poingnant reference to the Laodiceans. It would have gotten the point across to them due to their geographic location, and since bacteria does not grow in hot or cold water, it gives us insight into the metaphor. Jesus was comparing them to the disgusting, bacterial, parasite ridden water they had to deal with everyday. Hot or cold would have been more desirable than that.

It is lukewarm water that Christ says he detests. It has been said that "Lukewarmness" amounts to fence riding, and that is not true. Lukewarmness refers here, to apathy. They were a church in profession only. They were useless to the Kingdom of God.

It really is simple. You are holding on to traditional face value approaches, that subjectively read the meaning of "hot" and "cold" into the passage. It is quite clear from the passage, that "cold" and "hot" hold a different connotation than they might in another context.

And, just from a natural viewpoint just from basic English, if I were to speak in an English lit class about hot and cold and lukewarm or a science class, I think the understanding would be clear that cold and hot were opposites and that lukewarm was in between.

That demonstrates what I mean. You are not in an English class, or a science class. You have to use the context and the metaphor being used in the passage in order to objectively understand what it being said to the Laodiceans. You cannot use your natural viewpoint to subjectively impose what YOU want hot and cold to mean.

I have a feeling that you had a particular direction you were headed, and if we apply this passage in light of the metaphor, it kinds puts a crimp in things.

I definately give up....I use Greek, historical context, actual literal context, and geographical context, and all I get is, "I believe this..."
That is the hold that tradition has on people. Christians can be as bad as anyone when it comes to holding to their traditions.

THANK YOU!!! :)


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  197
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  2,461
  • Content Per Day:  0.33
  • Reputation:   4
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  02/18/2005
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  12/31/1949

Posted
Well it is one way of looking at cold, and I don't think it is invalid at all. Although I think the way I was thinking of lukewarm, it does not mean almost faithful, or almost there, it means a blindness which does not produce repentance, thus the Lord needs to smack their eyes open to get their attention, and thus the need for the severe letter and tone.

Hi Christ's Free Servant. Isn't the bible amazing. There is just so much there for us to think about. For me any of these interpretations are useful and helpful to me personally and my church. I think it is meant to make us think in this way, maybe there is not in this case only one correct way of understanding this passage?

Smalcald,

I have been reading various commentaries on this passage and have been amazed at the various ways of interpreting the passage. It can certainly be applied to churches today, even if it was written for the church of Laodecia. Some feel it applies to the universal church in America, and I have to agree that it does describe much of what we see in the Church in America, though certainly some of the other letters describe various individual church bodies, as well.

There are two schools of thought on the meaning of the word "cold" - one thought being that it refers to the water of a nearby town which had cold and refreshing springs and another thought is that cold is the opposite of hot, so it refers to non-believers and "hot" refers to those who are walking in fellowship and obedience with God. Lukewarm could mean they are neither living fruitful regenerated lives nor are they of the belief that Jesus did not die for their sins, but they are duped into believing they are believers when they are not. The "lukewarm" are thought to be either Christians who are living in apathy or they are non-believers who think they are believers, because it goes on to say that they think they are rich when they are poor, etc. So, there are two schools of thought on what it means to be "lukewarm," as well.

I think that no matter which way it is interpreted, the message is clear - we, the Church, need to take a hard look at our lives, both as a whole body and as individuals who make up the whole body. We need to examine ourselves to see if we are "lukewarm" in our relationship with the Lord - whether we are true believers who have slipped into mediocrity and who need to be revived or we are actually not true believers but have been fed a lie to convince us we are believers. Whichever the case may be, we need to get on our knees before God, we need to repent of our sins, and we need to draw near to God. We need to move from "lukewarmness" into His wonderful light and we need to begin walking in that light. Only God knows our hearts. Only he knows who is truly his. And, only he knows truly what it means when he says he will spit you out of his mouth. We can speculate, but only he knows what that truly means.

Now, was this written to a specific church at a specific time or is this representative of a Church age or is it something else? There are several schools of thought on that, as well. No matter our thinking on that, there is a reason it is in Revelation. I think that is what we need to look at. Why is it there? And, what are we supposed to glean from it? Is there a universal principle that can be applied to our lives that is consistent with other scripture? I believe there is. And, why is it in Revelation? I personally believe these letters describe various conditions in churches that both existed then and exist now and the reason these letters are in Revelation is so we, the Church, can examine our hearts and can repent of our sins and can be in a right relationship with Christ before he returns, not only for ourselves, but for the salvation of others. If the Church in America (people) would get on its knees before God in repentance, we could shake this nation for Jesus! And, that is what this nation of ours needs right now. Either we shake it for Christ's sake, or He is going to shake it for repentance's sake. Oh, Church, wake up!


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  197
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  2,461
  • Content Per Day:  0.33
  • Reputation:   4
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  02/18/2005
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  12/31/1949

Posted
All this arguing over hot and cold when it is luke warmness that is the issue. :emot-eek:

:wub:


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  112
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,489
  • Content Per Day:  0.46
  • Reputation:   13
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  07/28/2004
  • Status:  Offline

Posted
I have a feeling that you had a particular direction you were headed, and if we apply this passage in light of the metaphor, it kinds puts a crimp in things.

I'm beginning to believe this too, my friend.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Our picks

    • You are coming up higher in this season – above the assignments of character assassination and verbal arrows sent to manage you, contain you, and derail your purpose. Where you have had your dreams and sleep robbed, as well as your peace and clarity robbed – leaving you feeling foggy, confused, and heavy – God is, right now, bringing freedom back -- now you will clearly see the smoke and mirrors that were set to distract you and you will disengage.

      Right now God is declaring a "no access zone" around you, and your enemies will no longer have any entry point into your life. Oil is being poured over you to restore the years that the locust ate and give you back your passion. This is where you will feel a fresh roar begin to erupt from your inner being, and a call to leave the trenches behind and begin your odyssey in your Christ calling moving you to bear fruit that remains as you minister to and disciple others into their Christ identity.

      This is where you leave the trenches and scale the mountain to fight from a different place, from victory, from peace, and from rest. Now watch as God leads you up higher above all the noise, above all the chaos, and shows you where you have been seated all along with Him in heavenly places where you are UNTOUCHABLE. This is where you leave the soul fight, and the mind battle, and learn to fight differently.

      You will know how to live like an eagle and lead others to the same place of safety and protection that God led you to, which broke you out of the silent prison you were in. Put your war boots on and get ready to fight back! Refuse to lay down -- get out of bed and rebuke what is coming at you. Remember where you are seated and live from that place.

      Acts 1:8 - “But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses … to the end of the earth.”

       

      ALBERT FINCH MINISTRY
        • Thanks
        • This is Worthy
        • Thumbs Up
      • 3 replies
    • George Whitten, the visionary behind Worthy Ministries and Worthy News, explores the timing of the Simchat Torah War in Israel. Is this a water-breaking moment? Does the timing of the conflict on October 7 with Hamas signify something more significant on the horizon?

       



      This was a message delivered at Eitz Chaim Congregation in Dallas Texas on February 3, 2024.

      To sign up for our Worthy Brief -- https://worthybrief.com

      Be sure to keep up to date with world events from a Christian perspective by visiting Worthy News -- https://www.worthynews.com

      Visit our live blogging channel on Telegram -- https://t.me/worthywatch
      • 0 replies
    • Understanding the Enemy!

      I thought I write about the flip side of a topic, and how to recognize the attempts of the enemy to destroy lives and how you can walk in His victory!

      For the Apostle Paul taught us not to be ignorant of enemy's tactics and strategies.

      2 Corinthians 2:112  Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices. 

      So often, we can learn lessons by learning and playing "devil's" advocate.  When we read this passage,

      Mar 3:26  And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end. 
      Mar 3:27  No man can enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he will first bind the strongman; and then he will spoil his house. 

      Here we learn a lesson that in order to plunder one's house you must first BIND up the strongman.  While we realize in this particular passage this is referring to God binding up the strongman (Satan) and this is how Satan's house is plundered.  But if you carefully analyze the enemy -- you realize that he uses the same tactics on us!  Your house cannot be plundered -- unless you are first bound.   And then Satan can plunder your house!

      ... read more
        • Oy Vey!
        • Praise God!
        • Thanks
        • Well Said!
        • Brilliant!
        • Loved it!
        • This is Worthy
        • Thumbs Up
      • 230 replies
    • Daniel: Pictures of the Resurrection, Part 3

      Shalom everyone,

      As we continue this study, I'll be focusing on Daniel and his picture of the resurrection and its connection with Yeshua (Jesus). 

      ... read more
        • Praise God!
        • Brilliant!
        • Loved it!
        • This is Worthy
        • Thumbs Up
      • 13 replies
    • Abraham and Issac: Pictures of the Resurrection, Part 2
      Shalom everyone,

      As we continue this series the next obvious sign of the resurrection in the Old Testament is the sign of Isaac and Abraham.

      Gen 22:1  After these things God tested Abraham and said to him, "Abraham!" And he said, "Here I am."
      Gen 22:2  He said, "Take your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you."

      So God "tests" Abraham and as a perfect picture of the coming sacrifice of God's only begotten Son (Yeshua - Jesus) God instructs Issac to go and sacrifice his son, Issac.  Where does he say to offer him?  On Moriah -- the exact location of the Temple Mount.

      ...read more
        • Well Said!
        • This is Worthy
        • Thumbs Up
      • 20 replies

×
×
  • Create New...