Results 101 - 120 of 517
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Beja Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
101 | who was the first person jesus saved? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 230741 | ||
John, I disagree with you. I believe the seed of the woman promised to them by God was in fact predicting Christ crucified, though admitedly in obscure language. In that, God from the very beginning of the fall held forth Jesus Christ to be hoped in as the coming see. Then after the murder of Abel and the punishment of cain, when Seth was born we see something interesting. Gen 4:25 And Adam again knoweth his wife, and she beareth a son, and calleth his name Seth, for God hath appointed for me another seed instead of Abel: for Cain had slain him. It seems clear that Eve was hoping upon and looking for the promised seed, as all God's redeem of all ages before His coming. I'll grant its not proof, but I argue its more than enough to suspect her as one of God's elect from before the foundation of the earth. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
102 | Everybody dies with recent sins | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 231561 | ||
Doc my friend, you are always worth the extra effort it takes to read you. : ) In Christ, Beja |
||||||
103 | Ezekiel's Temple vision-when, why, who? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 232090 | ||
Update to last post, I forgot to add in point 3, that we should note that on the curtains entering the tabernacle we find a Cherubim. The only places we find these cherubim that I can think of in scripture is guarding the garden, and guarding the entrance to the tabernacle/temple. This should help solidify in our minds that a return to the presence of God is being imaged by the tabernacle/temple and that is central to what it is about. Somebody coming into the tabernacle would literal have to go past the guardian cherbum into God's presence and do so safely only upon the blood of a sacrifice. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
104 | NIV...Gods...? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 232130 | ||
Preston, Eph 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, I find this verse to differ somewhat with your list. And my church sadly does not have an altar. We are in serious trouble! In Christ, Beja |
||||||
105 | NIV...Gods...? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 232132 | ||
Preston, I will continue to preach salvation in Christ alone, through faith alone, by grace alone. Scripture does not render faith as "assumed" in its message and neither shall I. Gal 2:15 "We are Jews by nature and not sinners from among the Gentiles; Gal 2:16 nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified. Php 3:9 and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith, Rom 4:2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. Rom 4:3 For what does the Scripture say? "ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS." Rom 4:4 Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. Rom 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness, Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. Rom 1:17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, "BUT THE RIGHTEOUS man SHALL LIVE BY FAITH." I place my hope in nothing less than Jesus' blood and righteousness. I dare not trust my sweetest frame but wholely lean on Jesus' name. Christ purchases obedience for us, our obedience does not purchase Christ for us. Psa 119:146 I call to you; save me, that I may observe your testimonies. Salvation causes obedience. Obedience does not cause salvation. The order you seek them in makes all the difference in the world. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
106 | continued pursuit, or saving faith | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 232353 | ||
loavesnfish, Wow, very old posts you have brought up. I will respond to this one but not the other. On the other passage my mind has both become resolved on in the three years since I asked the question and I have learned that it is a passage that causes much friction. With regards to this passage. 1. I never meant to suggest anything other than salvation by grace through faith in Christ alone. 2. I think the basis of your point hinges on the word "rewarder." If I understand right you are suggesting that the notion of reward implies merit. We affirm that we in no way merit our salvation and therefore the passage can't be speaking of salvation. However, I think we must not import the notion of merit into this greek word in this particular passage. I'll show why in point three. 3.) The author is very much speaking of salvation by faith in this passage. Here is the evidence. ....in verse 3 abel by faith acts and receives the testimony (martureo) that he was righteous. So we see faith evidenced by works resulting in God declaring Abel righteous. ....verse 5 and 6 we see by faith that Enoch received the witness (Martureo) that he was pleasing to God. So again, faith receiving God's acceptance. ....verse 7 by faith Noah acts and builds the ark and is saved from the judgement upon the entire world. Specifically said to beecome an heir to the righteousness which is through faith. So again we see faith resulting in being saved and that faith is evidenced through works. ....verse 39 sums up the entire chapter saying that all these people gained approval (martureo) through faith. This word means testimony most literally. Testimony of what? The account of Abel sets our context. The testimony from God that they were righteous. So the entire chapter which illustrates verse six is all about individuals being declared righteous by God and receiving acceptance from God because of their faith which was evidenced by their works. 4.) This fits perfectly with the purpose of the book of Hebrews. The readers were being tempted to abandon faith in Christ so that they may avoid escalating persecution. Chapter 11 shows them those who because of sincere faith, held to their faith and endured hardship and received the ultimate reward. Likewise, the readers should through sincere faith endure the persecution thus evidencing the sincere faith and receiving salvation through faith as a result. Salvation through faith evidenced by obedience and enduring is what is being taught here. 5.) We must let the term "rewarder" be flexible here as we are guided by the entire chapter to understand that salvation is very much in the author's mind. We must believe that in God there is a great salvation which is valued above all this world and that it is worth enduring the many trials and tribulations through which we must pass in order to receive this salvation. Act 14:22 strengthening the souls of the disciples, encouraging them to continue in the faith, and saying, "Through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God." We must believe that God is a rewarder of those who seek him. There is no notion of merit here rather simply the declaration that not only must we believe that God exists, but despite all the current hardship and all the lying deceits of the lusts of this world, we must also firmly believe that in God alone is our good and hope in Him. That is faith. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
107 | What is the law? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 232829 | ||
Doc, Its ok, you provided a good exegisis of my one line answer! :) In Christ, Beja |
||||||
108 | Romans in the light of Jonah does it say | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 232835 | ||
Yes. We have had an exposition of that. And afterwards you and I agreed it was best for us not to speak any further on these forums. Now you continue to press of an explination of my view from others immediately after that agreement. Do you think that is fair? In Christ, Beja |
||||||
109 | What is the law? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 232891 | ||
elder4yhwh, Let me first confess my fears to you and then I will point you to answers. Now my fear is that you do not ask this question in sincerity. What I mean is that you ask me which laws he has fulfilled or done away with and you don't truly want to learn anything from any answer I might give. Rather that you think to be asking an impossible question and thus from the impossibility of answering it you have proven your point that such a notion is nonsense. Now I do not accuse you of this, I am simply afraid it could be the case. So here is how I shall answer your question, I shall point you to the answers and if you are willing to pursue them you shall have your answers. But if you are asking only in attempts to prove a point, then I will have no waisted my time arguing about it. 1.) First, you need to have a right understanding about what Christ has done. When we say that due to the work of Christ we are no longer under the law, we don't mean to say that the law is no longer a picture of righteousness any longer. We simply mean that our acceptance or condemnation before God is no longer based upon our fulfillment of the law for those who are in Christ. So due to what Christ has done and my partaking of the benefits via faith, I no longer am accepted or rejected by God based upon whether I have committed adultery. What we DO NOT mean is that I am now free to commit adultery. We do not hold to antinomianism, or lawlessness. The moral law remains our sure guide to right and wrong and rightly restrains wickedness. Now this could have a lot more to be said about it. Namely that Paul goes through lengths to show that the Spirit is the driving force of righteousness in Christians rather than the law. However, I simply want to assert that Christ has freed us from the covenant of the law, not the expectation of the law. I point you to a book called "The Marrow of Modern Divinity" to learn more about this. This book is a very easy and enjoyable read. I do not wish to push you to accept every doctrinal thought the author holds, but it very much helps to get the broad concept of being free from the law as a covenant while still holding to the law as the picture of righteousness fit to instruct the saints and sincerely obey. Oh, this book is available online in its entirety for free. 2.) Now we rightly say that some things have passed away entirely due to Christ having fulfilled them. And this point is more to what you are pressing for an answer on. I point you to John Calvin in the "Institutes of the Christian Religion." He deals with this very well. He will expound upon concepts such as the moral, ceremonial, and civil aspects of the old testament law. I think he rightly teaches it. So I offer these two sources for you. If you truly wish to know the answers to your questions, you will do well to pursue your answers in these sources. If you are in truth not seeking answers, but rather have begun this thread asking a question only to start a debate over a topic which you previously were quite convinced of your own position, and rather than seeking an answer were really only trying to engage in a discussion to sway others, then I suspect you will continue debating in this thread while putting out no effort to look into these books. I wish you well in your study. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
110 | Book of Life | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 233176 | ||
I knew this thread looked familiar! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v[equal]sShMA85pv8M You'll have to replace [equal] with an actual equal sign for the link to work. I think it best we accept that no verses are forthcoming, friends. Just my 2 cents. :) In Christ, Beja |
||||||
111 | Adultery always involves married woman? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 233633 | ||
Emethalethia, I disagree finally on the way to answer this question but I recognize that you are sincerely trying to make sense of scripture and I respect that. However, let me caution you not to fall into one particular mistake. Just because others face less hostility for holding to the more normal view on this, do not think that others are coming to a different interpretation of scriptural evidence on this issue that they are doing so out of an urge to avoid negative social consequences. As long as another's actions allow us to believe the best of them, we are bound in christian charity to do so. Therefore we ought to assume that they would be willing to follow their beliefs into persecution, only sincere opinion has happen to place them with the majority. As you have given me no reason to assume you do anything but give the benefit of the doubt, I assume you agree with the sentiment. Now with regard to considering your view, what do you make of 1 Timothy chapter three requiring elders to be a "one woman man"? What does it mean, and why is this obligation placed upon them? In Christ, Beja |
||||||
112 | Adultery always involves married woman? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 233642 | ||
Emeth, It is clear to me that you have had some rough conversations regarding this topic in the past. This topic is not worth quarreling over in my estimate. I feel like you have gotten so used to being attacked by those who feel threatened by what you are saying that you have come into this discussion with your "dukes up" so to speak. Therefore, I see no reason to continue this conversation. I end my participation of this thread with no harsh feelings and I hope you are a long fruitful participant on the forum. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
113 | Adultery always involves married woman? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 233657 | ||
emethalethia, I understand completely where you are coming from. I am a calvinist, 99.9 percent of the people I know are not calvinist. What has given me the most heartache in that situation is not that people I know disagree with me, but rather when they simply will not even look at what scripture has to say. They will simply say, "no that can't be" or as you say, simply walk away with no discussion at all, all the while judging me for my belief. It is as if they truely do not want to know what God's word says on the issue. When I actually find somebody who will look scripture straight in the face, acknowledge what calvinism actually teaches and yet ultimately tell me they disagree with me I count it an absolute joy. Even if they disagree with me I am very delighted because I am so use to people refusing to even consider scripture that I find it so refreshing for somebody to at least do that! The point being I know exactly how you feel. However...I also know how much that wounded me. It took me a long time to realize that no matter how sincere and pure my desires were, being faced with that type of willfull blindness hurt badly(I do not refer to non calvinists, only to those who will condemn it while refusing to consider scripture on it.) And for awhile it caused a bitterness within me and a skepticism towards most other people who professed religion. It took me some time to work out those feelings, and what I did not realize at the time was that in the mean time while I worked through that hurt, most of my conversations were colored by that. I found myself entering conversations actually expecting people to not consider scripture. I expected them to choose their comfort zone rather than the often discomforting realities of what God's word said. And my expectations doomed the conversations to be unedifying at the least and harmful and sinful at worst. I choose to walk away from this conversation not from an unwillingness to look at scripture concerning this question, but becaue I can see there have been many professors of religion who have done the same to you. They have absolutely dismissed your question with no sincere desire to see whether scripture agrees with you. I can truely see that, and I can see it has caused you the same pain that it did me. And I can see hints of the same hurt that it left in me. And I can see you expecting me to respond to you with the same shallowness that they did. That is why I choose not to discuss it with you, because I know from experience that converstations undertaken in that context will seldom end well. Know that you have my prayers and sympathy. Continue seeking to know scripture and to submit to it and in time the precious Spirit of truth will perfect us both. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
114 | the word "world" and "all" refer to all | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 235647 | ||
Hupogramos, This is necessarily going to be impacted by our other views on this topic. I personally believe in predestination, but the topic of limited attonement has been a doctrine I have been slow to accept. I was determined to first look carefully at passages such as John 3:16. To that end John Owen's classic, "The Death of Death in the Death of Christ" was invaluable. He particularly satisfied me with regards to John the apostle. I would dig there. It is hard reading though. Either way, we should all remember this is a volatile issue and while on the forum should approach it in the spirit of understanding one another rather than any spirit debate. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
115 | Age of accountability? | OT general | Beja | 223962 | ||
Searcher, Indeed he could have meant that. When I preached on the topic I clearly pointed out as much. I can't recall my post but I meant to point it out there as well. In fact, the possibility that he could have meant that largely drove my application. I suggested that it is likely enough that he meant "heaven" that I feel we can validly offer hope to a grieving parent. However, we are on thin enough ice that we should never under any circumstances rest on this with regards to a living child. To a living child, we always rely on teaching the gospel rather than a notion of an "age of accountability." Hope this clarifies. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
116 | Age of accountability? | OT general | Beja | 223965 | ||
Freeatlast, Let me respond in two parts. First, I will respond concerning the passage in 2 Samuel. As I have readily admitted, and will continue to do so, it is very possible that David simply means the grave. However, let me defend the possibility that he means in heaven with two observations. First, there is no flaw in the reasoning if we mean to say that it is possible that he meant it, and we do not mean to say dogmatically that he meant it. In other words, we can't say that he certainly meant the grave any more so than we can say he certainly meant heaven. There is some valid ambiguity here because of which we ought not be dogmatic on either side. The next observation, it seems that David is truely consoling himself in someway with what he says. He is finding some peace or assurance from it. It seems much more likely that he is professing something that comforts him rather than saying, "It's pointless at this point, so who cares?" Therefore, while I whole heartedly agree that David could be referring to the grave, I do not at all think it is a irresponsible reading of the text to suggest he means the child is in heaven. Though once again, I affirm we do not have the grounds to insist upon it dogmatically. Second, I will respond with regards to the age being thirteen. The one absolutely gaping problem is that scripture never in any way explicitely teaches a doctrine of "age of accountability." There are texts from which we infer that teaching, but nowhere can we point to a text and say that scripture was there specifically trying to teach us that children of a certain age go to heaven when they die. All passages are of the nature of the one in 2 Samuel which while we may look at them and have some grounds for hope, we certainly can't dogmatically assert such a doctrine. So then, if we can not dogmatically assert that scripture even teaches a doctrine of the age of accountability, how absolutely irresponsible it is of us to extend our speculation so far as to try to name an exact age! How can you argue that it must clearly be the age of thirteen, when you can not defend the doctrine even exists adiquately? Lets go one step further. What is to be gleaned from arguing a specific age? Nothing is gained except the risk of causing parents to be lax in their "laboring until Christ is formed" in them. I will state here what I will continue to teach in the Church which I pastor. We will extend the age of accountability as a comfort to a grieving parent, but we will never extend it as a comfort and a reason to be lax to the parent of a living child! May we stive mightily in the preaching of the gospel to our children! In Christ, Beja |
||||||
117 | when we die are we go atraigth to heaven | OT general | Beja | 225291 | ||
Godsaves, Indeed it does. I believe that is revelation 20 that you are referring to. To my understanding, when we die, we are present with the Lord at that time but we are not yet in our final state. We won't yet have our final ressurection bodies. I think this is supported by the scriptures I referred you to and in addition 1 Thesselonians which says when Christ returns his saints will be with him. 1 Thess 4:14. So we are already with him, then he returns with us, and then we are ressurected. I believe the picture is that we are going to be reunited with our current bodies (although greatly changed) on the day of the ressurection. But in the mean time we are with the Lord in some other temporary arranged body. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
118 | IS BAPTISM NECESSARY | NT general | Beja | 220863 | ||
Mamametal, I believe this is a reference to Ezekiel 36:25-27. In that passage it speaks of the new birth in a few different terms. These are: sprinkling with clean water for clensing, taking out the heart of stone for a heart of flesh, and putting His Spirit within us. I can't prove that is what He was referring to, but I can tell you I'm not alone in this interpretation. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
119 | Is it Ok to pray to the Holy Spirit? | NT general | Beja | 221553 | ||
Cathy, Basically his answer is that the new testament pattern is that we pray to the father, in the name of Christ, through the power of the Holy Spirit, or in the Spirit. So we want to follow the new testament pattern whenever possible. So in general we pray to the Father. But he notes there are some exceptions to the rule. For example, "Come quickly, Lord Jesus." He mentioned an exception for the Holy Spirit also. So there are some things appropriate to address to the Son, and the Spirit, but our norm should be praying to the Father. But listen to the clip when you get the chance, there is just something about listening to John Piper that I certainly can't reproduce. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
120 | Is it Ok to pray to the Holy Spirit? | NT general | Beja | 221560 | ||
Cathy, No, I've never heard of that being said of acts 13. I think you are correct to disagree with him. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ] Next > Last [26] >> |