Results 801 - 820 of 1935
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: BradK Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
801 | Is the end at hand? | Joel 2:28 | BradK | 179554 | ||
Hi Joanna, If I might make a blunt observation: experience is a poor determinant of truth- especially Biblical! Why would people need to have (extra-biblical)dreams and visions to tell us to spread the message of Jesus since scripture already does this? It would seem redundant at best. Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
802 | Paul, the Answers Are? | Luke 5:8 | BradK | 179525 | ||
Hi Paul, I'm in basic agreement with your reply in the 1st 3 paragraphs. However, I'm still hanging with your scenario of Judas and the ongoing question that "Without judas would I be a Christian?" Are you stating that God's plan would have been frustrated? You seem to contradict your initial response!? Isn't this merely speculative as Judas did betray Christ and the prophecy was fulfilled? Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
803 | The meaning of your statments | Luke 5:8 | BradK | 179498 | ||
Dear brother paul, Out of curiosity, what is your answer to the question you posed, "Without Judas would I be a Christian?" Was it merely rhetorical or did I miss something? Your reply came across a little ambiguous- maybe even confusing. Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
804 | forgiven or not | Psalm | BradK | 179253 | ||
Hello Joe-Joe, I'm not sure that I completely follow your logic? Possibly you could elaborate on the points you made? 1. You said, "Once "saved" converted we acknowledge our place in Adam's original sin and ask forgiveness of it. we are "saved" but salvation is not complete for us yet. From that point on we are responsible for our OWN sin." If, this is in fact the case, then what did Christ accomplish on the cross? You seem to be saying that we're saved by grace, BUT once there it's up to us? Eph. 1:7 proclaims: "In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace." Our forgiveness, is conditioned not upon our confession of, but rather upon the riches of His grace! Our own merits would fall woefully short. There is simply no remission without the shedding of blood (Heb. 9:22) If our sins must be atoned for AFTER we come to Christ, then logically Christ would have to go back to the cross to obtain forgiveness- and obvious impossibility based upon Rom. 6:10. Christ either died once for sin, or He didn't. Certainly this is not what scripture teaches. Could you provide more of a scriptural foundation for your contention? Heb. 9:28 states that, "so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him." 2. You also said, "If you don't take responsibility for your sins by confessing them and asking forgiveness then fine...BUT you have judgment to contend with." What judgment are you talking about? Are you saying that a believer will be judged for his sins? Again, this is not exactly what scripture says. There is the great White Throne Judgement of Rev. 20:11 where "anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire." This judgment deals with the non-believer. The believer will only suffer judgment as to rewards. This is the Bema seat judgment of Rom. 14:10 and 1 Cor. 3:11-15. Verse 15 reading: "If any man's work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire." 3. How do we "...stand not IN CHRIST, but on our own merits before Him." Is not one (a believer) either In Christ (en Christo) or not? Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
805 | The effects of Repentance | 1 John 3:6 | BradK | 178940 | ||
Hi Doc, Quite right. And, if I may sum it up from scripture: "For the sorrow that is according to the will of God produces a repentance without regret, leading to salvation, but the sorrow of the world produces death." (2 Cor. 7:10) BradK |
||||||
806 | 2nd last book of the NT Contrary? | 2 Tim 3:16 | BradK | 178801 | ||
Dear Kum Kum, The burden of proof is on you as you are making the assertion! Can you provide specific evidence- other than opinion- to back what you are claiming? Beyong that my freind, you appear to be climbing out on a limb. Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
807 | 2nd last book of the NT Contrary? | 2 Tim 3:16 | BradK | 178798 | ||
KumKum: Please. I'm not one to play Biblical hide-and-seek games!And, no I don't "know the rest". Might you take some time to clearly spell out your argument or leave well enough alone:-( Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
808 | should females pastor | 1 Corinthians | BradK | 178742 | ||
Hello Doc2, Thanks for your reply. However, I'm not exactly clear on the point you're making? The qualifications for Bishop/Deacon in the Body of Christ are defined in 1 Tim. 3 and Titus 1. All believers are "annointed" of God: "Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and anointed us is God," (2 Cor. 1:21) Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
809 | How to Discern a Servant of God | Acts 5:15 | BradK | 178609 | ||
Hi Mark, Your comments are well taken and they do bring up a reasonable and sound basis for how we critique a ministry. Certainly, it must be biblical. This would go back to the foundations of her (or any other ministry). Personally, from what I've read and studied of her, she seemed bizarre- even mystical. As you know, I place many if not most of the modern claims of healing under the lable of "skeptical". Allow me to share some hopefully relevant comments. This past summer I challenged myself to read "Christ The Healer" by F.F. Bosworth. This book- written in 1924- was a (the) catalyst of many modern WOF and Healing ministries, like Kuhlman, and later Copeland and Hinn, etc. [It was soundly rebutted the same year by A.C. Gabelein in his work, "The Healing Question".] I read it to gain perspective and to better understand a doctrine that is so prevalent and that we deal with all too frequently on the Forum. It was a challenge because of my bias and my presuppositions. Nevertheless, I plodded through some 200-plus pages and did complete it. Here's my assesment of F.F. Bosworth: 1. He was sincere in what he believed. He did not delve into the other tangents like "name-it-and-claim-it", etc., but simply held that "it is God's will to heal the body as it is to heal the soul."; 2. He almost completely ignored any context; 3. He "proof-texted" his entire argument; 4. He ignored Church History and 2000 some years of scholarship. He also demonstrated little more than a cursory comprehension of NT Greek; 5. He blatantly said in many places something a verse said, that it plainly did not- scripture twisting. Now, what does this have to do with Katherine Kuhlman? Well, it's my studied conclusion that most of her persuasion fall into this same category. Not ALL, but most. Their basis is faulty. They start out with the wrong supposition, therefore their conclusions are faulty. They twist and misuse scripture as a basis for their ministry. This is where I place her ministry and work. Zealous, but without a solid foundation! Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
810 | Free will and predestination co-exist? | Rom 8:29 | BradK | 178593 | ||
Hello Z, I too feel the need to voice my concern over your reply to brother Mark. With all due respect, you are remiss in not showing love toward your brethren! Please lighten up! Obviously you have some zeal- which is fine. However, you're coming across in a very judgmental and condescending tone. That is not necessary nor edifying. You are new to this Forum, so may I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the it if you haven't already:-) The "About Forum" link might might be instructive. Should you feel so led, feel free to visit my User Profile to get to know a little more about me too:-) We're all on the same side here, brother. Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
811 | Women speak in church? | 1 Cor 14:34 | BradK | 178464 | ||
Dear souljouners, I think we're mis-communicating here. I'm attempting to keep our discussion within the bounds of scripture! At issue is not what you or I think, but what the inspired, authoritative Word of God says! How then, would you interpret 1 Tim. 2:12-13?: "But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve." You seem to imply that this was merely a "suggestion" of Paul and in no way instructive!? Is what Paul says- through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit- not authoritative? Was he simply offering his opinion? What Paul is writing in 1 Tim. 2 has a direct bearing upon his continuation in Chap. 3 dealing with qualifications of Bishops and Elders. It is also referred to as context! Here are some comments from the late Dr. Kenneth Wuest- a noted NT Greek Scholar: "(2:11, 12) Paul is still dealing with the conduct of women in the assemblies. This admonition to the effect that women are to learn in silence with all subjection, is made clear as to its meaing by I Corinthians 14:34, 35, where the women were disturbing the church service by asking their husbands questions, presumably about that which was being preached. The silence here and in our I Timothy passage has to do with maintaining quiet in the assembly, and does not forbid a woman to take an active part in the work of the church in her own sphere and under the limitations imposed upon her in the contextual passage (I Tim. 2:12). The correct understanding of Paul’s words, “I suffer not a woman to teach,” are dependent upon the tense of the Greek infinitive and the grammatical rule pertaining to it." "Thus, didaxai (aorist), is to teach, while didaskein (present 2:12), is to be a teacher. Paul, therefore, says, “I do not permit a woman to be a teacher.” The context here has to do with church order, and the position of the man and woman in the church worship and work. The kind of teacher Paul has in mind is spoken of in Acts 13:1, I Corinthians 12:28, 29, and Ephesians 4:11, God-called, and God-equipped teachers, recognized by the Church as those having authority in the Church in matters of doctrine and interpretation. This prohibition of a woman to be a teacher, does not include the teaching of classes of women, girls, or children in a Sunday School, for instance, but does prohibit the woman from being a pastor, or a doctrine teacher in a school. It would not be seemly, either, for a woman to teach a mixed class of adults. The expression, “usurp authority,” Vincent says, is not a correct translation of the Greek word. It is rather, “to exercise dominion over.” In the sphere of doctrinal disputes or questions of interpretation, where authoritative pronouncements are to be made, the woman is to keep silence." [Kenneth S. Wuest, Wuest's Word Studies from the Greek New Testament] A.T. Robertson, also another well-known 20th Century Greek Scholar stated: "I permit not [ouk epitrepo]. Old word [epitrepo], to permit, to allow (I Cor. 16:7). Paul speaks authoritatively." [A.T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament] I don't pretend to think that this will settle the matter, but trust that it will add to the discussion and be edifying as we seek better understanding. Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
812 | Women speak in church? | 1 Cor 14:34 | BradK | 178457 | ||
Dear souljourners, I don't think there is any argument that God has used Women in His master plan. Scripture is abundant with examples such as the one's you provided. In fact, He still uses them today! Where I think we need to define the issue and draw a line is in distinguishing between women being used of God and their proper role(s) in the Body of Christ in a (local)church. Again 1 Tim. 2:12 states: "But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet." The roles and functions of bishops and deacons are outlined clearly in 1 Tim. 3 and Titus 1. I see Paul laying the groundwork in 1 Tim. 2 as to how gender fits into this. The offices described are all in the masculine. I think this was Divinely ordered through the inspiration of the Word! So, does God use women in His work? Yes, without doubt. Is their role to be that of a teaching Pastor in authority over a congregation. I doubt it. Vertical alignment is God-ordained. I further believe, that much of this debate over the role of women in the church has stemmed from the 20th and 21st Century "Womens Right" movement that is trying to equalize the sexes. Our Culture should not drive the interpretation of God's Word. Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
813 | baptism when and who | Acts 2:38 | BradK | 178455 | ||
Hello cashly, Might I ask where you get the definition that, "Baptism itsself (sic) means being taken or overshadowed now according to all the scripture ?" Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
814 | Spare the rod, spoil the child | Prov 13:24 | BradK | 178371 | ||
Hello look..., I believe you're referring to Prov. 13:24, "He who withholds his rod hates his son, But he who loves him disciplines him diligently." I think the better question to ask is: Where does scripture prohibit corporal punishment? The responsibility of discipline is clearly given to parents (Prov. 22:6). As a parent, I have used spanking as a final measure of discipline to get my children's attention, to let them know I mean business, and to order their behavior. My children were not abused or mistreated. There is a big distinction between discipline and abuse. Speaking the Truth in Love, Bradk |
||||||
815 | should females pastor | 1 Corinthians | BradK | 178370 | ||
Hello DOC2, This is an often-debated topic. The other half of the verse you quoted (1 Tim. 2:12) says, "...or to have authority over a man". This would seem to preclude a women from the role of Pastor. That does not mean that a woman cannot "minister"- as we're all called to do so- it just means not in a role of authority:-)To help frame the perspective, verse 13 gives the reason. "For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve." The Commentary Critical makes these notes on 1 Tim. 2:12-13: 12. usurp authority—“to lord it over the man” [Alford], literally, “to be an autocrat.” 13. For—reason of the precept; the original order of creation. Adam - first—before Eve, who was created for him (1 Cor. 11:8, 9). The Bible Knowledge Commentary offers this: 2:11-12. "In emphasizing godly conduct for women, Paul stressed, with Peter, “the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God’s sight” (1 Peter 3:4). The females in the congregation should receive instruction from the male leadership with quietness and full submission. They should not attempt to turn the tables by clamoring for the office of congregational teacher or by grasping for authority over men. Rather they should, literally, “be in quietness.” The word, hesychia (Gr.), translated “quietness” in 1 Timothy 2:11 and silent in verse 12, does not mean complete silence or no talking. It is clearly used elsewhere (Acts 22:2; 2 Thes. 3:12) to mean “settled down, undisturbed, not unruly.” A different word (sigao) means “to be silent, to say nothing” (cf. Luke 18:39; 1 Cor. 14:34). 2:13. Why is such a quiet and submissive spirit “of great worth in God’s sight”? (1 Peter 3:4) Because it manifests an understanding and acceptance of His design for the human race. As elsewhere (cf. 1 Cor. 11:8-10), Paul here based his view of male - female relationships in the church on the account of Creation recorded in Genesis 2. He made no reference whatever to the so-called “curse” of Genesis 3:16. Rather, the roles Paul spelled out here are a product of God’s fundamental design wherein Adam was formed first, then Eve (cf. Gen. 2:7-25). More is involved here than mere chronological priority. Paul saw the priority in time as indicative of the leadership given to the male, to which the woman, the “helper suitable for him” (Gen. 2:18), should respond." Speaking the Truth In Love, BradK |
||||||
816 | verse explains nonChrist knowing savior | 2 Cor 5:15 | BradK | 178337 | ||
Hello Paul, I have to disagree! Then God is not truly sovereign and He most certainly does not operate after the good pleasure of His will! So, God could not have used another means had He chosen to do so? Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
817 | verse explains nonChrist knowing savior | 2 Cor 5:15 | BradK | 178329 | ||
John, A big Amen! In Him, BradK |
||||||
818 | how do you speak in tongue | 1 Cor 12:11 | BradK | 178137 | ||
Hello glory2godnow, I think the better question to ask is: Why would one want to seek the gift of speaking in tongues? Remember 1 Cor. 12:28, "All do not have gifts of healings, do they? All do not speak with tongues, do they? All do not interpret, do they?" No is implied. I believe a pure focus on tongues misses the essential point! Regardless of of where one is with the "sign gifts" the greater is so often overlooked and even ignored in this discussion! Paul explains the more "excellent way" leading into the great treatise on LOVE in 1 Cor. 13! Then, in 13:1, he warns that, "If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal." The chapter then ends with verse 13, "and now abide faith, hope, love, these; but the greatest (greater) of these is LOVE. He then starts Chap. 14 with the imperative to "Pursue love..." I would ask: Do we have the gift of love? If not, how do we get IT? Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
819 | tongues? | Bible general Archive 3 | BradK | 178119 | ||
Lillie, My discussion on this matter will end with this: 1 Cor 12:30 "All do not have gifts of healings, do they? All do not speak with tongues, do they? All do not interpret, do they?" The implied answer is NO. Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
820 | Faith and Satification meaning??? | Heb 11:1 | BradK | 178084 | ||
Hello wisdom..., You said that, "Faith is : Word of God, Jesus, His Word, The Law..". Yet, Gal. 3:12 states: "However, the Law is not of faith; on the contrary, "HE WHO PRACTICES THEM SHALL LIVE BY THEM." Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 ] Next > Last [97] >> |