Results 401 - 420 of 787
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Radioman2 Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
401 | Active Homosexuals: Truly Christian? | Rom 1:21 | Radioman2 | 86964 | ||
"Every Scripture is God-breathed (given by His inspiration)..." 2 Timothy 3:16 AMPLIFIED Whenever a person does not believe the Bible--does not accept its divine inspiration and authority--then it is doubtful whether anything can be done to help that person, other than to pray for him/her. |
||||||
402 | Disease or Bad Personal Choice?? | Bible general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 86955 | ||
angellightboy: You have rendered us a service by your many posts. Each time you submit a post defending homosexuality with lame and unscriptural arguments, you provide an opportunity for others to reply with opposing arguments that are sound and scriptural. Maybe it's time for you to invoke your right to remain silent. At this point that may be the best thing you could do to cut your losses. |
||||||
403 | Heresy Hunting or Biblical Mandate? | Matt 24:11 | Radioman2 | 86884 | ||
Heresy Hunting or Biblical Mandate? POINT: Heresy Hunting In his article "Seven Tactics Of The Heresy Hunters" Word of Faith proponent and defender Troy J. Edwards writes: 'Conclusion: The heresy hunters have caused quite a bit of stir in the church. They have caused the very division and strife that they often accuse those who they attack. They present themselves as "defenders of the faith" and "contenders for the truth." Yet they use false accusations, innuendo, and other ungodly methods to contend for this "truth." They are defending the truth as they see it. They claim to be modern day Bereans. I'm afraid that they do not qualify:' ____________________ This is an excerpt from "Seven Tactics Of The Heresy Hunters" by Troy J. Edwards (http://www.tgm.org/heresyHunters.html) *********************************** COUNTERPOINT: Biblical Mandate (Perspective: CP0601 www.equip.org) 'Well, I’m sure you’ve all heard by now, that Christians are simply supposed to love one another and be united together in faith. Should we, therefore, regard as divisive those Christians who speak out against teachings in the church which are clearly unbiblical? 'I can tell you firsthand that it is no joy to be labeled a “heresy-hunter.” Yet, as Paul instructed Timothy, we are to zealously guard the purity of the message God has entrusted to us, and for good reason (1 Tim 1:18-19; 6:20; 2 Tim. 4:2-5). 'We read in such passages as Acts chapter 20, and 2 Peter chapter 2, that false teachers will arise, bringing with them destructive heresies, distorting the truth and destroying the faith of some. Moreover, it is clear that these teachers will come not only from outside the church, but also from within the body of Christ as well. 'It is therefore imperative that we test all things by Scripture (1 Thes. 5:21). It was in this spirit that the Bereans examined the words of the Apostle Paul, for which they were reckoned as noble in character (Acts 17:11). 'Indeed, not only can the Bible be used for preaching, teaching and encouragement, but, it is equally valuable for correcting and rebuking (2 Tim. 4:2). As a matter of fact, we as Christians are held accountable for proclaiming the whole will of God, warning others of false teachings. (Acts 20:26-28; cf. Ezek. 33:7-9; 34:1-10). 'This is not merely a suggestion, it is, in fact, a divine mandate. Of course if heresies are coming from teachers within the church, we ought to try and approach them first with our concerns. Should that fail to resolve the problem, we are told in Matthew 18 to expose their errors to the church; and if need be, divulge their names. (1 Tim. 1:20; 2 Tim. 2:17-18; 4:14-15; 3 John 9-10). 'We would, therefore, do well to heed Scripture’s explicit warnings to be on guard for false teachings (Rom. 16:17-18; cf. 1 Tim. 1:3-4; 4:16; 2 Tim. 1:13-14; Titus 1:9; 2:1), and to point them out to brothers and sisters in Christ (2 Tim. 4:6). At CRI, it is not our practice to make an issue out of peripheral matters on which honest Christians can differ. However, we are committed to exposing those who would compromise the essential doctrines of the historic Christian faith. Remember, controversy for the sake of controversy is sin. But controversy for the sake of the truth is a divine command.' ____________________ 'Exposing Doctrinal Errors: Heresy Hunting or Biblical Mandate? (www.equip.org/free/CP0601.pdf) |
||||||
404 | once saved always saved | John 10:28 | Radioman2 | 86861 | ||
What does it mean...? Heb 6:6 ____________________ "With full revelation they rejected the truth . . . They can never have more knowledge than they had when they rejected it." "There is no possibility of these verses referring to losing salvation. Many Scripture passages make unmistakably clear that salvation is eternal (compare John 10:27-29; Rom. 8:35,38,39; Phil. 1:6; 1 Pet. 1:4,5)." ____________________ Hebrews 6:6 "Fall away. "This Gr. term occurs only here in the NT. In the LXX, it was used to translate terms for severe unfaithfulness and apostasy. It is equivalent to the apostasy in [Heb] 3:12. The seriousness of this unfaithfulness is seen in the severe description of rejection within this verse: they re-crucify Christ and treat Him contemptuously (see also the strong descriptions in 10:29). "The 'impossible' of v. 4 goes with 'to renew them again to repentance.' Those who sinned against Christ in such a way had no hope of restoration or forgiveness. The reason is that they had rejected Him with full knowledge and conscious experience (as described in the features of vv. 5,6). With full revelation they rejected the truth, concluding the opposite of the truth about Christ, and thus had no hope of being saved. They can never have more knowledge than they had when they rejected it. They have concluded that Jesus should have been crucified, and they stand with his enemies. "There is no possibility of these verses referring to losing salvation. Many Scripture passages make unmistakably clear that salvation is eternal (compare John 10:27-29; Rom. 8:35,38,39; Phil. 1:6; 1 Pet. 1:4,5). Those who want to make this verse mean that believers can lose salvation will have to admit that it would then also say that one could never get it back again." (Note at Hebrews 6:6, MacArthur Study Bible, Word Publishing, 1997. For all Scripture references, see the MacArthur Study Bible.) |
||||||
405 | once saved always saved | John 10:28 | Radioman2 | 86859 | ||
What does it mean...? 6:5 Hebrews 6:5 "Tasted. "(See [previous] Note on v. 4.) This has an amazing correspondence to what was described in [Heb] 2:1-4. Like Simon Magus (Acts 8:9-24), these Hebrews had not yet been regenerated in spite of all they had heard and seen. They were repeating the sins of those who died in the wilderness after seeing the miracles performed through Moses and Aaron and hearing the voice of God at Sinai." (Note at Hebrews 6:5, MacArthur Study Bible, Word Publishing, 1997. For all Scripture references, see the MacArthur Study Bible.) |
||||||
406 | once saved always saved | John 10:28 | Radioman2 | 86858 | ||
"Once saved, always saved" may or not be true. It certainly is not stated in the Bible in these exact words. Moreover, I have never used those words in any of my postings, except to discuss the matter with someone else who used those words. My point: I neither claim nor disclaim the validity of that statement. My original point is that according to the plain language of Hebrews 6:4 in context it teaches that once salvation is lost -- if it is-, it would be impossible to renew that person again to repentance. Why? Because such a one has already rejected the only means of forgiveness and justification, which is the grace of God, God's one and only plan of salvation, the blood of Christ shed on the cross to atone for our sins. |
||||||
407 | once saved always saved | John 10:28 | Radioman2 | 86857 | ||
Heb 6:4-6 What does it mean...? Hebrews 6:4 "Enlightened. "They had received instruction in biblical truth which was accompanied by intellectual perception. Understanding the gospel is not the equivalent of regeneration. In John 1:9 it is clear that enlightening is not the equivalent of salvation. "Tasted the heavenly gift. "Tasting in the firurative sense in the NT refers to consciously experiencing someting. The experience might be momentary or continuing. Christ's 'tasting' of death was obviously momentary and not continuing or permanent. All men experience the goodness of God, but that does not mean they are all saved. Many Jews, during the Lord's earthly ministry experienced the blessings from heaven He brought -- in healings and deliverance from demons, as well as eating the food He created miraculously. Whether the gift refers to Christ or to the Holy Spirit, experiencing either one was not the equivalent of salvation. "Partakers of the Holy Spirit. "Even though the concept of partaking is used in Heb 3:1; 3:14; and 12:8 of a relationship which believers have, the context must be the final determining factor. This context in vv. 4-6 seems to preclude a reference to true believers. It could be a reference to their participation, as noted above, in the miraculous ministry of Jesus who was empowered by the Spirit or in the convicting ministry of the Holy Spirit which obviously can be resisted without experiencing salvation." (Note at Hebrews 6:4, MacArthur Study Bible, Word Publishing, 1997. For all Scripture references, see the MacArthur Study Bible.) |
||||||
408 | once saved always saved | John 10:28 | Radioman2 | 86856 | ||
Halting short of faith in Christ. Hebrews 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, "impossible "Hebrews 6:4-8 presents the case of Jewish professed believers who halt short of faith in Christ after advancing to the very threshold of salvation, even "going along with" the Holy Spirit in His work of enlightenment and conviction (John 16:8-10). It is not said that they had faith. This supposed person is like the spies at Kadesh-barnea (Deuteronomy 1:19-26) who saw the land and had the very fruit of it in their hands, and yet turned back. "partakers (Greek - iJlavskomai ," going along with)." Bibliography Information Scofield, C.I. "Scofield Reference Notes on Hebrews 6". "Scofield Reference Notes (1917 Edition)". http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/ScofieldReferenceNotes/ |
||||||
409 | Repost of ID# 86566 by Stokey | John 9:24 | Radioman2 | 86818 | ||
. | ||||||
410 | Repost of ID# 56104 by stokeyhk | John 9:24 | Radioman2 | 86817 | ||
. | ||||||
411 | Repost of ID# 55729 by stokeyhk | John 9:24 | Radioman2 | 86816 | ||
. | ||||||
412 | Can one accept Christ but not the Bible? | Luke 24:27 | Radioman2 | 86782 | ||
Mommapbs: Q: 'Why was this "restricted?"' A: I don't know. Radioman2 |
||||||
413 | Gender?? | Deut 6:4 | Radioman2 | 86755 | ||
What Jesus told the Sadducees is: "For in the RESURRECTION they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven." Matthew 22:30 NASB (Emphasis added.) Gracefull: The only reason I quote this verse is that I myself was always forgetting the exact wording of it. I couldn't remember whether it was "in heaven they neither marry" or "in the kingdom of God..." Just yesterday I looked it up to be sure and wrote the verse in a notebook. So please don't take my post as being negative or critical. That is not my intention. Grace and peace, Radioman2 AMPLIFIED Matthew 22:30 For in the resurrected state neither do [men] marry nor are [women] given in marriage, but they are like the angels in heaven. |
||||||
414 | Can one accept Christ but not the Bible? | Luke 24:27 | Radioman2 | 86732 | ||
. | ||||||
415 | Can one accept Christ but not the Bible? | Luke 24:27 | Radioman2 | 86730 | ||
Can one be a skeptic and a believer at the same time? Can an individual accept the Son of God but reject the written Word of God? Edb, Emmaus, Hank, Justme, Mommapbs, Morant61, Reformer Joe and anyone else who wishes to reply: I have a question for you. I sincerely would like to know: Here on the forum we often read postings written by people who claim to be Christians, who profess faith in Christ for salvation. Then they go on to say they have many strong doubts about the Bible -- its inspiration, authority and reliability in the various English translations. Often they cite verses by Paul that they question -- ones they don't agree with or that anger them. Or they may cite passages in Genesis that they have a hard time accepting as inspired, accurate and literal. Some do not trust any English translation, as if all were perverted versions produced as a result of some conspiracy to deceive. You get the picture. My question is: Is it likely that the person who continues to reject part(s) of the Bible, to question the inspiration or authority of the Bible, to have no confidence in any English translation, etc. -- is it likely that such a person is really a Christian? Especially if this doubt and mistrust of the Bible continues for years and years with no change, no growth, and no resolution? (In my question I am not suggesting that we pick certain individuals by name and judge whether they are saved.) My question is a general one. In short, people who have a low view of the Bible and who question every other verse they read -- how likely is it that they have really come to know Christ, with the result that they are saved and indwelt by the Holy Spirit? If one's faith in the written Word is so uncertain, precarious and fragile and remains that way for years and years, is it likely that this person truly believes that Jesus is everything the Bible says he is? Is it likely that their salvation is real? Again, this is not to judge any given individual(s) as to their salvation. But, it just seems a contradiction to me that although what we know of God and Christ is contained in the Bible, there are people who have little or no trust in the written Word of God and still claim to be Christians. Is this possible, impossible, the normal Christian experience, abnormal or what? What do you all think? Why do you believe what you do regarding this question? Can you give scripture and sound reasoning to back up your view of this matter? Sincerely, Radioman2 |
||||||
416 | Repost of ID# 86566 by Stokey | John 9:24 | Radioman2 | 86713 | ||
[Repost of ID# 86566 by Stokey. What happens to dead? Answer Bible general Stokey Thu 06/12/03, 10:54pm] Comparing Psalm 16:10 and footnote with Acts 2:31, we see that "Sheol," or the grave is the equivalent of "Hades." See Luke 16:23, footnote, NIV. What is the condition of people in Sheol or Hades? Ecclesiastes 9:5, 6, 10 answers: They "know nothing." Their love, hate and jealousy have "vanished." There is no "working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom." (Compare Job 3:11-19; 14:10-15; Psalm 104:29; John 11:11-14, 23-25.) Luke 16:13-31 is a parable as verse 26 shows. Compare verse 31 with John 11:47-53; 12:10, 11. Isaiah 14 is talking about the death of the Babylonian world empire; compare verses 18-20. Isaiah 66:24 is merely referring to "dead bodies" burning. Jesus contrasted "hell" with "life" in Mark 9:45-48. Incidently, in these verses, "hell" is the translation of the Greek "geenna," not "hades." "Gehenna" or the "lake of fire" refers to "the second death." (Revelation 20:10, 14) |
||||||
417 | Repost of ID# 56104 by stokeyhk | John 9:24 | Radioman2 | 86712 | ||
[Repost of ID# 56104 by stokeyhk. How ya doing, Steve. You seem to be the ... stokeyhk Sat 07/27/02, 3:19am] How ya doing, Steve. You seem to be the only one who wants to talk to me now! You know, those modern translations that you use'll be the death of you. What is ESV anyway? 1) As you may know, the Greek word rendered worship is "proskyneo." Strong says this word means: "to fawn or crouch to, i.e. (lit. or fig.) prostrate oneself in homage (do reverence to, adore)." a) "Jesus said to him: 'Go away, Satan! For it is written, "It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service."'" b) Jesus said: "The true worshipers will worship the Father with spirit and truth, for, indeed, the Father is looking for suchlike ones to worship him." From these two verses, we can see that Jesus taught us to render exclusive worship to his Father. "Proskyneo" is rendered as "worship," but not exclusively so. For example: the NIV renders it "fall down" in Revelation 3:9, and "fell on his knees before him" in Matthew 18:26. Why? Context! Whereas the KJV renders them as "worship" and "worshipped." What about in the case of Jesus? Should it be rendered as "worship" or as "fall down"? Consider Mark 15:19. Here the KJV renders it as "worshipped" regarding what the soldiers did to Jesus. However, the NIV renders it as "falling on their knees, they paid homage to him." Why? Context again! They clearly did not view Jesus as God or as a deity. As "bow before" (AT), 'pay homage' (NEB) and 'do obeisence' (NWT) are in harmony with the Greek, with Jesus' comments at Matthew 4:10 and John 4:23, and the angels comments at Revelation 22:9, these individuals who 'performed proskyneo' to Jesus were doing so because they recognized Jesus as God's representative and as "the Son of God." (Matthew 14:32, 33) c) It was angels, not humans, who, as the New English Bible says, 'paid homage' to Jesus in Hebrews 1:6. 2) As you rightly quoted, Isaiah said he heard Jehovah speak these words: "Whom shall I [Jehovah] send, and who will go for us [Jehovah and Jesus, John 12:39-41]?" So Isaiah heard Jehovah say, "us." Isaiah also "got to see [in vision, Exodus 33:20] Jehovah." Was John teaching that the Jehovah Isaiah saw was in fact the prehuman Jesus? Consider two things: a) John 12:38 calls Jesus "the arm of Jehovah." b) John 12:40 applies Isaiah 6:10 to Jesus showing that he was sent by Jehovah to do a preaching work. (Isaiah 61:1; Luke 4:16-21) The "glory" that Isaiah saw was, as John 1:14 says, "the glory as of the only begotten of the Father." (Genesis 1:26; Proverbs 8:30, 31) 3) Rather than Jesus being granted "life in himself" "from eternity," Isaiah 9:6 says Jesus would be called "Everlasting Father [life-giver] after he 'was born as a child' and glorified. (John 5:26, 27; 17:2) Thus being granted to have "life in himself" to eternity based on his 'ransom as the Son of man.' (Matthew 20:28) 4) Revelation 21:2 says: "I saw the Holy City, the New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God." This, then, is focusing on the earth and "men." (Verse 3) 5) Jesus said the Queen of the South "came from the ends of the earth to listen to Solomon's wisdom." Seems like Jesus didn't view him as losing sight of anything. The apostles' quotations from the Proverbs show this, too. The expression "under the sun" refers to a life excluding God's purpose which is indeed "meaningless." (Ecclesiastes 1:2, 3) Solomon was focusing on planet earth, whereas Peter was focusing on "ungodly men." (2 Peter 3:5-7, 10, 12, 13) Stokey |
||||||
418 | Repost of ID# 55729 by stokeyhk | John 9:24 | Radioman2 | 86711 | ||
[Repost of ID# 55729 by stokeyhk. "The teaching that Michael, the archangel... stokeyhk Wed 07/24/02, 10:40am"] The teaching that Michael, the archangel is Jesus Christ before he came to earth and since his return to heaven is not exclusive to Jehovah's Witnesses. The name of Michael is found in Daniel 10:13, 21; 12:1; Jude 9; Revelation 12:7. The term "the archangel" is found in 1 Thessalonians 4:16 (NIV) and Jude 9. Daniel 10:13 says: "Michael, one of the chief princes." Daniel 10:21 says: "Michael, your [Daniel's] prince." Daniel 12:1 says: "Michael, the great prince who protects your [Daniel's] people." Jude 9 says: "Michael the archangel." Revelation 12:7 says: "Michael and his angels." Michael means "Who is like God?" This points to the fact that Jehovah God is without like, or equal, and that Michael is the one who takes the lead in upholding Jehovah's sovereignty and destroying God's enemies. At 1 Thessalonians 4:16 (NIV), the command of Jesus for the resurrection to begin is described as "the voice of the archangel," and Jude 9 says the archangel is Michael. If the designation "archangel" applied, not to Jesus, but to other angels, then the reference to "the voice of the archangel" would be describing a voice of lesser authority than that of the Son of God. Notice the term is never plural in the Bible, thus implying that there is only one: "THE archangel." Revelation 12:7-12 describes "Michael and his angels" defeating Satan and his angels in connection with kingly authority being conferred on Christ. (2 Thessalonians 1:7) Jesus is the one who leads the armies in heaven to destroy the nations of the world. Jesus is the one who will 'crush Satan's head' also. (Genesis 3:15; Galatians 3:16) Daniel 12:1 associates the 'standing up of Michael' to act with authority with an unprecedented "time of distress" during "the time of the end." (Daniel 11:2-4, 7, 16b, 20, 21, 40) This fits the experience of the nations in Revelation 19:11-16 and Matthew 24:21. So the evidence indicates that the Son of God was known as Michael before he came to the earth and is known also by that name since his return to heaven where he resides as the glorified spirit Son of God. Stokey. |
||||||
419 | Who did Cain marry to have children? | Genesis | Radioman2 | 86641 | ||
"Angels neither marry nor are given in marriage (Mt 22:30), so that this verse hardly applies to them." - - - - - - - - - - The Nephilim in the Bible are "people of great size and strength. The Hebrew word means 'fallen ones.' In men's eyes they were the 'mighty men...of old, men of renown,' but in God's eyes they were sinners ('fallen ones') ripe for judgment." (Zondervan NASB Study Bile, p. 12) "Gen 6:4 Nephilim. From a root meaning 'to fall'; i.e., to fall upon others because they were men of strength (only other use of this Hebrew word is in Num 13:33) Evidently they were in the earth before the marriages of Gen 6:2, and were not the offspring of those marriages from which came the *mighty* men (military men) and *men of renown * (of wealth or power)." (p. 16, Ryrie Study Bible, Moody Press, 1976, 1978) "Gen 6:1-4 *sons of God.* The 'sons of God' may mean God's created, supernatural beings, who were no longer godly in character (6.3). Some commentators believe, however, that this expression refers to the 'godly line' of Seth and that 'daughters of humans' (v. 4 in the NRSV) refer to women from the line of Cain. Most likely the phrase refers to those descendants of Seth who trusted in the Lord but whose children intermarried with women descended from Cain. Those marriages were not with angels then, but between godly and ungodly human families. Angels neither marry nor are given in marriage (Mt 22:30), so that this verse hardly applies to them. ... *Nephilim* are strong, violent, tyrannous men of great wickedness. It may well be that the explanation of these verses has been lost to us." (NRSV Harper Study Bible, Harold Lindsell, Ph.D., D.D., Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1991) |
||||||
420 | Yeshua, [which means 'ADONAI saves,'] | Matt 1:21 | Radioman2 | 86627 | ||
Cwade: Q: "What is the reason for this difference in spelling?" A: I don't know. :-( Radioman2 |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ] Next > Last [40] >> |