Results 1701 - 1720 of 1928
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Reformer Joe Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1701 | Please help me to understand these verse | 2 Thess 2:13 | Reformer Joe | 18327 | ||
Tom: Thanks for your reply. It was the original poster who cited this verse, and I by no means hold this single verse to be ironclad evidence in itself of predestination. I do hold to the Reformed view of election, though, based on the whole counsel of God. Feel free to examine my posts on this forum and respond to them, since this topic has been addressed at length in many many threads. Thanks! --Joe! |
||||||
1702 | Christian Primer Terms? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 18314 | ||
Kalos: You wrote: "To repent ACTUALLY means *to change the way you think and act.* (It does NOT mean merely to feel badly about one's sins. Nor does it mean confession by itself. As a condition for salvation, repentance 'is a false addition to faith when understood as a *prerequisite,* requiring the cleansing of the life [first] in order to be saved' (Dr. Charles C. Ryrie, Ryrie Study Bible, Moody Press, 1978)." I found it interesting that you apporvingly quoted Ryrie's stance on what repentance is when you seem to stand with MacArthur and so many others who disagree with this view. The word "metanoia" (repentance) literally means "a change in thinking." I disagree that repentance itself is the change in actions; it is a change in attitude toward sin that will inevitably RESULT in a change of actions. I hold that repentance is a gift of God that accompanies saving faith. Ryrie and Zane Hodges and others actually hold to a very weak view of repentance which doesn't necessarily mean any change of life at all. Most historically have held that repentance is a component of all true conversion. In Eastern Europe and Russia and other places in the world, they will actually use the term "repent" to describe their conversion. Rather than saying, "I was saved at age 30," Christians in this part of the world will say "I repented at age 30." Ryrie and Hodges hold that people who are saved can go through their entire lives and not show the marks of true salvation. For Ryrie, the biblical idea of repentence is not only not a prerequisite; it isn't truly necessary at all! And, of course, that denies several Scriptures which emphatically state that repentance is a part of saving faith and that the Christian will exhibit a markedly different life than the unregenerate: Jeremiah 8:6 Ezekiel 18:30 Matthew 3:2-11; 11:21; 12:41 Mark 1:15 Luke 13:1-5; 15:1-10; 24:47 Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31 (who GRANTS repentance?); 11:18; 26:20 Romans 2:4-5 2 Corinthians 7:9-10; 12:21 2 Timothy 2:25 2 Peter 3:9 I have even heard people in the so-called "free-grace" vein go so far as to say that murderers can go on murdering, homosexuals can go on practicing homosexuality, thieves can go on stealing (and I would assume that cannibals could even go on eating), all without repentance and still be heaven bound because they have professed Jesus as their SAVIOR. What do Jesus and the apostles say? "So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit." Matthew 7:17-18 "Either make the tree good and its fruit good, or make the tree bad and its fruit bad; for the tree is known by its fruit." Matthew 12:33 "Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God." --1 Corinthians 6:9-10 "Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God." --Galatians 5:19-21 "Do not love the world nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world. The world is passing away, and also its lusts; but the one who does the will of God lives forever." 1 John 2:15-17 "Little children, make sure no one deceives you; the one who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous; the one who practices sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning. The Son of God appeared for this purpose, to destroy the works of the devil. No one who is born of God practices sin, because His seed abides in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. By this the children of God and the children of the devil are obvious: anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor the one who does not love his brother." --1 John 3:7-10 Sorry to belabor the point, but here inthe United States in particular is this evil notion that repentance and saving faith are mutually exclusive concepts. Repentance is not a work any more than intellectual belief in the facts of the Gospel is; hoever, repentance is inextricably linked to true, saving faith and will produce good fruit and the decrease of sin in the believer. --Joe! |
||||||
1703 | Lionstrong, who is the world? | Eph 3:6 | Reformer Joe | 18254 | ||
Bill: 1. I am sure that Lionstrong will provide his answer here, or else he will direct you to the same thread that I did, where you will find a whole host of Bible verses by me and Lionstrong which support the biblical view of election. My response does not prevent him from answering. I merely wanted people such as yourself to follow the guidelines of this forum to "look before asking." This is a public bulletin board, not a medium for private communication. That is what e-mail is for. 2. As long as you make assertions which I hold to be unbiblical, I will continue to correct you with SCRIPTURE, as I did recently in another thread with you. Your response to SCRIPTURE there, however, was to basically say "I am done talking." How is that "considering"? 3. I must respect the whole counsel of God more than your perceived right to write anything that you want without a response from those who will disagree with you. --Joe! |
||||||
1704 | Doctrine of Election, Yes or No? | Eph 3:6 | Reformer Joe | 18252 | ||
Bill: I would recommend that you do a word study in the New Testament of the words "choose," "chosen," "predestined" and "elect." See who they are talking about, who they are not talking about, and realize that Calvinism does NOT state that God says "no" to people who place their faith in Christ alone. --Joe! |
||||||
1705 | Christian Primer Terms? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 18227 | ||
Charis: Thanks for sharing about the work habits of the Japanese. I had never even thought of that as an avenue for communicating God's truth. So many things come into play there for the Christian to address. Here are some that I can think of right off hand: 1. Gaining the whole world, and yet losing your soul (Matthew 16:26; Mark 8:36) 2. Biblical admonitions of raising one's child (too many references there to cite) 3. Christian marriage (1 Peter 3; Ephesians 5) 4. Counting all things as loss for the sake of Christ (Philippians 3). I would suspect that this would be quite a powerful one, since Saul was on the fact track to executive status when he met his Maker on the road to Damascus :) 5. Ecclesiastes. Need I say more? :) 6. And, of course, bringing it all back to God's holiness, our sin, judgment, and the Cross... You know without a doubt that the Bible stands completely contrary to the lifestyle of the Japanese middle class (in a different way than it does in the U.S., in many respects). What an opportunity you have to advocate the Christian "counterculture" there! What a marked difference those who are following Christ will make there! Perhaps a very effective approach would not be to try and find in-roads into the culture (blending Christianity ino the culture), but rather stressing it as a way of life completely contrary to the lifestyle of the Japanese world. This is certainly not going to cause those who will continue to love the world to embrace Christianity, but that is the idea, isn't it? First John in living, breathing, 3-D. And, as you can undoubtedly attest, a task for which only the Holy Spirit is equal... Thanks for sharing! --Joe! "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. 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.'" --Romans 1:16-17 |
||||||
1706 | COULD A BELIEVER LOSE THEIR SALVATION? | Hebrews | Reformer Joe | 18215 | ||
It does make a pretty design, though.... --Joe! |
||||||
1707 | Christian Primer Terms? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 18211 | ||
Charis: Of course, I don't know your situation intimately, but have you considered that the lack of fruit may not be from a poor EXPLANATION of theology, but rather the way it is PROCLAIMED? What are the "tried and true" methods that you mention in your post that have been ineffective in stemming the decline in church membership? One thing I can tell you from the experiences I have here is that true revival is not likely to result from the "new wave of programs, etc." One thing that you know will work is the proclamation of God's Word (Romans 1:16-17). The proclamation of the Gospel, whether there are any beels, whistles, dramas, or whatever, is the ONLY thing that will be the means of convicting the Japanese of their sinfulness before a holy God and direct them to Jesus Christ as the only mediator between them and that God. I guess that rather than go on, I would like a better perspective of your situation. What do the Christian churches do to get the Word out to the Japanese, "to hit them where they live," so to speak? As Augustine put it, "Our souls are restless until they find their rest in Thee." No matter how much they suppress the truth, their souls are indeed restless, because they were created for relationship with God. I guess what I am wanting to learn in order to expand my knowledge of the situation is what have been the failed efforts in your experience? How would such traditional methods such as street preaching without "gimmicks" work? Tracts which speak of God's holiness and our sinfulness and need of repentance? What is the attitude of those who are going to church as far as proclaiming the Gospel to those in their spheres of influence. Revival will come when and where the Holy Spirit brings it about. The possibility exists that you may be doing everything right and they are rejecting the Gospel. However, the preaching of God's Word is the primary means that God uses to draw the elect to Himself. You are right that every nation has it's own situation in the particulars. But as human beings, we at the core all have the same situation. The obstacles may manifest themselves in different ways, but at the heart is the depravity of man, which only the regeneration by the Holy Spirit can overcome. Knowing the particulars in Japan's culture, how can you most effectively strike at the heart of their secularism and unbelief? Take a cue from Paul in Acts 17. In the meantime, I would love to know some of the particulars myself, so please share some specifics of your struggles so that we can learn more about the struggles of the church in Japan and how to pray effectively for you. --Joe! |
||||||
1708 | Possible Lockman Forum Improvements #2 | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 18193 | ||
Ed: No offense taken at the misreading. It happens! I certainly didn't think there was any malice there. You are also correct at the dangers of individuals doing the "maverick" interpretations with their Bibles. When the Protestant Reformation gave the Bible back to the laity, the Reformers certainly didn't consider that it would be a great idea for everyone to run off and figure everything out for themselves. God gave us the church (the church universal and invisible) so that TOGETHER we can correctly come to correct interpretations of the Bible. The notion of "private interpretation" simply meant that we do not rely on a religious hierarchy to tell us what God is saying to us. That is one of the great things about this forum. Despite the fact that we often rub each other the wrong way and will not come to a complete consensus on major (yet not salvific) issues, together with our different educational levels and perspectives and backgrounds we are learning about each other and from each other. Ever since God started saving Gentiles, there has been a lack of complete agreement on issues. Some of them, like the Judaizers, fell under the category of heresy. Others, like whether to eat this or that, did not place someone outside the brotherhood of Christ. In any case, our great God in his sovereign grace has preserved the bride of Christ despite our misunderstandings and imperfections and differences of opinion. This is who we are as a church. What better picture to paint for the newcomer to the forum than that one? --Joe! P.S. I do long for the time when we will stand together, glorified, and you all see things my way! :) |
||||||
1709 | How do we know the Bible is the truth? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 18168 | ||
My point exactly! --Joe! |
||||||
1710 | How do we know the Bible is the truth? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 18153 | ||
Lionstrong: I wasn't arguing that it is not VALID to point out that Scripture says that it is true. My argument was that a document's claim to be true is not a sufficient test of that document's truth. --Joe! |
||||||
1711 | How do we know the Bible is the truth? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 18152 | ||
Steve: The first page of the Book of Mormon contains a "testimony of three witnesses" and a "testimony of eight witnesses" which claim that they themselves saw the plates from heaven from which Joseph Smith allegedly translated the Book of Mormon. In addition, the text itself makes the claim that what is written there is true. It is standard operating procedure for Mormon missionaries to ask potential converts to pray over the Book of Mormon to be convinced of its truth based on the following verse: "And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost." --Moroni 10:4 Another LDS document considered to be inerrant and inspired Scripture is Doctrine and Covenants, which states: "And again, I command thee that thou shalt not covet thine own property, but impart it freely to the printing of the Book of Mormon, which contains the truth and the word of God" --Doctrine and Covenants 19:26 Both of these claim that the Book of Mormon is true. I don't really understand how you seem to say that such a claim would be a test for truth anyway. If I wrote a book saying I created the universe and included the phrase, "all that is written here is truth," would that make it so? That was the original intent of my question. --Joe! P.S. Am I the first person to quote cult scripture here? There should be something like that on the Statistics page! :) |
||||||
1712 | How do we know the Bible is the truth? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 18136 | ||
It makes sense to me. You were not able to accept/realize the truth of the Bible until you were born again. Those who are not Christians suppress the truth in unrighteousness (Romans 1:18). However, the Bible itself is truth even if 100 percent of humanity were to deny its truth. --Joe! |
||||||
1713 | How do we know the Bible is the truth? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 18133 | ||
Steve: The Book of Mormon also says that it is true. Is it? --Joe! |
||||||
1714 | Possible Lockman Forum Improvements #2 | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 18090 | ||
Civility and FREE WILL?!? Here we go again... :) --Joe! |
||||||
1715 | Possible Lockman Forum Improvements #2 | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 18089 | ||
Ed: I think that there are very few seekers that frequent this virtual establishment. There is not going to be a consensus of opinion, no matter what. I have even been called an arrogant know-it-all here for holding to such radical ideas as the idea that God is uncreated and the sufficiency of Scripture to reveal God to humanity and justification by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. I think you misunderstood the rest of my post. I was actually agreeing with you that a "neutral summation" is impossible. I also am not keen on "agreeing to disagree," as you yourself can personally attest. There does come a time when a debate is exhausted, but is one person's annoyance the basis for terminating discussion? I hold that this forum is not primarily evangelical in nature, but exists primarioly to spur one another on...to challenge and edify fellow believers. What I was saying is that the inability to convince one another of our opinion should not be a deterrent to presenting ones view and (here's the key:) SUPPORTING IT WITH SCRIPTURE. If I had a dime for every time a person cried "foul" or attacked my motives or character when I asked a simple rebuttal question based on a Scripture passage, I could finance my own Bible translation! --Joe! |
||||||
1716 | Possible Lockman Forum Improvements #2 | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 18065 | ||
I suppose my question would be, What is a neutral perspective? Once you start getting beyond the very basics of the Christian faith, we delve into areas that are incredibly shaped by one's theological perspective. Whether one is asking how can a loving, all-powerful God permit the terrorist attacks in New York City; or how (and even IF) he can be assured of his salvation, different traditions within Christianity will come into play. The answers will conflict at times. Should we all "agree to disagree," and in essence say that the answers do not really matter? Debate is something that has characterized the church from its very beginning. Without wrangling at the Council of Jerusalem recorded in the book of Acts, where would the Gentile believers be today? What about the Council of Nicaea in the fourth century, in which the historic Christian understanding of the Trinity was codified? Reasoned debate and discussion has led to most of the beliefs we cherish (or should cherish) today as followers of Christ. To avoid debate is to constantly wade in the shallow end of the pool, theologically speaking. I agree that repetition is not necessary in written discussion or debate, except in the case of summary or to particularly emphasize a point. However, to shun debate in order to falsely present a consensus on all issues is nothing less than deception. We debate, sometimes vigorously, not necessarily because we are contentious beings, but rather because the issues on this forum do bear a lot of importance. The online debate between Tim Moran and myself, for example (even though I think he is as wrong as he thinks I am), has served both to help me clarify my own thinking and understand the perspectives of others. My biggest complaint regarding debate is the way that soem conduct it. We are not engaged in a presentation of opinions or of theology with no clear Biblical basis. What irks me is that in debate here we see such a scarcity of actual references to the Word of God. I see a lot of "I believe this" or "I grew up under pastors who teach this" with little or no Scriptural support. When the debate turns to the Bible, often one of the debaters turns to ad hominem attacks rather than critiques of the theological perspective being put forward. If you do not like rigorous, in-depth discussion of the more profound questions raised here, that is fine. One is not forced to read the threads on here. However, unless the discussion is clearly not Bible-related or is obscene or inappropriate in some manner, let's all please realize that on unmoderated forums such as this, what we see here is par for the course. Feel free to debate with me on my point of view. My skin is thick enough to take it! :) --Joe! |
||||||
1717 | Can we agree? | Hebrews | Reformer Joe | 18027 | ||
Kelkat: It is called discernment. All Christians are called to distinguish between true and false teachings using the word of God. The people of Berea did it (Acts 17:11). Paul himself spoke out against false teachings to the Galatians. If Paul is any kind of model for Christian conduct, then it is not out of line for us to question other human beings regarding sound doctrine. Or was Paul wrong to speak up against the Judaizers or John wrong to speak out against the Gnostics? Both groups claimed to be Christian, after all. Paul also told Timothy to watch his doctrine closely: "Pay close attention to yourself and to your teaching; persevere in these things, for as you do this you will ensure salvation both for yourself and for those who hear you." --1 Timothy 4:16 Therefore, it is possible for believers in the pulpit to be wrong in their teaching. Should we then automatically accept all that they say? It is not fault-finding; it is pursuit of God's truth. "As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming" --Ephesians 4:14 --Joe! |
||||||
1718 | Joe, what is Paul and Hebrews 'the Law'? | Heb 6:4 | Reformer Joe | 17995 | ||
Bill: This is a Bible study forum, and we are discussing the Bible. Why are you wanting to take this privately? I have asked you two questions, both based on James 2. The first one had to do with Abraham's faith being demonstrated through his works. The second one has to do with this verse: "But someone may well say, 'You have faith and I have works; show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works.'" --James 2:18 Notice that James does not say "Christ performing God's works through me." He says MY works. Paul says the same thing in Philippians 2: "So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure." --Philippians 2:12-13 Yes, God is working in me, conforming me to the image of Christ, but in a very real sense I am "working out my salvation" (not working FOR it, mind you). If it is simply a matter of "letting Christ woirk through us," why does Paul give us such specific commands? "Therefore, laying aside falsehood, SPEAK TRUTH EACH ONE of you WITH HIS NEIGHBOR, for we are members of one another. BE ANGRY, AND yet DO NOT SIN; do not let the sun go down on your anger, and do not give the devil an opportunity. He who steals must steal no longer; but rather he must labor, performing with his own hands what is good, so that he will have something to share with one who has need. Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only such a word as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, so that it will give grace to those who hear." --Ephesians 4:25-29 "For you were called to freedom, brethren; only do not turn your freedom into an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another." --Galatians 5:13 "But have nothing to do with worldly fables fit only for old women. On the other hand, discipline yourself for the purpose of godliness... For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers." --1 Timothy 4:7,10 "Conduct yourselves with wisdom toward outsiders, making the most of the opportunity." --Colossians 4:5 "Now flee from youthful lusts and pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace, with those who call on the Lord from a pure heart." --2 Timothy 2:22 Nowhere do we find that it is "Christ doing these things through us." Striving, pursuit, work, labor, service, discipline are all the things which the believer engages in. It is through the power of the Holy Spirit indwelling us that we are given the power to please God (Romans 8:7-9), but it is most definitely we who are active in the deeds of righteousness, thanks to God's sanctifying work in our hearts and our wills. Christ already knows the specifics on how to please the Father. If it were as simple as "letting Christ work through us," we would not need the COMMANDMENTS we find all throughout the epistles. And, personally, I find the idea abhorrent that we as human beings "let" the sovereign Lord of the universe do anything. Who is in charge here, anyway? --Joe! |
||||||
1719 | Whatever happened to John 17:21? | Heb 6:4 | Reformer Joe | 17992 | ||
It was to be humorous. Who says that it loses something in posts? I do hope you see the point I was trying to make, however, regarding labels. Abandoning the denominational labels does nothing to take away the diffrences in our theology. --Joe! |
||||||
1720 | Joe, what is Paul and Hebrews 'the Law'? | Heb 6:4 | Reformer Joe | 17965 | ||
Bill: You wrote: "The key phrase here is not 'until heaven and earth pass away,' the key phrase is 'until all (of the Law) is accomplished.' And Christ did that." Please explain why Christ included the phrase. What does it mean, "until heaven and earth pass away" in the context of what he is saying? You also wrote: "True, God's moral requirements existed before the Mosaic Law. Why? Because they are a reflection of who He is." I wouldn't say that is WHY they exist, even though what you say is true. My question remains: if they did indeed exist apart from the covenant with Israel, why do you insist that those requirements no longer have any meaning for us (like the ceremonial and sacrificial Law of Moses)? It is precisely because the moral law of God existed prior to and beyong the Law of Moses that I hold that God never intended for us to toss out the moral commandments. I also noticed that you didn't comment on Abraham. I would be interested on your thoughts on what I wrote. You wrote: "Faith in Christ alone is what pleases God. Anything else is works." That does not hold up in the New Testament. Our faith enables us to please God. Our faith in Christ is the instrument of our justification. So now that I am a believer, works do not matter at all? I think there are about a dozen epistles that would challenge that view. If all that is required is a "works-less" faith, why does Paul criticize the licentiousness of the Corinthians? What do you make of James 2? God wants faith, but a true, saving faith produces works which are pleasing to God. They are also the mark of a true believer, and Paul tells us to expel those false brethren whose works do not demonstrate a saving faith. How is your faith demonstrated, Bill? Apart from works? Is that a saving faith or a dead one? If it is demonstrated in works, what works are those? The ones that reflect the moral commandments of God? Or something else? --Joe! |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 ] Next > Last [97] >> |