Results 481 - 500 of 1928
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Reformer Joe Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
481 | How do I make sense of the context? | Acts 8:13 | Reformer Joe | 69792 | ||
Romans 3:25 is referring to sins committed before Jesus went to the cross, not the sins we committed before receiving Christ. Hosea 4:6 addresses the totality of Israel as a covenant people, not individuals. Because there was wholesale covenant breaking, God is announcing judgment upon them in the form of invasion and scattering of the people of Israel. Both those who were keeping the covenant (such as the prophets themselves) and the majority who weren't were caught up in this judgment of the sins of the people, so eternal destiny is not primarily in view here. In addition, Hosea 14 announces God's plan to not forsake Israel forever. Where does it say that future sins are forgiven? Places like this: "By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins; but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, SAT DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD, waiting from that time onward UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE A FOOTSTOOL FOR HIS FEET. For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified." --Hebrews 10:10-14 Also see Romans 8:28-39 (for what has God predestined the Christian?), Colossians 1:13-14 (we have been transferred BY GOD from one kingdom to another), and Hebrews 9:26-28. The language of all of these points out that Christ has paid in full the debt of sin for His people, and continues to intercede for us before the Father. You wrote: "Doesn't a sin have to be repented of in order for it to be forgiven?" It is God who brings about the repentance, but the righteousness which gets believers into heaven is Christ's, not ours. We are not going to get into heaven because we have constantly "cleaned our slate," but because Christ already lived the perfect life in our place and died in our place. "Future sins don't even exist yet. How can something that doesn't exist be forgiven?" Well, since Jesus Christ died 2000 years ago, none of my sins existed at the time. When the Bible was written saying Jesus has already paid the price for sin, none of my sins existed yet. However, they were all foreknown by an omniscient God, and therefore the efficacy of Christ's atonement is not limited to a particular place and time, but is applied to God's people from the foundation of the world to the end of time. --Joe! |
||||||
482 | I have a related question for anyone... | Acts 8:13 | Reformer Joe | 69790 | ||
Yeah, that's what I was trying to say, but ol' Matt Henry had to go say it a whole lot better... --Joe! |
||||||
483 | I have a related question for anyone... | Acts 8:13 | Reformer Joe | 69781 | ||
"I have never found the position that Hebrews is warning against something that can't really happen, very convincing!" Neither have I. I just say that it cannot happen to the elect, just to those who for a time seem to be so from their participation in the visible church. Apostasy is a very real thing, but I hold that it demonstrates the lack of justification rather than removes one from that state. --Joe! |
||||||
484 | I have a related question for anyone... | Acts 8:13 | Reformer Joe | 69777 | ||
"I put the baby down! :-)" I hope you did it on purpose! The verses you cited do indeed speak of inward sanctification; my point was that one could be visibly a member of the church (or Israel, in the Old Testament), receiving the outward signs of such membership (i.e. the sacraments of baptism and partkaing of the Lord's Supper) and not be truly one of God's people. The challenge to interpreting Hebrews 10 is understanding the purpose of the writer's warning. To me, it is quite obviously (in part) a warning against apostasy. Like you, I believe that full and final apostasy from the church means that the apostate will be in hell. However, the difference of opinion we have is whether these people were ever justified in the first place. What it seems to me that we see in Hebrews 10 is an exhortation to persevere, as well a word of assurance to the saints: "But we are not of those who shrink back to destruction, but of those who have faith to the preserving of the soul." --Hebrews 10:39 I would consider it the "flip side" of adding faith to our good works to make our calling and election sure (2 Peter 1). While God works in us so that we produce God-honoring works, He also works in us so that we will persevere. Our willing perseverance is a sign that we truly belong to God, so the Hebrews writer exhorts us to it, the outward command to which God's people will respond. --Joe! |
||||||
485 | I have a related question for anyone... | Acts 8:13 | Reformer Joe | 69772 | ||
"For the unbelieving husband is sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through her believing husband; for otherwise your children are unclean, but now they are holy." --1 Corinthians 7:14 --Joe! |
||||||
486 | I have a related question for anyone... | Acts 8:13 | Reformer Joe | 69767 | ||
"Assuming that Heb. 10:29 is referring to someone who was sanctified, but had not truly acquired it, how would it then relate to the question of election? In other words, does God partially sanctify anyone, and does He sanctify anyone who isn't elect?" Outwardly, yes. One can belong to the visible communion of saints and enjoy the privileges without being one of the elect. Think of all those Jewish males who were circumcized (set apart) but whom Jesus proclaimed to be "children of the devil." Paul says in Romans 3:1-3 and Romans 9:1-5 that all of Israel shares in the outward benefits of being in the covenant community, even if "they are not all Israel who are of Israel." --Joe! |
||||||
487 | Why do catholic call Mary mother of God. | Amos 1:1 | Reformer Joe | 69757 | ||
You can read the official Mariology of the RCC here: http://www.christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/church6.html The best Protestant evaluation of Mary I have seen is also a quite recent one. It is called _Who is My Mother?_, by Eric Svendsen. http://store.yahoo.com/discerning/whoismymoter.html --Joe! |
||||||
488 | Why do catholic call Mary mother of God. | Amos 1:1 | Reformer Joe | 69709 | ||
I live in a part of the country populated pretty heavily by Hispanics, and knowing the history of the Virgin of Guadalupe, I would like to know another Catholic's take on a situation like this: The other day I saw a window decal on a truck with the Virgin, and around it, written in Spanish, were the words "My life is in your hands." To me, statements like this seem to cross the line from "veneration" to "worship." As a member of the RCC, would you stand behind a statement like the one I saw or not, and please let me know why or why not. You wrote: "As for Christ's finite human nature, don't you think it was transformed and elevated by the Resurrection?" Transformed, yes. I am not sure what you mean by the word "elevate." I do not think that Christ's human nature took on the divine characteristic of being infinite (in order that people all over the world could be feasting on His body and blood in a physical sense at this very moment and at all times throughout the day somehwere on the planet since Pentecost), and I think St. John's vision in Revelation 1 would lend some support to that position. Also, I believe that the Bible teaches that one day all of God's people will one day be everything Christ is in His human nature. Passages like 1 Corinthians 15 and the end of Philippians 3 seem to support this? Do you agree, and do you think this means we will be infinite as well? Thanks! --Joe! |
||||||
489 | Why do catholic call Mary mother of God. | Amos 1:1 | Reformer Joe | 69687 | ||
"God-bearer" is not a problem at all for me, and is very Chalcedonian. I guess the problem that most Protestants have with the term "mother of God" is the possible connotation that Jesus' divine nature in some respect had his divine origin with her. In this respect, I think that many Catholics (not necessarily you) come to the opposite but equally bad heresy of the Monophysites, who declared that Jeses has only one nature, a blending of the two rather than a union of the two in one person. As an aside, one of the reasons I reject transubstantiation (and the consubstantiation of Lutheranism) is that it seems to make the important distinction between the finite human nature of Christ and His infinite divine nature. --Joe! |
||||||
490 | Why do catholic call Mary mother of God. | Amos 1:1 | Reformer Joe | 69579 | ||
What did he say that was Nestorian? It seemed quite in conformity with Chalcedon: "Therefore, following the holy fathers, we all with one accord teach men to acknowledge one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, at once complete in Godhead and complete in manhood, truly God and truly man, consisting also of a reasonable soul and body; of one substance with the Father as regards his Godhead, and at the same time of one substance with us as regards his manhood; like us in all respects, apart from sin; as regards his Godhead, begotten of the Father before the ages, but yet as regards his manhood begotten, for us men and for our salvation, of Mary the Virgin, the God-bearer; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, recognized in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation; the distinction of natures being in no way annulled by the union, but rather the characteristics of each nature being preserved and coming together to form one person and subsistence, not as parted or separated into two persons, but one and the same Son and Only-begotten God the Word, Lord Jesus Christ; even as the prophets from earliest times spoke of him, and our Lord Jesus Christ himself taught us, and the creed of the fathers has handed down to us." The "separation" he was talking about wasn't a physical one, but rather the same distinction Chalcedon makes between the two natures ("...but yet as regards his manhood begotten, for us men and for our salvation, of Mary the Virgin, the God-bearer"). --Joe! |
||||||
491 | The foundation of the church | Eph 2:20 | Reformer Joe | 69426 | ||
"Look at the church today, instead of advancing from the book of Acts it has diminished. With all due respect sir/madam the church that I witness today has in no way surpassed Acts (as the seed of the church)." You are kidding, I hope. Do you really think that it has been all downhill since the first century? I recommend a study of church history to show how the church has flourished in the last 2000 years, desite the setbacks that are a result of sinful human beings. And I also recommend a study of the epistles in Scripture to get a background of how much turmoil did exist in the earliest church, even with the apostles around. Judaizers, Gnostics, false apostles, people using the name of Jesus Christ for sex and money...they were all there right under Paul's nose. You wrote: "We cannot ignore the division within the church nor can we ignore our doctrinal differences which, if it continues will never lead to the unity of the faith." And, of course, your solution to this problem is for ME to abandon the doctrinal differences I have with you, rather than the other way around. :) "Since the dark ages He began to restore truth to His church beginning in the 1500's with Martin Luther (which I believe operated in an apostolic frequency breaking patterns of erroneos religiosity as did the early apostles in the midst of the Pharisees)proclaiming justification by faith in the midst of opposing doctrine that existed in his time." But Luther did not claim any special revelation from God apart from Scripture. He even claimed that Scripture must be the final authority for him and the only source of revelation. He also made no claims of apostleship. "Similarly God has used other moves such as the Holiness/Evangelical, Pentecostal, Latter Rain, Charismatic moves to restore foundational truths to the church as was present in the book of Acts so that we can grow unto perfection/completion (i.e. without spot or wrinkle)." And Luther opposed similar moves in the 16th century. They were called "enthusiasts" back then. What I have personally seen from a lot of movements you have mentioned (and my wife, as a former member of one of these movements, will attest) is an erosion of doctrine, not a unity of doctrine. These movements are historical novelties, and not present in the church until 1905 or so. "Yet Paul never met Jesus Christ in the physical sense as did the twelve. Jesus presented Himself to Paul on the Damascus road and spoke to him throughout his ministry truths that were never before revealed." So in Acts 9, Jesus did indeed appear to Paul, and gave him the role of apostle. That is exactly my point. Paul was a witness of the resurrected Christ: "After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep; then He appeared to James, then to all the apostles; and last of all, as to one untimely born, He appeared to me also." --1 Corinthians 15:6-8 "I believe that this is a principle that we as believers must ask the Holy Spirit to reveal to us - the relevance of God choosing someone outside of 'the twelve' to play such a significant role as an apostle to the church." I hope you don't think that I hold that God limited himself to the Twelve for the ministry of apostle. All I am saying is that the revelatory and foundation-laying work of the apostles is done. --Joe! |
||||||
492 | Genesis 11:7 Who is "Us"? | Gen 11:7 | Reformer Joe | 69425 | ||
"Hello? Is anybody home or are you too filled up to hear another opinion?" No, for almost 1900 posts I have been out. I hope to return shortly! :) "What I express here are my OPINIONS and it is too bad that one of us appears to be closed off." If I were closed off, I wouldn't respond at all. Opinions expressed publicly are subject to peer review within the guidelines of the owners of this Forum. Disagreement welcomed, as long as it is supported with Scripture. "You are not accurate in your attack, Take a breath and I will explain." I am not attacking. Inhale...exhale. "First of all, what do you mean we are not talking about translations??" What I mean is that there is not a single reliable translation from the original languages that would state that there is more than one God. Yes, there are slight differences in doctrine based on how one translates certain passages, but the monotheism of the Christian faith is not one of those disputed doctrines. "Why do you think there are so many different denominations? Because people receive things differently (even though it is written the same)" I think that there are so many different denominations because people pick and choose what they believe about the Bible (and, yes, I am quite certain that includes me, too). 'You said, “We are not talking about translation discrepancies, but rather what is clearly stated in nearly every book…” This is exactly what I am talking about and the key to your comment is in your word ‘nearly’' I did not say that other books contradict monotheism; some just take it as an implicit assumption. The entire Bible does indeed affirm one God, and the New Testament in particular elaborates that this one God eternally exists simultaneously and distinctly as Father, Son, and Spirit. "Yes the Bible is the Truth and the word of God as it was understood by the people who were inspired to write it." So you do not believe in the inerrant, infallible inspiration of Scripture? You are suggesting that the humanity of the writers got in the way of God's message getting through loud and clear? "What I mean is that when one studies the Bible he or she receives what is written. Now when this person is unclear as to what God means, he should pray about it and the truth and clarification will be made available to him." You are leaving out important things that God provided to help make sure that the "truth" we receive is indeed the truth. God has provided His communion of saints (the Church), along with Spirit-equipped teachers to guide the body of Christ in the proper understanding of the Scriptures. The learning about God was never intended to be an individual activity (Ephesians 4; Romans 12; 1 Corinthians 12). "Now image this… Let’s pretend God “SPEAKS” to you." And that would be pretending, in the sense that he spoke to the apostles and prophets... "Let’s say He show’s you an object and talks to you about it. Now I would image that he may or may not use only “spoken words” HE may also use pictures or images, could He not? Ok if we are in agreement for a moment – now I would like for you to look at a piece of wood furniture there in your home. Notice the intricate detail of the grains in the wood, the color, texture, shape, etc. You obviously see and KNOW what you are looking at right?" But you are leaving out the supernatural guiding of the Bible writers to protect them from error. The doctrine of inspiration holds that God superintended the writing of Scripture so that the words of the Bible are simultaneously the words of men and the words of God (and therefore infallible and inerrant). --Joe! |
||||||
493 | Genesis 11:7 Who is "Us"? | Gen 11:7 | Reformer Joe | 69421 | ||
"HOW DO YOU KNOW?" A good question to ask. How do we know that the Scriptures are the word of God? Here is the way one of my church's confessional standards answers that question: "The Scriptures manifest themselves to be the Word of God, by their majesty and purity; by the consent of all the parts, and the scope of the whole, which is to give all glory to God; by their light and power to convince and convert sinners, to comfort and build up believers unto salvation: but the Spirit of God bearing witness by and with the Scriptures in the heart of man, is alone able fully to persuade it that they are the very word of God." You wrote: "Not to mention that GOD Himself did not write the Bible." The doctrine of inspiration teaches that the Bible's words are those of God and of the men that wrote them at the same time. You are not suggesting that the Bible is not completely and infallibly authoritative, are you? If I am misunderstanding you, I apologize. If not, please pay attention to Lockman's guidelines for the Forum: "2. This post is not intended as a personal attack on the authority of the Bible or on other users of this forum." You wrote: "Sometimes He uses spoken words in the form of a voice in our mind," I don't believe that. '...but it is my experience that typically He replies to us with a “gut feeling”. In my opinion, this gut feeling is your soul which is connected to Him.' You used both the words "experience" and "opinion" here (along with "gut feeling"). Are we as sinning human beings, who often do not want God's will to be done, to rely on opinion and experience and feeling? How do you know your "gut feeling" was God and not indigestion? --Joe! |
||||||
494 | The foundation of the church | Eph 2:20 | Reformer Joe | 69417 | ||
The only shortcomings I see with your definition of an apostle (a 'shepherd of shepherds,' an encourager of other ministers) is that the mantle of apostle is appealed to as a source of final authority in Scripture: "through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith among all the Gentiles for His name's sake" --Romans 1:5 "If to others I am not an apostle, at least I am to you; for you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord." --1 Corinthians 9:2 "nor did we seek glory from men, either from you or from others, even though as apostles of Christ we might have asserted our authority" --1 Thessalonians 2:6 The apostle also seems to have a revelatory role in the early church, and I would not see present-day ministers in any capacity having a revelatory capacity (but rather an "illuminating" one with reference to God's completed revelation). Now that the Scripture is complete, I hold (as the early church did) that ministers do not produce new teaching/doctrine, but rather authoritatively interpret what is already there. --Joe! |
||||||
495 | The foundation of the church | Eph 2:20 | Reformer Joe | 69387 | ||
You wrote: "The government and rule of the kingdom of God is expressed in the earth through his governmental organizational structure found in the joint operations of the apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers." The role of apostles and prophets was a foundational ministry (Ephesians 2:20, Revelation 21:14). There was a standard for holding the office of a prophet as well: "Therefore it is necessary that of the men who have accompanied us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us-- beginning with the baptism of John until the day that He was taken up from us--one of these must become a witness with us of His resurrection." --Acts 1:22-23 An apostle was a witness of the resurrected Christ. Upon the foundation of the OT and NT prophets heralding His coming and the NT apostles heralding His resurrection, the church was founded. Church history supports this biblical teaching as well. None of the disciples of the apostles (the writings of many of whom are extant) nor any of the early Church Fathers ever claimed the office of apostle for himself. In fact, it wasn't until the 20th century that people started getting so brazen as to claim apostleship for themselves. Therefore, this brings me back to one of the most important questions we have to answer in situations like this: If there is NO evidence of apostles throughout church history past the first century, how did the church manage to grow and spread and flourish without them and why didn't God raise them up for the intervening 850 years? Church history really does a lot to dispel things like this. Any defense of modern-day apostleship has to successfully address the above question, as well as address the constant association of apostleship with being an eyewitness of the resurrected Jesus. --Joe! --Joe! |
||||||
496 | Genesis 11:7 Who is "Us"? | Gen 11:7 | Reformer Joe | 69320 | ||
You wrote: "I would add a word of caution to those of you who get caught up in translation discrepencies..." We are not talking about translation discrepancies, but rather what is clearly stated in nearly every book in the Bible: ONE GOD. 'As far as I am concerned, if you really want to know the answer you will need to request it from the source. Because when God gives you information - you "just know" and sometimes trying to explain somethat that you "just know" is easier said than done...' And what if what one Christian "just knows" is directly contrary to what another Christian "just knows"? God does give us information, but is contained in His written revelation to us and not "out there" somewhere for us to access in some kind of Gnostic fashion. --Joe! |
||||||
497 | Genesis 11:7 Who is "Us"? | Gen 11:7 | Reformer Joe | 69319 | ||
You wrote: "languistically spoken words are a very POOR way to communicate in the first place" Yet it is the way God ordained to preserve His revelation for His people.... You also wrote: "Anyway, when we communicate with Him, he understands us even without words because when he made us he installed a communications link - ....your soul..." According to the Bible, it is not our souls that are the "communications link." It is God Himself, the Holy Spirit: "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you." --John 14:26 "In the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words; and He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He intercedes for the saints according to the will of God." --Romans 8:26-27 "Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God, which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words." --1 Corinthians 2:12-13 --Joe! |
||||||
498 | Genesis 11:7 Who is "Us"? | Gen 11:7 | Reformer Joe | 69318 | ||
You wrote: "languistically spoken words are a very POOR way to communicate in the first place" And yet it is the way God ordained to preserve His revelation for His people.... You also wrote: "Anyway, when we communicate with Him, he understands us even without words because when he made us he installed a communications link - ....your soul..." According to the Bible, it is not our souls that are the "communications link." It is God Himself, the Holy Spirit: "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you." --John 14:26 "In the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words; and He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He intercedes for the saints according to the will of God." --Romans 8:26-27 "Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God, which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words." --1 Corinthians 2:12-13 --Joe! |
||||||
499 | Genesis 11:7 Who is "Us"? | Gen 11:7 | Reformer Joe | 69317 | ||
You wrote: "languistically spoken words are a very POOR way to communicate in the first place" And yet it is the way God ordained to preserve His revelation for His people.... You also wrote: "Anyway, when we communicate with Him, he understands us even without words because when he made us he installed a communications link - ....your soul..." According to the Bible, it is not our souls that are the "communications link." It is God Himself, the Holy Spirit: "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you." --John 14:26 "In the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words; and He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He intercedes for the saints according to the will of God." --Romans 8:26-27 "Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God, which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words." --1 Corinthians 2:12-13 --Joe! |
||||||
500 | Genesis 11:7 Who is "Us"? | Gen 11:7 | Reformer Joe | 69316 | ||
You wrote: "languistically spoken words are a very POOR way to communicate in the first place" And yet it is the way God ordained to preserve His revelation for His people.... You also wrote: "Anyway, when we communicate with Him, he understands us even without words because when he made us he installed a communications link - ....your soul..." According to the Bible, it is not our souls that are the "communications link." It is God Himself, the Holy Spirit: "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you." --John 14:26 "In the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words; and He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He intercedes for the saints according to the will of God." --Romans 8:26-27 "Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God, which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words." --1 Corinthians 2:12-13 --Joe! |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ] Next > Last [97] >> |