Results 581 - 600 of 1928
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Reformer Joe Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
581 | Teacher, when were the 11 rebaptized? | Romans | Reformer Joe | 67048 | ||
"In Acts 22:16 we read-AND NOW WHY TARRIEST THOU? ARISE, AND BE BAPTIZED, AND WASH AWAY THY SINS, CALLING ON THE NAME OF THE LORD. Here it is clear, that water baptism after believing on Jesus is a commandment." Absolutely true. "Your below answer was all that needed to be said." Well, you did make some questionable statements in your previous post regarding whether God's grace depends upon our repentance, obedience and faith; or whether repentance and obedience and faith depend on God's grace. "Jesus warned us that the traditions of men make God?s Word of none effect. In other words, Jesus was saying, the traditions that you are doing are not from God?s Word, but are only of men; and being only of men, you are sending people to hell by your traditions." Actually, what Jesus warned about was supplanting the law of God with the traditions of men. We all follow traditions, and some of them, while not in the word of God, do not contradict or take the place of the teachings of Scripture. My church sings songs that are not part of Scripture; does yours? My church celebrates Easter and Christmas; does yours? My church has pews; does yours? My church has Wednesday night services; does yours? We pass around the offering plates during the service; does your church do the same? All of these are examples of things that are not commanded in Scripture, but are glorifying to God (or at the very least do not dishonor Him). Traditions of men, in other words. Simply put, we do not have a clear-cut set of procedures for worship like can be found in the Torah for temple ceremony. While it is certainly not a case of "anything goes," it is also rather simplistic to think that any church today does things EXACTLY the same way things were done by the apostles, or even that the apostles were uniform in the churches that they oversaw (e.g. the differences between primarily Jewish congregations and primarily Gentile congregations). "Thanks for you responce Joe!" You are quite welcome! --Joe! |
||||||
582 | Teacher, when were the 11 rebaptized? | Romans | Reformer Joe | 67021 | ||
"We are saved by faith. Does this mean we are saved by faith without repentance? Not at all. We must repent of our sins, or there is no salvation." That is because repentance accompanies saving faith. Some go so far as to call it an aspect of saving faith. "For it is written, EXCEPT YE REPENT, YE SHALL ALL LIKEWISE PERISH-Lk 13:3. Does this mean that we are saved by faith only, and we never need to confess Jesus publicly? Not at all. We should confess that Jesus is (the only Hope) of our salvation to everyone that asks us. If we are ashamed of Jesus, He will be ashamed of us at the judgment." And a result of true saving faith is that we will confess Jesus publicly. That is James 2 in a nutshell. We are saved as a result of God's grace alone through faith alone. However, true grace and true faith will result in accompanying works. So are we saved by works or by faith? Both are present in the truly saved, but which one does Paul mention as the INSTRUMENT of our justification time and again? Not works, but faith. (Romans 5:1) 'So we may ask, "What about baptism?"' Yes, we may. :) You wrote: "THERE IS NO GRACE WITHOUT BELIEVING ON JESUS" Believing in Jesus is a RESULT of God's grace: "A woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple fabrics, a worshiper of God, was listening; and the Lord opened her heart to respond to the things spoken by Paul." --Acts 16:14 "And when he wanted to go across to Achaia, the brethren encouraged him and wrote to the disciples to welcome him; and when he had arrived, he greatly helped those who had believed through grace" --Acts 18:26 You wrote: "THERE IS NO GRACE WITHOUT REPENTANCE" Grace precedes repentance; repentance is a result of God's grace: "Or do you think lightly of the riches of His kindness and tolerance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance?" --Romans 2:4 "with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth" --2 Timothy 2:25 You wrote: "Is there grace without baptism?" Of course there is. Grace motivates the believer to be baptized. God's grace is absolutely free and is not chained by our own activity or inactivity. Grace moves US to obedience; our obedience does not "let" God be gracious to us. "In the same way then, there has also come to be at the present time a remnant according to God's gracious choice. But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, OTHERWISE GRACE IS NO LONGER GRACE." --Romans 11:5-6 --Joe! |
||||||
583 | John:30-33 Manna | Josh 16:1 | Reformer Joe | 67001 | ||
This is one of my favorite chapters in John, and one must be careful not to disconnect Jesus' statements about himself from the miracle He had performed the previous day. One thing that liberal Christianity actually gets right is that Jesus was an excellent teacher. Everything that He said, every action that He took, pointed to Himself. He took the meager lunch of a little boy, and miraculously multiplied it so that over 5000 people had their fill and twelve baskets were left over. Is this just to show His power, or is there more to it than that? The next day, Jesus is confronted by "followers" who want a repeat performance of their satisfying meal. Jesus then sets out his comparison between the bread with which He fad the multitude and the Bread of Life that He is. Just as Jesus took the bread on the mountain, broke it, and distributed it to nourish a great number of people, so His own body would be broken, resulting in spiritual nourishment for countless people throughout history. It is Jesus who will give the "food" that leads to eternal life (John 6:27), and he Himself is the Bread of God, the Bread from Heaven, the Bread of Life. He even says explicitly starting in verse 53 that unless one eats the flesh of the Son and drinks His blood, that one has no life in him. His flesh is true food, and his blood is true drink. We must in faith feed on Jesus Christ to have life eternal. In contrast to the persihable bread from the miracle, and the manna which spoiled at the end of every day, Jesus the Bread of Life will sustain all of his people and "whoever feeds on this Bread will live forever" (v. 58). And, of course, this is not the only time that Jesus likens His flesh to bread. As Jesus said, and as Paul elaborated later in 1 Corinthians 10, the bread that we break at the Lord's table is a participation in the body of Christ, and the cup that we share is a participation in His blood. The benefits of Jesus' divine life are multiplied and distributed to all those who are His, so that a little boy's lunch becomes a picture of Jesus' atoning work on behalf of all who believe. --Joe! |
||||||
584 | Jesus died go do what? | Matthew | Reformer Joe | 66809 | ||
Jesus paid the penalty for our sins on the cross, not in hell: 'Therefore when Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, "It is finished!" And He bowed His head and gave up His spirit.' --John 19:30 Two symbols are constantly used as a representation of our reconciliation with God and the work of Jesus Christ on our behalf: --the CROSS (1 Corinthians 1:18; Galatians 6:12-14; Ephesians 5:16; Colossians 1:20, 2:14; 1 Peter 2:24) and --the BLOOD of Jesus Christ (Matthew 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; John 6:53 ff.; Acts 20:28; Romans 3:25, 5:9; 1 Corinthians 10:16; Ephesians 1:7, 2:13; Colossians 1:20; Hebrews 9:13-14, 10:19-20, 13:12; 1 Peter 1:18-19; 1 John 1:7; Revelation 1:5, 7:14). Since neither one of those two things would have gone to hell with Jesus Christ, why would the New Testament writers stress those two things so much without one, single, clear, definitive passage saying that Jesus suffered in hell for our sins? This is a clear example of someone taking a single, debatable verse and building a whole system of theology on it, and it comes out faulty as it always does in such situations. The Scriptures make it 100 percent clear where the atonement took place, and it was not in hell: "and He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed." --1 Peter 2:24 --Joe! |
||||||
585 | Of course I'm bitter! You would be too. | 1 Cor 7:5 | Reformer Joe | 66663 | ||
"I'm always astounded that when I ask my question about my wife breaking God's Word, the answers I get involve my responsibility." I don't know why you would be astounded at that. This is StudyBibleForum, and the Bible says: "For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body." --Ephesians 5:23 You wrote: "Heaven forbid that she should be held accountable for 20 years of pushing her husband away! Heaven forbid that she is the one who is disobedient and actually tempting me to commit adultery!" I don't see where anyone denies that she is being disobedient or not tempting you toward adultery. That does not negate your biblical responsibility to hold her accountable for her sin. If she has been pushing you away for 20 years without you taking action before now, then the problem is greater than simply her sin. Who permitted her to move to a separate bedroom? Where is the church in confronting her with her sin? "She won't go to counseling." Are you members of a church? An unrepentant, sinning wife should be confronted by the pastor or elders of your church. "She won't repent because she doesn't think she has done anything wrong." That is where she is wrong. The Bible says: "The husband must fulfill his duty to his wife, and likewise also the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; and likewise also the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Stop depriving one another, except by agreement for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer, and come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control." --1 Corinthians 7:2-5 A wife depriving her husband is definitely sinning and helping Satan tempt him toward adultery. You wrote: "It makes me angry that the counsel I get from my Christian brothers and sisters always puts this monkey on my back. I've carried this monkey alone, without help or encouragement to the point of exhaustion." And what counsel have you sought from the leadership of your church? God established church discipline for a reason. "But if I did chose to divorce her on the grounds of 2 decades of her unfaithfulness, I defy you to condemn me as sinning." It is not a question of me condemning you. However, you have given no indication in your posts of anything you have done either to assert your authority as the head of the household or to seek help from those God ordained as overseers of the church. If you have done so, we are not mind-readers, so attacking us for responding to half the story is pretty petty. It seems to me that you have been keeping this a secret for the last two decades. This Forum is for Bible study, not to serve as a substitute for wise counsel from the leadership in your church. My only advice is to talk to those who know you and your wife personally as well as the word of God and their role in overseeing the flock. --Joe! |
||||||
586 | Why Rabbi? | Eph 5:33 | Reformer Joe | 66589 | ||
For the record, Charis, I prefer "Saint Joseph." And that is biblical, too! :) --Joe! |
||||||
587 | Did Jesus suffer in hell when he died? | Luke 23:46 | Reformer Joe | 66556 | ||
I am afraid that you misunderstood what I meant in my post. Jesus very well may have ascended between the Resurrection and Acts 1:9. I personally do not hold that the Bible teaches such a thing, but neither my faith in Jesus Christ, nor my understanding of who He is and what He accomplished on my behalf, nor the manner of my obedience to Him is in any way affected by such a thing. In my opinion, you are passionately arguing something that, in the long run, doesn't change the tenets of Christianity in any significant way at all. --Joe! |
||||||
588 | Prayer for Persecuted Church! | Heb 13:3 | Reformer Joe | 66526 | ||
This week, remember to be in prayer with and for our brothers and sisters around the world who are being persecuted for the cause of Jesus Christ. http://www.idop.org --Joe! |
||||||
589 | What about...? | Matt 19:5 | Reformer Joe | 66523 | ||
You wrote: "We are not able to get married yet because of financial situations since we are both still in college. That is the only thing however that is keeping us from walking down the aisle." Well, there is nothing in Scripture which requires an expensive wedding. I would suggest talking to your pastor/minister about the financial situation and see what solutions he might have to offer you. "We have already committed ourselves totally to each other, and other than the peice of paper, are pretty much married in every other way." I hope that this is an exagerration, because being married "in every other way" besides the piece of paper constitutes fornication, a sin and definitely not God's will for you two. The problem that we have here is that you are SAYING that you are committed to each other, but there exists no bond outside your own feelings for each other that serves as an outward sign and seal of that lifelong commitment. Really and truly, one or both of you could decide that the commitment really wasn't what it seemed to be and take off without any difficulty whatsoever. This is not marriage. Christian marriage is a covenant vow solemnly yet joyfully made with the other person before God. It is more than saying, "I really love you forever." --Joe! |
||||||
590 | Did Jesus suffer in hell when he died? | Luke 23:46 | Reformer Joe | 66405 | ||
You wrote: "No, I was likening CRI with Paul's christian ministry and how he was careful not to oppose God by speaking evil of the high priest. Please read Ray's post here if you do not understand: " Well, the very verses you had chosen in your post, in their context, are directed toward Pharisees and to those who oppose the working of God in the nation of Israel. Paul was addressing speaking evil of a ruler of the people, in accordance with God's command to refrain from doing so in Deuteronomy (and what Paul writes himself in Romans 13). However, you would not conclude that Paul is in theological agreement with the Pharisee high priest Ananias, would you? His whole ministry was dedicated to proclaiming the opposite of what their whole lives were about. This verse is not an admonition against speaking out against heresy or false teaching. The James verse is a good one. We should be slow to speak. That is not an admonition not to speak at all. And in its context, James is dealing with general practical Christian living, not warning them against holding up the truth against falsehood. The fact is that God has given us a standard by which we know what we are to believe about God and what He requires of us. He has also given us their church throughout history through which he has worked, in spite of our fallibility. One of the roles of the church is to preserve and guard and proclaim the truth, and to root out what is not in keeping with the teaching of Jesus and the apostles. That is where discernment comes in. --Joe! |
||||||
591 | Did Jesus suffer in hell when he died? | Luke 23:46 | Reformer Joe | 66371 | ||
Now, I would be careful here. You are likening a Christian ministry to the Pharisees and to those who hate and oppose God. While you may disagree with the organization in certain areas, you also should exercise enough wisdom to realize that heresy has been in the church from the very beginning, and the apostles themselves boldly spoke out against it wherever it was found. Not everything that someone in the church claims is "of God" is truly of God. The ministry of discernment is an extremely important one, and if something does not line up with biblical revelation, it does need to be condemned. Indeed, we need to be sure that we are not attacking God, and that goes for both sides of this argument. --Joe! |
||||||
592 | Unforgivable sin | Romans | Reformer Joe | 66325 | ||
Because a companion doctrine to unconditional election is the one of perseverance (or preservation) of the saints. Reformed individuals such as myself believe that not only does God choose those who will believe and be saved, but also will, by His Spirit, keep them from falling away. That would preclude the truly saved from committing any unforgivable sin. --Joe! |
||||||
593 | Unforgivable sin | Romans | Reformer Joe | 66319 | ||
You wrote: "What about those who believe in unconditional election though? If a person is elected by God to salvation yet blasphemes the H.S. how will it end?" One who is elected by God will not blaspheme the Holy Spirit. --Joe! |
||||||
594 | help with a group paper on nat.selection | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 66273 | ||
Please describe for me the "psychological trauma" that a newborn has in being adopted from a single teenage mother into a Christian home. Please describe for me how the "psychological trauma" that a child has in being adopted is more traumatic than remaining in a home facing physical, emotional and sexual abuse, as well as neglect. There are a lot of reasons besides poverty which lead to adoption. And considering that adoption by God is a very biblical concept, the concept can hardly be a hateful one. --Joe! |
||||||
595 | Did Jesus suffer in hell when he died? | Luke 23:46 | Reformer Joe | 66224 | ||
I don't mean this to be curt, but could you explain why it is so important to your theology that Jesus ascended into heaven bewteen the Resurrection and Acts 1:9? I suppose Jesus could have if He had wanted to, but why are you so passionate about insisting that He actually DID? Thanks! --Joe! |
||||||
596 | Why doesn?t God just show himself to tho | Mark 11:22 | Reformer Joe | 66223 | ||
You are correct. Science can't prove the existence of God. Science by definition measures the observable and makes conclusions inductively from observations. Therefore, one cannot prove the supernatural beyond any shadow of a doubt. It is beyond the scope of science's ability to do so. But then, science can't prove that Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, either. However, I DO think that scientific observation does correspond with the Bible's claim to an Intelligent Designer of the universe. --Joe! |
||||||
597 | Did Jesus suffer in hell when he died? | Luke 23:46 | Reformer Joe | 66218 | ||
Even if the altar in heaven is a literal one, there is no reason to believe that Jesus had to have placed His blood there prior to the Ascension in Acts 1:9. | ||||||
598 | Did Jesus suffer in hell when he died? | Luke 23:46 | Reformer Joe | 66200 | ||
Thanks for the Greek insight. By the way, I am saving my pennies to study both Greek and Hebrew this coming summer. Then we can duel on an entirely new level! ;) --Joe! |
||||||
599 | John 6:60,66-67 | John 3:34 | Reformer Joe | 66183 | ||
Incidentally, some Presbyterians believe that as well. It was the position of most of the Reformers (the notable exception being Zwingli). However, while the Reformed doctrine of the real presence of Christ does find some support in John 6, most Reformers do not hold that Jesus was necessarily speaking of communion in that situation. And we don't hold that in any manner Christ's body is physically, locally present in the elements themselves, in the manner of transubstantiation and consubstantiation. --Joe! |
||||||
600 | Did Jesus suffer in hell when he died? | Luke 23:46 | Reformer Joe | 66166 | ||
You wrote: "But here, he told Thomas to thrust his hand into his side, which leads me to believe that by this time he had ascended to the Father." Jesus ascended to the Father in Acts 1, approximately 40 days after the Resurrection. John 20:17 reads this way in the NASB: 'Jesus said to her, "Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, 'I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.'"' One could interpret this in several ways that does not require an interim visit to heaven between the Resurrection and the Ascension. The way it reads here, Mary apparently was already "clinging" to him, so he could be telling her instead to let go and go tell everyone that He is risen. There is no reason we must conclude that in the garden that Jesus was for some reason "untouchable" and then later he was "touchable." --Joe! |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 ] Next > Last [97] >> |