Results 1541 - 1560 of 1928
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Reformer Joe Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1541 | 2 Corinthians- What is 'suffering' | 2 Cor 1:5 | Reformer Joe | 80992 | ||
"I believe healing is provided through the atonement as stated in Isaiah 53 for all who receive by faith, just as salvation is received by faith in Jesus." I am aware that you believe it. The question remains whether you have good reason to do so. "You call it heresy because it disagrees with 'traditional orthodox teaching'." I don't believe I have used the term "heresy." I do most definitely hold it to be error... "If scripture disagrees with traditional orthodox teaching-so be it." Indeed. But that is a tall order to suggest that 1900 years of the church didn't manage to see what you do so "clearly." While it is not 100 percent impossible for the church to be so wrong for so long, it is so highly unlikely that one must very soberly re-examine one's views before making such a pronouncement. "Religious leaders and then the dark ages of hidden "Word" kept truth suppressed." That is a pretty sweeping (over)generalization of church history. Have you ever studied it in detail? "This truth came back out before television. Television is an instrument for reaching many...Or do you view TV as an instrument of the devil? Or are you simply 'profiling' WOF believers as believers who do not go to church? Most go to church AND study via TV." I was not referring to fans of television per se, but rather to those who live in their comfortable existences and dare to suggest that missionaries who died of illness while bringing the light of Christ to the darkest parts of the world simply died from a "lack of faith" or a "lack of understanding." What do you think of these heroes of the faith? Were they faithless or just unenlightened? --Joe! |
||||||
1542 | why is baptism important | 2 Cor 5:17 | Reformer Joe | 22305 | ||
Tim: You wrote: "Spiritual rebirth ONLY takes place at the physical immersion (Baptism) in water." Explain the family of Cornelius. "For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God. Then Peter answered, 'Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?' And he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to stay on for a few days." --Acts 10:46-48 Clearly Cornelius received the Holy Spirit not AT baptism in water, but prior to it. In fact, it was by the clear demonstration of his regenerative state that Peter commanded them to be baptised. We see the same things at Pentecost. One cannot legitimately say that all those there who received the Holy Spirit had been water baptised at the same moment: "So then, those who had received his word were baptized; and that day there were added about three thousand souls." --Acts 2:41 Those who had received his word (past perfect) were baptised (after event #1). One does not receive the things of God without the Spirit of Christ (1 Corinthians 2:14). And we have the thief on the cross? But the other answered, and rebuking him said, "Do you not even fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? And we indeed are suffering justly, for we are receiving what we deserve for our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong." And he was saying, "Jesus, remember me when You come in Your kingdom!" And He said to him, "Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise." --Luke 23:40-43 No baptism, just belief. And the result? Salvation. Now I do not want to be characterized as saying that baptism is not important. One must wonder about the salvation of someone who has no desire to be baptized. However, the two are clearly not the same. --Joe! |
||||||
1543 | why is baptism important | 2 Cor 5:17 | Reformer Joe | 22322 | ||
Then please enlighten us as to what the case of Cornelius IS talking about. Scripture helps us understand Scripture. Did Cornelius receive the Holy Spirit or not? The apostle sure seemed to think so (he specifically uses this term, despite your insistence that Cornelius did not receive Him), and the inspired Luke sure didn't disagree with him. So tell us, Tim, what was the deal with Cornelius? Are you right or is the Bible right about Cornelius RECEIVING the Spirit? --Joe! |
||||||
1544 | why is baptism important | 2 Cor 5:17 | Reformer Joe | 22348 | ||
Tim: You wrote: "This is the ONLY one where the one being converted received any special dispensation from the Holy Spirit." Show me where and explain why Cornelius was a special case. Here we have clear example of someone receiving the Spirit (exact words) before baptism, and this is the BASIS for Peter ordering him to be baptised. It is very clear: 1. Cornelius hears the word of God. 2. Cornelius receives the Holy Spirit. 3. BECAUSE Cornelius has received the Holy Spirit, Peter orders that they be baptised. He even defends his action of baptising them on this basis in front of the Jerusalem elders. It is really quite clear, and nowhere does it say that Cornelius falls under some special dispensation. --Joe! |
||||||
1545 | why is baptism important | 2 Cor 5:17 | Reformer Joe | 22365 | ||
Tim: You wrote: "In addition though Jesus was dying the new testament had not yet been instated so rules that apply to salvation after the kingdom came with power at Pentecost do not apply before that date!" So Jesus ADDED a requirement for salvation? Abraham is justified by faith (no baptism), but we as New Testament believers have to do MORE thanks to the substitutionary death of Christ? For what does the Scripture say? "ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS." But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness --Romans 4:3,5 Indeed, what does the Scripture say? The way of salvation has been the same since the Fall. --Joe! |
||||||
1546 | why is baptism important | 2 Cor 5:17 | Reformer Joe | 22485 | ||
"4. The accounts of salvation without baptism all precede the death of Christ on the cross (including the thief on the cross). While Christ was still on earth, and before his New Testament had been instituted, He had all authority to forgive sins. Today the only way you can get forgiveness of sins in the first place is through the waters of baptism -- That is why every example of conversion in Acts includes baptism. You cannot get any clearer than that." Actually, chances are that the thief on the Cross probably died after Jesus, since He was already dead by the time they came around for the traditional breaking of the legs. And let it be clear that I hold that baptism is an essential first step in the believer's new life in Christ. I by no means want to indicate that it is merely a nice little "picture." It is obedience to our Lord God. However, baptism is a response to regeneration, not the cause of it. --Joe! |
||||||
1547 | why is baptism important | 2 Cor 5:17 | Reformer Joe | 22489 | ||
Tim: Sorry, but this is completely illogical thinking in your attempt to hold to baptismal regeneration at all costs. First you arrgued that NO ONE ever received the Holy Spirit before baptism; then you argued that Cornelius didn't receive the Holy Spirit, but rather just manifested some gifts of the Spirit; and now you are saying that he did indeed receive the Spirit before baptism as Acts 10 said, but that he was a "special case." Are you going to stick to this interpretation? In any case, I think Acts 8 is an interesting passage to look at. If the Holy Spirit comes at baptism as you say, why DID the apostles have to come later and lay hands on them to receive the Holy Spirit. You keep changing your definition of what exactly the Holy Spirit does at baptism. Does one RECEIVE the Holy Spirit at baptism or not? First you said "yes," then you bring up passages that clearly indicate that at least in this case, the Holy Spirit was NOT received at baptism, and yet they were still saved and "sealed" because of their baptism. I think you need to go back and get your definitions stright, Tim. It is very hard to argue against you when you change your own position with almost every post and re-define terms such as "receiving the Holy Spirit" when it suits your pre-conceived notions. So maybe you had better clearly distinguish between these three so the rest of us know what you are talking about: ...receiving the Holy Spirit ...the gift of the Holy Spirit ...the seal of the Holy Spirit Please nail those down once and for all so we don't have this chameleon debate. How are these things different, and when do each of these become a part of the life of a person? --Joe! |
||||||
1548 | why is baptism important | 2 Cor 5:17 | Reformer Joe | 22490 | ||
I disagree on the last point. While baptism occurs apart from saving faith, it is not a "choice." It is a commandment. Don't let the pendulum swing too far in the other direction! --Joe! |
||||||
1549 | why is baptism important | 2 Cor 5:17 | Reformer Joe | 22796 | ||
Our salvation does not DEPEND on our works, but works are a manifestation of our faith and allegiance to Christ. If a person refuses the sacrament of baptism, one has to wonder why. Obedience should never be considered a choice for Christians. Baptism is a sign and seal of grace, and it is very clear from the book of Acts that baptism occurred immediately upon conversion. It is intended to be the first act of the believing Christian; make no mistake about that. Here is how the Westminster Confession of Faith puts it: "Although it is a great sin to contemn or neglect this ordinance, yet grace and salvation are not so inseparably annexed unto it, as that no person can be regenerated, or saved, without it: or, that all that are baptized are undoubtedly regenerated." In other words: 1. Not being baptized is a sin. 2. Baptism and regeneration are not the same thing. 3. Not all who are baptized are saved. If God commands baptism, it is not a choice. --Joe! |
||||||
1550 | why is baptism important | 2 Cor 5:17 | Reformer Joe | 22801 | ||
You have provided no evidence that has distinguished the manifestation of the gifts of the Spirit from the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Repeating your assertion does not make it any more true. It simply makes no sense to suggest that the Holy Spirit would exhibit gifts through a believer whom He did not already indwell. Your Cornelius case remains weak. Go read Romans 4. Our FAITH is credited to us as righteousness, just like in the case of Abraham. Show me one clear New Testament case of someone manifesting the works of the Spirit without being a believer in Christ, and then we can investigate this idea further. Until then, I will continue to put stock in verses like these: "So then, does He who provides you with the Spirit and works miracles among you, do it by the works of the Law, or BY HEARING WITH FAITH?" --Galatians 3:5 But what does it say? "THE WORD IS NEAR YOU, IN YOUR MOUTH AND IN YOUR HEART"--that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation. --Romans 10:8-10 "For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not in cleverness of speech, so that the cross of Christ would not be made void." --1 Corinthians 1:17 Hmmm...the gospel and baptism: two separate things...imagine that! --Joe! |
||||||
1551 | What does it mean to be "in Christ?" | 2 Cor 5:17 | Reformer Joe | 100112 | ||
An interesting point is that baptized believers are still commanded to "put on Christ": "But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh in regard to its lusts." --Romans 13:14 |
||||||
1552 | What does it mean to be "in Christ?" | 2 Cor 5:17 | Reformer Joe | 100160 | ||
'A command is not optional, yet do we sometimes see it that way? So if we "put Him on" can we "take Him off?" Just wondering.' In practice, I believe the answer is "yes." --Joe! |
||||||
1553 | Did Jesus die spiritually? | 2 Cor 5:21 | Reformer Joe | 83227 | ||
Namely, the Council of Chalcedon in 451 addressed Scripture's revelation of the two natures of Christ and the union between them: http://www.reformed.org/documents/chalcedon.html --Joe! |
||||||
1554 | J. Preston Eby? | 2 Cor 11:4 | Reformer Joe | 83063 | ||
Hi, Tom. Did you also include the references to hell which don't actually employ the term, such as when Jesus refers to outer darkness with much weeping and gnashing of teeth, or to eternal punishment, or to being cast into the fire? All of those are obviously references to hell as well. --Joe! |
||||||
1555 | Are these churches cults? | Gal 1:7 | Reformer Joe | 26797 | ||
It is important to note that the Worldwide Chruch of God in the last decade and a half has undergone a dramatic move into Christian orthodoxy under the leadership of Joseph Tkach. The organizations mentioned are "splinter groups" that hold to the "true teachings" of Armstrong. --Joe! |
||||||
1556 | But isn't that a contradiction | Gal 2:17 | Reformer Joe | 13754 | ||
Tim: Calvinists hold that Adam and Eve had free choice in the garden. Also, he did not set them up to fail. He did know from eternity past what their choice, would be, and He decreed that the sin would take place (i.e. he would allow it and use the sin for the purpose of His glory); it did, however, originate in the hearts of our first parents (with an assist from a snake, of course). --Joe! |
||||||
1557 | But isn't that a contradiction | Gal 2:17 | Reformer Joe | 13830 | ||
That makes twice we agree in as many days! Kinda spooky... --Joe! |
||||||
1558 | But aren't they mutually exclusive? | Gal 2:17 | Reformer Joe | 13927 | ||
Norrie: No, I don't believe in "plans A, B, C" etc. Briefly, here is my take on what the Bible says about God's will: SOVEREIGN WILL: What WILL happen 1. Includes what God actively does Himself 2. Includes what God allows to occur by voltitional members of His creation 3. Partially revealed in Scripture (e.g. the Second Coming is not a "maybe"; the fact a specific set of human beings are chosen to eternal life is something that WILL occur) 4. How do we know God's sovereign will? First, look at what HAS happened. Nothing in history has happened that was not an element of God's sovereign will. Also, look to Scripture regarding what God has revealed regarding His plans for the future. Both of these comprise His revealed sovereign will. 5. There is no getting around God's sovereign will. It was established in eternity past and was decreed by God as what will happen. It is plan A. There is no plan B. God's MORAL WILL: 1. Includes what God COMMANDS and FORBIDS his creatures to do. 2. Completely revealed in Scripture. 3. Refelects perfectly God's character and standard of moral perfection. 4. Can and is violated by human beings, acting according to their sinfulness. 5. Such violations are not only foreseen by God, but the extent and manner in which humans are permitted to "step out of bounds" is sovereignly governed by God. Also the effects of such sinful acts are part of God's sovereign will and will be ultimately used for His glory, just like the acts we humans do that please Him as well. --Joe! |
||||||
1559 | But aren't they mutually exclusive? | Gal 2:17 | Reformer Joe | 13970 | ||
Norrie: I do disagree with some of your statements; but it is not important who agrees with whom, but rather which view is most closely aligned with the revealed Word. Personally, I do not see a lot of support, for example, for the idea that God has ONE person in mind for you to marry and that you must "seek out God's perfect will" in that area. One sees general guidelines for whom you should select as a mate (e.g. not being "unequally yoked") and one should exercise wisdom in the choice of a mate (e.g. don't marry a homebody if you plan on being a missionary in Burma), but there is not a Scripture which suggests that if I marry Jane the Christian instead of Denise the Christian that somehow I have messed up God's perfect plan. Same is true for other life decisions as well. There is God's moral will which is revealed, and God's sovereign will which is inescapable. I see no biblical support for a particular kind of "individual will" in which God plays hide-and-seek for what He wants us to do. Thanks! --Joe! |
||||||
1560 | But aren't they mutually exclusive? | Gal 2:17 | Reformer Joe | 13975 | ||
Norrie: It is a leap in logic to say that because God ordains everything that happens, that he allows evil to exist just to punish individuals. Hopw do you explain Job? Was it not God's plan for all of that to happen to him (notice, who points Satan in Job's direction in chapter 1?)? Did Job do something to deserve the evil that befell him? Nope, the text makes that perfectly clear as well. Therefore, we have God pointing out Job, knowing exactly how Satan would react (since God is omniscient), and using the entire incident to glorify Himself. This is the God who is. As far as Hitler: when did God know that Hitler would commit the atrocities that he did? Who brought Hitler into existence? Who allowed him to gain the power that he did, knowing all along the evil in Hitler's heart? Who allowed Hitler to build the concentration camps? Who allowed him to kill as many as he did before being stopped? And the most important question: did any of the Holocaust take God by surprise in the slightest? And, lastly, what do you make of verses like these? Remember the former things long past, For I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me, Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things which have not been done, Saying, 'My purpose will be established, And I will accomplish all My good pleasure'; Calling a bird of prey from the east, The man of My purpose from a far country. Truly I have spoken; truly I will bring it to pass. I have planned it, surely I will do it. --Isaiah 46:9-11 Again, the question isn't whether you SEE God doing it. The question is whether that is the God as revealed in the whole counsel of the Bible. Thanks! --Joe! |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 ] Next > Last [97] >> |