Results 441 - 460 of 1928
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Reformer Joe Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
441 | Entering Heaven | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 71292 | ||
You wrote: "Abraham had faith but not until God tested him by offering his son Issac as a sacrifice." You packed a lot into that paragraph. Are you saying here that Abraham did not have faith until God tested him? You also wrote: "Faith is born with the obedience of a broken heart not the words of a clever mind." Biblically speaking, faith produces obedience, not the other way around. "For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but faith working through love." --Galatians 5:6 Hebrews 11 gives a long list of saints whose works were evidence of their faith. Their faith was not born by their obedience, but rather their obedience was born by their faith. --Joe! |
||||||
442 | Entering Heaven | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 71346 | ||
You wrote: "SAVING FAITH IS FAITH AND ACTION TOGETHER NOTHING LESS." Then why does the Bible say that Abraham BELIEVED God, and it was credited to him as righteousness (Genesis 15:6; Romans 4:3; Galatians 3:6)? Yes, Abraham's belief/faith led to obedience, but he was justified by faith before obeying. Faith and obedience go hand-in-hand, but they are not the same thing. We are saved as an act of God's mercy. Our salvation is not earned by us (Ephesians 2:8). At the same time, as you have correctly pointed out, the saving faith that God does work in His people leads to obedience. That, too, is an act of God's grace. "For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men, instructing us to deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age, looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus, who gave Himself for us to redeem us from every lawless deed, and to purify for Himself a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds." --Titus 2:11-14 --Joe! |
||||||
443 | Is water baptism must for Holy communion | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 75175 | ||
I am a covservative, evangelical Protestant that agrees with Emmaus on this one. Baptism is the initiatory rite into the visible church. While I disagree with him on what baptism does, it is the first order of business for a new believer. Why would someone want to take part in the Lord's Supper but not be baptized? --Joe! |
||||||
444 | Is water baptism must for Holy communion | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 75176 | ||
While I agree that we are not justified by baptism, could you give me a reason why a true believer would take part in communion but neglect baptism? Look at the New Testament model. When did new converts get baptized, in every recorded case? --Joe! |
||||||
445 | Is water baptism must for Holy communion | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 75440 | ||
"Could you give some scripture that supports your view?" Yes. The book of Acts. While one is justified by faith alone, one joins the visible church by baptism. In every single recorded conversion in the book of Acts, baptism immediately followed. The notion of an "unbaptized Christian" has absolutely no Scriptural support whatsoever in the life of the New Testament church. While one cannot see into the heart of a communicant, offering communion to someone who is openly unrepentant in their sin or even a professing non-believer is the height of pastoral irresponsibility. You are correct that God will judge the situation (see 1 Corinthians 11 for the judgment, BTW), but He will judge more than the heart of the partaker. He will judge the actions of the one entrusted with the administration of the ordinances of Jesus Christ. Woe to the minister who knowingly fails to revere what Jesus sanctified for His people alone. --Joe! |
||||||
446 | Is water baptism must for Holy communion | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 75634 | ||
"My point is that not everyone has a choice in taking communion. While in the USN everyone took a wafer dipped in grape juice as it was required, and there was no choice about it not partaking." Wow, that is surprising. So what if the navy man was a Muslim? No one could object on religious grounds? If it was a Roman Catholic Priest, I cannot imagine him using grape juice and going against the RCC catechism. What decade are we talking about here? "I do not see that a pastor doing his or her best in being obediant to the call of Christ, and administering communion, can be called irresponsible if he or she is unaware of such sins of the people." Lack of awareness is one thing. Should a minister permit communion participation from an openly homosexual professing believer, however? "I most certianly can not find damnation for a child or unsaved person partakes is under Gods to be punnished list." For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly. --1 Corinthians 11:29 Paul even links the unworthy participation in communion to the sickness and death of Corinthian church members in this chapter. "I revere Jesus and what He said, but let us not forget Judas took the cup as well, and followed Jesus, he saw the healings and much more." Actually, Judas left before the institution of the Lord's Supper (John 13:30). "Blessings and peace." And to you! :) --Joe! |
||||||
447 | Is water baptism must for Holy communion | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 76176 | ||
My fur wasn't ruffled, justme. As far as I was concerned, we were just having a friendly discussion. Thanks for sharing. My point was that I believe a minister should not knowingly administer communion to one whom he KNOWS to be living an openly unrepentant and sinful lifestyle. May you be renewed this Lord's Day! --Joe! |
||||||
448 | Hold fast the Scriptures- then memorize? | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 80952 | ||
Hmmmm...speaking of apostasy, can anyone name the Bible translation of choice for most of the major cults in the English-speaking world today? Give you a hint: it ain't the NASB or NIV. --Joe! |
||||||
449 | Hold fast the Scriptures- then memorize? | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 80955 | ||
"Riplinger has a B.A.,M.A.,and M.F.A. degrees and has done additional postgraduate study at Harvard and Cornell Universities." I am just curious as to why degrees in INTERIOR DESIGN make anyone a Bible scholar.... "I'LL BET YOU STILL HAVENT PRAYED ABOUT THIS HAVE YOU?" Nope. Haven't prayed over the Book of Mormon, either, making many a missionary disappointed. "I have to agree with The Lord Jesus Christ in Rev.3:16." So do I. 'My stomach can only take so much of this apostate,back slidden,powerless "Christianity".' Ahhh...the smell of empty, ad hominem-ism! "The prisoners that I teach are twenty times closer to The Lord than anything Ive seen on this site since I loged on.I'm outa here!" Nothing like a "captive audience," is there? --Joe! |
||||||
450 | Do Jesus and Paul agree on salv by faith | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 81185 | ||
Hello, Emmaus. You quoted: 'Paul never says that we are saved by faith alone, although he does say we are saved by "faith, apart from works of the law."' Paul also says: "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast." --Ephesians 2:8-9 You also quoted: 'A closer look at "works of the law" and works in general seems appropriate.' What God-honoring works are not found in the law of God? --Joe! |
||||||
451 | Do Jesus and Paul agree on salv by faith | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 81205 | ||
"Works of grace in Christ are another kind of work altogether." I see. Is this tied into why you think (as far as I can tell) that circumcision and Levitical sacrifice were not means of grace? --Joe! |
||||||
452 | Do Jesus and Paul agree on salv by faith | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 81206 | ||
It is tied into understanding the distinction between justification and sanctification. The classical Protestant understanding is that our sins are forgiven and Christ's perfect merit is put on our account, by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. That is justification. However, all those God justifies he also sanctifies. Sanctification is the work of grace in our hearts which bring us to obedience and make us more like Jesus Christ in practice. Justification is a one time event. Sanctification shows itself in our works and starts at the same time we believe (justification), but continues throughout the lives of those who truly are justified. So Jesus is addressing sanctification in many passages (although passages like John 3:16 and John 5:24 point out that faith is what justifies). Simply put, we are saved by faith, not works; but no evidential works likely means no faith. We can never earn our place in heaven, but God in his grace makes true believers more obedient to His law. True believers show their true faith in the way that Jesus describes. Incidentally, passages like 1 Corinthians 6:11 show that Paul also agrees that works follow faith. Certain people will not inherit the kingdom of God, and their works often show them to be false believers. --Joe! |
||||||
453 | Do Jesus and Paul agree on salv by faith | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 81214 | ||
"In response to your question, what kind of grace are you asking about and what does Hebrews say about those sacrifices?" I was just trying to get a better fix on your view of what the OT rituals accomplished. I know that no one was justified by the sacrifices, but I as a Reformed Protestant also hold that one is not justified by baptism. Since the "works of the law" refer at least to these two practices, I was just wondering how they tie in, in your understanding. Do Catholics hold that grace (any kind) was conferred in the OT sacrifices for the believer? If so, what is the nature of that grace. Thanks! --Joe! |
||||||
454 | John 1:1---"a god"? !?!? | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 87762 | ||
'If you want to try and make Jesus Almighty God, go ahead. He's not, he is God's "only-begotten son", "first born of all creation".' He is that and more: "God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world. And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power." --Hebrews 1:1-3a 'But of the Son He says, "YOUR THRONE, O GOD, IS FOREVER AND EVER, AND THE RIGHTEOUS SCEPTER IS THE SCEPTER OF HIS KINGDOM.' --Hebrews 1:8 "Behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to render to every man according to what he has done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end. Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter by the gates into the city. Outside are the dogs and the sorcerers and the immoral persons and the murderers and the idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices lying. I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star." --Revelation 22:12-16 Jesus is the Alpha and Omega? Who is "the Alpha and Omega" in Rev. 1:8 and 21:6? And if the NWT is so dedicated to accurate Bible translation, where does the word "other" come from in its rendition of Colossians 1:16-17? It is used four times there, but has no business being there at all, Greekly speaking. Same thing with John 1:3. Take your eraser to them and what do you get? The deity of Christ. Really, now, who is playing fast and loose with the translations? "That's what the Bible tells us and if you want to try make it mean otherwise, and what others have told you go right ahead but that doesn't make it true. As far as John 1:1 is concerned, again the translators such as the NIV and NASB and King James have tried to make the trinity appear as true. I have studied what Greek scholars say defending their translations for and against. Both translations are proved by these scholars as acceptable Greek grammar." And the anti-Trinitarian arguments do not make sense in the context of John's prologue. In verse 1:3, John makes it clear that NOTHING was made without Jesus' participation. If Jesus was made, then he is self-created (a logical impossibility) or else he is eternally pre-existent like Jehovah the Father. --Joe! |
||||||
455 | Do Jesus and Paul agree on salv by faith | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 92286 | ||
'My friend, the bible never mentions "faith alone".' Romans 4-5 indicates that we are justified by faith apart from works and have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. "As we have seen in James faith alone is dead. James 2:19 says even the demons believe and tremble." Yes, it does, which means that biblical, saving faith results in God-honoring works. "Why did Christ command us to do things, if it wasn't nessesary to be saved." So do you consistently do everything Christ commands? If not, how can you call yourself saved? And for the question which no one of your theological persuasion has ever been able to answer satisfactorily: If immersion is required for salvation, where was the church during that millennium and a half, when almost everyone was sprinkled in infancy. Immersion did not (re)emerge as normative until 1550 or so. So, where was the church before the Anabaptists made an issue of believer's baptism by immersion? Did God let this bride disappear off the face of the earth for over a dozen centuries? Many of these non-immersed people are the theological ancestors of the Churches of Christ. Many of them wrote the hymns that you sing every Sunday. Do you really think that the men who wrote "Amazing Grace" and "A Mighty Fortress is our God" were not Christians because they were never baptized as you think Christ commanded? If so, your church needs to tear out the hymns of John Newton, Isaac Watts, Martin Luther, Augustus Toplady, and Charles Wesley, for they are all roasting in hell, according to your theology. So where was the church during all those years of almost exclusive infant sprinkling? And what of those your church considers men of God who did NOT ever get immersed? --Joe! |
||||||
456 | Do Jesus and Paul agree on salv by faith | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 92766 | ||
Actually, my post was directed toward the person you were conversing with. Peace. --Joe! |
||||||
457 | Scripture support? | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 94798 | ||
Um...John specifically says here that these other works were NOT written down (hence the hypothetical clause beginning with the word "if"). Since they were not written down, they could not possibly qualify as "Scripture" (which by definition are holy WRITINGS). John merely says that there is a lot more to Jesus life than is written down. Since those things are not part of Scripture, obviously the Holy Spirit does not deem it necessary for us to know of them. The apostles did not need other NT books to "use." Having been Jesus' students for years (except Paul), they got their doctrine straight from the Source. Paul is included, too, as his teachings received the seal of approval from those who were of the original twelve. Just because a book is mentioned IN the Bible does not mean that the book should BE part of of the Bible. That is an unwarranted leap in logic. --Joe! |
||||||
458 | And what about those who will die before | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 98245 | ||
Heinlin really IS science fiction, then! :) "But the free gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many." --Romans 5:15 Seems to me like what God freely gave is of immeasurable value... --Joe! |
||||||
459 | And what about those who will die before | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 98248 | ||
You wrote: "My attempt was not to enrage you, but to open your mind to the fact that Salvation is not free..." Then what do you do with Romans 3:23-24, almost all of Romans 5, Romans 6:23, and the rest of the epistle (for starters)? 'To blindly give salvation away goes against the teachings of the prophets... For if no unclean thing can dweal in the presence of God then how is it I merely say, "I believe." and I am saved?' No one is saved by merely SAYING "I believe." However, I have been declared righteous because my Savior lived a holy, perfectly obedient life and died for my sins 2000 years ago. I have been made clean by the perfect life and substitutionary death of the now-risen Christ. Having been justified by faith, I have peace with God through my Lord Jesus Christ. (Romans 5:1) 'The children of Isreal and the early Christians were constantly commaned to repent and be baptized... Why would we be COMMANDED to Repent if all I have to do is "Belive"' Because repentance accompanies biblical faith. Repentance is not a work; it is a change of disposition toward one's sin. "God's gift of Salvation is the greatest gift of all, but it is not a free gift, and to presume so is ignorant to the teachings of Apostles" It is a gift, but not a FREE gift? So it is an EARNED gift? Does that make sense? "Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness" --Romans 4:4-5 "I hope this will help humble you and know that I do not undermine the greatness of God, but glorify Him in exponding the importance of His Son, Jesus Christ..." How is it humbling to state that I earned my salvation in any respect? "If I offended you I am sorry, but I am not sorry for the teachings of the Apostles and Prophets" No, it is your interpretation of the apostles and prophets that is sorry... --Joe! |
||||||
460 | And what about those who will die before | NT general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 98260 | ||
"Heinlin's theory doesn't oppose the gift of salvation... it demonstrates that blind faith erases the value of the gift..." Asserting something is not the same as demonstrating something. " To blindly say you believe for the sake of being saved gives no value to the gift of salvation... I'm not pointing fingers, but there are many people who think just 'cause they say they're saved, they're saved..." And I stand with you in saying that simply saying something does not make it so. That does not take away from the biblical truth that human beings are saved by God's grace alone through faith alone in Christ's work alone. "Which is why the gift of salvation isn't necissarilly "Free" in the understanding of most people..." It seems that it is you who is demonstrating a lack of the understanding of "free." 'we still must do our part by keeping and exercising our Faith in Christ, that in itself is a "work"' Sure it is a work, but it is in no way the ground or instrument of our justification. "and Grace makes up the rest... which means we do our required part to earn it..." Salvation is not earned; otherwise it is a wage, not a gift. You never did mention what you do with Paul's epistle to the Romans. Grace does make up the rest; the contribution I make is zero percent. God did the other 100 percent in Christ to bring me to Himself. --Joe! |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 ] Next > Last [97] >> |