Results 341 - 360 of 801
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: jlhetrick Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
341 | I can use Galatians 4:16 as a support. | 1 Tim 5:19 | jlhetrick | 184475 | ||
Greetings TTime, thank you for your comments. I'm glad your concerned about the witness of Christians and I pray for a successful outcome regarding your current struggles. I do appreciate what you are going through. In my years as a Christian I have been disappointed by many in the church regarding their sin. In time though, I finally realized that my attention to their sinfulness did more to take time, energy, and effort away from dealing with my own sin. It's like racism. Focusing on the perceived shortcomings of the other in order to feel superior. It's a tragic trap to get caught up in. I agree that it is inappropriate for any Christian to be participating in any sin at any time for any reason. Any Christian, including one in a leadership position, needs to be held accountable when continuing willfully in sin. If you find it necessary to take on that role of disciplinary yourself, I hope this exchange has given you enough to think about during the course. One final thought and passage that hopefully will help. "Matt 7:1-5 "Judge not, that you be not judged. 2 For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you. 3 And why do you look at the speck in your brother's eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye? 4 Or how can you say to your brother, 'Let me remove the speck from your eye'; and look, a plank is in your own eye? 5 Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye. " NKJV It is not my intention to call you the "hypocrite" but to encourage you to ensure that you are not. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
342 | I can use Galatians 4:16 as a support. | 1 Tim 5:19 | jlhetrick | 184426 | ||
Hello TTime, It seems you have resisted if not rejected my input. Allow me to clarify please. I did not intend to suggest that you have no grounding in the Word, I apologize for having come across that way. On the forum I have a habit of "cutting to the chase" as the space and time is limited for responding. Your original question was: "Where are scriptures to support having to confront leadership or authority? I recall I believe there was a time when Peter had to confront authority..." A clear statement that you did not have the Scriptural foundation to address the problem at hand. This issue being such a delicate matter, I felt it prudent to recommend you leave the matter to someone "more" grounded in the Word. I hope this is better expressed and received. Sorry you didn't find the scripture reference helpful. But your follow up to me did very well to demonstrate the application. You are half right concerning those sinners that Jesus interacted with. Some were changed, but some, as we see in the text, were not. Multiple encounters with the religious leaders of the day are good references. I agree totally that if this "leader" is accepting of the sin vs. the sinner then your concern is legitimate. While I am not an "official" church leader, I do believe I am a respected member of the church and local community. This weekend I will be attending a dinner party with my wife and her coworkers. It will be in a public place. There will be alcohol served and at least two of the participants are openly homosexual. I will be friendly and sociable. I know some things about these people and I don't believe a one of them to be saved. They also know a little about me. It's nice to know that my presence alone is enough to prevent dirty jokes and other behaviors that are customary for this group. I will enjoy my meal and my wife's company and pray that my witness will be obvious. Of course, I always pray that the Lord will use me to lead another to Him. God bless and thank you for allowing me to clarify. Jeff |
||||||
343 | WHY DOSE IT HAVE TO BE MOSSES AND ELIJAH | Revelation | jlhetrick | 184405 | ||
Hello weit74, Just thought I'd let you know that you are responding to a post that is just a couple of weeks short of being six years old. This is perfectly fine, just wanted you to know you might not get a response back from Elijah. |
||||||
344 | I can use Galatians 4:16 as a support. | 1 Tim 5:19 | jlhetrick | 184381 | ||
Hello TTime, sounds like a dire situation and my heart goes out to you as you are apparently very disturbed about the situation. However, let my words be words of caution. It is far from our understanding, and possibly your own, just exactly what this leader is involved with. Possibly sinful behavior, possibly reaching out to the lost. So my caution is that you don't misjudge this person and act in a way that will end up embarrassing yourself and putting yourself in the wrong. It may be more appropriate to have someone more grounded in Scripture deal with this. It's no small thing to question or "confront" a leader called by God as we have to assume at this point this person is. While your mulling this over consider the following passage. Matt 9:10-13 10 And as Jesus reclined at table in the house, behold, many tax collectors and sinners came and were reclining with Jesus and his disciples. 11 And when the Pharisees saw this, they said to his disciples, "Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?" 12 But when he heard it, he said, "Those who are well have no need of a physician , but those who are sick. 13 Go and learn what this means, 'I desire mercy, and not sacrifice.' For I came not to call the righteous, but sinners." ESV God bless and prayer for the Lord's guidance on this, Jeff |
||||||
345 | Same supper as John 12? | Luke 10:38 | jlhetrick | 184380 | ||
Hello Jonp, Thanks for directing me to those accounts. It's time for me to break out my "Harmony of the Gospels" again. Thanks, Jeff |
||||||
346 | What about physical attraction? | 1 John 2:16 | jlhetrick | 184362 | ||
Johp, Excellent post, advise, and representation of God's truth in this matter. Thank you for shedding honest and truthful light on this issue that probably effects more men than are honest or brave enough to admit to. Blessings, Jeff |
||||||
347 | Same supper as John 12? | Luke 10:38 | jlhetrick | 184359 | ||
Hello Jonp, Good points brother and well said. For clarification I just wanted to point out that we're not told that "some of the disciples...protested" but rather only Judas Iscariot was mentioned individually and by name. And specifically the Scriptures tell us that his protest was "internal" "...because he was a thief and had the bag, and carried what was put into it..." Otherwise your explanation of these two separate events was very well stated and insightful, not to mention very sound principles set forth. And thanks Mommapbs for asking the question. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
348 | origin of the devil | Ezek 28:13 | jlhetrick | 184323 | ||
Sister Azure, bless you and thank you for your kindness. Speaking for myself, and I believe others would agree, there are many things that you contribute to the forum that are as productive and as much a blessing as what others may have "learned" about the scriptures. Your humility, your grace, and your sincere honesty are treasures of Scripture that many of us know very much about but few are able to live them. I just want you to know that when I read your posts, it is these things in you that cause me to strive ever harder, making me aware of my own shortcomings. God bless your church ministry and all you do. We understand when you have to be away for awhile but please don't forget about us. You are a pearl. Sincerely, God bless, Jeff |
||||||
349 | Cont radiction??? | Luke 2:11 | jlhetrick | 184302 | ||
Correction: In the first sentence of my above post where I typed Isaiah 28:18 I meant isaiah 28:10. Sorry! Jeff |
||||||
350 | Cont radiction??? | Luke 2:11 | jlhetrick | 184301 | ||
Hello San Lukas, When I wrote that you will be well on your way when you are able to explain Isa 28:10 I truly hoped you would take that opportunity to consider Isa 28:18. I mean, in terms of what the verse is saying, who is saying it and what really is the point. We have to be careful in loose interpretations. You wrote as your understanding of the verse: "clearly we don't have to read the whole verse after God answers our question with the 'line'...." Some logic will do nicely here. Ask youself, if the "line" is sufficient, then why did God inspire the whole verse; and those after, and those before? The verse is teaching actually quite the opposite from your assumption. Again; who is speaking, Isaiah the prophet? Some translations show this verse in quotation marks. It is widely understood that it is probably those leaders Isaiah mentioned in the previous verses. When you consider they were angry with Isaiah and the wording of verses 9-10 it takes on a certain sarcastic tone; wouldn't you agree? "To WHOM will HE teach knowledge, and to whom will HE explain the message...(empasis added). "Those who are weaned from the milk, those taken from the breast? (sarcasm) As though Isaiahs teachings were for no more than children, certainly not the wise and learned among them. The priests and prophets had become drunkards and in their position of power and authority did not appreciate that Isaiah "spoke down" to them as though they were children..."precept upon precept, precept upon precept, line upon line, line upon line, hear a little there a little." (remember the sarcastic drip). So what do we gain from this. My belief is that precept upon precept, precept upon precept, line upone line, line upon line, and hear a little there a little must have been the way Isaiah the prophet was approaching the teaching of God's people. So as with children, "precept upon precept, precept upon precept - repetitive learning, hearing it over and over again. "line upon line, line upon line" This would be the most important point in correcting your view here. This would not mean read along until you think you have an answer and then stop (even in the middle of the verse). Rather, it refers to the truth that Scripture interprets Scripture. As we read along and study, line upon line, verse upon verse, chapter upon chapter, book upon book, and testament upon testament, the "doctrine" will be established. I hope this helps, God bless, Jeff |
||||||
351 | Did Jesus clean the temple twice | NT general Archive 1 | jlhetrick | 184249 | ||
Hello stj, Yes, our Lord was a prophet. It surprising that you are not willing to accept biblical evidence of this. How about Jesus Himself referring to Himself as a prophet. Would you accept that friend? Luke 13:31-33 (ESV) 13:31 At that very hour some Pharisees came and said to him, "Get away from here, for Herod wants to kill you." 32 And he said to them, "Go and tell that fox, 'Behold, I cast out demons and perform cures today and tomorrow, and the third day I finish my course. 33 Nevertheless, I must go on my way today and tomorrow and the day following, for it cannot be that a prophet should perish away from Jerusalem.' And what will you pass of as the meaning behind our Lord's words in Luke 4:24? I particularly like how Wayne Grudem put it. PROPHET: One of the offices fulfilled by Christ, the office by which he most fully reveals God to us and speaks to us the words of God. (29 A) (from Systematic Theology, Copyright © 1994 by Wayne Grudem. All rights reserved.) I particularly appreciate how detailed and specific many of His prophecies were such as His predicting His betrayal by Judas, that of Peter's denying Him, His own death and resurrection, the Last Days, etc., ect., so on and so forth. WOW!! stj, now THAT is really something. And what a prophet He was don't you agree. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
352 | origin of the devil | Ezek 28:13 | jlhetrick | 184217 | ||
Brother Jonp, Thanks for the response. Bare with me as I do my best to respond to some of what you have said here. I will do my best to stick to the point. "A good principle in Scripture is to commence with what is clear, and then to move on to what is not clear, and finally to interpret what is not clear by what is clear." I agree with this statement yet I do not see this happening in this particular case. It seems that you have taken a few verses, and, based on your presumptions about Gen. 1:26, assigned those same presumptions. Pointing to Gen 3:22 doesn't begin to present a clear example that would sufficiently clarify 1:26 as referring to Angels. "But ‘like one of us’ here gives a decided suggestion of plurality far in excess of what we would expect to find in a book which emphasises the oneness of God, if God alone was in mind. Indeed if its reference is to God alone then it leaves itself wide open to being interpreted as signifying more than one God." When considering the trinity, I simply don't agree with this premise. Switching the focus to the "knowledge of good and evil" statement and presenting the argument that the angels knew both good and evil does not support the argument in my opinion. I would like to here from others regarding how they see this. The rest of your post does give some good examples of how angels operate, but still does not point to support your position in any way clear to me. I do believe that if there is anything you have written that should serve to bring question to your own argument it should be your comment on verse 27. You wrote. "But Genesis 1.27 makes clear that it was God Himself Who was involved in creating man, just as He alone created all things." To clarify, I believe you meant it WAS GOD who created.. vs. "who was involved in creating..." If you do not mean/believe this please correct me. But the value of your statement is in it's pointing back to vs. 26. If the "US" and "OUR" refers to both God and the angels, then how could we possibly interpret this verse as saying anything other than man was created by BOTH God and the angels? If God said "let us make" and was speaking to the angels, then the "us" being God and the angels did in fact create man. I'm of the opinion that either of us believe that. What we have agreed on is the importance of context and the only proof positive interpretation method is that of Scripture interpreting Scripture. With those things agreed on I would add that the best "context" is the immediate context (though that is my opinion and certainly open to debate). What where there is immediate context that apparently speaks to the point, my thought is that that should be considered with the heavier weight. Where it stands, vs. 27, "God created man in His own image..." (NASB) seems a better and more immediate reference to clarify the preceding vs 26. We're not only dealing with a "our image" issue, we're dealing with a "us create" issue. Otherwise we tend to rewrite vs 27 in such a way as to say "God and the angels created man in their own image..." There would be a false teaching. And jonp, please sir. To present the theory that God simply wanted the angels to "feel involved in what He was doing" is an extreme stretch in the least case. As parents, you and I may in fact mislead our children into believing they are more involved with a task than they are in order to involve and encourage them. But even if it's something as small as bringing daddy the hammer from the tool box, the fact is that the child did participate in the completion of the task. I stress caution in this way of thinking. I find nowhere in Scripture where God misleads His creation in order to make them feel involved. I hope my response is sufficient to cause some alarm and caution at least. It is likely that we all have been guilty of interpreting scripture based on preconceived ideas based on early taught experiences and denominational biases. The work of growing in the knowledge of Him is in that we allow the scriptures themselves to fine-tune our understanding and what we believe. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
353 | origin of the devil | Ezek 28:13 | jlhetrick | 184196 | ||
I agree and I particularly appreciate our sister Azure as well. Haven't seen anything from her lately but I do miss a lot with only being able to log on for short periods some days. By the way, I hope to encourage you by saying that regarding the regular posters, you represent the top one percent in terms of responding with grace. I'm afraid I often come across on the other end of the spectrum and I guess recognizing this is at least a step in the right direction. God bless, Jeff God bless, jeff |
||||||
354 | origin of the devil | Ezek 28:13 | jlhetrick | 184189 | ||
humbled, Thank you for your question to Jonp regarding the reference to Gen. 1:26-27. If you look below you will see that I was also trying to address this but was unable to articulate the question as well as you were. In any case, I do believe that if the "us" referred to God and angels verse 27 might look quite different. Just my thoughts, God bless, Jeff |
||||||
355 | origin of the devil | Ezek 28:13 | jlhetrick | 184188 | ||
Jonp' you wrote: "God is God and Satan is only one of 'the sons of the elohim' (Job 1-2). But that being said as a created being he is very powerful (Jude 9). We must therefore be thankful that our lives are hid with Christ in God' and have been transported into the kingdom of His beloved Son where all he can do shoot his arrows at us." Yes, thankyou for that statement brother. And Praise the Lord that He does keep and protect us. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
356 | origin of the devil | Ezek 28:13 | jlhetrick | 184186 | ||
Thanks Jonp, You did not bring up the question in order to cause controversy. I brought up the question. And not to cause controversy but for the very reason I stated in my post. I have heard the passage explained both ways; referring to the angels and referring to the trinity. You have given a lot of information in response but the questions remain as they have not been answered here. It is not an issue of controversy so please don't feel the need to be defensive. This is the way of the Forum. When someone posts something very specific that is questionable and does not offer biblical support for it, another will often ask for clarification and/or biblical support. In my case, on this topic, I simply don't know the answer and was hoping that you might help. In the interest of trying to weigh this all allow me to comment on some points you made. you wrote: "The issue here is why God said 'us'. We must ask, would a writer who was very concerned continually to stress the oneness of God (Deuteronomy 6.4-5; Exodus 20.3 - note the 'Me') be so careless as to use 'us' in a polytheistic world." I honestly don't know, but my first thought was that the writer DID use the word US and DIDN'T offer an explanation. That would appear to make your question irrelevant. You also wrote: "And this is especially so as in a creation account we should expect to find some indication of where the Cherubim in 3.24 came from." Yet we do not find it in this creation account...? "So there is nothing unlikely in their being introduced" But they are not..? "Moving on to your questions about God's image. We must ask, what is the image of God in man. It is surely 'that in man that makes him different from all other creatures" Would you include the created angels in this statement; I mean, that we are "different" from all other creatures? That seems to take us back to square one here. Anyway, I hope my response serves to show that I truly do not know which is right on this topic and my questions were my questions, not attempts to discredit you or cause controversy. By the way, you do have my email so if you are able to answer the question from Scripture I'm still searching and would appreciate your input. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
357 | origin of the devil | Ezek 28:13 | jlhetrick | 184175 | ||
Hello jonp, This is a little off topic perhaps, but I have a question about a statement in your post. You wrote: "just as the angelic court are assumed in God's words 'Let us make man in OUR image' (Genesis 1.26). We are given a recognition that such spiritual beings exist but not given the details." I too have heard it taught that God was speaking to the angels when He said "let us make man in OUR image", but I have always struggled wtih this teaching. Perhaps you can shed some light on it for me. Where in Scripture are we to draw the conclusion that God was speaking to angels. I guess the questions that need to be answered are; 1. where does Scripture state that angels were created in God's image? 2. where in Scripture does it state that man was created in the image of angels; or the image of God and angels? Help with this please. I have also heard this passage taught as referring to the Trinity and having heard this accepted it as being scriptural. Thanks in advance for any help you can give here. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
358 | Cont radiction??? | Luke 2:11 | jlhetrick | 184143 | ||
Hello San Lukas, It surprises me that you would ask who we should trust, "Bible scholars or God himself". The answer is God always. If you ever do run across a so-called bible scholar who in any way suggest that he/she should be trusted before God, please alert the forum so we can all steer clear. With that said, it seems to me that we are seeing more and more the attempt of many to hold their own half-hearted, inconsistent, presumptuous study efforts above that of the sound scholars and teachers that have gone before us. As a matter of fact, if you pay close attention on this very forum, there are occasional posters who even go so far as to teach something brand new as though God had finally chosen, say, Joe Blow to reveal a new truth finally in 2007. Am I exaggerating? NOPE! Keep this in mind. Our doctrine does not establish the truth of Scripture. It is the Truth of Scripture that establishes our doctrine. 2 Cor 11:1-4 Oh, that you would bear with me in a little folly — and indeed you do bear with me. 2 For I am jealous for you with godly jealousy. For I have betrothed you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. 3 But I fear, lest somehow, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, so your minds may be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. 4 For if he who comes preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or if you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted — you may well put up with it! NKJV Gal 1:6-9 I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel , 7 which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed. NKJV Keep these Scriptures in mind as you proceed. You will be well on your way when you are able to well explain Isa 28:10 which you quoted. That is a good place to start. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
359 | Cont radiction??? | Luke 2:11 | jlhetrick | 184103 | ||
Hello San Lukas, With all due respect friend, I believed my original answer was a "straight" answer. Too often some are not satisfied with a direct answer from Scripture unless the responder offers a lot of "interpretation" or thought on it. It's not important that I say that Jesus and the Father God are one. What did Jesus say? He said: "I and the Father are one". If you type the word Trinity in the search box you will find a lot of information regarding the Scriptural doctrine of the Trinity. As for the long list of verses you quoted let me offer this. I don't find the value in plucking verses spontaneously from various books and do not know of any serious bible student or scholar who recommends that type approach to bible study. Furthermore, it certainly is not an efficient nor an effective use of the Forum space. None of what I have written is meant to be short and I am not unconcerned about your questions. My encouragement though is that you focus your studies in a way that is logical and focused so that your time will be more productive. You might start over at this point by asking a question about a specific teaching and or meaning of a passage. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
360 | philippians 3 | Phil 3:10 | jlhetrick | 184043 | ||
Hello brother Jon, Very excellent points. I can not speak for Searcher but I will say that I took his post to have been made out of the same concern I had when I read yours. PJ's question was specific in asking "what did Paul have to do to attain..." While your post did point out that the WORK was that of God and not Paul (thank you), that was more of an afterthought (in my opinion) and the sacrifice of Paul seemed to have prominence. I'm guessing that Searcher was responding to that. For anyone with a good background in bible doctrine your post was easily understandable, however, there are many who ask and simply read along on the Forum who lack even the basics (not referring to you PJ as I don't know your background). In any case, we try to police ourselves the best we can when these issues come up. Hope your enjoying the Forum, God bless, Jeff |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ] Next > Last [41] >> |