Results 321 - 340 of 801
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: jlhetrick Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
321 | What was reason for the virgin birth? | Matt 4:1 | jlhetrick | 185008 | ||
Steve, very excellently put. While I very much appreciate Mark's post (as I always do) I do disagree with any who would argue that Christ was capable of sinning OR that the word of God does not make that perfectly clear. To believe that Christ had the potential to sin is to say absolutely that God has the potential to sin. This argument disagrees with everything I have come to understand about the nature of our Creator. I believe that's why it is important to distinguish between His being sent in the "likeness" as you pointed out. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
322 | Continuous Adultery or not? | Matt 5:32 | jlhetrick | 163785 | ||
Hi Brenda L, Just to let you know you posted your response to me which is no problem as it appears in the thread. However, if you click on the question, in this case by dcj, that person gets an email and they know they have been responded to. You may already know this but I wanted to make sure. Jeff |
||||||
323 | Continuous Adultery or not? | Matt 5:32 | jlhetrick | 163792 | ||
up to you, if there following along it shouldn't matter. For me personally, especially this time of year, I get real busy and don't always follow a thread I have been involved in until I have an email reminder, Jeff |
||||||
324 | Are we to pray to the holy spirit? | Matt 6:9 | jlhetrick | 155201 | ||
Hi Ray, got a question for you related to your above post. You wrote: The heavenly Father is Spirit. The Holy Spirit is Spirit. The Son, being God, is Spirit Jesus was born, lived, and died on the cross a (m)man (in the flesh) who was also God. When He rose again He was "flesh and bone". This same physical body was seen by the deciples ascending into Heaven. Question: Is Jesus now "spirit"? |
||||||
325 | Are we to pray to the holy spirit? | Matt 6:9 | jlhetrick | 155239 | ||
Hi Ray, Well, my (m)man thing was just showing that I disagree with you on your capitalization argument here. Where the title "man" is used to refer to Jesus there are two different functions involved. That of showing that Jesus was a man, and that of showing that Jesus was God. When we refer to His being a (m)man we are talking about that state of humility that He experienced in setting aside for a time His glorified Self in Heaven to become like you and me. When Jesus used the title man to refer to Himself as God, He used Son of Man which pointed toward His being God (capitalization is appropriate). We recognize and believe that Jesus the (m)man was also God. So, I just believe that to attempt to assign God status to the (m)man that Jesus became in order that He might experience temptation and physical death invalidates His whole purpose and need for becoming like us. Perhaps you have heard it taught that Jesus was "fully man" and "fully God". It was required of Him to be fully man, otherwise He could not have truly experienced temptation; though He sinned not. It would not have been so great a feat for Him if He had not become fully man; first, He could not have experienced temptation of sin (and therefore could not have been sufficient as a sacrifice being found blameless), so no biggy and no suffering, and second, He could not have died a physical death, again no suffering. If He could not have died a physical death, He could not have been raised again to life, physically, and death still would not be conquered. So we must honor Him for having humbled Himself in that He became a (m)man and died for you and me, by recognizing that He did so. We do this while recognizing that Jesus was and is fully God. Of course this at once becomes a mystery at this point and one that my (and your) human minds can not comprehend. I have followed your arguments regarding capitalization and respect your opinion though I disagree here. But, I hope that you do not teach or believe that Jesus was not in fact born an actual, physical human. On the other issue; Ray, I simply can't follow your argument here. You support your position with a verse that absolutely contradicts yourself and your position. You write: "I believe that Jesus was always Spirit, was always God, and is now "Spirit" Then you give as support: Luke 24:39 says, "See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; touch Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have." Jesus, right there in your quoted verse says; "a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see THAT I HAVE. Jesus was saying, Hey, wake up guys, your not looking at a "SPIRIT" here, it's me, Jesus, in the flesh. Look at it again Ray, closely. You then contradict yourself again. You write: "A spirit or a ghost does not have flesh and bones like Jesus had, so He was not a ghost." Finish the thought. A SPIRIT OR A GHOST does not have flesh and bones LIKE JESUS HAD, so He was not a ghost (though finished- and He was not a spirit). Not to put words in your fingers Ray, this is only a logical conclusion. Finally Ray, you write: "So He had a resurrected body, one that could still eat food, yet one that went through doors, and could change appearances. Who knows or understands? But I know that He is a Spirit and we shall see Him as He is." Your right that Jesus' body after the resurrection was different. The bible teaches that it was a glorified body but a body none-the-less. Ours too will be changed, and made incorruptible at His glorious coming. We will SEE Him, actually and absolutely. In Luke 24:39 it was a physical body as you point out; He ate and the deciples were able to touch and feel Him. But you emphasis that He "went through doors." Well I go through doors several times a day. I assume that you are teaching what I have heard others teach; that being that he went through a closed door without opening it or similarly through a wall. Let me redirect this and argue that no where in scripture does it teach or say that Jesus walked through unopened doors or through walls, but instead "he stood among them." A more acurate interpretation would be that He "appeared" before them and how, again, this is a mystery that speaks to His glorified body, but a body it was and is. But the bible does not say that "He walked through doors." I don't fault you here though as it is an easy mistake to make when you consider that the verse does render that the doors were locked, bringing the readers attention to the doors. But lets not re-write it. Anyway, I hope I make myself understandable whether or not you agree; I at least hope my presentation is rational and able to be understood. 2 Tim 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. KJV God bless, Jeff |
||||||
326 | how to pray for a backslidder | Matt 7:18 | jlhetrick | 237823 | ||
Amen to that Doc | ||||||
327 | Is lifestyle change proof of salvation? | Matt 7:21 | jlhetrick | 186589 | ||
Good point Steve :) Jeff |
||||||
328 | Is God's love really unconditional? | Matt 10:33 | jlhetrick | 199276 | ||
Doc- a really excellent post. Something I might add that may be helpful to PaPaH is that we Christians must be wise enough to know when our knowledge of the subject is too limited to offer guidance to others (unbelievers or believers). 2Timothy 2:15-16 God bless, Jeff |
||||||
329 | Paul had problems? No one acts good? | Matt 11:28 | jlhetrick | 164956 | ||
Ebrain, Very well put. I hadn't been aware that there were any who thought differently regarding these clear teachings in Romans. I was concerned by the position atdcross was taking. But that is what the forum is for, so that we can consider these things and let the word of God straighten them out for us. Wich writer in the bible referred to himself as "chief" of sinners? Sincerely, Jeff |
||||||
330 | Paul had problems? No one acts good? | Matt 11:28 | jlhetrick | 164970 | ||
Hello Edwin, Yes, Paul referred to himself as chief among sinners, though I have felt at times that I could challenge him for that title. I believe that this self-proclaimed title represented what he illustrated in Romans chapter 7. Thankfully, Paul understood that while he was a long way off from being made perfect, the gift of grace through Christ had already freed him from the slavery to sin though the struggle with the "old" nature continued. Thanks for your continued insightful posts. sincerely, Jeff |
||||||
331 | Why is it not relevant today? | Matt 12:31 | jlhetrick | 186857 | ||
Hello Psalm 52, I have heard arguments both on the side that the unforgivable sin of blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is still a possible sin today and that it is not possible to commit this sin today. On the side of it still being possible the basic gist is that all who die unsaved are guilty of the sin. In fact, as the argument goes, it is the disavowing of Christ's work on the cross that amounts to the sin. On the other side of the argument I have never heard it taught that, as you put it, "The reason it is not relevant today is it was directly addressed to the pharisees as "they were the ones blaspheming the Holy Spirit giving credit for the miracles to Satan." I don't know the answer myself, though I can't understand how your statement about it might in any way suggest the sin was uniquely relevent only to those pharisees. We might perhaps rule out gentiles whom might have likewise given credit to the miracles of Christ to Satan; as they had not been entrusted with the law and the Scriptures. They really had no basis from which to attribute the Lord's work to the one true God. The Gentiles were not well versed in the Scritpures nor awaiting the promise of the Messiah. But what of other Jews who witnessed the miracles of Christ? The argument that it does not apply to today that makes most sense to me is as follows. Those who personally witnessed the man Jesus perform miracles and works (not heard about them but witnessed them) and had knowledge of what to expect in the Messiah; having seen and being unwilling to believe and furthermore basing their rejection on the attribution to Satan were guilty. The argument continues that because our Lord has ascended and it is impossible for any to witness Jesus the man perform a miracle, it is impossible to commit blasphemy of the Holy Spirit in our time. As I stated, I don't know the answer myself, but I don't agree that it was only possible for those pharisees based on the fact that Christ "directly addressed" them or they were the ones in that specific event who made the accusation. I am a bit confused too by your last statement "the one and only unforgivable sin is refusing to believe in Jesus". Does this amount to saying that refusing to believe in Jesus and blasphemy of the Holy Spirit are the exact same thing? If we were to agree that this is true, we would have to conclude that blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is as much possible today as at any time. Would you agree? In any case, your post has encouraged my deeper thinking on the issue so thank you. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
332 | Why is it not relevant today? | Matt 12:31 | jlhetrick | 186895 | ||
Thank you Psalm 25, I don't believe we ever crossed wires on the definition of blasphemy and I don't believe anything either of us have posted suggests that either of us might be confused about the definition. I definitely agree that the THEORY of evolution is blasphemous. If one studies the theory even on a basic level, he will find that it easily and obviously falls into the category of "foolish things" (1Cor 1:27) Did you have a response to my post though? God bless, Jeff |
||||||
333 | Why is it not relevant today? | Matt 12:31 | jlhetrick | 186896 | ||
WOS, As is to be expected, your feedback is right on target and much appreciated. If you look back at my post, my comments on the views regarding the particular sin and whether it can still be committed were not my own views, but the arguments I have heard others make. It's impossible at this point to reference a source for them as they are simply memories of different things I have heard. I most recently heard both sides of the argument night before last on a radio talk show I happened upon while waiting for my youngest daughter to get out of class. I have no idea the name of the program or the speakers. Anyway, I didn't offer my own opinion because it would be just that, opinion. Not worth a grain of salt if I can't back it up with Scripture and I can't so I won't on this issue. I agree totally with your statement "Rejecting the God inspired testimony of the Christ (and what He did) seems really similar to blaspheming the Holy Spirit since it is the Spirit that bears witness in God’s Word." WOS, your feedback is always appreciated and deeply considered as I have found you to be a consciences, biblically based participant. Thanks and God bless, Jeff |
||||||
334 | Why is it not relevant today? | Matt 12:31 | jlhetrick | 186914 | ||
Psalm, I was really asking you to clarify your position; sorry I wasn't clear. For reference I will copy and paste your post (186832 ). You wrote: “If we keep Matt. 12:31 in context the pharisees refused to acknowledge Jesus as "the Son of God," and were therfore attributing His miracles as originating from Satan rather than from God. They only had two choices, either Jesus was "from God the Father" or He was not. If He was not then He got His power from the devil. The reason it is not relevant today is it was directly addressed to the pharisees as "they were the ones blaspheming the Holy Spirit giving credit for the miracles to Satan." The reason it was unforgivable is they did not believe in Jesus as being the Son of God. The one and only unforgivable sin is refusing to believe in Jesus.” In the effort to be clear I will keep it simple. I don’t agree that the argument that Jesus “addressed the Pharisees directly as they were the ones blaspheming the Holy Spirit…” supports that the sin of blaspheming the Holy Spirit is not relevant for today. I did offer an alternative that I have heard others argue, put simply, it was not that Jesus addressed them directly, but rather that they addressed Him directly. In other words, the argument offers that because Jesus the man as ascended and is no longer doing miracles in person for us to witness, it is impossible for us to witness it first hand and attribute it to Satan. After rereading your post several times, it may be that the later is what you were trying to say (maybe not- not wanting to put words in your mouth so to speak :) I may have said that this argument carries some logic, but I also said, and want to reiterate, that I don’t claim to know the answer; I don’t know the answer. Another thing that stood out and lead me to seek clarification was that you seemed to be contradicting yourself; and of course I may be simply misunderstanding you, thus the need for clarification. In either case, you seem to be saying that blasphemy of the Holy Spirit does not/can not occur today while at the same time ending your post with “The one and only unforgivable sin is refusing to believe in Jesus”. It is still possible to, and many do, live a life-time and die having refused to believe in Jesus. So based on your post, as I understand it, you either do believe in at least two unforgivable sins, OR, you believe blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is still relevant for today (and refusing to believe in Christ is that sin), OR, you don’t believe people refuse to believe in Jesus (and I'm not saying that either is true, just left unsure which). Some might argue that this whole issue is irrelevant and not worthy of serious time and consideration. My response to that would be that if there is such thing as a sin that is UNFORGIVABLE by God (and Jesus clearly said there is) it ranks way up there. Whether or not we can answer if the sin is committable today begs the question, why is the warning found in Scripture? God bless, Jeff |
||||||
335 | Why is it not relevant today? | Matt 12:31 | jlhetrick | 186919 | ||
I would agree with that with the obvious reminder that you did offer an argument/answer to the question. Based on your stated concern for leading other readers to err, I respect your decision not to account for your earlier statements. In the event that you do draw some conclusion, feel free to email me a response. My user profile includes my email. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
336 | Why is it not relevant today? | Matt 12:31 | jlhetrick | 186938 | ||
Hello John, I believe I agree with your statement, or at least your intent here. In the case a person dies in his/her sin, I couldn't qualify that the sin was unpardonable, but it certainly was unpardoned. John 8:21-47 (HCSB) 8:21 Then He said to them again, “I’m going away; you will look for Me, and you will die in your sin. Where I’m going, you cannot come.” 22 So the Jews said again, “He won’t kill Himself, will He, since He says, ‘Where I’m going, you cannot come’?” 23 “You are from below,” He told them, “I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. 24 Therefore I told you that you will die in your sins. For if you do not believe that I am [He], you will die in your sins.” 25 “Who are You?” they questioned. “Precisely what I’ve been telling you from the very beginning,” Jesus told them. 26 “I have many things to say and to judge about you, but the One who sent Me is true, and what I have heard from Him—these things I tell the world.” 27 They did not know He was speaking to them about the Father. 28 So Jesus said to them, “When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am [He], and that I do nothing on My own. But just as the Father taught Me, I say these things. 29 The One who sent Me is with Me. He has not left Me alone, because I always do what pleases Him.” 30 As He was saying these things, many believed in Him. 31 So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed Him, “If you continue in My word, you really are My disciples. 32 You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” 33 “We are descendants of Abraham,” they answered Him, “and we have never been enslaved to anyone. How can You say, ‘You will become free’?” 34 Jesus responded, “ I assure you: Everyone who commits sin is a slave of sin. 35 A slave does not remain in the household forever, but a son does remain forever. 36 Therefore if the Son sets you free, you really will be free. 37 I know you are descendants of Abraham, but you are trying to kill Me because My word is not welcome among you. 38 I speak what I have seen in the presence of the Father, and therefore you do what you have heard from your father.” 39 “Our father is Abraham!” they replied. “If you were Abraham’s children,” Jesus told them, “you would do what Abraham did. 40 But now you are trying to kill Me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. Abraham did not do this! 41 You’re doing what your father does.” “We weren’t born of sexual immorality,” they said. “We have one Father—God.” 42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love Me, because I came from God and I am here. For I didn’t come on My own, but He sent Me. 43 Why don’t you understand what I say? Because you cannot listen to My word. 44 You are of your father the Devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning and has not stood in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he tells a lie, he speaks from his own nature, because he is a liar and the father of liars. 45 Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe Me. 46 Who among you can convict Me of sin? If I tell the truth, why don’t you believe Me? 47 The one who is from God listens to God’s words. This is why you don’t listen, because you are not from God.” God bless friend, Jeff |
||||||
337 | Why is it not relevant today? | Matt 12:31 | jlhetrick | 186941 | ||
Hello Psalm and thanks for your patience and for responding. Great quote from "Got Questions.org. With the exception of the contradiction in the statement I basically agree with it. It is close to the usual explanation I often here. I believe the contradiction is in the first statement being "As a result, the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit cannot be duplicated today. Jesus Christ is not on earth. but seated at the right Hand of God. No one can witness Jesus Christ performing a miracle and then attribute that power to Satan instead of the Spirit." Followed by this statement: "Continual rejection of the Holy Spirit’s promptings to trust in Jesus Christ is the unpardonable blasphemy." Again, we are left with the question, is it still possible to commit the unpardonable sin today or not? The statement from Got Questions.com also seems to say no and yes. Anyway, I believe you and I are probably very close, if not in complete agreement, regarding the issue. As I said before, this is not an issue that I would accept at this point as being a waste of time in considering. I do agree that there is nothing productive that can come from the continued discussion here on the Forum. thanks for your feedback, Jeff |
||||||
338 | Offended by What is Understood | Matt 15:12 | jlhetrick | 242031 | ||
I can identify with that - 2 Timothy 3:16 | ||||||
339 | how did jesus teach disciples about | Matt 16:19 | jlhetrick | 208929 | ||
Cheri, well put.. it grabs hold because it offers hope. For those who do not know and do not submit to God and His word they can not know that the hope WOF offers is a false hope; not to mention a gross misrepresentation (in the least) of God's holy word. | ||||||
340 | Still not convinced preterism is false | Matt 16:28 | jlhetrick | 184851 | ||
Coper, You wrote: "Matt. 28:16-20 is called the great commission. To whom was it addressed? Verse 16 says explicitly that it was to the eleven remaining disciples. Was it written to us? No. It is history. And, they proceeded to do just as Christ commanded them. If one chooses to apply that to themselves and others, I believe that they are misusing the direct command of Christ to the eleven. If one does not use this hermeneutic they open themselves up to all the abuses that we've all seen." Respectfully I must say that your standard that others must use "this hermeneutic" in other words, Your interpretation then they "open themselves up to all the abuses that we've all seen" is perhaps the most telling of anything you have written thus far. You have essentially stated that any interpretation other than yours (specifically concerning Matt 28:16-20) is an abuse. WOW! You have just declared yourself an authority. I'm afraid that, based on your teachings, I can't accept that. However, as a self-declared authority (in my opinion) can you please explain a couple of things regarding Matt 28:16-20. Was Jesus' command to the eleven as you assert, or was it to the Church of which He is the head? If we are to believe your hermeneutics then we must absolutely accept that the eleven failed to fulfill the command of Christ. After all, we know from record that they did not in fact reach every nation with the gospel. We also know absolutely that every nation still has not been reached with the gospel. So my concern is that if the rest of Christendom was to accept your interpretation and belief on the issue, the church would not be continuing to do the work of the Kingdom. I can appreciate that viewing the "Great Commission" as a "principle" instead of a command would lend convenience to many who wish not to take seriously the responsibilities of reaching the lost. But I would seriously caution calling the position the majority of Christians take on this command as being an "abuse". Still hoping to shed light, Jeff |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ] Next > Last [41] >> |