Results 3741 - 3760 of 4232
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: kalos Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
3741 | Is man a 'triune' creature? | Heb 4:12 | kalos | 2210 | ||
So far I have heard, "It is my conviction...," "I believe...," and "I believe..." Scripture, please. | ||||||
3742 | Is man a 'triune' creature? | Heb 4:12 | kalos | 2302 | ||
Dear Charis: Fear not. I'm not going to blow a gasket. I like to think that usually when I blow a gasket, it is because the reply is neither logical nor Scriptural, but a rambling diatribe against my position. I respect your views not only because I know the quality of them, having read so many at this site, but also because they are well-thought-out and presented so calmly and reasonably. However, after serious consideration of your reply, I still stick to my original position on this issue. . . . With regard to MacArthur's opinion(?) (if it's an opinion, it is a highly educated one), please note that he quotes Heb 4:12 and 1 Thess 5:23 to support his answer, just as you do to support yours. . . . If indeed the soul and spirit are two separate entities, I would like to see a clear verse of Scripture defining soul and another defining spirit. Then I would like to see a verse that clearly defines the distinction between the two, not a verse that merely lists the two without differentiating between them. I am not trying to test or tempt anyone. I feel that my question is a reasonable one that deserves clear verses of Scripture to establish some distinction between spirit and soul. One thing no one can deny is: I cannot spell or type in the morning. This website needs a spell checker. Amen? |
||||||
3743 | Is man a 'triune' creature? | Heb 4:12 | kalos | 2319 | ||
To whom it may concern: . . . It's OK if Charis (and Charis only, please) calls me dummy. :-) He knoweth whereof he speaketh. |
||||||
3744 | Is man a 'triune' creature? | Heb 4:12 | kalos | 2323 | ||
Dear Charis: I do respect what you wrote to inhzsvc. Honestly, I think the closest one could come to making a factual disctinction between soul and spirit would be: To look up the original Greek and Hebrew word(s) translated "soul", and the one(s) translated "spirit". Then read what each original language word means, how it is used, and the different English words used to translate the orginal Heb or Gr word throughout the same Bible version. This might shed some light on the subject. Yours, JVH0212 (not dummy, just a little forgetful :-) ) | ||||||
3745 | Is man a 'triune' creature? | Heb 4:12 | kalos | 2412 | ||
Dear Charis, No need to apologize. I never took any offense. In fact, it was obvious to me that you were not addressing me, since the word dummy was in the non-existent Bible verse which you so accurately quoted. rofl Your brother in the Lord, JVH0212 | ||||||
3746 | EXPLAIN HEBREWS 4:12 WHAT DOES IT MEAN? | Heb 4:12 | kalos | 32682 | ||
Tim: Isn't the forum a wonderful educational experience? Without it I never would have known that Hebrews 4:12 was not talking about the Scriptures. I guess we are in error when we say the Scriptures are (the Bible is) "living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword." So, according to some Forumites (not you, Tim), it is not true that the Scriptues are able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart? What an odd notion! Grace to you, kalos |
||||||
3747 | How can Jesus be tempted if He is God? | Heb 4:15 | kalos | 4790 | ||
RWC: Good to hear from you. The only comments I have with regard to what you asked me are as follows: In His incarnation, Jesus was both true God and true man. And He never for one minute ceased being God. This nonsense that teaches He became a sinner on the cross, then went into hell, took upon Himself the nature of Satan, and had to be born again in hell, then rise from the dead; and only after his rebirth in hell and resurrection did he pay the full price to atone for the sin of the world -- this whole thing is blasphemy, heresy, and probably apostasy. (I am not attributing this teaching to you. I know that you never said this. I merely cite what some erroneously believe so that I can emphasize that Jesus Christ never for one minute ceased to be God.) I can empathize with your struggle. However, regarding the second part of your question, "I wonder if Jesus was just as capable of disobeying as Adam had been," I must say: 1) I am not equipped to answer your question with the careful wording that the answer deserves. 2) I've stopped trying to explain that which is unexplainable. RWC, I criticize neither you nor your question. Nothing in my answer should be taken as sarcasm. Instead, I encourage you in your pursuit of understanding. In the Word of God keep seeking for the truth with an open mind and you will find it. God bless you. I have given you the best answer that I am capable of. --JVH0212 |
||||||
3748 | Did Jesus experence real temptation? | Heb 4:15 | kalos | 164841 | ||
Could Jesus have sinned? 'If He was not capable of sinning, how could He truly be able to "sympathize with our weaknesses (Heb 4:15)? If He could not sin, what was the point of the temptation?" 'No, Jesus could not have sinned. If He could have sinned He would still be able to sin today because He retains the same essence He did while living on earth. He is the God-Man -- and will forever remain so, having full deity and full humanity so included in one person as to be indivisible. To believe that Jesus could sin is to believe that God could sin. Colossians 1:19 For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell. Colossians 2:9 For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. 'Although Jesus is fully human He was not born with the same sinful nature that we are born with. He certainly was tempted in the same way we are, in that temptations were put before Him by Satan, yet He remained sinless because God is incapable of sinning. It is against His very nature (Matthew 4:1; Hebrews 2:18, 4:15; James 1:13). Sin is by definition a trespass of the Law. God created the Law and the Law is by nature what God would or would not do. Therefore, sin is anything that God would not do by his very nature. 'To be tempted is not in and of itself sinful. A person could tempt you with something you have no desire to do, such as to smoke crack or participate in a homosexual act. You probably have no desire whatsoever to take part in these actions, but you were still tempted because someone placed the possibility before you. There are at least two definitions for tempted: '1) Tempted - To have a sinful proposition suggested to you by someone or something outside yourself or by your own sin nature. '2) Tempted - To consider actually participating in a sinful act and the possible pleasures and consequences of such act to such a degree that the act is already taking place in your mind. 'The first definition does not describe a sinful act/thought, the second does. When you dwell upon a sinful act and consider how you might be able to bring it to pass you have crossed the line of sin. Jesus was tempted in the fashion of definition 1, except that He was never tempted by a sin nature because it did not exist within Him. Satan proposed certain sinful acts to Jesus but He had no inner desire to participate in the sin. Hence He was tempted like we are but remained sinless. 'Jesus knows what it is like to be tempted but He does not know what it is like to sin. This does not prevent Him from assisting us. We are tempted with sins that are common to man (1 Corinthians 10:13). These sins generally can be boiled down to three different types: the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh and the pride of life (1 John 2:16). Examine the temptation and sin of Eve as well as the temptation of Jesus and you will find that the temptations for each came from these three categories. Jesus was tempted in every way and in every area that we are, but remained perfectly holy. Although our corrupt natures will have the inner desire to participate in some sins we have the ability to "just say no" to sin because we are no longer slaves to sin but rather slaves of God (Romans 6 especially verses 2 and 16-22).' ____________________ www.gotquestions.org/could-Jesus-have-sinned.html |
||||||
3749 | Could Jesus have sinned? | Heb 4:15 | kalos | 178987 | ||
Could Jesus have sinned? (Source: www.gotquestions.org/could-Jesus-have-sinned.html) 'If He was not capable of sinning, how could He truly be able to "sympathize with our weaknesses (Heb 4:15)? If He could not sin, what was the point of the temptation?" 'No, Jesus could not have sinned. If He could have sinned He would still be able to sin today because He retains the same essence He did while living on earth. He is the God-Man -- and will forever remain so, having full deity and full humanity so included in one person as to be indivisible. To believe that Jesus could sin is to believe that God could sin. Colossians 1:19 For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell. Colossians 2:9 For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. 'Although Jesus is fully human He was not born with the same sinful nature that we are born with. He certainly was tempted in the same way we are, in that temptations were put before Him by Satan, yet He remained sinless because God is incapable of sinning. It is against His very nature (Matthew 4:1; Hebrews 2:18, 4:15; James 1:13). Sin is by definition a trespass of the Law. God created the Law and the Law is by nature what God would or would not do. Therefore, sin is anything that God would not do by his very nature. 'To be tempted is not in and of itself sinful. A person could tempt you with something you have no desire to do, such as to smoke crack or participate in a homosexual act. You probably have no desire whatsoever to take part in these actions, but you were still tempted because someone placed the possibility before you. There are at least two definitions for tempted: '1) Tempted - To have a sinful proposition suggested to you by someone or something outside yourself or by your own sin nature. '2) Tempted - To consider actually participating in a sinful act and the possible pleasures and consequences of such act to such a degree that the act is already taking place in your mind. 'The first definition does not describe a sinful act/thought, the second does. When you dwell upon a sinful act and consider how you might be able to bring it to pass you have crossed the line of sin. Jesus was tempted in the fashion of definition 1, except that He was never tempted by a sin nature because it did not exist within Him. Satan proposed certain sinful acts to Jesus but He had no inner desire to participate in the sin. Hence He was tempted like we are but remained sinless. 'Jesus knows what it is like to be tempted but He does not know what it is like to sin. This does not prevent Him from assisting us. We are tempted with sins that are common to man (1 Corinthians 10:13). These sins generally can be boiled down to three different types: the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh and the pride of life (1 John 2:16). Examine the temptation and sin of Eve as well as the temptation of Jesus and you will find that the temptations for each came from these three categories. Jesus was tempted in every way and in every area that we are, but remained perfectly holy. Although our corrupt natures will have the inner desire to participate in some sins we have the ability to "just say no" to sin because we are no longer slaves to sin but rather slaves of God (Romans 6 especially verses 2 and 16-22).' ____________________ www.gotquestions.org/could-Jesus-have-sinned.html [Note: If anyone reading this has neither the ability to understand nor the faith to believe that Jesus could not have sinned, then I feel sorry for you and will pray for you. "To believe that Jesus could sin is to believe that God could sin." --Kalos] |
||||||
3750 | Could Jesus have sinned? | Heb 4:15 | kalos | 179006 | ||
Well said, Doc. Grace to you, John |
||||||
3751 | Protect them wheresoe'er they go | Heb 4:16 | kalos | 107290 | ||
A Prayer Request Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need. Heb 4:16 Let us not forget to pray daily for the men and women of the U.S. armed forces who are serving in Iraq, as well as other perilous duty stations around the world -- and for their families. Almighty Father, Strong to Save "O hear us when we cry to Thee For those in peril on the sea." "O Trinity of love and power, Our brethren shield in danger's hour; From rock and tempest, fire, and foe, Protect them wheresoe'er they go; Thus, evermore shall rise to thee Glad praise from air and land and sea." |
||||||
3752 | What is a repentance from dead works? | Heb 6:1 | kalos | 133655 | ||
Justified by faith apart from good deeds Steve: Yours is an excellent answer! NASB Romans 3:28 For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law. AMPLIFIED Romans 3:28 For we hold that a man is justified and made upright by faith independent of and distinctly apart from good deeds (works of the Law). [The observance of the Law has nothing to do with justification.] Grace to you, Kalos |
||||||
3753 | Once salvation is lost, it's always lost | Heb 6:4 | kalos | 226 | ||
" . . . logically v. 4 implies that if salvation were to be lost, it would be impossible for that person to be born again, lose it, and then be born again again. This much is clear: whoever openly and consciously rejects Jesus Christ is unregenerate even if he seemed to have been saved ealier." Whether he had lost his salvation or never had it to begin with, "either way, the result is identical." (note at Heb. 6:4ff, NRSV Harper Study Bible) | ||||||
3754 | Halting short of faith in Christ. | Heb 6:4 | kalos | 5079 | ||
6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, "impossible "Hebrews 6:4-8 presents the case of Jewish professed believers who halt short of faith in Christ after advancing to the very threshold of salvation, even "going along with" the Holy Spirit in His work of enlightenment and conviction (John 16:8-10). It is not said that they had faith. This supposed person is like the spies at Kadesh-barnea (Deuteronomy 1:19-26) who saw the land and had the very fruit of it in their hands, and yet turned back. "partakers (Greek - iJlavskomai ," going along with)." Bibliography Information Scofield, C.I. "Scofield Reference Notes on Hebrews 6". "Scofield Reference Notes (1917 Edition)". http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/ScofieldReferenceNotes/ 1917. |
||||||
3755 | Once salvation is lost, it's always lost | Heb 6:4 | kalos | 7419 | ||
I was not saying a backslider (whatever that is, since no form of the word appears in the NT) cannot be restored. Nor am I the author of the concept that: If they "have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance," as it plainly SAYS in Hebrews 6:6. The writer of Hebrews is the one who says that. Maybe that verse wasn't inspired. Maybe the writer was "in error." Maybe the scripture here does not mean what it says. Maybe somebody doesn't understand or believe what it says. All of the above? None of the above? |
||||||
3756 | Once salvation is lost, it's always lost | Heb 6:4 | kalos | 7509 | ||
I know Scripture doesn't contradict itself. That's what I've been saying on this forum for the last 109 days. :-) JVH0212 |
||||||
3757 | Once salvation is lost, it's always lost | Heb 6:4 | kalos | 7549 | ||
If you have a point, would you mind calming down and telling me plainly what it is? | ||||||
3758 | what does Hebrews 6v4-6 mean? | Heb 6:4 | kalos | 9735 | ||
Nolan: You still don't get it? We have been advised to assassinate our brains, throw out all our study Bibles and reference books, forget the fact that Christ has given to the church teachers and that many of those gifted teachers write books. Instead, we are to pretend that we already know everything we need to know. That the best method of interpretation is to read the text of the Bible and whatever comes to mind first must automatically be the right interpretation. And, if you ever do need help, you don't need people like Dr. Ryrie, Dr. Scofield, Dr. Stanley, or Dr. MacArthur. Just consult your local Lone Ranger self-appointed Forum Bible expert. This makes sense, does it not? Not. |
||||||
3759 | what does Hebrews 6v4-6 mean? | Heb 6:4 | kalos | 9755 | ||
Hank: I see you get it. (And I know Nolan gets it, too.) You've made some very good observations here. Weeks or months ago, I posted the thought that a lot of people are quoting a lot of Bible verses without knowing what the words in those verses mean. If the Holy Spirit in me plus the text of the Bible alone always equaled the right interpretation, then pray tell, why do 20 supposedly Spirit-illuminated people read the same passage and come up with 20 different interpretations? There is some weakness in either the Bible, the Holy Spirit, or the individual. Well, I wonder which one it is. We could post these thoughts every day for 1,000 days and some still would not get it. |
||||||
3760 | what does Hebrews 6v4-6 mean? | Heb 6:4 | kalos | 9800 | ||
EdB: You write: "However reference is just another man’s opinion," In some cases, the references contain a man's conclusions. I would hardly call them opinions, but I won't debate that. However, writers of study Bibles and other references are not giving opinion, but fact, when they give language, historical, cultural, or geographical information. They are giving factual information that has nothing to do with opinion. What a certain word means in the original Greek; who was king, governor, high priest, or tetrarch at a given time; the meaning of words like ephod, fringes, phylacteries, and shekel; and the location and elevation of a certain Israeli village -- all these things are matters of fact. They have nothing to do with anyone's interpretation of anything. Historians may disagree in their conclusions, but everyone agrees that a cubit equals approximately 18 inches. There are not a dozen opinions on the meaning of cubit. So, every last word of every last commentator is NOT opinion. Much of it consists of simple statements of fact -- fact which sheds much light on the proper interpretation of various passages of scripture. No one said throw out your study Bibles? In the 143 days in which I have participated in the Forum, many people in many ways have said exactly that. They have said they don't need any reliable sources, they don't need any commentaries, study Bibles, etc. They have said that their intuition or whatever is more reliable than what others have written. As Hank said, it is as if they are implying that all the study Bibles and other references are just a lot of hogwash that we don't need. The point here is not whether to agree or disagree with those who have written such statements. The point is that such statements have been posted on this forum and that not a few people share this opinion. One more thought. If I have said it once on this Forum, I have said it a dozen or more times. No man, no preacher or teacher, no writer, no commentary, no denomination is infallible. Only the Bible is infallible and only in the original manuscripts. This is my way of saying that I agree with you when you say that outside references are not to be viewed as the final authority. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 ] Next > Last [212] >> |