Results 3921 - 3940 of 4232
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: kalos Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
3921 | did Jesus die for our sins or sickness | 1 Pet 2:24 | kalos | 160440 | ||
'Physical healing - Is it guaranteed in Christ's atonement? '"...with his stripes we are healed." 'No, while ultimate physical healing is in the atonement (a healing we will enjoy in our resurrection bodies), healing of our bodies while in the mortal state (prior to our death and resurrection) is not guaranteed in the atonement. 'Moreover, it is important to note that the Hebrew word for healing (rapha) can refer not just to physical healing but to spiritual healing. The context of Isaiah 53:4 indicates that spiritual healing is in view. In verse 5 we are clearly told, "He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him, And by His scourging we are healed" (v. 5). Because "transgressions" and "iniquities" set the context, spiritual healing from the misery of man's sin is in view. 'Further, there are numerous verses in Scripture which substantiate the view that physical healing in mortal life is not guaranteed in the atonement and that it is not always God's will to heal. [] 'The apostle Paul couldn't heal Timothy's stomach problem (1 Timothy 5:23) nor could he heal Trophimus at Miletus (2 Timothy 4:20) or Epaphroditus (Philippians 2:25-27). [] 'Paul spoke of "a bodily illness" he had (Galatians 4:13-15). He also suffered a "thorn in the flesh" which God allowed him to retain (2 Corinthians 12:7-9). [] 'God certainly allowed Job to go through a time of physical suffering. [] 'In none of these cases is it stated that the sickness was caused by sin or unbelief. [] 'Nor did Paul or any of the others act as if they thought their healing was guaranteed in the atonement. They accepted their situations and trusted in God's grace for sustenance. [] 'It is noteworthy that on one occasion Jesus indicated that sickness could be for the glory of God (John 11:4). [] 'There are numerous verses in Scripture which reveal that our physical bodies are continuously running down and suffering various ailments. Our present bodies are said to be perishable and weak (1 Corinthians 15:42-44). Paul said "our outer man is decaying" (2 Corinthians 4:16). Death and disease will be a part of the human condition until that time when we receive resurrection bodies that are immune to such frailties (1 Corinthians 15:51-55). 'Am I saying we shouldn't pray for healing? No, not at all. I'm just saying that after we've asked for healing, we need to submit to God's sovereign will. He may have a purpose in allowing our illness.' Author: Dr. Ron Rhodes of Reasoning from the Scriptures Ministries. ____________________ http://christiananswers.net/ q-eden/rfsm-healing.html (search words: "heal" AND "atone" AND "Isa") |
||||||
3922 | did Jesus die for our sins or sickness | 1 Pet 2:24 | kalos | 160441 | ||
'The first of these so-called “healing in the atonement” passages is Isaiah 53:5, which specifically mentions that by Messiah’s wounds we are healed. The word translated “heal” in this passage is actually the Hebrew word rapa, which is often used in a spiritual as opposed to a physical sense in the Old Testament (cf. Ps. 107:20; Jer. 3:22). However, as we look at the context of Isaiah 53, there’s no doubt that the healing described there is definitively one which is spiritual in nature.' (www.equip.org/free/CP1104.htm) For more information see ID# 135983. Grace to you, Kalos |
||||||
3923 | did Jesus die for our sins or sickness | 1 Pet 2:24 | kalos | 161100 | ||
In general, there are two major approaches to forming our beliefs. One is to read the Bible, accepting what it actually says and teaches. The other is to start with a preconceived notion of what we believe and look for a verse here and a verse there to prove it. Each of us should ask himself: Which approach do I use? Grace to you, Kalos |
||||||
3924 | Plain or Intended Meaning? | 1 Pet 2:24 | kalos | 165930 | ||
'Words have different meanings in different contexts (that's what makes puns work). When we consider a verse in isolation, one meaning may occur to us. But how do we know it's the right one? Help won't come from the dictionary. Dictionaries only complicate the issue, giving us more choices, not fewer. Help must come from somewhere else close by: the surrounding paragraph. 'With the larger context now in view, you can narrow your focus and speculate on the meaning of the verse itself.' ____________________ www.str.org |
||||||
3925 | Plain or Intended Meaning? | 1 Pet 2:24 | kalos | 165931 | ||
"Please note, Mark, with all due respect, you apprehended the text not on the basis of the word itself but on the basis of (1) a form of teaching understood within the culture; (2) other relevant verses that bring light Luke's understanding of Jesus' statement; (3) in relation to other texts about the command to love, which I am not against doing." ____________________ "How to Study Your Bible: Closing the Gaps" (...) "...in order to get the most out of God's Word, in order to really understand what God meant by what He said we have to close some gaps. (...) "The gaps in our understanding of the Bible are related to an ancient document. We're dealing with an ancient document. This book is a very old book...it is ancient. It was completed, as you obviously know, in the first century A.D., that's 2,000 years ago, and so we have a very old document. That creates some gaps for us. If we're going to understand the Bible we have to close those gaps. "Gap number one is a language gap. The Bible was not written in English. [It was written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.] (...) "So knowing the language is very important. Somebody has to know the language. If you as a Bible student don't know it, you have to have somebody who does know it informing you about it. That's where commentaries come in to be of help to you and study materials and Vine's Dictionary of New Testament Words and Dictionary of Old Testament Words and those kinds of things that help you to come to grips with what the words mean. (...) "A second gap that has to be closed is the culture gap. That deals not with the speech but with the customs. Speech is connected to custom. (...) "You can't recreate the scenery biblically unless you know the culture, that's very, very important unless you know the background. Understanding many things about culture, Jewish culture, Greek culture very, very important in interpreting the Scripture. The culture of the mystery religions, the culture of the Pharisees, the culture of the Sadducees, the Romans, the whole situation there, the culture around Israel, the polytheism, the polytheism meaning the many god pagans, the culture of Baal worship, all of that stuff that surrounds the biblical data is part of understanding the framework in which language exists and in which stories are told. "Thirdly the geographical gap, the geography gap. (...) "[First] you understand much about [the language and] the culture of the Bible, [then] you understand much about the geography of the Bible, and then you're going to get to understanding the fourth point which is the history, the plot itself. You have to close those gaps. "Now let's talk about those...those four gaps...the language gap, that gives you the speech; the culture gap gives you the customs and the idioms; the geography gaps creates the scenery, the actual scenario around it; and the history gap is the plot, what's going on historically around that. What is the context of history. I have found through the years that spending a maximum of time on these matters is crucial to all effective Bible understanding..." To read more go to: www.gty.org/Broadcast/transcripts/90-158.htm |
||||||
3926 | Plain or Intended Meaning? | 1 Pet 2:24 | kalos | 166014 | ||
Atdcross: Your apology is accepted but not necessary. I took no offense. When I first read your Note to me I figured it was just a mix-up. No problem. Grace and peace, Kalos |
||||||
3927 | did Jesus die for our sins or sickness | 1 Pet 2:24 | kalos | 168333 | ||
Is the Word of Faith movement Biblical? "teachings range from completely heretical to completely ridiculous" "a peculiar mix of orthodox Christianity and mysticism" "its theology just strays further and further from Scripture" "...the Word of Faith movement exalts man to god-status and reduces God to man-status." "Our hope is in the Lord, not in our own words, not even in our own faith (Psalm 33:20-22)." "Countering Word of Faith teaching is a simple matter of reading the Bible." 'The Word of Faith movement is deceiving countless people, causing them to grasp after a way of life and faith that is not biblical. Our hope is in the Lord, not in our own words, not even in our own faith (Psalm 33:20-22). Our faith comes from God in the first place (2 Peter 1:1), and is not something we create for ourselves. So, be wary of the Word of Faith movement, and any church that aligns itself with Word of Faith teachings.' ____________________ www.gotquestions.org/Word-Faith.html |
||||||
3928 | If God had a beauty contest | 1 Pet 3:4 | kalos | 137112 | ||
The beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit "Do not let your adornment be merely outward — arranging the hair, wearing gold, or putting on fine apparel — rather let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the incorruptible beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is very precious in the sight of God." (1 Peter 3.3-4) 'If God had a beauty contest, these would be the areas in which He would award points: 1) The hidden person of the heart, and 2) Incorruptible beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit. These attributes according to Peter are "… very precious in the sight of God." The rest, i.e. the outward adorning, is of little consequence when compared to the inward grace that the Lord admires.' ____________________ http://studylight.org/col/tll/index.cgi |
||||||
3929 | Are Christian apologetics unbiblical? | 1 Pet 3:15 | kalos | 57702 | ||
Emmaus: Thanks for your reply. You make very good points here. I agree with you that arguing is unproductive and a waste of time. I just want to clarify something for the benefit of whoever may be reading this thread. When I used the word "argument" in my question, I did not mean it in the sense of "quarrel" or "disagreement." I meant it in the following sense: "argument -- 2 a : a reason given in proof or rebuttal b : discourse intended to persuade 3 b : a coherent series of statements leading from a premise to a conclusion" (www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary). I do not mean to imply that you did not get my intended meaning. Rather, I am clarifying my previous use of the word in order to remove any ambiguity or uncertainty about it. Also, I will post my answer to my question after we have read some more replies. Much grace to you, kalos |
||||||
3930 | Are Christian apologetics unbiblical? | 1 Pet 3:15 | kalos | 57743 | ||
Steve: Thank you for sharing your good insight and observations with us. I would agree with you: sound apologetics does not equal Scripture twisting. Sound reasoning to arrive at a conclusion does not equal taking Scripture out of context and twisting it. I would also note that, while somewhat similar or related, Christian apologetics is not quite the same thing as systematic theology. On the other hand, if a group has no theology -- no statement of faith --, how do they define what it is they believe? How is anyone to know with any certainty what and how that group believes? Since all churches usually claim to go by the Bible, yet do not have the same interpretation of the Bible, then claims to go by the Bible alone are not adequate to express WHAT that church believes about the Bible or HOW they interpret or understand the Scriptures. Hence the need for churches to clarify what they beilieve -- what they mean when they say they go by the Bible alone. How do they clarify their position? By theology. By a statement of beliefs. But, again, my primary question has to do with Christian apologetics, not with denominational or systematic theology. Grace to you, kalos |
||||||
3931 | Are Christian apologetics unbiblical? | 1 Pet 3:15 | kalos | 57779 | ||
flinkywood: Thank you for the kind words. And I agree with you 100 percent -- "I like Makarios' posts, for ex., or Hank's." There are others on this forum you can trust including, but by no means limited to, Morant61 and Reformer Joe. Grace to you, kalos |
||||||
3932 | Are Christian apologetics unbiblical? | 1 Pet 3:15 | kalos | 57781 | ||
John: "We are commanded by God to employ our reasoning powers to dig into the Word and to discover the richness and sweetness of it's truth. How one can do this without employing our God-given powers of reason is beyond me." Yes, sir. It is beyone me, too. Grace to you, John (my real name) |
||||||
3933 | Are Christian apologetics unbiblical? | 1 Pet 3:15 | kalos | 57800 | ||
Correction. Regarding my previous post, the last sentence, "It is beyone me, too." Delete: "beyone". Add: "beyond". |
||||||
3934 | Are Christian apologetics unbiblical? | 1 Pet 3:15 | kalos | 57808 | ||
Colin: Thank you for another post that is truly edifying. I enjoyed reading it. But, let me emphasize once more that when I use the word "argument" here, I do not mean it in the sense of "quarrel" or "disagreement." I mean it in the following sense: "argument -- 2 a : a reason given in proof or rebuttal b : discourse intended to persuade 3 b : a coherent series of statements leading from a premise to a conclusion" (www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary). Grace to you, kalos |
||||||
3935 | Always ready to give a LOGICAL defense | 1 Pet 3:15 | kalos | 116688 | ||
"Always be ready to give a logical defense..." 1 Peter 3:15 Amplified The sources I quote are not infallible. I am not infallible. You are not infallible. But sometimes I get the idea that no matter what I post, if it does not support someone else's doctrine, then that person lightly dismisses the evidence presented and decides I am "wrong". How easy it is to assert that someone else is wrong. Anyone can assert anything, but asserting is not proving; asserting something does not make it true. Where is the scriptural support? Show me the evidence! Everyone has the right to their own opinion, but no one has the right to be wrong in their facts. Everyone has the right to their own opinion. But it would be helpful if, when you disagree, you would address the specific points the other person made and demonstrate why you think those points are invalid. When this is not done, then there is no dialogue, but merely two simultaneous monologues. |
||||||
3936 | Always ready to give a LOGICAL defense | 1 Pet 3:15 | kalos | 116689 | ||
. | ||||||
3937 | A logical defense? Show me the evidence! | 1 Pet 3:15 | kalos | 116690 | ||
"Always be ready to give a logical defense..." 1 Peter 3:15 Amplified The sources I quote are not infallible. I am not infallible. You are not infallible. But sometimes I get the idea that no matter what I post, if it contradicts or does not support someone else's belief, then that person lightly dismisses the evidence presented and decides I am "wrong". How easy it is to assert that someone else is wrong. Anyone can assert anything, but asserting is not proving; asserting something does not make it true. Where is the scriptural support? Show me the evidence! Everyone has the right to their own opinion, but no one has the right to be wrong in their facts. Everyone has the right to their own opinion. But it would be helpful if, when you disagree, you would address the specific points the other person made and demonstrate why you think those points are invalid. When this is not done, then there is no dialogue, but merely two simultaneous monologues. |
||||||
3938 | A logical defense? Show me the evidence! | 1 Pet 3:15 | kalos | 116739 | ||
"Always be ready to give a logical defense..." 1 Peter 3:15 Amplified The sources I quote are not infallible. I am not infallible. You are not infallible. But sometimes I get the idea that no matter what I post, if it contradicts or does not support someone else's belief, then that person lightly dismisses the evidence presented and decides I am "wrong". How easy it is to assert that someone else is wrong. Anyone can assert anything, but asserting is not proving; asserting something does not make it true. Where is the scriptural support? Show me the evidence! Everyone has the right to their own opinion, but no one has the right to be wrong in their facts. Everyone has the right to their own opinion. But it would be helpful if, when you disagree, you would address the specific points the other person made and demonstrate why you think those points are invalid. When this is not done, then there is no dialogue, but merely two simultaneous monologues. |
||||||
3939 | Log off the web now IF... | 1 Pet 3:15 | kalos | 122275 | ||
Log off the web now IF... ____________________ 'It is impossible to know the meaning of any written text. If this is true, log off the web now. If not, read this commentary to find out about self-refuting arguments.' ____________________ 'Let me give you a picture of my world, by and large, at least as it touches this particular issue. My world is a world in which thinking matters, in which there is such a thing as truth, in which truth can be known and in which we use thinking to assess ideas to determine whether they are true or not. There's really not much room in my thinking system for comments like, Well, that's just your interpretation, or just your opinion, when the emphasis is on "just." Of course it's my interpretation. Of course it's my opinion, but it's not just those things in that I'm not simply sharing my point of view, I'm sharing my reasons why I have a point of view. 'Now it could be that my opinion or my interpretation is mistaken, but the only way for me to find out whether it's mistaken or not is to get at the reasons I draw the conclusions which form either my opinion or my interpretation. I don't believe that all opinions are equal. I don't believe that all interpretations are equal . . .' ____________________ (Some Things are True by Gregory Koukl) To read more go to: (http://www.str.org/free/commentaries/philosophy/stat.htm) |
||||||
3940 | How do we respond to Sam Harris? | 1 Pet 3:15 | kalos | 177148 | ||
“God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise” 18For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate." 20Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength. 26Brothers, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. 27But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. 28He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things--and the things that are not--to nullify the things that are, 29so that no one may boast before him. 1 Corinthians 1:18-29 NIV |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 ] Next > Last [212] >> |