Results 1721 - 1740 of 2277
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Hank Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1721 | How does God speak to us? | Acts 10:36 | Hank | 133706 | ||
whitt: While it is well known that there are those who lay claim to special, personalized divine revelation, there is no real biblical support that God reveals Himself in such a manner in our time. The Book of Hebrews opens with these words, "God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in many portions [of Scripture] and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son..." And 2 Timothy 3:16,17 says that "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work." Hebrews 4:12 affirms that "the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart." It is possible to conclude thus from these passages and many others that God speaks to us through the instrumentality of His word, the Bible, the Holy Scriptures. But someone says, "Well, but couldn't God speak to man in any way He chooses?" and the answer of course would have to be 'yes' in view of God's sovereignty and omnipotence. Yes, He could, being sovereign. But there is overpowering scriptural evidence that God uses His written word as His means to reveal Himself to man "in these last days," as the writer of Hebrews has called the age in which we live (Hebrews 1:2). You may be familiar with the Latin term "sola scriptura." What Christians mean when they use the term is that they accept Scripture alone as their guide to faith and practice. How has God "spoken to us in His Son" (Hebrews 1:2)? How do we learn about Jesus and His teaching? Is it not through the instrumentality of God's written word, the Bible? If private divine visitation were the normative mode of revelation of the will of God, of what use is Scripture and why did God bother to inspire it? What is the source of our faith anyway? Scripture tells us clearly what it is. "Faith comes by hearing , and hearing by the word of Christ" (Romans 10:17). This can be either the gospel concerning Christ or Christ speaking His message through His messengers. In either case, God's word is the sourcebook for them both. --Hank | ||||||
1722 | Difference between christian/ disciple | Acts 11:26 | Hank | 130424 | ||
tduplechain: --- Are you proposing that a regenerate believer in Christ should not be called a Christian? Look up the definition of Christian in a dictionary and tell us how a disciple of Christ is not Christian. Do you believe in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit? If you do, you're a trinitarian, but you want find that word in the Bible. Do you believe that Jesus died on the cross for man's sin? Then you believe in the substitutionary death of Christ, but you won't find the term "substitutionary death" mentioned in the Bible either. ..... It seems you're placing considerable, and exclusive, emphasis on the word "disciple." After all, Karl Marx and Adolph Hitler had their disciples, so to call oneself merely a disciple doesn't say much. A disciple of what or whom? Frankly, the suggestion is an odd and groundless one that disciples of Christ should avoid calling themselves Christians. Surely you can come up with another question or comment that has more substance than this one. It's rather nit-picky, don't you think? Your argument falls into the category of quotidian posts to which this Forum falls prey, posts that are too inane and pointless to merit extended space. --Hank | ||||||
1723 | Why | Acts 11:26 | Hank | 144320 | ||
tduplechain - If it should be considered vain for any man to impugn as something evil my attempt to share with him whatever insights to spiritual truth the Holy Spirit through His word has elected to grant my unworthy soul, how much more vain would I be than he should I lend a deaf ear to his attempt to share with me what the Spirit has taught him. No follower of Christ is an island unto himself: he stands to a significant degree in interdependence with all his Christian brothers, and they all of them stand to a superlative degree in total dependence on Christ. ..... One imparts knowledge when he speaks: he acquires it only when he listens. Therefore, he whose greatest need is knowledge should listen more and speak less. I believe this applies to everyone. --Hank | ||||||
1724 | Allowed to wish all a Happy Easter? | Acts 12:4 | Hank | 3586 | ||
The Japanese term for what we call Easter which you kindly translate for us who flunked Japanese 101 as "Resurrection Celebration" comes much closer to the real meaning of of what the occasion is all about than the word "Easter" does. One wonders what we'd call it had the KJV translators rendered the word in Acts 12:4 as "Passover" the way modern English translations do. The Hebrew for Passover is "pesech" and the Greek is "pascha" -- hence the term "paschal Lamb" referring to Christ. The name "Easter" derives from the Anglo-Saxon goddess of Spring (Eostre). Easter was originally observed on the day following the end of the Passover fast (which was the 14th of Nisan according to the Jewish calendar) regardless of the day of the week on which it fell. It is also interesting to note that the date of December 25, our Christmas, may well have had its origin in paganism. The most widely accepted theory is that December 25 had already been a major pagan festival, that of Sol Invictus, the "birth" of the "Unconquerable Sun." With the triumph of Christianity, Christians replaced the pagan festival with Christmas, thus the "Unconquerable Sun" became the "Victorious Son" or perhaps the "Sun of Righteousness" (Malachi 4:2) Isn't it interesting that neither word -- Christmas nor Easter -- is mentioned in the Bible (except "Easter" once in KJV which means "Passover"? Furthermore, the Bible gives no instruction to observe them as church ordinances, as it does for baptism and the Lord's Supper, for example. It's hard to find real fault with the custom of setting aside a special day on which to center our thought on the birth of our Lord and another on which to pause and reflect on His resurrection. But in a real sense every day in the life of a Christian is, or indeed ought to be, a celebration of the true meaning of both Christmas and Easter. Hank. | ||||||
1725 | Was Easter in Romans | Acts 12:4 | Hank | 113530 | ||
The word "Easter" appears in Acts 12:4 in the Authorized or King James Version. Modern translations use the word "Passover." --Hank | ||||||
1726 | What is the Bible's take on sacriments? | Acts 13:38 | Hank | 68419 | ||
"...why did he [God] also institute baptism, communion (and any other sacriment that you can think of) for the forgiveness of sins." ..... First of all, He didn't institute baptism, communion (or any other sacrament that one can think of) for the forgiveness of sins. We were all of us dead in our trespasses and sins in which we formerly walked, but God being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, made us alive together with Christ, for by grave we have been saved, through faith; and that not of ourselves, it is the gift of God, not as a result of works (or any sacrament that you can think of), so that none of us has any right to boast that we effected our salvation by anything we did or can do. [See Ephesians 2]..... Secondly, there is no biblical support for believing that what you call sacraments (and what most Protestant churches call ordinances) are salvific. The ordinances of baptism and communion are acts of obedience for believers to be done in accordance with Christ's commands. --Hank | ||||||
1727 | Is James the first pope? | Acts 15:13 | Hank | 132905 | ||
- | ||||||
1728 | FIRST AND OR SABATH DAY | Acts 15:20 | Hank | 144700 | ||
Emmanuel-Samuel ::: In 1 Cor. 16:2 Paul evidently assumes that the church met on Sunday: "On the first day of the week let each one of you lay something aside, storing up as he may prosper, that there be no collections when I come." ..... Another indication of the observance of Sunday as the day of meeting of the church in apostolic times is found in Acts 20:7: "Now on the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread i.e., to observe the Lord's Supper], Paul, ready to depart the next day, spoke to them and continued his message until midnight." ....... The risen Lord met with His disciples on two successive Sundays (John 20:19,26). ...... It is evident that, because of the resurrection, Christians had exchanged the Sabbath (Saturday) as the primary day of worship for the first day of the week (Sunday), the day of Christ's victory over the grave (Matt. 28:1; Mark 16:2,9: Luke 24:1; John 20:1). This change in the major day of assembly and worship also serves as a clear distinction between old Judaism on the one hand and new Christianity on the other. The Lord's Day, then, is the first day of the week and is sanctioned by the apostles as the proper day of worship. ....... Bibliography: Notes on 1 Cor. 16:2 and Acts 20:7 in Believer's Study Bible (Nelson); MacArthur Study Bible (Word); Ryrie Study Bible (Moody); and Defender's Study Bible (World). Also, articles under "Sabbath" in Harper's Bible Dictionary and Holman's Bible Dictionary. --Hank | ||||||
1729 | Can we eat medium rare meat or not? | Acts 15:29 | Hank | 16945 | ||
This is neither to evade your question nor ridicule it, but in our age of splintered churches and conflicting views on nearly everything under the sun, shouldn't Christians be less concerned about what they eat and more concerned about what's eating them? --Hank | ||||||
1730 | call upon name of Lord you and house sav | Acts 16:31 | Hank | 173270 | ||
Luke (Acts 2:21) and Paul (Romans 10:13) quote Joel 2:32 "whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved." However, these passages do not contain a reference to "your household." but Acts 16:31 does: "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household." This was what Paul and Silas said to the Philippiann jailer in response to his question, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" (Acts 16:30). If you question turns on the word "household" as I suspect it may, you may wish to compare the usage in Acts 16:31 with John 4:53 as well as with Acts 11:14. And, as always, it is best to read all these passages in both their immediate context and in the broader context of what the Bible teaches on the subject of soteriology. --Hank | ||||||
1731 | Bereans in Acts 17:10-12 | Acts 17:11 | Hank | 110624 | ||
Huron, I believe verse 12 answers your question. These Jews are described (in verse 11) as being "fair minded...in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things we so." Then verse 12 picks up with a "therefore": "Therefore -- on the basis of and as the result of what is stated in the preceding verse -- therefore many of them (the Jews) believed, and also a few of the Greeks." ..... This passage illustrates the truth of Romans 10:17: "Faith comes by hearing" (in this case, by hearing Paul and Silas) preach) "and hearing" (the gospel message, which the Bereans confirmed as true) "by the word of God." They were thus brought to a saving faith. --Hank | ||||||
1732 | Spirit Baptism...Crucial? | Acts 19:2 | Hank | 114142 | ||
SOLT: According to Jesus Christ, it is absolutely vital to salvation. "Jesus answered, 'Truly, truly I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.'" (John 3:5). --Hank | ||||||
1733 | What is eographical setting and place? | Acts 19:5 | Hank | 179325 | ||
tonjab - The place in Acts 19:5 is Ephesus (see 19:1), one of the largest and most impressive cities of the ancient world, situated in western Asia Minor across the Aegean sea from Athens. Mentioned more than 20 times in the NT, Ephesus was a political, religious and commercial center in Asia Minor. Associated with the ministeries of Paul, Peter and the apostle John, it played a key role in the spread of early Christianity. Paul wrote a letter, the first of his 'prison epistles,' to the saints at Ephesus. ..... The dozen or so disciples who answered Paul's question in Acts 19:2 evidently were Jewish proselytes, disciples of John the Baptist, who became Christians under Paul's teaching (read the whole passage in context, Acts 19:1-7). --Hank | ||||||
1734 | How well are thing done, fast, method? | Acts 19:5 | Hank | 179352 | ||
tonjab - Can you be more specific please? Your questions are too general it seems to me, and are thus difficult to follow. Please explain what you're getting at. --Hank | ||||||
1735 | Such thing as a Christian Witch? | Acts 19:19 | Hank | 155812 | ||
A Christian witch? You've got to be kidding! Of course there isn't. If you have, as you say, "read all the verses" then you know full well that Scripture condemns witchcraft, sorcery and kindred abominations. ...... And you don't need to try magic "for closure." What you need to do is believe what the word of God teaches and forget your foolish notions! God has already given you "closure" on this subject if you will read and believe His word. Are you a born-again believer in the Lord Jesus Christ? I take it that you are a young person itching to experiment, is that true? You could hardly have picked a more dangerous experiment than messing around with the dark work of Satan. Advice in a word: Don't! --Hank | ||||||
1736 | Help Bible study to accept differences? | Acts 20:7 | Hank | 185308 | ||
MJH - "The Sabbath was given to Israel, not the church. ...... The Sabbath is still Saturday, not Sunday, and has never been changed. But the Sabbath is part of the Old Testament Law, and Christians are free from the bondage of the Law (Galatians 4:1-26; Romans 6:14). Sabbath keeping is not required of the Christian -- be it Saturday or Sunday. The first day of the week, Sunday, the Lord's Day (Revelation 1:10), celebrates the New Creation with Christ as our resurrected Head. We are not obligated to follow the Mosaic Sabbath -- resting, but are now free to follow the risen Christ -- serving." To read more, go to http://www.gotquestions.org/Saturday-Sunday.html ...... This "Torah Club" you mentioned, exactly what is it, Jewish perhaps? --Hank | ||||||
1737 | Geography of the Forum! | Acts 21:39 | Hank | 34262 | ||
Hank: In a log cabin (soon to have indoor plumbing and electricity) in Fort Smith, Arkansas! Go, Razorbacks! | ||||||
1738 | Where is "accept Christ" in the Bible? | Acts 24:3 | Hank | 4213 | ||
In deference to my fine colleagues on the Forum, I believe the key issue under consideration is a semantic, not a theological, one. The first definition of "accept" in Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary is "to receive willingly." To receive and to accept mean virtually the same thing; I see no merit of one term over the other. Paul in 2 Cor. 6:2 uses a word that the NASB and other translators rendered as "acceptable" in this passage: "Behold, now is the acceptable time, behold now is the day of salvation." Webster's first definition of "acceptable" is "capable or worthy of being accepted." I'm as conservative a creature as just about anyone who ever came down the pike, but I fail to see anything instrinsically non-scriptural with accept in the context of "to accept Christ." It is a monument to the richness and scope of the English language to have synonyms such as "receive" available for those whose orientation leads them feel more comfortable with an alternate term. There are far more serious threats to sound teaching, with vastly greater potential to do harm, being promulgated by some modern theologians than the issue of accept versus receive. --Hank. | ||||||
1739 | Distinction between Christian/disciple? | Acts 26:28 | Hank | 173623 | ||
Hello, Makarios, good friend and cherished 'little brother'... Along with Doc, I don't see any distinction that Scripture makes between Christians and disciples of Christ -- or followers of Christ, or His sheep, or saints. They are all the same, that is, various phrases that are used in Scripture to describe those who have been reborn in Christ. ...... Doc mentioned the Engle Scale. I don't think much of it. Frankly, I think it, along with any other theoretical point systems, or "scales," are man-made contrivances that, when weighed in the balance, are found wanting! I find it ridiculous to assume that Paul and Silas led the Philippian jailer to salvation along the 10 steps of the Engle scale. The jailer wanted to know what he must do to be saved and Paul and Silas told him forthrightly what he must do. There is no record of their having led the jailer first to point 1, thence to point 2, point 3, etc. all the way to point 10 of Engles's scale. Matter of fact, I see no evidence of a soteriological point system having been used in any conversion in all of Scripture. If you want to read more about this Engle scale, which I view as useless and inane, Google the two words, Engle scale. Good to hear from you, Makarios, and blessing to you. --Hank | ||||||
1740 | SAFE? | Romans | Hank | 21822 | ||
My esteemed Charis: Either I've been woefully unclear in my post or you mistook the meaning. I'm not calling the middle ground "safe" by any means. Please observe that I put the word in quotes and the intended meaning was therefore the exact opposite of how you seem to have taken it. The "middle ground" or "middle of the road" is, in fact, a dangerous place to be. In my little anecdote, the middle-of-the-road guy was struck by a car. My, how tricky words can be. Sorry that I was not more lucid. --Hank | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 ] Next > Last [114] >> |