Results 101 - 120 of 500
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Reformer Joe Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
101 | Do you believe that God was a man | Gen 1:27 | Reformer Joe | 35952 | ||
God the Father has never been a man. "God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth." --John 4:24 "God is not a man, that He should lie, Nor a son of man, that He should repent; Has He said, and will He not do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?" --Numbers 23:19 You wrote: "1. We know that Angel to not need to eat or rest." And how do we KNOW that? Secondly, having no need of food or rest does not mean that they are unable to engage in such activities. After all, God doesn't NEED rest, and yet He did on the seventh day. We also see in Genesis 19:2 that these very same angels do indeed go over to Lot's place to spend the night. You wrote: "2. Or Have feet." The Bible says: "Seraphim stood above Him, each having six wings: with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his FEET, and with two he flew." --Isaiah 6:2 Sorry, but you are mistaken in just about everything you posted here. --Joe! |
||||||
102 | Who were the three men whit God? | Gen 1:27 | Reformer Joe | 36394 | ||
The King David Book? We commonly call the first book of the Bible "Genesis." As for who thre three men were, it is clear from the following chapter that two of them were angels. Many people consider the third to be the pre-incarnate Son of God in human form, a situation commonly called a "theophany." If indeed that is the case, that does not mean that God previously existed as a true human being before His human nature was conceived in the womb of the virgin Mary. And it certainly doesn't mean that angels can't eat or don't have feet! --Joe! |
||||||
103 | Adam and Eve, no fall from grace? | Gen 2:16 | Reformer Joe | 31530 | ||
What did Adam and Eve fall from? The Westminster Shorter Catechism addresses this: "Q10. How did God create man? A. God created man male and female, after his own image, in knowledge, righteousness, and holiness, with dominion over the creatures." This is the estate from which humanity fell. We no longer fear God, which is the beginning of knowledge (Proverbs 1:7). We are obviously no longer righteous (Romans 3:10). Nor are we holy. All of this we collectively lost as a people when our first parents sinned. I do not want to speak for Lionstrong, but I think he was referring to saving grace when he said that Adam and Eve did not need it. Our very lives, as you have correctly stated (and the Reformers certainly agreed) are unmerited gifts from God. Adam and Eve, pre-Fall, simply did not have any need for the special grace God extends to sinners in spite of their unrighteousness, because there WAS no unrighteousness before the fatal bite of fruit. --Joe! |
||||||
104 | GOD'S COVENANT THAT MAN COULD DO GOOD OR | Gen 2:17 | Reformer Joe | 21068 | ||
See the verse above and the one that precedes it. --Joe! |
||||||
105 | Sinful nation between holy nation? | Gen 3:6 | Reformer Joe | 69235 | ||
If you are a believer in Jesus Christ, a member of His Church, then you are part of a holy nation here and now, in the midst of a fallen and sinful world. And why? The Scriptures give us the answer: "But you are A CHOSEN RACE, A royal PRIESTHOOD, A HOLY NATION, A PEOPLE FOR God's OWN POSSESSION, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light" --1 Peter 2:9 --Joe! |
||||||
106 | Who else was on earth at time of Adam... | Gen 4:1 | Reformer Joe | 29340 | ||
Addressed a bazillion times...type "Cain" and "wife" into the quick search field. --Joe! |
||||||
107 | Robots? | Gen 4:7 | Reformer Joe | 79653 | ||
Hi, sniper. You wrote: "Do you think that God would be pleased with people who loved him and obeyed Him only because they were forced to?" Who said anything about people being forced to do anything? I was persuaded and convinced by the Holy Spirit. "Do you think that God would truly be happy with someone followed him only because He gave them the belief and obedience?" Why are you asking "Do you think...?" questions? Do we worship the God we would like Him to be or do we worship the God who actually exists? And you ask a loaded question. You are assuming that there exist people who are capable of belief and obedience apart from God granting that to them. If God didn't grant repentance, there wouldn't be any obedience to God at all. "Wouldn't that make us robots acting only in the ways in which God has programmed us?" Not at all. It makes us slaves to a different master, not robots. "Do you not know that when you present yourselves to someone as slaves for obedience, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin resulting in death, or of obedience resulting in righteousness?" --Romans 6:16 "But now having been freed from sin and enslaved to God, you derive your benefit, resulting in sanctification, and the outcome, eternal life." --Romans 6:22 So which kind of slave are you? Are you enslaved to sin or enslaved to God? --Joe! |
||||||
108 | I don't understand? | Gen 4:7 | Reformer Joe | 79813 | ||
Greetings. We discussed this on the Forum about a year and a half ago. I recommend typing the number 13602 in the Quick Search box to get some of my thoughts. --Joe! |
||||||
109 | Did God actually die on the cross? | Gen 22:8 | Reformer Joe | 66372 | ||
God the Father did not die on the Cross, if that is what you are asking. I would go a step further than that and say that it was Jesus' human nature that died on the Cross. The church throughout its history has imterpreted the Bible to say that Son of God became human by taking on a second nature. Therefore, the person Jesus Christ has two natures, one human and one divine. Jesus shares the same divine nature with God the Father and God the Holy Spirit, so I understand this to mean that the divine nature is immortal and imperishable. The human nature (the one he shares with is and was made like us in all ways, excpet without sin) was created, depends on God for its existence and survival, got tired and hungry and thirsty and weak, and obviously was perishable. So yes, the Lamb is God and man both, but I would disagree that the "God" nature died on the Cross. --Joe! |
||||||
110 | Is the Christian under Law? | Ex 1:1 | Reformer Joe | 12854 | ||
Bill: Okay...guess this has to be a two-parter! First of all, you didn't address my complete quotation from Matthew 5, the very words of Christ Himself. We have to understand Paul's teaching on law by reconciling it to Christ's claim that he did not come to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it. The Law still exists in a moral sense. It is the sacrificial and ceremonial aspects of the law which were fulfilled in Christ's life, death, and resurrection. God's morality still exists as a standard for believers to attain to. The fact is not that the law has disappeared, but that Christ fulfilled all the requirements of God's moral law in himself. Those who are not in Christ are still under the requirements of God's morality (and still fall short -- Romans 3:23). I never argued that we are saved (i.e. justified) by law. No one ever was (Romans 3:20,28-30). What I am arguing is that the holiness exemplified by the moral aspects of the Law is definitely is the goal of our progressive sanctification. Let me address each of the points you made (and by the way, the three contentions are not mine, but those of John Calvin): You wrote: "The Holy Spirit now convicts the believer of sin and points us to Christ as sufficient - not the Law." Yes, the Holy Spirit convicts the believer of sin, but the Holy Spirit acts in concert with His revealed word. Therefore, the Holy Spirit employs Scripture (i.e. law) that He inspired to convict people of sin, just as he did at our coversion (Romans 3:20). Note that I am not saying that the ceremonial aspects of the Law are needed today, but God's moral commandments are still in effect and reveal the holy character of God and what righteousness is. (Romans 7:12). The fact that we cannot keep them without the empowerment of the Holy Spirit does not mean that God doesn't care whether we are moral or not. More in the next episode... --Joe! |
||||||
111 | Is the Christian under Law? | Ex 1:1 | Reformer Joe | 12855 | ||
On with the show! You wrote: "God doesn't want a moral people. The Pharisees were very moral. God wants a people who have Christ living through them. This goes beyond morality to miraculous. We don't need to eat from the morality Tree (of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, right and wrong), we need to eat from the Tree of Life, Jesus Christ." I think the "tree" exegesis is a stretch, Bill. Show me that one from Scripture. In any case, God wants righteousness from His people, which includes moral living (John 14:15, 1 Peter 1:14-16; Philippians 2:12-13; 1 Thessalonians 4:7-8 and on and on and on). Secondly, the Pharisees were not moral. They were hypocrites, "whitewashed tombs", "sons of the devil." Their so-called "morality" was a prideful attempt at self-glorification, not a God-honoring righteousness. Jesus repeatedly told them that their devotion to external obedience without a proper grasp of the spirit of the Law was their downfall. The Father places commands upon His followers; so does Christ; all of them are in accordance with the moral law. It is the Holy Spirit who teaches us, reminds us of them, and enables the believer to follow them (Romans 8:7-14). You wrote: "We live out our sanctification. We do nothing to obtain it. Our spirits are 100 percent sanctified at conversion and we have the privelege of seeing that 'worked out' through our souls and bodies as we trust in Christ as our sufficiency and grow in His love. See Titus 2:11 - God's GRACE, not the Law, teaches us to live righteously and godly lives." You, like many Christians today, are confusing justification with sanctification. Justification is totally a work of God; we do nothing to obtain it. Our spirits however, are not 100 percent SANCTIFIED at conversion. There are three dimensions to our sanctification as revealed in Scripture: initial, progressive, and final. Initial sanctification occurs when we become believers, and in that sense we are "set apart" from those who are perishing, for a holy purpose (1 Peter 2:9, 10; Ephesians 2:10). Progessive sanctification is the Lord's work in a believer from conversion until death, in which we are gradually conformed to the image of Christ in this life, bearing spiritual fruit. While it is the Holy Spirit who brings about this change, there is a clear cooperative dimension on our parts, involving our wills and yes, our WORKS (Philippians 2:13). These works are not the basis of our justification, but are a component and result of our sancification. Final justification occurs when the believer enters God's presence, and is made perfect in righteousness. Titus 2:11-12 does not contradict the role that God's moral demands in the Law have in revealing to us what God's will is. As I stated before, the Holy Spirit does not work in a vaccum, but rather utilizes His word (his moral commandments) in our sanctification as well. Lastly, Hebrews 10:14b is most likely rendered best in a progressive sense ("those who are being sanctified", as we see in the NKJV, NIV, and as an alternate rendering in the footnote in the NASB). This is in keeping with the idea of "progressive sanctification" that we see above. We may positionally be seated with Christ, but I think you would agree that that is practically not the case in our lives as we now live them. Bill, Paul himself cites God's moral law as something that should be practiced by the Christian, quoting from the Ten Commandments in Ephesians 6:1-3. If Paul and Christ and John and James all testify to the value of law in holy living of believers, why can't you? --Joe! |
||||||
112 | What is your identity in Christ? | Ex 1:1 | Reformer Joe | 12904 | ||
Why don't you try addressing the Scriptures I presented rather than dodging my very cogent arguments? The idea of God's law having different dimensions is not my own, but has been held by the majority of Christians throughout church history. That includes Catholics and Protestants, Reformed and Dispensationalists, etc. What you are promoting is a heresy called antinomianism (i.e. "lawlessness") which has been condemned time and again throughout the history of the church. But I assume you presume to know more about the Bible than Calvin and Luther and Augustine and Edwards and Spurgeon and all of the others who have condemned your view. The very reason that the sacrifices have ceased is because Christ is our ultimate sacrifice. Most of the ceremonial aspects of the Law were shadows of the ministry of Jesus to come. Obviously, they have been fulfilled as well in the person of Christ. He even fulfilled the moral requirements of the Law, which the Jew could not do. However, Paul makes quite clear in Romans 4:9-25 and Galatians 4:17 that the covenant of grace both pre-dates the law and replaces the larger covenant of works that God established with Adam and his descendants. But God still very much cares how we conduct ourselves, even as believers. That comes from the Scriptures, including the Ten Commandments. Jesus makes that so very plain in the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5, which you continually fail to address when I bring it up. You constantly refer to Galatians, which is not an attack upon God's moral requirements (which are present in the Law), but rather a refutation of the idea that the Galatians must even enter into the Mosaic Covenant in the first place! Remember, that these are not people who had been subjects of the Law of Moses at any time (they were uncircumsized). Therefore, they were never under Mosaic Law, but they still were subject to the righteous demands of God which are found in the Law. Our trust in Christ's substitutionary death and resurrection does not mean that God just nods and smiles when we violate the Ten Commandments. Otherwise, every moral command in the New Testament is rendered completely meaningless. He is very much interested in purifying us in our daily lives and the way we live them, and it is all for His glory. As far as sanctification is concerned, the three dimensions of sanctification are doctrine that has been held by the majority of Christians throughout church history. That includes Catholics and Protestants, Reformed and Dispensationalists, etc. The fact is that even though Christ's righteousness has been imputed to us (i.e. been put on our account), we are not 100 percent righteous now in practice. Do you sin, Bill? That is unrighteousness, and clear evidence that the work in us in not completed. Our final perfection (ultimate sanctification) has not occurred and will not until we pass from this life to the next. Looking at Romans 5:19, you should pay attention to tense: "For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous." The first clause is past tense (WERE made), and the second is future tense (WILL BE made). The very verse you quote as "support" for antinomianism belies your view. We are already sinners. We will be made completely righteous in the future. You seem to stress that the Christian life is one solely of "resting," Bill. Why do Christ and the apostles speak of it as "pressing on," (Philippians 3:12-18 -- incontrovertible passage on the fact that we are still a "work in progress"), "striving," (Luke 13:24; Romans 15:30; 1 Timothy 4:10; Philippians 1:27; Colossians 1:29; Hebrews 12:4) "labor," (1 Timothy 4:10), and "suffering" (Philippians 1:29, 1 Peter 3, 2 Timothy 3:12, etc.)? Don't get me wrong, salvation is assured for those whom God has set apart (which is what "sanctified" literally means). However, that is not the end of the ball game, for God has called us to righteous living as His ambassadors (2 Corinthians 5:20) and to glorify Him through righteous works (Ephesians 2:10) which the Spirit enables us to do (Romans 8:7-9) as he conforms us to the image of His Son (Romans 12:1-2) in accordance with his moral law (his righteous demands which reflect his character and are pointed out in the Law of Moses -- Romans 7:7-12). Therefore, your last sentence is a false one. You are still a sinner in practice, not a righteous, perfect person. "If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us." --1 John 1:8 --Joe! |
||||||
113 | Are Positional and Practical truths true | Ex 1:1 | Reformer Joe | 12910 | ||
Bill: What is "hogwash" is your understanding of the three aspects of sancification. In addition, I think it is arrogance to assume that here in the twenty-first century you have figured something out that every major figure in church history DENIES. Sanctification means simply "to be set apart." The verses you quoted in your first paragraph all support the truth that when we were regenerated, we were spiritually set apart from those who were perishing, for a specific purpose (1 Peter 2:8-9). Again, this happens at our conversion, when we are justified. Sanctification and justification, however, are different things. However, as I noted in my other post, while Christ did indeed secure my salvation 2000 years ago at Calvary, in a practical sense, I am not holy in all my behavior. If this were already a PRACTICAL truth for Christians, then Peter would not have had to write to believers to "be holy yoursleves in all your behavior." (1 Peter 1:15). The words "holy" and "sanctified" are the same in Greek. Would you say that you are holy in all your behavior? I sure wouldn't say that about myself. Neither would Paul. In Philippians 3 he expresses the idea that even though he has been called and set apart for eternal life, that in this life he has not achieved holiness in practice: "Not that I have already obtained it or have already become perfect, but I press on so that I may lay hold of that for which also I was laid hold of by Christ Jesus. Brethren, I do not regard myself as having laid hold of it yet; but one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and reaching forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. Let us therefore, as many as are perfect, have this attitude; and if in anything you have a different attitude, God will reveal that also to you; however, let us keep living by that same standard to which we have attained." --Philippians 3:12-16 There we have it: the fact that Christ has attained it for us, but the paradoxical statement that Paul is pressing on to attain what Christ has attained for him. We also see that paradox in 2:12-13 (we work, and yet God works). Therefore, in one sense Christ's righteousness has been imputed to our account and we have been declared righteous (rather than the "infused" righteousness of Roman Catholicism), but another sense in which that spiritual reality is to be lived out in our day-to-day existence, with a goal in mind and by the power of the Holy Spirit. Paul concludes chapter 3 with a verse which shows that we still have perfecting to look forward to, which is in keeping with the final moral perfection we will attain when God does away with this body of death and all vestiges of our sinfulness. On a side note, your comparison of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit with that of Babe Ruth's smacks of animism and Eastern mysticism. We are not to "turn everything off" and let God operate our bodily shells as if we were robots. Look at Philippians 2;12-13 again. Our wills are definitely involved in our conforming to the image of Christ. "Let go and let God" is NOT Scriptural. The "let God" part is, but nowhere are we commanded to divorce ourselves from our sanctification. --Joe (not Steve) |
||||||
114 | Are Positional and Practical truths true | Ex 1:1 | Reformer Joe | 12912 | ||
And if you continue to insist that God is not concerned with righteousness, you are going to have to stop ignoring verses like these (all of which are given to those who are already believers in Christ) and explain them in light of your theology. Note that not one of them suggests that we are passive on the road to holiness, and all of them stress the importance God places on righteous living of the believer: "...so now present your members as slaves to righteousness, resulting in sanctification [sanctification is a RESULT here for those who already believe]." --Romans 6:19b "For this is the will of God, your sanctification [but aren't we already 100 percent sanctified in every sense?]; that is, that you abstain from sexual immorality; that each of you know how to possess his own vessel in sanctification and honor, not in lustful passion, like the Gentiles who do not know God; and that no man transgress and defraud his brother in the matter because the Lord is the avenger in all these things, just as we also told you before and solemnly warned you. For God has not called us for the purpose of impurity, but in sanctification [note: the PURPOSE for believers is sanctification]. So, he who rejects this is not rejecting man but the God who gives His Holy Spirit to you." --1 Thessalonians 4:3-8 "Therefore, prepare your minds for action, keep sober in spirit, fix your hope completely on the grace to be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ. As obedient children, do not be conformed to the former lusts which were yours in your ignorance, but like the Holy One who called you, be holy yourselves also in all your behavior; because it is written, "YOU SHALL BE HOLY, FOR I AM HOLY." --1 Peter 1:13-16 "If you love Me, you will keep My commandments." --John 14:15 "But flee from these things, you man of God, and pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, perseverance and gentleness." --1 Timothy 6:11 "Now flee from youthful lusts and pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace, with those who call on the Lord from a pure heart." --2 Timothy 2:22 God doesn't want human righteousness? Scripture seems to disagree, Bill. I could go on, but if I am mistaken in my interpretation of these passages, I would love to hear your take on them. One more, which relates to our discussion on the value of law for a Christian not under the Mosaic Covenant: "All Scripture [which includes ALL of the Old Testament] is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for TRAINING IN RIGHTEOUSNESS [emphasis mine]; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work." --2 Timothy 3:16 All of the Bible, including the Law, has a place for our training in righteousness. --Joe! (not Steve) |
||||||
115 | I'm sorry, Readers, and Reformer Joe | Ex 1:1 | Reformer Joe | 12980 | ||
No offense taken, Bill. What I would like to know is that if I have interpreted Scripture erroneously, what is your interpretation of the Scriptures I presented? I especially refer to those which are in answer to your statement that "God does not want us to be righteous." I am always open to correction, but you need to be detailed in showing me just how I have misapplied the list of Scriptures I gave in my post, rather than just implying that I am pulling something out of thin air in my use of them. Thanks! --Joe! |
||||||
116 | Where are muslims in the Bible? | Ex 20:3 | Reformer Joe | 21094 | ||
No one does, because it doesn't exist. --Joe! |
||||||
117 | "What did Jesus look like?" | Ex 20:4 | Reformer Joe | 57069 | ||
I think the person who asked this question may be a member of an ethnic minority. The truth is the Bible doesn't give much more description of Jesus than to say that he was a Jewish male. Of course, I usually respond to questions like the one you got by pointing out that it doesn't matter to me whether Jesus was black or white or blue with a third nostril. I would be just as happy to boast in him as my Savior if he was as black as night. If Jesus was indeed a dark-complected Jew, then a dark-complected Jew died for my sins. Hope this helps some. --Joe! |
||||||
118 | How can I submit to fallable clergy? | Ex 20:14 | Reformer Joe | 32802 | ||
Listener: Every submission of one human being to another is a submission to a fallible person. Nonetheless, it is commanded in Scripture. The elders at my church, for example, are certainly no more sinless than I am; however, they have God's authority to rule over the congregation (Hebrews 13:17). We are to submit to earthly rulers as well, even the non-Christian ones (Romans 13:1; 1 Peter 2:13)! My wife will be the first to tell you my shortcomings, but she is called to submit to me as the church submits to Christ (Ephesians 5:24). The apostles demonstrated what it means to be in submission to the God-ordained authority of the state, civilly disobeying only when the state's directives would cause them to sin in not fulfilling Christ's commandments (Acts 4:19-20). And I think that is where we should draw the line as well. As one who is particularly gifted with discernment, I often disagree with decisions that those in authority over me make. However, it is not my place to "do what I feel like" unless I am being told by those in authority to commit an offense against God. A good example would be an assignment a pastor gives you in the context of a church ministry. You may feel that you are better suited elsewhere (which may be either your own self-will and error or a lack of wisdom on his part). It would be sin for you to bail out of that particular ministry simply on those grounds. In the situation which prompted this thread, I am not in a position to give advice, but a biblically-centered pastor is very well-equipped to give wise counsel to a couple in such a situation. They are not bound to take his counsel, but God has certainly provided him for a reason. The bottom line is that failure to submit to authorities simply because they are fallible people is a sin, forbidden in Scripture. --Joe! |
||||||
119 | Why is God jealous? | Ex 34:14 | Reformer Joe | 5187 | ||
Because all glory, honor and praise DO truly belong to God. Our jealousy is seeing things that other people have or exhibit that we merely want for ourselves. God's jealously comes from the fact that everything in creation is indeed his. It is more like how I jealously guard my wife against advances from others. We belong to each other, and no one else has a right to her. This is the same way Christ loves his church and the way God is possessive of all His creation and the praises of His people. --Joe! |
||||||
120 | Joe, is the Bible not sufficienct? | Lev 16:34 | Reformer Joe | 20262 | ||
Bill: You wrote: "Are you saying that if a person knew how to read and all that he had was the Bible, that it would not be enough for him to arrive at a saving faith?" I am not saying that at all (factoring in the "minor" detail of the Holy Spirit's involvement, of course). You wrote: "In fact, I would recommend that any new Christian avoid sitting under anyone's teaching for at least a year so that only he and the Holy Spirit can spend time learning what God's Word says and means before having it filtered through someone else." I think that is the most horrible idea that has come from your keyboard yet. Kalos already quoted Ephesians 4:11 for you, and it is very clear from Scripture that God has established his church for a reason. To suggest that a new believer avoid the sound instruction and edification and correction that comes from the church is so completely contrary to Scripture that it doesn't require any exposition. Why does Paul instruct Timothy and Titus in being TEACHERS of sound doctrine (that's three epistles, mind you) if teachers are so unnecessary? Sheer nonsense. Yes, we are to test the spirits (1 John 4:1; Acts 16:11). However, "testing the spirits" assumes that we are actually listening to someone besides ourselves. God gave teachers to the church. Not all who claim to be teachers of truth are indeed teachers of truth, but to reject God's true gift of good Bible expositors is to dishonor Him to a great degree and build oneself up in pride. And what about verse like these? "The things which you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, entrust these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also." --2 Timothy 2:2 "But as for you, speak the things which are fitting for sound doctrine." --Titus 2:1 Need I cite the passages which rebuke individuals for being UNTEACHABLE? If, as you say, new believers don't need teachers, why would the more mature ones? Why listen to anyone's teaching at all, ever?!? I hold to my original, biblical contention that where possible, sanctification and growth in the knowledge of the truth does not come about in solitude, but in the context of the community of believers. --Joe! |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ] Next > Last [25] >> |