Results 201 - 220 of 500
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Reformer Joe Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
201 | Preacher having a living wife | Matt 19:9 | Reformer Joe | 70433 | ||
See the verse above. If this church leader doesn't meet the qualifications set forth in Titus 1 and 1 Timothy 3, he should not be shepherding in God's household, and you sheep should not follow him. --Joe! |
||||||
202 | Is a rich man doomed? | Matt 19:24 | Reformer Joe | 5186 | ||
The answer is two verses down: And looking at them Jesus said to them, "With people this is impossible, but with God all things are possible." (Matthew 19:26) Of course, the rich man's problem was not that he had wealth, but that he loved his wealth and the things of this world, and therefore rejected Christ. --Joe! |
||||||
203 | Who is the man in this verse? | Matt 22:11 | Reformer Joe | 29263 | ||
There are a couple of ways to answer this question. Parables were stories to teach one or two important truths, and everything in the parable doesn't necessarily correspond to something true spiritually. A good example of this would be in Luke 11 where we have the man beating persistently on his neighbor's door who reluctantly gives in to give him some bread for his guest. While we should be like the man outside in being persistent in prayer, we should not view God as someone who doesn't want to give to us but gets tires of us wearing Him down. In fact, the rest of the passage flatly says the opposite. In the case of the marriage feast, we don't necessarily have to hold that there are some people who will "sneak into Heaven undetected" to get the idea of the passage: that there are many who expect to be welcome in Heaven but are not clothed in proper attire (in this case, the righteousness of Christ). Jesus sums up the parable in 22:14: "For many are called, but few are chosen." Many are outwardly called to the feast, but only those who come on the King's terms will be granted participation in it. Reformed theology has a lot to say about the outward call to all men and the inward, effectual call of God to His elect, but suffice it to say that there are many who try to get into the feast without the proper credentials. One of the ministers at my church referred to this very parable this morning before our participation in the Lord's Supper, encouraging all who partake to examine themselves to see if they are "dressed appropriately" for the feast (i.e. if they truly possess saving faith in Christ alone). Hope this helps you understand better! --Joe |
||||||
204 | What is your understanding of the H.S.? | Matt 22:37 | Reformer Joe | 64182 | ||
First of all, the Holy Spirit is a "He," not an "it." The Holy Spirit is God, the third Person of the Trinity. "We believe and confess also that the Holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son-- neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but only proceeding from the two of them. In regard to order, he is the third person of the Trinity-- of one and the same essence, and majesty, and glory, with the Father and the Son. "He is true and eternal God, as the Holy Scriptures teach us." (Belgic Confession, Article 11) "Justifying faith is a saving grace, wrought in the heart of a sinner BY THE SPIRIT and Word of God, whereby he, being convinced of his sin and misery, and of the disability in himself and all other creatures to recover him out of his lost condition, not only assenteth to the truth of the promise of the gospel, but receiveth and resteth upon Christ and his righteousness, therein held forth, for pardon of sin, and for the accepting and accounting of his person righteous in the sight of God for salvation." (Westminster Larger Catechism, Answer #72). --Joe! |
||||||
205 | Does Mt. 22:39 assume self-love? | Matt 22:39 | Reformer Joe | 51244 | ||
No, it is assumed that you already love yourself. Loving ourselves is not something we need to learn to do. If you look at the parallel passage in Luke, this story is followed by the parable of the Good Samaritan, which is a striking illustration of how we are to love others as ourselves. Just as we seek after our own survival and well-being, we should also look after the interests of others. Christ, of course, provided the supreme example of this (Philippians 2:3-11). --Joe! |
||||||
206 | Matt. 23:37 Calvinism or Arminianism? | Matt 23:37 | Reformer Joe | 70431 | ||
"Does Matt. 23:37 prove: (a) Calvinism or (b) Arminianism?" No. Welcome back! --Joe! |
||||||
207 | fall of Jerusalem | Matt 24:2 | Reformer Joe | 26307 | ||
A.D. 70 --Joe! |
||||||
208 | Still studying Mattew 24 | Matt 24:3 | Reformer Joe | 78597 | ||
You asked: "OK, so if Matthew 24 has already occured why hasn't Jesus returned? Is Matthew 24 split into two different time periods? " That is exactly what some believe, actually. Proponents of what is commonly called "partial preterism" look at Matthew 24 as Jesus' two-part answer to what they consider to be a two-part question in verse 3: "[a] Tell us, when will these things happen, and [b] what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?" You asked: "What about the sun and moon being darkend, and stars falling from the sky, when does that occure? A group of small meteors striking the earth could easly account for that." Often prophecy uses cosmic and environmental symbolism to describe total destruction. Those who hold that part of Matthew 24 took place in A.D. 70 suggest that this is the case in this situation. --Joe! |
||||||
209 | Will the 2nd Coming Ever Occur? | Matt 24:34 | Reformer Joe | 55370 | ||
Welcome back, Treadway. Hope you don't mind me putting my pocket change in! You wrote: 'I have spent much, much time in tracking down this “soon” business, and the conclusion is that the evidence is overwhelming that Jesus will not be coming back.' I am sorry that you have not found anyone to adequately address your concerns. As a point of fact, there are many who believe that much of what Jesus predicts in Matthew 24 and what the apostles mention did indeed occur within the lifetimes of those hearing Jesus' words. In A.D. 70, Jerusalem and the temple were utterly destroyed, and the Jewish people were slaughtered wholesale by the Roman soldiers under the command of General Titus. Many hold that the first half of the chapter is describing this campaign against the Jews as the judgment Christ executes on the Jews for rejecting their Messiah. This view is known as "preterism" and comes in two different forms, which are normally termed "partial preterism" and "full preterism." Partial preterists believe that only some of the prophecies regarding Christ returning to the earth have been fulfilled, while others (such as Philippians 3:20-21 and 1 Corinthians 15 concerning the general resurrection at the end of the age) have yet to come to pass. Full preterists believe that Christ's return has already occurred during the first century, and that we should not expect Him to come back. So both preterist views hold that the "soon" and "within this generation" prophecies did indeed occur during the lifetime of the apostles. I myself cannot bring myself to accept a full preterist view at all, for several reasons. First of all, it results in the need to "symbolize" all of the passages which have not clearly happened yet, such as the ones I cited above. Also, if the resurrection of Christians has already taken place, what about believers now? Secondly, 2 Peter 3 makes it clear that God is patient, holding back the destruction until all have come to repentance. Since there are people that are repenting as I type this somewhere in the world (to the praise and glory of our great God), obviously that "all" hasn't been reached yet. Thirdly, there seems to be a "period of Gentiles" (Luke 21:24 and Romans 11) which will be followed by a resugence of Jewish people embracing their Messiah. We still have not seen such a thing yet. Lastly, the earliest church, even to the generation that succeeded the apostles, were anticipating the return of Jesus Christ. If A.D. 70 had been all there was to it, surely the apostles would have tipped the churches off that there was nothing left to wait for. Therefore, God is not slow as some count slowness, but will bring about the culmination of history in His own timing. For an examination of the partial preterist view, which you may or may not find enlightening, considering your questions, I recommend the book _The Last Days According to Jesus_ by R.C. Sproul. If anything, you will find a perspective that does not count "soon" as being 2000-plus years or "this generation" to mean the human race. Hope this gives you some new avenues for exploration! --Joe! |
||||||
210 | Not preached on?? | Matt 26:13 | Reformer Joe | 4870 | ||
The very fact that this account is included in Matthew's gospel fulfills what Jesus says. | ||||||
211 | Do spirits travel during sexual sins. | Matt 26:41 | Reformer Joe | 12893 | ||
What is the Scripture reference that brings about this question? --Joe! |
||||||
212 | Explain this to me | Matt 27:3 | Reformer Joe | 74531 | ||
"Can someone explain this? When Joe or John responds on this subject it is done in manner to attack the character, integrity or spirituality of the person holding the opposite view." I can explain it. It is your imagination. By the way, what do you call this?: "[Calvin] was not a theologian seeking God's truth." --Ed's last post You were saying something about attacking the integrity, spirituality, and character of one's theological opponents? Something about pots and kettles comes to mind. I will be happy to stop pointing out your unsubstantiated factual inaccuracies as soon as you stop making them or start substantiating them. I promise! --Joe |
||||||
213 | Definition of worldly sorrow? | Matt 27:5 | Reformer Joe | 27789 | ||
NAV: I would not say that Jesus' sorrow was a worldly sorrow. In 2 Corinthians 7, Paul is specifically speaking of the sorrow of the church at Corinth in response to his letter (most likely a rebuke). Paul is comparing the godly grief (God-given) that leads to repentance (God-given) rather than some kind of self-pity that results in no change of attitude toward the sin itself. Jesus never expressed either of these kinds of sorrows, because he was never rightfully accused of wrongdoing. I think Judas' suicide is perhaps the best example of a worldly sorrow leading to death (thanks to Sinclair Ferguson for this example). --Joe! |
||||||
214 | Really that difficult for Christ to die? | Matt 27:46 | Reformer Joe | 68393 | ||
"I know his death was for the atonement of our sins, but how was his death any harder than our own death?" Well, that atonement thing is a really big deal, facing God's infinite wrath so that I won't. In addition to that, however, in our assertion of Jesus' divinity, we also often forget that He is a human being, and he experienced human emotions and his death was a very real and physical one, just like you and I will experience one day. And the means of his death was far more brutal than what we are likely to experience. Maybe it would help to look at it from our own lives. As Christians, we know that eternal glory and bliss lie on the other side of our own death. I have full assurance of that. However, does that make us look forward at all to the actual process of our deaths? As R.C. Sproul is known to say, he is not afraid of DEATH; it is DYING that he doesn't look forward to. --Joe! |
||||||
215 | WHY DO WE NEED TO EVANGALIZE? | Matt 28:19 | Reformer Joe | 4571 | ||
1. Christ commanded it (Matthew 28:19). 2. It is our purpose as "new creations" to glorify God, which includes evangelism. The fact that some will not be regenerated is not an excuse. We will worship and praise God for all eternity in Heaven, and everyone there will already be in complete agreement with us. Therefore, proclaiming Christ and His gospel is not only for the purpose of "winning the lost," but for proclaiming the excellencies of Him who CALLED us out of darkness into His marvelous light. (1 Peter 2:9,10; see also 2 Cor. 5:17-21 and Ephesians 2:8-10). 3. While God in his sovereignty certainly doesn't NEED his creation to call the elect to himself, we are clearly the ordained means of doing so. It is the Holy Spirit who regenerates the elect, but He usually works in tandem with the Gospel proclaimed verbally by believers. Therefore, we are God's primary ordained MEANS of the message coming to the currently-unbelieving elect, whom God the Holy Spirit will supernaturally re-create to believe the message. The important thing to remember is that saving faith involves an object (Christ's sinless life, substitutionary death, and resurrection). Gad causes believers to believe, but the "information" also has to be present for the elect to place his faith in. Therefore, while God has chosen, he has allowed us the privilege of being a part of his redemptive work! While my neighbor's salvation due to God's grace and mercy (or her just condemnation) does not DEPEND on my evangelism to her, I am disobedient to our holy God when I do not proclaim the Gospel, and I also do not share in the blessing of being God's instrument if I keep silent. One last corollary to all the above: while the elect is known to God, He has not revealed it to us. Therefore, we should not assume that someone not saved right now will not be called to faith in Christ at some future point. Those who use the doctrine of unconditional election to refrain from proclaiming Christ crucified and raised either misunderstand the message or are merely using it as an excuse. --Joe! |
||||||
216 | 3 commands from one person | Matt 28:19 | Reformer Joe | 4893 | ||
All variations of the Great Commission, despite the fact that the most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have the last twelve verses of Mark's gospel, indicating that most likely it was a much later addition and not penned by Mark nor inspired by the Holy Spirit. By the way, Acts 1:8 should fall in this list as well. --Joe! |
||||||
217 | strong words for sin, not sinner | Matt 28:19 | Reformer Joe | 57094 | ||
Estelle: You wrote: "However, I don't recall Jesus exhorting us to denigrate the person who is doing the action, but to rebuke the person FOR the action." If you mean by "denigrate" to give unfair insults and to do so in order to make oneself look better at anoth's expense, you are right. If you mean that Jesus never spoke harshly to his theological opponents, I suggest you go re-read the gospels. The second half of John 8 is a good place to start. Jesus referred to the Pharisees as hypocrites, vipers, blind guides, whitewashed tombs, sons of the devil, etc. Are those terms referring to sins or the people committing them? Is Jesus sinning by "calling them names"? If not, why not? 'I also don't recall Jesus or any of the disciples "starting the fights". They didn't allow themselves to be walked on, but neither did they initiate the confrontation.' I am glad that you see things that way, since this confrontation was not initiated by me, but rather by someone who dug up a post from MAY, 2001 and decided that I needed a lesson in how to embrace a false teacher and a cult member as someone who is "where he needs to be" instead of so shaprly correcting him after his constant insistence that the biblical doctrine of the Trinity is a pagan invention and twisting Scripture to try and prove it. Why she felt the need to appoint herself as my "manners instructor" FIFTEEN MONTHS after I made the post is beyond me, but she has yet to use one single verse of Scripture to correct me in what she perceives to be my "unloving attitude" (she knows my heart based on one post, apparently), which is the biblical model of correction (2 Timothy 3:16). So you tell me: who "started this confrontation"? You wrote: "Sin is what starts the confrontation, therefore the rebuke should be toward the sin. Some people are still hardheaded even after the sin is pointed out. At that point, a "HEY YOU, you're on the wrong path because of xyz" is necessary. But a "HEY STUPID, YOU'RE NOT SMART because of xyz" is never called for." 1. The direct object of the verb "rebuke" is ALWAYS a person committing the sin, not the sin itself. The apostles do not say, "Good heretic, bad heresy." 2. Please show me one instance where I have ever called ANYONE stupid on this forum. Please do not commit the sin of slandering me. Bearing false witness is one of the big ten, you know. 3. There is a difference between STUPIDITY (Lack of intelligence) and FOOLISHNESS (failure to exercise biblical wisdom). For example, this whole issue even coming up in the first place is foolishness. The fact that the one who instigated this character attack and unbiblical lesson toward me has been corrected (gently, even) by no less than four other individuals on this forum and still persists in her unbiblical stance is foolishness. She may be a rocket scientist, but she is attempting to point out that sharp rebuke against heresy is unloving, when the Bible demonstrates this not to be true. That, too, is foolishness, just as it is foolishness that this thread persists. Again, please go back into the archives, dust them off, and actually read the exchange which caused cookie to get on her soapbox in the first place. You will find that I was direct, to the point, biblical, but not insulting to anyone's intelligence. --Joe! |
||||||
218 | Mark: Two narrative composition? | Mark | Reformer Joe | 37333 | ||
You wrote: "Anyone interested in this discussion about Mark as a narrative composition?" Probably not too many on this forum. What I am curious about is your sources for making a claim that Mark is a composite of a plurality of accounts. Surely this is not your own primary research, so please cite for us whose scholarship you are posting to this forum. Thanks! --Joe! |
||||||
219 | How can I help without scaring her away? | Mark 2:17 | Reformer Joe | 20755 | ||
Vicalan: Give her the verse above and point out to her that the very reason Jesus came to earth was to die for the sins of bad people. Point out to her from Romans 3:10-18 that we all start out as bad people. Use Romans 3:23-24 to show her about God's free gift, as well as passages like Ephesians 2:8-9 and Titus 3:5. Stress that God's forgiveness comes IN SPITE OF our sinfulness rather than because of our goodness (Romans 5:6-8 are good verses here). Share these verses with her. Discuss them with her. Let her read them herself. Never underestimate how God can use His Bible to impact the lives of the hurting. It seems that your friend already has a pretty good awareness of her sin; without denying her sinfulness, point out the love and mercy of God toward all those who put their trust in Christ's death and resurrection as payment for their own sins. What an opportunity you have to speak the truth of God to someone who really needs to hear it! Please let us know how it goes. --Joe! |
||||||
220 | What happened to the disciples? | Mark 3:16 | Reformer Joe | 7088 | ||
Hank is right about the Bible saying nothing about the fate of the apostles (with the exception of James the brother of John in Acts 12:2 (and Judas Iscariot, of course). Other histories/legends hold that all of the the Twelve with the exception of John were martyred. Peter was crucified upside down during the reign of Nero. Thomas became a missionary to India and was run through by a spear. I can't remember about the others right now. Does anyone know of a good book which details the specifics for each of the Twelve? As Hank said, a lot of the material we do have is scattered in histories and writing of the Early Church Fathers. Perhaps Eusebius gathered them together in his history... --Joe! |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ] Next > Last [25] >> |