Results 421 - 440 of 449
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Jesusman Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
421 | Is God ONE or is God THREE? | James 2:19 | Jesusman | 36232 | ||
Hello, Just because someone didn't sit down and put pen to paper, and wrote down the concise doctrine of the trinity until after the New Testament period was done, does not mean that the Doctrine did not exist. For example, the scientific comunity didn't really formulate the laws surrounding many of the basic fuctions of nature until well into the 1800's. However, these same laws were seen and commented upon in the Bible. Most of these biblical comments are found in the later chapters of Job, which dates back to the time of Abraham. Now, since these scientific laws weren't written down until the 1800's, does that mean that these functions of nature did not happen before then? No, it means that no one took the time to write it down in a concise manner until then. Now, as with the Trinity Doctrine, it is seen all through out the Bible: Old and New Testament both. You asked about my comments about Denying the trinity is to deny Jesus as God in the Flesh. Simply this. The Doctrine of Jesus Christ as God in the flesh is universal within the christian community. This doctrine implies that Jesus was God in his earthly form. Now, when we read the gospels involving Jesus talking about or to God, he speaks of another person altogether. Jesus refers to himself as another person from The Father. He refers to the Holy Spirit as being different from himself and the Father. So, from Jesus' talks about The Father, we find that there are three aspects, essences, people, or whatever term you choose within the God-head. So, now we change gears to God being one God. Again, this doctrine cannot be denied because many verses come right out and declare it. So, when you put this all together, you have the doctrine of the Trinity. So, you see that the doctrine that Jesus is God in the flesh, a universal doctrine, is undeniably linked to the Doctrine of the trinity. Now, for the point about at hand, because of this link, you cannot pick one and deny another. When you reject the trinity doctrine, yet believe the Doctrine that Jesus was God in the flesh, you get a contradiction in theology. How can God be in heaven, as Jesus clearly says, while he is on the earth as Jesus? Does God have some cosmic form of Multiple personalities? The only way to smooth out this contradiction is the doctrine of the Trinity. That God, being one God, manifests himself as three (insert term here). Jesusman |
||||||
422 | Is God ONE or is God THREE? | James 2:19 | Jesusman | 36722 | ||
Hello, Tell me, how do you rectify the passages where Jesus speaks not only about God the Father, but to God the Father as well. Here you have God talking to God. Also, you have Jesus' statement in the Great Commission: "Baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit". Jesus states three identities in which we are to Baptize in. It is clear that the Apostles believed in the Trinity. Look at Peter's sermon in Acts 2. In verse 33, Peter speaks about Jesus saying, "Therefore having been exalted to the righthand of God, and having recieved from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He has poured forth this which you both see and hear." This verse supports that the Apostles believed in the Trinity. Paul, time and time again, speaks of blessing Both the Father and the Son in many of his introductions to his epistles. A clear sign that he believed in the Trinity. John the Beloved in 1 John 4 speaks of God the Father sending God the Son to earth in human form. Another sign that John the Beloved believed in the Trinity. So, the doctrine of the Trinity is all throughout the New Testament. As I said before, Just because someone didn't write it all down until later doesn't mean that no one believed it until then. I was beginning High School when I first picked up a superman comic and began drawing the pictures I saw in there. The first picture I drew was a picture of the Eradicator dressed as Superman from the Reign of the Supermen series that followed the Death of Superman series. I saw this picture of him, liked it, and drew a copy of just him without the background. Now, did I invent this Character when I drew him? No, he was already a part of the Story. Did I invent the suit he wore? No, someone else designed it. In fact, all I did was I copied someone else's design by free hand, meaning that I didn't trace it. The Eradicator was already an established character. He was an adversary of Superman some five years before this appearance. The Eradicator was a kryptonian computer hologram that was programed into Kal-El's shuttle with the program to re-create Krypton on what-ever planet the shuttle landed. It remained dormant until it was discovered. Superman defeated him by throwing him into the Sun. When Kal-El died, the robots from the Fortress of Solitude revived the Eradicator program to replace Superman. Later, the Eradicator played a key part in bringing Kal-El back to life. Now, did I invent this story just now? No, this was all thought up and written nearly 5-10 years ago. I have the comics at home to prove it. I just took the time to sum it up for you, just as the fore-fathers took the time to write down the Doctrine of the Trinity for the people of their times. Do you see my point? The doctrine of the trinity wasn't invented after the New testament period. It was written down, or summed up, as it were. It was believed by the Apostles and Jesus Christ well before someone wrote it all down. Jesusman |
||||||
423 | Is God ONE or is God THREE? | James 2:19 | Jesusman | 37339 | ||
So, are you saying that Jesus was able to switch his Godhood on and off like a light switch? Are there any verses that support that? The main problem I see with what you are saying is that it is saying that Jesus was in fact a blasphemer. The only way that Jesus could claim to be the "Son of God" and able to pray to him as a "Son" is if the "Son" with in the Godhead. So, when Jesus is praying to God. It isn't his humanity only that is praying, it is his unified Man and Godhood praying together within the role of God the Son praying to God the Father. Hebrews 1:1-4 God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world. And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become as much better than the angels, as He has inherited a more excellent name than they. It's clear that Jesus was perfectly God while still being perfectly Human, and that he didn't switch his deity on and off. He was always God and always human, even while he was praying. Therefore, Jesus had to be God the Son of the tri-une Godhead. ON top of that, you have Jesus living the perfect life, free from Sin. The only way he could remain that way, and become the perfect and final sacrifice was if he was fully God all throughout his life. If he kept switching between man and God, then he wouldn't have lived the sinless life because the human nature, described as sinful, would've lead him into sin. However, we know that that isn't the case. Therefore, Jesus was always fully God while still being fully Human, and thus being a member of the Trinity. Sola Scriptura is a very good basis to study from. Let scripture interpret Scipture. However, that does not mean that we should throw all other documents and resources out the window. Jesus commanded his followers to teach and make disciples. The early church fathers who sat down and wrote out the early concise forms of Christian doctrine were doing just that. They were teaching, and they continue to teach us today. To remain strictly "sola scriptura" would be self-defeating because your students would have to reject your biblical insights because it wouldn't be Scripture. There needs to be some form of supplimental resources to clarify the Scriptures. For that, we turn to those who lived and studied before us. I am not saying that these resources should replace the Bible in importance and supremicy. I'm saying that they shouldn't be rejected. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
424 | how do you make sense of this verse? | 1 Peter | Jesusman | 32943 | ||
Hello, Look at the previous verses. Beginning in verse 13, Peter says for us to "gird your minds for action." During Biblical times, Hebrews wore robes, even during combat. Before a battle began, they would take a scarf, belt, or sash and tie it around them, and tuck their robes into it. It aided in preventing them from falling in the middle of battle. As time passed, the phrase "Gird yourself" meant "prepare for what is immediately coming". Then we go onto what we should prepare for. In verse 14, Peter tallks to us in the context of being children. In that discussion, he tells us to be holy, or separate from the world as Christ was separate. Our behavior should reflect Christ's. Then we move on to verse 17 and on until verse 21. Here, Peter changes gears from reflecting upon how we relate to christ, to focusing upon how we relate to God the Father. The main point throughout this particular passage is how we should conduct ourselves before the world around us. Now, let's look at verse 17 in particular. In Matthew 23:9, Jesus tells us to not call anyone on earth your "Father", but to only refer to God in Heaven as "Father". You take that, along with the following description that Peter gives of someone who "impartially judges according to each man's work ...", and you have an accurate description of God the Father. So, here you have Peter telling us to remain obedient to God the Father as children should be. To remain separate from this world, and to conduct ourselves accordingly. Then he tells us that the one we call "Father" is also an impartial judge who judges our actions as well, and that we should be fearful of that. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
425 | Do not conform! | 1 Pet 1:14 | Jesusman | 31379 | ||
Hello, I like the meaning for "Holy". "Hagios" in it's simplest meaning is "to be pure". It stems from cultic practices where the quality of one's worship of their deity was of supreme importance. The intension was to be so "holy" that you became divinity. I find it ironic that we, as Christians, are called not only to be Holy, but to live as Christ lived and to possess the mind that Christ possessed. Not only are we called just to be holy and pure, but to be as Holy and pure as christ is holy and pure. This even ties into the being made righteous, or sanctified, before God. In fact, "sanctified" and "Sanctuary" both have origins connected with "Hagios". There's a lot of doctrine in that little word, "hagios". Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
426 | Behavior before the Gentiles? | 1 Pet 2:12 | Jesusman | 30223 | ||
Hello Charis, Let me speak from experience on this one. If you are a Christian, people know that you are a Christian, and they see you screaming insults and profanity at someone, what kind of an image are making in their minds about Christianity? Not a good one, I tell you that. In the end, you have aided in their hearts being hardened because you didn't set a good positive image. Then you'll have no choice but to move on to a different group to witness to, because your witness is worthless in their eyes. They are going to see you and think that all Christians are just like you. Thus make all of our duties to spread the Gospel harder in the long run. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
427 | What is wrong with proving it true? | 1 Pet 3:15 | Jesusman | 192336 | ||
Greetings, Recent conversations have me baffled over something that I would like clarification on. What is so upsetting about providing scientific and archeological support for the Bible? The reaction thus far I get from others would seem like I farted in church. I understand the idea that the Bible doesn't need to be proven true that it is true, however not everyone in the world shares that belief. There are even christians who don't believe the Bible is true historically. What is wrong with trying to prove it true?? |
||||||
428 | did jesus go to hell | 1 Pet 3:18 | Jesusman | 106405 | ||
Nowhere in the Bible does it say that Jesus went to hell. Jesus finished the payment of sin, and the defeat of death on the cross. His own words were "It is finished!" He didn't say "It will be finished in three days after I return from Hell." Also, as he died on the cross, he said "Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit." He didn't say, "Satan, into thy hands I resign my being." He told the thief on the cross, "Today, you will be with me in Paradise." He didn't say, "I'll join you in paradise after I kick satan's butt in hell for three days." Jesus went to be with the father during the three days his body was in the tomb. You can tell that from his own words. "It if finished!" John 19:30 "Today, you shall be with me in Paradise." Luke 23:43 "Father, into they hands I commend my spirit." Luke 23:46 Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
429 | Who are the "any" and "all" in verse 9 | 2 Pet 3:9 | Jesusman | 52973 | ||
Hello, I must also throw my hat in with Hank an Tim on this one. Because, look at the context. Beginning in verse 8 and going on through to verse 13, Peter is referring to the coming of the Lord. He begins his thought in verse 8 about how God views time. He explains that God views time differently than we do. Then he begins verse 9 by saying that God is not slow, but is patient instead. He implies here that God is waiting on us. In the phrase you quoted, "not wishing for any to perish, but for all to come to repentance", I think Peter is expanding the focus. He began with God alone, then brought in the Saints, then he expands to include all of mankind, and he then expands to involve the whole earth and the heavens in verse 10. In verse 10, he describes all being destroyed. In verse 11, he begins to narrow down the focus, from the world to the saints. In verse 12, he narrows it again to God, and concludes in verse 13 with God and the new creation. If you go back to the beginning of the Chapter, you find a similar pattern of starting with a focus of a single person or group, only to expand to include the world, then narrowing the focus down to the single person or group. So, In all, I agree that Peter is referring to any person universally. Jesusman |
||||||
430 | why was this epistle written? | 1 John | Jesusman | 35921 | ||
The main thought into why 1 John was written was to combat Gnosticism, which was common in those days. Jesusman |
||||||
431 | why was this epistle written? | 1 John | Jesusman | 36020 | ||
Hello John, From your post, I gathered that you wanted a critique of sorts. I have viewed many of your posts. One thing that I have noticed is that you have a strong background into Doctrine and Scriptural interpretation. This is good. We should all be well versed in the Doctrines and the Scripture. However, there are other areas which would provide helpful insight into the meaning of the Scriptural texts. It is good that you are able to interpret the Sriptural truths into modern thinking through the benefit of the great theologins. However, a good understanding of biblical history is important as well. Remember, the original authors of the Bible weren't writing to the future Church. They were writing to a specified group in a specified time in a specified culture. The main thrust of Hermaneutics is to gain insight into that culture, audience, and time. For example, Let's look at the final point in Calvinism: Preservance of the Saints. From an interpretive view, the proofs for this point are found throughout the New Testament. Take 1 Peter 1:3-7 for instance. In this Passage, Peter clearly say that our inheritance is reserved for us in heaven. He says that it is undefiled, imperishable, and won't fade away. It is clear that while we may back slide into sinful actions, our eternal life inheritance will remain in heaven. Now, from the hermaneutical view, the proofs for this point can be found in the history behind the terms used in the New Testament. Take Romans 8:12-17 for instance. In this passage, Paul says that all who have been saved have also been given a "spirit of adoption". He says here that we have the full right to call God, "Abba, Father", or "Daddy" as it would be more accurate. Now, a look into the Roman and Jewish culture of the first century reveals some interesting views behind "adoption". First, every "legit" child was adopted. Second, an "adopted" child, no matter what the circumstances, could NOT be denied his/her inheritance. Third, The adoption contract was so strong and binding, that not even the courts could nullify or desolve it. The adoption was permanent, even through death. So, with that historical insight, the proofs for the preservance of the Saints is clearly seen. So, you can see that the history and culture pertaining to the Bible is extremely important when interpreting Scripture. As for Limited Atonement, from one perspective, I agree, yet from a different perspective, I disagree. Atonement is for all of those who believe in the Lord Jesus Christ. Any who believes will achieve atonement. Now, From that perspective, I agree that atonement is limited to those who believe and call upon the Lord Jesus Christ. However, there are many Calvinists, especially the more dogmattic ones, who take this a step further and say that Christ died for the elect alone for it is only they who will achieve atonement. I have argued with many of them over the past few years. This perspective I disagree with. I believe that Christ died for the Sins of all mankind, not just those who will be saved. As I said in another thread all together, there are many things in which I agree with Calvinistic Theology. However, there are many places where I disagree as well. So, overall, I would suggest that you do some research into the history and culture of the Bible. As for the Biblical language aspect, which I didn't cover, most commentaries will decifer through most of it for you. A couple good references to look into are: Vincent's word studies of the New Testament, and The Hebrew-Greek Key Word Study Bible by Zodhiotes(sp). Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
432 | why was this epistle written? | 1 John | Jesusman | 36230 | ||
Hello, I did demonstrate how to use history and culture to study Biblical Doctrines. I just did it with a different subject. I used the subject of Eternal Security as opposed to particular redemption. Why? I have studied the history and culture behind Adoption in relation to Security more than I have the topic of Redemption and election. I am more familiar with that area. I don't know enough about Election and Redemption in the New Testament culture to comment fully. So, I chose a different subject. As for your other concerns, I never said that we should ignore the Scripture's applications to the Church of today. I am saying that we should use the meanings of then to amplify how the text means to us today. After all, terms change over the years. While a word in the Greek may say this in english, the implied meaning and history behind it has a different meaning and application all together. Take "Logos" for example. IN english, this word means "word". However, when you study the history, cultural, and implied meaings inherant within "Logos", the more accurate translation and meanings would be " the Logic or understanding behind the spoken word, the thought, and so on." Now, this doesn't change the meaning of Jesus being refered to as the "Logos" as used in John 1. The same meaning still applies. Jesus is not only the Word from God, but he is the thought, logic, and understanding behind that word as well. Do you see my point? Jesusman |
||||||
433 | How can I be certain God speaks to me? | 1 John | Jesusman | 40454 | ||
Hello, In 1 John 4:1-6, John pretty much covers this subject. Basically, if God is speaking to you, then what he says will coincide with His expressed word with in the Bible. If what is told to you does not coincide or is contradictory to the Bible's teachings, then ignore it. Jesusman |
||||||
434 | false prophets | 1 John 4:1 | Jesusman | 90552 | ||
Hello, John the Beloved provides the answer to your inquiry. How do you know a false prophet from a true prophet? Test them. In 1 John 4: 1-3 tells us to first not believe every person claiming to be sent of God, but to test them. He continues on to say how you will know them. If they confess Christ has come from in the flesh. If they do not confess that Christ is from God, or confess that Christ is not from God, then they are false prophets. The basic idea here is to test everyone who claims to be from God. Test what they say according to scripture. Just like the Bereans of Acts 17:10, we only know truth by examining the scriptures daily. A friend of mine, now deceased, told me a story once. He used to work in a bank as a teller. One time, he and a few co-workers had a unique opportunity to go to a federal reserve. They were only there to do one single thing. Count the money as it comes off the press. They handled several hundred thousand dollars during their stay, just counting it. When they returned to their bank, my friend was counting a customer's money. He raised his hand, and told his supervisor that the money he was handling was fake. When asked how he knew, My friend said that it didn't "feel" like the actual thing he had spent so long counting at the federal reserve. The customer turned out to be a counterfitter, and was arrested. The point to this is to know the Bible so well, that when a false prophet, or false teacher comes along, you'll know it. You'll know it not because you know where they are wrong, but because you'll know it doesn't "feel" like the truth you've been studying. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
435 | how do you deal with a lying spirit? | 1 John 4:1 | Jesusman | 193200 | ||
Take the advice of John in 1 John 4:1-6 and test what is being said to determine if they are of God or not. Then, take the advice of Jesus in Matthew 18:15-20 if the person claims to be a christian and confront the person. If they refuse to listen, bring another and approach him again. After you go through this, if the person still continues, then, as Jesus puts him, treat him as a gentile or tax collector. Basically, as being unwanted, and don't associate with him. For others, You might want to read up on what Paul told the Ephesians in Ephesians 4:17 - 5:21. To summerize, be immitators of christ and speak truthfully, honorably, and let your speech edify and aid others. You might also concider what Jesus told the multitude in John 8:41-47, basically that those who lie are of Satan. Jesusman |
||||||
436 | Are all at the white throne judg. lost? | Revelation | Jesusman | 35299 | ||
Hello, I would say that all of mankind is in heaven before the Great White Throne. First off, the word usage suggests that. Notice, that verse 12 states that John saw all of the dead, both great and small, standing before the throne. ON top of that, you have verse 15 which suggests that the lost were separated from the saved and where cast into Hell. Also, remember Jesus' parables of the Wheat and the Tares and the Sheep and Goats? In both parables, Jesus teaches that the wheat and tares were harvested together, and the Sheep and Goats were brought together before separation. So, it is reasonable to assume that all of mankind, saved and non-saved, will stand before the Almighty at the Great White Throne. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
437 | Are all at the white throne judg. lost? | Revelation | Jesusman | 35901 | ||
Hello, First off, is the "law of double jeopardy" in the Bible? Secondly, The question must be asked, "Was Jesus judged, or did he die in order to pay the debt of Sin that all of Mankind owes?" Thirdly, The Bible never says that the saved are exempt from being at the final Judgement. It says that the final judgement is where the separation is to take place: ie: the separation of the Saved from the Non-saved. That is what Revelation 21 reveals. Finally, God is on throne. He can judge whoever he feels like judging. Do you honestly believe that you are exempt of being held accountable for your actions, and that you have no need to Fear God? Jesusman |
||||||
438 | Are all at the white throne judg. lost? | Revelation | Jesusman | 35918 | ||
Hello, Ok? First off, you are correct that Jesus was not judged. However, he did pay the price for Sin. The price of sin is death, which Paul reveals in Romans 3. Jesus paid that price for us, for all of mankind in fact. Now, as a result, Salvation is not entirely the cleansing of our sins, rather it is our acceptance of the Payment made by Jesus. The Final Judgement, which every person shall go through, concerns this. Involved with in the final judgement is the separation. Jesus three time refers to this. In one parable, He talks of separating sheep and goats. IN another parable, he talks of separating wheat and tares. In a third parable, he speaks of a dragnet which contianed all types of fish, which were sorted through between the good and bad fish. So, it is clear from Jesus alone that there will be a time of separation. As we turn back to the passage in Revelation 20:11-15, the first thing that happens after they are all gathered is that they are all judged according to their deeds. Just following, they are separated. Now, The key factor is found in verse 15. Notice, that those who were not listed in the Book of Life were cast into the Lake of Fire. It wasn't those who were judged according to their actions, it was those who accepted the payment by christ. A former pastor of mine explained it this way. The court is gathered, and the defendants are placed, one by one, before God. The accuser reads off the actions that this person committed during his/her lifetime. Just before the gavel hits, the defendant's attorney arrives and states that the defendant's punishment has already been paid and accepted. The judge confirms this in the Book of Life, and the defendant is set free. However, this is not the same for every defendant. For there are those who refused to accept the Attorney's counsel. As for the difference between the Judgement seat and the Great White Throne, I see them both as the same event, namely the Final Judgement. Both Romans 14 and 2 Corinthians 5 speaks of giving an account on that day of our deeds, and that all must endure this. Just as Revelation 20:11-15 describes. Besides, you never hear in Scripture of two final judgements. Only one, the one before God. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
439 | Are all at the white throne judg. lost? | Revelation | Jesusman | 36018 | ||
Hello, My reason why I asked about whether or not the Double Jeapardy law is int the Bible is because I didn't remember seeing it in the Bible. I thought that it was an American political law that was developed. That's all. Look at Revelation 20:11-15 again. John clearly says that "the dead" appeared before the throne. Now, if this was only the non-saved, then why go through and separate them by looking in the Book of Life. They would all be non-saved people. Looking into the Book of Life would be a waste of time. However, we have the parables that reflect this time from Jesus. As I listed in my previous post, Jesus says that all of mankind will be gathered together, then separated. Just as Revelation 20 points out. Now, we, the saved, still pass on into Life after the judgement due to our names being in the Book of Life. It is our actions that are judged, as the passage reveals. It is the non-saved who will be judged twice. Once for their actions and a second for their souls. As a result, the non-saved will be thrown into the Lake of Fire as a punishment. As for the Judgement seat of Christ, this is also the Great White Throne, or Final Judgement. Both the Judgement Seat and the Great White Throne are wrapped up into one single event, the Final Judgement. As for your comment about Jesus' sacrifice being a judgement call from God upon the Human race, I must disagree slightly. It wasn't just a judgement against Man, but a payment for Sin. The price of Sin must have been paid. Sin was already judged as a violation, and man was already judged as being a criminal long before Jesus died on the Cross. God's speach to Adam and Eve just after they sinned is a clear sign that Mankind and sin was already judged as a whole. The final judgement is a one on one basis, if you will. Why would God have sent the Law if he already didn't have a judgement against Mankind? Noah's Ark and the Great Flood is a Judgement against Man. The Plagues in Egypt is a judgement call from God. The Exile in Babylon and Persia was a judgement call from God. God's cursing of David shortly after the affair with Bathsheba was a judgement by God. The Bible is filled with times where God has judged mankind whether it be as a whole, as a nation, or individually. The Great white throne is the last judgement that God will ever make against mankind. The Final Judgement is not a payment for Sin. That was done with Chist on the Cross. The Final Judgement is against man alone. A judgement against his actions during his life when all of his deeds will be made public, both private deeds and obvious deeds. Jesusman |
||||||
440 | Are all at the white throne judg. lost? | Revelation | Jesusman | 36019 | ||
Hello, Sorry, but based on the Context, All of the Dead, saved and non-saved alike, will be at the Great White Throne. The Great White Throne is the time when the wheat will be separated from the Tares, the Sheep from the Goats, and the Good Fish from the Bad fish. All of mankind will be there, not just the non-saved. Jesusman |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ] Next > Last [23] >> |