Results 221 - 240 of 305
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Radioman Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
221 | the voice of god | John 10:27 | Radioman | 24279 | ||
John 10:27 "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me;" (NASB) My sheep respond to my voice, and I know who they are. They follow me," (GOD'S WORD Version) |
||||||
222 | Do you forgive Judas? | John 13:11 | Radioman | 42791 | ||
If anyone's postings result in Love Fountain becoming discouraged from future Forum participation, then that one's writings will not have been in vain. Be assured: reporting abusive or innappropriate postings to the Lockman Foundation has been done and shall continue to be done whenever necessary. |
||||||
223 | Jesus is the truth | John 14:6 | Radioman | 6551 | ||
What in the world are you talking about? Jesus said WHAT? You believe WHAT? Understanding comes before belief. Christianity is not a blind leap of faith. Our faith is in the fact of the Word of God. Our faith in Christ for salvation is grounded in the biblical and historical FACT of His resurrection. If we close our mind to the clear teaching of the Bible and refuse to use our God-given intellect, we will not be walking in the truth. Truth that is neither known nor discerned is truth that is not available to us. "Jesus is Love also We must put on Christ." What does that have to do with the question at hand? |
||||||
224 | What is Secular Humanism? | John 15:5 | Radioman | 15239 | ||
Main Entry: secular humanism Function: noun Date: 1933 : HUMANISM 3; especially : humanistic philosophy viewed as a nontheistic religion antagonistic to traditional religion |
||||||
225 | Was Jesus actually in the tomb 3 days? | John 19:31 | Radioman | 7703 | ||
Yes, He was. | ||||||
226 | Was Jesus actually in the tomb 3 days? | John 19:31 | Radioman | 7704 | ||
"Three days and three nights. (Matt 12:40) This phrase does not necessarily require that 72 hours elapse between Christ's death and resurrection, for the Jews reckoned part of a day to be as a whole day. Thus this prophecy can be properly fulfilled if the crucifixion occurred on Friday." (Ryrie Study Bible, Moody Press, 1976, 1978) . . . " 'Three days and three nights' (Matt 12:40)was an emphatic way of saying 'three days,' and by Jewish reckoning this would be an apt way of expressing a period of time that includes parts of 3 days. ... All sorts of elaborate schemes have been devised to suggest that Christ might have died on a Wednesday or Thursday, just to accommodate the extreme literal meaning of these words. But the original meaning would not have required that sort of wooden interpretaion." (MacArthur Study Bible, p. 1415, Word Publishing, 1997) . . . "THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS. (Matt 12:40) Including at least part of the first day and part of the third day, a common Jewish reckoning of time." (Matt 12:40, Zondervan NASB Study Bible, Zondervan, 1999) |
||||||
227 | curious about your response | Acts | Radioman | 9883 | ||
Case closed. | ||||||
228 | Church Age? | Acts 2:17 | Radioman | 5553 | ||
You say: "These things will take place only after the rapture of the Church." If this is so, then why does Peter say in Acts 2:16, "But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel"? Verse 17 goes on to say: "And it shall come to pass in the last days." We are in the last days. We have been in the last days since Jesus opened his eyes in a manger in Bethlehem. Answer (short): In Acts 2:17 the phrase " 'last days' refers to the present era of redemptive history from the first coming of Christ (Heb 1:2; 1 Pet 1:20; 1 John 2:18) to his return." (p. 1636, MacArthur Study Bible, Word Publishing, 1997). Answer (full): "LAST DAYS. In the passage quoted from Joel the Hebrew has 'after this' and the Septuagint 'after these things.' Peter interprets the passage as referring specifically to the latter days of the new covenant in contrast to the former days of the old covenant." At the time of Acts chapter 2, "the age of Messianic fulfillment" had "arrived." (p. 1575, Zondervan NASB Study Bible, edited by Kenneth Barker, Zondervan, 1999) "Last Day(s), Latter Days, Last Times. There are problems with the terminology of 'the latter days' in that, for example, the King James Version quite often refers to 'the latter days,' an expression not found in modern translations. Further, it is not always clear whether 'the latter days' means a somewhat later period than that of the writer or the latest times of all, the end of the world. There are also expressions that locate the day being discussed in the time of the speaker. Care is needed as we approach the passages that use these terms." (pp. 464-465, Baker Theological Dictionary of the Bible, Walter A. Elwell, editor, Baker Books, 1996) |
||||||
229 | Name of first Chirstinas 0-33 AD? | Acts 11:26 | Radioman | 14777 | ||
According to the "NIV Exhaustive Concordance," Christ's early followers were called "disciple(s)" 30 times in the books of Acts; "believer(s)" 13 times in Acts; and "Christian(s)" only once in the entire 66 books of the Bible. So which of the three words was most often used of Christ's early followers? "Disciples", which also, by the way, occurs a total of 296 times in all of the first five books of the NIV NT. |
||||||
230 | Believe or Believeth | Acts 16:31 | Radioman | 6547 | ||
Question: Is the meaning of Believe and Believeth the same? Answer: Yes, both words mean the same thing. |
||||||
231 | Reformed and Arminian Gospel Preaching | Rom 1:18 | Radioman | 20623 | ||
The one born of Armenian descent would be the Armenian. The one who believes in the opposite of Calvinism would be the arminian. |
||||||
232 | response | Rom 1:18 | Radioman | 20627 | ||
schwartzkm: In all sincerity, thank you for a very interesting post. However, I need clarification on something you wrote. Systamtic Theology. "Systamtic" is not a word that I am familiar with. Also, I could not find the word in the dictionary. Could you please define the word "Systamtic' in order to clarify your meaning. I won't know whether I agree or disagree with you until I know what the word means. Thank you. |
||||||
233 | Workout your own salvation | Rom 1:18 | Radioman | 20666 | ||
You write: "Now why we have to workout for our own salvation if our life is designed already?" You may not have intended to, but you have dangerously misquoted the Scripture. The Bible says work *out* your own salvation. It does NOT say work *for* your salvation. |
||||||
234 | Workout your own salvation | Rom 1:18 | Radioman | 20668 | ||
Concerning the Bible doctrine of Election, Election is not fatalism. Nor is it passive. You do err, knowing neither the sovereignty of God nor His power. Apparently you do not understand the Bible doctrine of Election. Your questions and answers seem to be founded, not on the actual doctrine of Election, but upon your limited understanding of the doctrine. This is not to criticize or put you down. My point is it is helpful to know the position you are against, before you attempt to refute it. |
||||||
235 | Commonwealth | Rom 1:18 | Radioman | 21492 | ||
. | ||||||
236 | You gave that statement | Rom 1:18 | Radioman | 21638 | ||
, | ||||||
237 | response | Rom 1:18 | Radioman | 22033 | ||
Joe: I have been reading your writings on the forum from the beginning. Your points are always well thought out, well researched and well written. I notice that you do not just write off the top of your head. You are thorough and accurate in every factual matter with which you deal. Any dabbler or babbler who thinks he can just waltz in here and with a few "witty" postings refute your points is very much mistaken. On the forum I've said all along that before one attempts to disprove or refute a position, he had better be very familiar with that position in order to write intelligently about it. Bravado and sophistry are themselves marks of immaturity and are no match for a knowledgeable, articulate believer such as yourself. Keep up the excellent, excellent work. Radioman P.S. To attack the razor sharp mind of R.C. Sproul with a dull butter knife is laughable at best. |
||||||
238 | Opinions of J. Falwell on WTC attack. | Rom 3:23 | Radioman | 16855 | ||
I have read your selected quotes of what Falwell said. So, what is your point? --Radioman |
||||||
239 | Christ dying only for elect? | Rom 5:6 | Radioman | 5544 | ||
This question, election, has already been much debated on this Forum, much to everyone's delight. If you use the Search function and after "contain these words" put "election", then you will have access to the Forum's accumulated wisdom concerning the subject. | ||||||
240 | Christ dying only for elect? | Rom 5:6 | Radioman | 5809 | ||
Re: The Bible Doctrine of Election. Some are trying to disprove a Bible doctrine -- election -- of which they have no knowledge or understanding. What attorney, professor or debater ever successfully disproved something of which he had absolutely no knowledge? An effective opponent of an idea would need to know all the main points and details of that idea before he could persuade others that the idea was false. It is obvious to me that most, if not all, the shrill anti-election people are clueless as to what election is and when, where and how the Bible speaks of the elect or election. If one is not even familliar with the terminology of that which he is debating, he will never convince anyone of anything. Election and people spoken of as the elect exist, according to the Bible, whether you and I believe or don't believe in the Bible doctrine of Election and regardless of how you define election. (Use a concordance and look up the words "elect" and "election." To set the record straight: 1) the word "freewill" is used 22 times in the NIV Bible. In every single reference the adjective freewill is used to modify the noun "offering(s)." So how does the Bible's use of the word freewill support the idea that the doctrine of election is false? 2) The dictionary defines the adjective "elect" as "chosen" or "carefully selected". So elect and chosen clearly mean the same thing. Some say "only a small portion of the Bible can be used to justify "election". For your information, while "freewill" occurs in the Bible (NIV) only 22 times and only in connection with the word "offering(s)", the word "elect" appears 11 times; "election" 3 times; "choose" (which means the same thing as "elect") appears 66 times; "chose" 45 times; and "chosen" 125 times. This gives us a total of 250 occurences of the words "elect", "election" (although not, in every instance, in connection with the Bible doctrine of Election ) or their equivalents choose, chose and chosen, but only 22 occurences of the word freewill, and then only in connection with offerings. There isn't one verse in the Bible which -- when properly translated and understood in the context and in relation to all other verses dealing with the same subject -- not one word that contradicts the Bible's teaching on the subject of election. The majority of nonbelievers in election are people who can neither define nor explain what it is that they are opposed to. It is apparent from the comments written by opponents of election that these people have not read the answers supporting election. They've neither read the answers, looked up the Scriptures cited, nor given the other side a fair hearing. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ] Next > Last [16] >> |