Results 1041 - 1060 of 1309
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Radioman2 Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1041 | Judas Iscariot saved our not? | Rom 10:9 | Radioman2 | 80614 | ||
Some at this forum believe that Judas went to heaven, while others believe that Jesus went to hell. (Welcome to the Bizarro world. Sometimes studybibleforum.com is a link to a special place, a place known as . . . The Twilight Zone.) |
||||||
1042 | Judas Iscariot saved our not? | Rom 10:9 | Radioman2 | 80607 | ||
Judas was not saved. Betraying Christ and then committing suicide are not exactly evidences of genuine saving faith. Judas went to "his own place" (Acts 1:25). NASB Acts 1:25 "to occupy this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside to go to his own place." AMPLIFIED Acts 1:25 To take the place in this ministry and receive the position of an apostle, from which Judas fell away and went astray to go [where he belonged] to his own [proper] place. Matthew Henry "25. that he might go to his own place--A euphemistic or softened expression of the awful future of the traitor" (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/JamiesonFaussetBrown). "from which Judas by transgression fell, threw himself, by deserting and betraying his Master, from the place of an apostle, of which he was unworthy, that he might go to his own place, the place of a traitor, the fittest place for him, not only to the gibbet, but to hell—this was his own place. "Note, Those that betray Christ, as they fall from the dignity of relation to him, so they fall into all misery. It is said of Balaam (Num. 24:25) that he went to his own place, that is, says one of the rabbin, he went to hell. "Dr. Whitby quotes Ignatius saying, There is appointed to every man idios topos — a proper place, which imports the same with that of God’s rendering to every man according to his works. And our Saviour had said that Judas’s own place should be such that it had been better for him that he had never been born (Mt. 26:24)—his misery such as to be worse than not being. "Judas had been a hypocrite, and hell is the proper place of such; other sinners, as inmates, have their portion with them, Mt. 24:51. (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/MatthewHenryComplete/) |
||||||
1043 | MOSES WAS BURIED IN MT NEBO | Jude 1:9 | Radioman2 | 80606 | ||
Jude 1:9 (ESV) But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, was disputing about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a blasphemous judgment, but said, "The Lord rebuke you." |
||||||
1044 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80604 | ||
"...Codex B or Vaticanus (Vatican 1209) of the fourth century CE, which is one of the few Greek texts that actually contains punctuation." That some copyist ADDED punctuation to a COPY of the Greek text proves what? 'If you think you're on safe theological ground because of a pet verse, better look twice. Simple prooftexting has its perils.' --(Gregory Koukl, Stand to Reason) One of the Watchtower organization's favorite tactics is to isolate a verse of Scripture from it's context (and re-translate and re-interpret it to fit their teachings) in order to proof text a particular doctrine of theirs. |
||||||
1045 | What was the answer? | 1 Sam 28:12 | Radioman2 | 80600 | ||
OVERSTATING THE BELIEVER’S AUTHORITY [While we are striving to separate fact from fantasy (truth from error) regarding the subject of authority, we may as well include this related information. (I address this post to you, Ed, not to take issue with you in any way, but because your post is the "primary" post in this sub-sub-thread.) ] The notion that people can order Satan about when they can't even get their kids to do what they tell them is truly astonishing. "Nowhere does Scripture state that believers have authority over Satan himself." STATEMENT DA082 The Bondage Maker: Examining the Message and Method of Neil T. Anderson (Part Two: Spiritual Warfare And The "Truth Encounter") by Elliot Miller "OVERSTATING THE BELIEVER’S AUTHORITY, Anderson’s entire approach to spiritual warfare, is based on the authority of the believer over the devil. This is manifest particularly in his emphasis on "binding and loosing": "[Anderson writes:] God has granted us the authority to "bind what shall be bound in heaven" (Matthew 16:19; 18:18). In other words, we have the spiritual capacity to discern God’s will and then, confident in the finished work of Christ, proclaim it in the spiritual realm. We have authority over demons as long as we remain strong in the Lord and operate in His strength (see Ephesians 6:l0)....The effectiveness of binding the strongman (see Matthew 12:20 [sic]) is dependent upon the leading of the Holy Spirit and subject to the scope and limits of the written Word of God.’ "In his instruction on how to help others find freedom in Christ, Anderson writes that the goal: "is to avoid all demonic activity which would short-circuit their ability to participate in the process. With this in mind, I usually begin the steps to freedom with a prayer similar to this: Dear heavenly Father....I take my position with Christ, seated with Him in the heavenlies. Because all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Him. I now claim that authority over all enemies of the Lord Jesus Christ in and around this room and especially (name). You have told us that where two or three are gathered in Your name You are in our midst, and that whatever is bound on earth is bound in heaven. We agree that every evil spirit that is in or around (name) be bound to silence. They cannot inflict any pain, speak to (names)’s mind, or prevent (names) from hearing, seeing, or speaking. Now in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ I command you, Satan, and all your hosts to release (names) and remain bound and gagged so that (names) will be able to obey God." (Elliot Miller continues:) "The biblical evidence suggesting that believers have been given direct authority over the demonic realm is scantier than is usually supposed. Anderson applies Matthew 12:29 ("first binds the strong man") to believers, when it is obvious from the preceding seven verses that Jesus was referring to Himself alone. Matthew 18:18 ("bind" and "loose") refers to church discipline, not spiritual warfare, as the larger context makes entirely clear, Anderson uses Ephesians 1:18-21 (Christ is seated above all authorities and powers) combined with Ephesians 2:5-6 (believers are seated with Him) as proof of the believer’s authority over the devil. But rather than dealing with spiritual warfare, these passages speak of Christ’s exaltation by the Father and the believer’s acceptance and exaltation before the Father in Christ." One should therefore be careful not to infer too much from them. "Nowhere does Scripture state that believers have authority over Satan himself. Those biblical passages that do speak of believers’ authority over the demonic realm apply strictly to driving demons out of lost human beings (Matt. 10:1; Mark 6:7; Luke 10:19; Acts 8:7). They are never applied to pastoral counseling or the believer’s personal battle with the devil. "This does not mean Christians must accept defeat in spiritual warfare. Scripture clearly teaches that Jesus has won the victory over the devil and all authority has been given to Him (Matt. 28:18; Eph. 1:20-22; Col. 2:15; 1 Pet. 3:22; etc.). While believers do not have the prerogative to say, "I command you, Satan (to do this or not do that)," Jesus does. Believers are indeed positionally seated with Him in heavenly places and are thus made partakers in His victory. They therefore can be confident that if they resist the devil, he will flee from them (James 4:7)." (http://www.equip.org/search/). This article first appeared in the Summer 1998 issue of the Christian Research Journal. |
||||||
1046 | What was the answer? | 1 Sam 28:12 | Radioman2 | 80596 | ||
Satan's loss of authority: The Scriptural truth about who and what Satan is [Ed: I have yet to see scripture to clearly and plainly show that Satan had authority then God gave it to Adam and then Adam gave it back to Satan. I haven't seen it, have you? Here, for a change, is that which the Bible clearly tells us about Satan.] 'Satan 'The Hebrew word satan [f'f] means "an adversary, one who resists." It is translated as "Satan" eighteen times in the Old Testament, fourteen of those occurrences being in Job 1-2, the others in 1 Chronicles 21:1 and Zechariah 3:1-2. There is some dispute as to whether it should be taken as a proper name or a title. In Job and Zechariah the definite article precedes the noun (lit., "the satan" or "the accuser"). Thus some argue it should be a title, while in 1 Chronicles (no article) it should be a proper name. The word is used also of various persons in the Old Testament as "adversaries, " including David (1 Sam 29:4), Rezon of Damascus (1 Kings 11:23,25), and the angel of the Lord (Num 22:22,32). (...) '"Satan" occurs thirty-six times in the New Testament, eighteen of that number in the Gospels and Acts. The Greek term satanas [Satana'"] is a loan word from the Hebrew Old Testament, and twenty-eight of the total occurrences are accompanied by the definite article. Often in the Gospel accounts Jesus is in contact with Satan directly or indirectly. He was tempted by Satan (Mark 1:13). In the famous "Beelzebub controversy" Jesus made clear his intention to drive Satan out of people's lives and to destroy his sovereignty (Matt 12:26; Mark 3:23, 26; Luke 11:18). He liberated a woman "whom Satan (had) kept bound for eighteen long years" (Luke 13:16). Paul spoke of his being sent to turn people "from the power of Satan to God" (Acts 26:18), and that the works of the "lawless one (were) in accordance with the work of Satan, " in doing sham miracles, signs, and wonders (2 Thess 2:9). Christ will come, he wrote, to overthrow that agent of Satan. 'While the activity of Satan is carried out in "the world" (i.e., among those who do not acknowledge Christ as Lord), he also works against the followers of Christ. He influenced Peter's thinking about Jesus to the extent that Jesus said to his disciple, "Get behind me, Satan!" (Matt 16:23). He asked for all the disciples in order to severely test them (Luke 22:31). He "entered" Judas Iscariot (Luke 22:3), and "filled the heart" of Ananias (Acts 5:3). Believers can be tempted by Satan due to a lack of self-control in sexual matters (1 Cor 7:5), and he can even masquerade as "an angle of light" to accomplish his purposes (2 Cor 11:14). He tormented Paul by means of "a thorn in (his) flesh" (2 Cor 12:7). Some people even turn away from their faith to follow Satan (1 Tim 5:15). (...) 'Satan is regarded in the New Testament as "master of death and destruction, " who carries out God's wrath against sinners. Twice we read of persons "handed over to Satan" for spiritual discipline by the church (1 Cor 5:1-5; 1 Tim 1:19-20). This appears to mean that excommunication puts people out into Satan's realm, a sovereignty from which believers have been rescued (Col 1:13; cf. Heb 2:14-15). In other cases, Satan attacked the disciples of Jesus by "sifting" them (Luke 22:31), a figure that is enigmatic. It may have meant to test their faith (with the intent of destroying it), or, it may have meant "to separate off the rubbish" (I. H. Marshall). In any case, Satan was up to no good. He was able to "enter" Judas Iscariot (Luke 22:3; cf. John 13:27), resulting in that disciple becoming a betrayer of his Master. Peter's sifting may have brought about his threefold denial of Jesus. (...) 'Jesus spoke of seeing Satan "fall like lightning from heaven" (Luke 10:18), a fall not identified but spoken of within the context of demons being cast out—a sign of Satan's LOSS OF AUTHORITY. In Revelation, amid a war in heaven, Satan was "hurled to the earth" along with his angels/demons (12:9). He, the Accuser, was overcome by One stronger than he. Finally, he is bound, imprisoned in the abyss for one thousand years, then ultimately banished in the fiery lake to suffer eternal torment (20:1-3, 10; cf. Matt 25:41). (...) 'Jesus would drive out "the prince of this world" by his cross (John 12:31); the latter would have no hold on Christ, for he was without sin (14:30); and Satan stood condemned at the bar of God's judgment (16:11). While the devil has had a career of sinning "from the beginning, " the Son of God came to destroy his wicked works (1 John 3:8). Those unable to hear and receive Jesus' words belong to the devil, who is their "father" (John 8:44)—they share a family likeness to him. ...' by Walter M. Dunnett Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology (Emphasis added.) (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Dictionaries/BakersEvangelicalDictionary/) |
||||||
1047 | Do you have to be baptized to be saved? | Rom 6:3 | Radioman2 | 80563 | ||
Tim: Thank you for a very good post. You point out: "The common mistake made here is to interpret 'justified' as referring to salvation . . . It has two possible meanings. "It can mean 'justified', or it can mean 'shown to be righteous'." I agree 100 percent. JUSTIFIED is used in two different ways. I have tried to get this point across several times in recent days. Yet each time I do, I get the same response: Someone repeats and repeats that it is being claimed that there are two different FAITHS. This is nonsense! My posts were never about two different faiths. Instead, they addressed the same issue you did, that "justified" has two possible meanings. It's so simple! James talks about being justified in the eyes of men. Paul talks about being justified (declared righteous) in God's eyes. The only evidence of a person's having been justified that men can see is what they see on the outside. God looks on the heart. And it is God who declares us righteous in his sight. He does so based on faith, not works. Romans 3:28 (ESV) For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law. Ephes. 2:8-9 (ESV) For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, [9] not a result of works, so that no one may boast. Moreover, it is absurd to imply that one portion of scripture (James) contradicts another (Romans). God, the Author of the Bible, does not contradict himself. Radioman2 |
||||||
1048 | 2 Corinthians- What is 'suffering' | 2 Cor 1:5 | Radioman2 | 80561 | ||
'Where is Paul’s “word of faith” and “positive confession”?' - - - - - - - - - - 'Another case in point is that God allowed affliction to come upon Paul, not answering his prayer for deliverance, so that Paul would not become too high minded as a result of the visions and revelations he had (2 Corinthians 12:7-10). [Frederick] Price’s response to this passage, which is typical of the movement, is: “Now that was Paul’s estimate of the situation. God didn’t tell him that He gave him that to keep him humble, but Paul was a man who was prone to brag and boast. Therefore he took it upon himself to believe all of this that was coming upon him was going to help him to stay humble.”[3] 'In this statement we find a disturbing lack of concern for the authority of the inspired authors of Scripture. There is nothing within the context of this passage to qualify this statement of Paul’s as being merely his own, possibly errant, opinion. Paul makes the statement with the full authority that, by virtue of inspiration, was rightfully his. If by our human rationalizing that Paul was one prone to boast (which finds no basis in Scripture), we have the freedom to dismiss his declaration in verse 7 as being misguided, then we may also dismiss anything else he said that does not fit into our doctrinal scheme. Once this happens, our basis of trust in the Scripture become effectively undermined. However, we find that Paul derived this estimate of the situation from the Lord’s answer to his prayers: “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is perfected in weakness” (verse 9). 'Paul learned to be content with this abiding affliction, for the Lord taught him that at the very moment that he was weakest in himself, the power of the Lord would be most evident through him, bringing glory to God rather than Paul (verses 9, 10). This lesson desperately needs to be learned by many who are being influenced by the false unlimited healing/prosperity doctrines today. 'Affliction can certainly be a tool for good in God’s hands. In Psalm 119 we read the following: 'Verse 67: Before I was afflicted I went astray, but now I keep Thy word. 'Verse 91: It is good for me that I was afflicted, that I may learn Thy statutes 'Verse 75: I know, O LORD, that Thy judgments are righteous, and that in faithfulness Thou hast afflicted me. 'There have been times, even in the Bible, when God’s people have had to accept and live with illness. Rather than telling him to “claim his healing,” Paul gave medicinal advice to Timothy: “No longer drink water exclusively, but use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and frequent ailments” (1 Timothy 5:23). 'This verse should have special significance to all who think the Bible supports some of the extreme teachings of our day. Where is Paul’s “word of faith” and “positive confession”? By giving medicinal advice, and telling Timothy he has frequent ailments (thus acknowledging their ongoing existence rather than “speaking healing into being”) Paul is completely out of line with the current wind of doctrine.* As Kenneth Hagin puts it” “People confess their lack and build up a sense of lack in themselves. As they confess these things, these lacks gain ascendancy in their lives.”[4]' [1] Price, Frederick K. C., Is Healing For All? Harrison House, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 1976, 9. [2] Ibid., 10. [3] Ibid., 12. [4] Hagin, Kenneth E., Right and Wrong Thinking, Kenneth Hagin Evangelistic Association, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 24 (http://www.equip.org/free/DH018.htm) |
||||||
1049 | 2 Corinthians- What is 'suffering' | 2 Cor 1:5 | Radioman2 | 80560 | ||
suffer -- 1 : to endure death, PAIN, or distress 3 : to be subject to DISABILITY or HANDICAP suffer defined Main Entry: suf·fer Function: verb Inflected Form(s): suf·fered; suf·fer·ing transitive senses 1 a : to submit to or be forced to endure (suffer martyrdom) b : to feel keenly : labor under (suffer thirst) 2 : UNDERGO, EXPERIENCE 3 : to put up with especially as inevitable or unavoidable 4 : to allow especially by reason of indifference (the eagle suffers little birds to sing -- Shakespeare) intransitive senses 1 : to endure death, pain, or distress 2 : to sustain loss or damage 3 : to be subject to disability or handicap synonym see BEAR - suf·fer·able adjective - suf·fer·able·ness noun - suf·fer·ably /-blE/ adverb - suf·fer·er noun (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary) |
||||||
1050 | Do you have to be baptized to be saved? | Rom 6:3 | Radioman2 | 80534 | ||
Does James 2 contradict Romans 4? 'The most serious problem these verses pose is the question of what James 2:24 means: "You see that a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone." Some imagine that this contradicts Paul in Romans 3:28: "For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law." John Calvin explained this apparent difficulty: 'It appears certain that [James] is speaking of the manifestation, not of the imputation of righteousness, as if he had said, Those who are justified by faith prove their justification by obedience and good works, not by a bare and imaginary semblance of faith. In one word, he is not discussing the mode of justification, but requiring that the justification of all believers shall be operative. And as Paul contends that men are justified without the aid of works, so James will not allow any to be regarded as Justified who are destitute of good works. . . . Let them twist the words of James as they may, they will never extract out of them more than two propositions: That an empty phantom of faith does not justify, and that the believer, not contented with such an imagination, manifests his justification by good works. [Henry Beveridge, trans., John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion 3:17:12 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1966 reprint), 2: 115.] 'James is not at odds with Paul. "They are not antagonists facing each other with crossed swords; they stand back to back, confronting different foes of the gospel." [The New International Commentary on the New Testament] In 1:17-18, James affirmed that salvation is a gift bestowed according to the sovereign will of God. Now he is stressing the importance of faith's fruit--the righteous behavior that genuine faith always produces. Paul, too, saw righteous works as the necessary proof of faith. 'Those who imagine a discrepancy between James and Paul rarely observe that it was Paul who wrote, "Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? May it never be!" (Rom. 6:15); and "Having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness" (v. 18). Thus Paul condemns the same error James is exposing here. Paul never advocated any concept of dormant faith. 'When Paul writes, "by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight," (Rom. 3:20), 'he is combatting a Jewish legalism which insisted upon the need for works to be justified; James insists upon the need for works in the lives of those who have been justified by faith. Paul insists that no man can ever win justification through his own efforts. . . . James demands that a man who already claims to stand in right relationship with God through faith must by a life of good works demonstrate that he has become a new creature in Christ. With this Paul thoroughly agreed. Paul was rooting out 'works' that excluded and destroyed saving faith; James was stimulating a sluggish faith that minimized the results of saving faith in daily life. [D. Edmond Hiebert, The Epistle of James (Chicago: Moody, 1979), 175.] 'James and Paul both echo Jesus' preaching. Paul's emphasis is an echo of Matthew 5:3: "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." James's teaching has the ring of Matthew 7:21: "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven." Paul represents the beginning of the Sermon on the Mount; James the end of it. Paul declares that we are saved by faith without the deeds of the law. James declares that we are saved by faith, which shows itself in works. Both James and Paul view good works as the proof of faith--not the path to salvation. 'James could not be more explicit. He is confronting the concept of a passive, false "faith," which is devoid of the fruits of salvation. He is not arguing for works in addition to or apart from faith. He is showing why and how, true, living faith always works. He is fighting against dead orthodoxy and its tendency to abuse grace. 'The error James assails is faith without works; justification without sanctification; salvation without new life. 'Again, James echoes the Master Himself, who insisted on a theology of lordship that involved obedience, not lip-service. Jesus chided the disobedient ones who had attached themselves to Him in name only: "Why do you call Me, 'Lord, Lord,' and do not do what I say?" (Luke 6:46). Verbal allegiance, He said, will get no one to heaven: "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven" (Matt. 7:21). 'That is in perfect harmony with James: "Prove yourselves doers of the word, and not merely hearers who delude themselves" (1:22); for "faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself" (2:17). [Excerpted from Faith Works] www.gty.org/IssuesandAnswers/archive/james2.htm |
||||||
1051 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80525 | ||
Gospel according to Price Joe: You have so correctly pointed out: "Things that Jesus verbalized are not any more or less true than the Psalms or Pauls' teaching in 2 Corinthians." If I may, I would like to expand a bit on your point here. - - - - - - - - - - 'Another case in point is that God allowed affliction to come upon Paul, not answering his prayer for deliverance, so that Paul would not become too high minded as a result of the visions and revelations he had (2 Corinthians 12:7-10). [Frederick] Price’s response to this passage, which is typical of the movement, is: “Now that was Paul’s estimate of the situation. God didn’t tell him that He gave him that to keep him humble, but Paul was a man who was prone to brag and boast. Therefore he took it upon himself to believe all of this that was coming upon him was going to help him to stay humble.”[3] 'In this statement we find a disturbing lack of concern for the authority of the inspired authors of Scripture. There is nothing within the context of this passage to qualify this statement of Paul’s as being merely his own, possibly errant, opinion. Paul makes the statement with the full authority that, by virtue of inspiration, was rightfully his. If by our human rationalizing that Paul was one prone to boast (which finds no basis in Scripture), we have the freedom to dismiss his declaration in verse 7 as being misguided, then we may also dismiss anything else he said that does not fit into our doctrinal scheme. Once this happens, our basis of trust in the Scripture become effectively undermined. However, we find that Paul derived this estimate of the situation from the Lord’s answer to his prayers: “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is perfected in weakness” (verse 9). 'Paul learned to be content with this abiding affliction, for the Lord taught him that at the very moment that he was weakest in himself, the power of the Lord would be most evident through him, bringing glory to God rather than Paul (verses 9, 10). This lesson desperately needs to be learned by many who are being influenced by the false unlimited healing/prosperity doctrines today. 'Affliction can certainly be a tool for good in God’s hands. In Psalm 119 we read the following: 'Verse 67: Before I was afflicted I went astray, but now I keep Thy word. 'Verse 91: It is good for me that I was afflicted, that I may learn Thy statutes 'Verse 75: I know, O LORD, that Thy judgments are righteous, and that in faithfulness Thou hast afflicted me. 'There has been times, even in the Bible, when God’s people have had to accept and live with illness. Rather than telling him to “claim his healing,” Paul gave medicinal advice to Timothy: “No longer drink water exclusively, but use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and frequent ailments” (1 Timothy 5:23). 'This verse should have special significance to all who think the Bible supports some of the extreme teachings of our day. Where is Paul’s “word of faith” and “positive confession”? By giving medicinal advice, and telling Timothy he has frequent ailments (thus acknowledging their ongoing existence rather than “speaking healing into being”) Paul is completely out of line with the current wind of doctrine.* As Kenneth Hagin puts it” “People confess their lack and build up a sense of lack in themselves. As they confess these things, these lacks gain ascendancy in their lives.”[4]' [1] Price, Frederick K. C., Is Healing For All? Harrison House, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 1976, 9. [2] Ibid., 10. [3] Ibid., 12. [4] Hagin, Kenneth E., Right and Wrong Thinking, Kenneth Hagin Evangelistic Association, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 24 (http://www.equip.org/free/DH018.htm) |
||||||
1052 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80500 | ||
Does God Always Heal? 'We have been made disturbingly aware of a number of problems that predictably arise wherever the healing/prosperity/confession movement spreads. It finally reached a point where we no longer had any choice but to do something about it. 'One very real problem is that the emphasis that is placed upon Christ bearing our diseases at Calvary undermines the biblical emphasis upon Christ bearing our sins. Whereas the preaching that we read in the New Testament is always centered around Christ’s death or our sins and resurrection for our justification (Romans 4:25), one finds that the preaching, and even the casual conversation of this current movement is dominated by the subject of bodily healing. Followers of the movement display practically an obsession with the topics of healing and “confession,” as though these subjects were the gospel and there’s little else in the Bible worthy of much discussion. Even if these doctrines were Biblical many who hold them would be guilty of being extremely unbalanced, not giving enough attention to many important aspects of Christian faith and living. 'Another unfortunate result of the preaching of these doctrines is that people lose their victory in Christ, and become shaken in their faith, because someone gave them a “biblical” formula for success, and it didn’t work. (...) 'To have the audacity to tell one of God’s children that if they are sick it is because of their own sin or lack of faith is to abound in presumptuousness, and be bankrupt in compassion. I’ve known of more than one person who demonstrated this insensitivity until God dealt with him by laying him flat on his back, and when none of his “principles” would work he suddenly developed an empathy of those he had once judged. We never see it portrayed in Scripture that perfect health is the sign of spirituality. To set up such a standard is to divert God’s people from the spiritual standard that Scripture does set forth (such as in 2 Peter 1:5-9). 'Ken Copeland and others teach that we must resist sickness in the same way that we resist sin. This also disturbs us. We’ve seen too many good Christians striving to “believe” their sickness away, and finally collapsing into self-condemnation and utter discouragement over their “lack of faith” or the “sin” in their lives. Most likely, there was a divine purpose for that sickness in their lives, and it would have been a lot easier on them, after they prayed in faith and nothing happened, to have ceased striving and simply rested in the comforting sovereignty of God. 'After being forced to go to this extent to prove that it is not always God’s will to heal, we do want to close on the positive note that we do believe that divine healing is for today. We see no Scriptural basis to doubt that we can expect to see healing take place here and now. Healing should be a regular part of the life of all churches (James 5:14-16). We also believe that faith plays an important part in receiving healing, and that the Church has much to learn about faith, and how to more effectively receive it for healing. We feel that many who saw this need embraced the “healing in the atonement” doctrine because it seemed to offer a more solid basis for faith. Unfortunately, however, this basis is not the Scriptural basis, and therefore it has created more problems than was hoped it would solve.' - Elliot Miller (This article has been edited due to space limitations. To read the entire article, see STATEMENT DH018, Healing: Does God Always Heal? [www.equip.org]) |
||||||
1053 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80498 | ||
Tim: You provide two excellent reasons not to view the story of Lazarus and the rich man as a parable. Unfortunately, well-trained JWs have heard this argument before, but reject it. In their indoctrination, they are trained to have an answer for everything, unaware that their answers don't answer anything. Yet to their credit, the JWs' answers consist of something other than ad hominem attacks. Radioman2 |
||||||
1054 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80493 | ||
Don't believe everything you read on the World Wide Web. I, too, went surfing for info on CRI. This is what I found: The website www.rapidnet.com has nothing good to say about CRI. They have leveled serious accusations against CRI in their many postings that bash the organization. Oh, I almost forgot to mention: The above anti-CRI website is also opposed to and strongly critical of the following: Benny Hinn; National Assoc. of Evangelicals; Tim and Beverly LaHaye; Larry Burkett; the Evangelical Free Church of America; Pat Robertson; D. James Kennedy; RC Sproul; Billy Graham; John MacArthur; Radio Bible Class and its principal publication "Our Daily Bread"; Campus Crusade for Christ; and Dr. James C. Dobson. Did they leave anybody out? Oh, yeah. They sound like a reliable, credible source of information, don't they? (Go to www.rapidnet.com Then in the Search field type Biblical Discernment Ministries) ad hominem. marked by an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made. |
||||||
1055 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80475 | ||
?God created man in “God’s class,” as “little gods,”? Matt 24:11 "Many false prophets will arise and will mislead many." I have a question for all who would defend the word of faith movement and its super-star preachers, including Kenneth Copeland, Kenneth Hagin, Fred Price, Paul and Jan Crouch, John Avanzini, Benny Hinn, Jesse Duplantis, and Marilyn Hickey. For a moment, forget their unbiblical doctrine of the prosperity gospel. What about their teachings concerning the nature of God, Christ and man, as summarized below? 'It (the Word of Faith movement) asserts that God created human beings in “God’s class” as “little gods.” Before the fall, humans had the potential to exercise a “God kind of faith” and could call things into existence. Humans took on Satan’s nature by rebelling against God in the Garden of Eden, thus losing the ability to call things into existence. In order to correct this situation, Jesus Christ became a man, died spiritually (taking Satan’s nature upon Himself), went to hell, was “born again,” and rose from the dead with God's nature. After this, Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to duplicate the Incarnation in believers so they might fulfill their calling to be little gods. 'It follows, then, that those who have had the Incarnation duplicated in them by the Holy Spirit (thus giving them the ability to exercise the “God kind of faith”) should be successful in every area of their lives. Furthermore, hardships like indebtedness, illness, and even being left by one’s spouse show lack of faith because these problems should be eliminated by “claiming” God’s promises. While certain details of the above outlined doctrine vary from teacher to teacher, the general outline remains the same.' (www.equip.org/free/RC010.htm) |
||||||
1056 | days numbered before birth | Ps 139:16 | Radioman2 | 80458 | ||
Your eyes saw my unformed substance, and in Your book all the days [of my life] were written before ever they took shape, when as yet there was none of them. (AMPLIFIED Psalm 139:16) |
||||||
1057 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80433 | ||
P.S. I found your posts regarding Hank by using the search feature. So I would like to cancel the request I made of you that you provide ID#s for your posts. | ||||||
1058 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80431 | ||
gracefull: You write: "...Hank LIED in his book..." Thank you for providing us with an example of what I just wrote about, which is: "Do they (WOF followers) seriously consider the information provided? No, instead they launch ad hominem (marked by an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made) attacks on the sources I quote." You write: "I pointed out to you on other posts where Hank LIED in his book..." I missed the other posts in which you pointed out that Hank lied in his book. If you will provide me with the ID#s of those posts, I would like to read them. Thank you. Radioman2 |
||||||
1059 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80422 | ||
Ed: Sorry? There's nothing in your post for which you should be sorry. You hit the nail right on the head regarding WOF. Well said! You write: "The biggest problem is they will not listen or read anything that may open their eyes." Once again you are right on target. I was just thinking today, even before I read your post, that every time I've ever confronted a WOF follower with the error of their doctrine, whether on the forum or here where I live, they absolutely would not listen to anything. They wouldn't even consider that their WOF gurus (many of them on TBN -- The Blasphemy Network) might be in error. Do they seriously consider the information provided? No, instead they launch ad hominem (marked by an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made) attacks on the sources I quote. Not once has any WOF follower I've encountered ever replied to the contentions made by me or the sources. Yet their WOF masters are infallible, according to them. Thank you, Ed, for saying what needs to be said regarding the dangerous and harmful WOF doctrine. Grace and peace, Radioman2 |
||||||
1060 | Die daily for Paul | Mark 8:34 | Radioman2 | 80413 | ||
"Never read a Bible verse. That's right, never read a Bible verse. Instead, always read a paragraph–at least" - - - - - - - - - - Never Read a Bible Verse by Gregory Koukl 'If there was one bit of wisdom, one rule of thumb, one single skill I could impart, one useful tip I could leave that would serve you well the rest of your life, what would it be? What is the single most important practical skill I've ever learned as a Christian? 'Here it is: Never read a Bible verse. That's right, never read a Bible verse. Instead, always read a paragraph–at least. 'When I'm on the radio, I use this simple rule to help me answer the majority of Bible questions I'm asked, even when I'm totally unfamiliar with the verse. It's an amazingly effective technique you can use, too. 'I read the paragraph, not just the verse. I take stock of the relevant material above and below. Since the context frames the verse and gives it specific meaning, I let it tell me what's going on. 'This works because of a basic rule of all communication: Meaning always flows from the top down, from the larger units to the smaller units, not the other way around. The key to the meaning of any verse comes from the paragraph, not just from the individual words' (www.str.org/free/studies/neverrea.htm). |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 ] Next > Last [66] >> |