Results 1081 - 1100 of 1309
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Radioman2 Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1081 | sons of god as in early gen | 1 Pet 3:19 | Radioman2 | 80188 | ||
You write: "We find a few references to these spirits throghout the bible as in the case of Peter 3:19-20. Having served their sentence they were relesaed from spirit prison." Have they served their sentence? Were they released from spirit prison? No, they were not. Instead they have been "kept in ETERNAL BONDS under darkness FOR (until) THE JUDGMENT of the great day." AMPLIFIED Jude 1:6 And angels who did not keep (care for, guard, and hold to) their own first place of power but abandoned their proper dwelling place--these He has reserved in custody in eternal chains (bonds) under the thick gloom of utter darkness until the judgment and doom of the great day. NASB Jude 1:6 And angels who did not keep their own domain, but abandoned their proper abode, He has kept in eternal bonds under darkness for the judgment of the great day, |
||||||
1082 | sons of god as in early gen | 1 Pet 3:19 | Radioman2 | 80187 | ||
"Angels neither marry nor are given in marriage (Mt 22:30), so that this verse hardly applies to them." - - - - - - - - - - The Nephilim in the Bible are "people of great size and strength. The Hebrew word means 'fallen ones.' In men's eyes they were the 'mighty men...of old, men of renown,' but in God's eyes they were sinners ('fallen ones') ripe for judgment." (Zondervan NASB Study Bile, p. 12) "Gen 6:4 Nephilim. From a root meaning 'to fall'; i.e., to fall upon others because they were men of strength (only other use of this Hebrew word is in Num 13:33) Evidently they were in the earth before the marriages of Gen 6:2, and were not the offspring of those marriages from which came the *mighty* men (military men) and *men of renown * (of wealth or power)". (p. 16, Ryrie Study Bible, Moody Press, 1976, 1978) "Gen 6:1-4 *sons of God.* The 'sons of God' may mean God's created, supernatural beings, who were no longer godly in character (6.3). Some commentators believe, however, that this expression refers to the 'godly line' of Seth and that 'daughters of humans' (v. 4 in the NRSV) refer to women from the line of Cain. Most likely the phrase refers to those descendants of Seth who trusted in the Lord but whose children intermarried with women descended from Cain. Those marriages were not with angels then, but between godly and ungodly human families. Angels neither marry nor are given in marriage (Mt 22:30), so that this verse hardly applies to them. ... *Nephilim* are strong, violent, tyrannous men of great wickedness. It may well be that the explanation of these verses has been lost to us." (NRSV Harper Study Bible, Harold Lindsell, Ph.D., D.D., Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1991) |
||||||
1083 | sons of god as in early gen | Gen 6:2 | Radioman2 | 80186 | ||
"Angels neither marry nor are given in marriage (Mt 22:30), so that this verse hardly applies to them." - - - - - - - - - - The Nephilim in the Bible are "people of great size and strength. The Hebrew word means 'fallen ones.' In men's eyes they were the 'mighty men...of old, men of renown,' but in God's eyes they were sinners ('fallen ones') ripe for judgment." (Zondervan NASB Study Bile, p. 12) "Gen 6:4 Nephilim. From a root meaning 'to fall'; i.e., to fall upon others because they were men of strength (only other use of this Hebrew word is in Num 13:33) Evidently they were in the earth before the marriages of Gen 6:2, and were not the offspring of those marriages from which came the *mighty* men (military men) and *men of renown * (of wealth or power)". (p. 16, Ryrie Study Bible, Moody Press, 1976, 1978) "Gen 6:1-4 *sons of God.* The 'sons of God' may mean God's created, supernatural beings, who were no longer godly in character (6.3). Some commentators believe, however, that this expression refers to the 'godly line' of Seth and that 'daughters of humans' (v. 4 in the NRSV) refer to women from the line of Cain. Most likely the phrase refers to those descendants of Seth who trusted in the Lord but whose children intermarried with women descended from Cain. Those marriages were not with angels then, but between godly and ungodly human families. Angels neither marry nor are given in marriage (Mt 22:30), so that this verse hardly applies to them. ... *Nephilim* are strong, violent, tyrannous men of great wickedness. It may well be that the explanation of these verses has been lost to us." (NRSV Harper Study Bible, Harold Lindsell, Ph.D., D.D., Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1991) |
||||||
1084 | What was the answer? | 1 Sam 28:12 | Radioman2 | 80184 | ||
[Note: The best information I've ever seen on 1 Samuel 28:3-25 is the following, which was posted here on the Forum by Makarios (ID# 7801).] 'Actually, there have been several explanations suggested for 1 Samuel 28:3-25.. 'Some believe the witch worked a miracle by demonic powers and actually brought Samuel back from the dead. In support of this view, there are certain passages that seem to indicate that demons have the power to perform lying signs and wonders (Matt. 7:22; 2 Cor. 11:14; 2 Thess. 2:9-10; Rev. 16:14). This view is unlikely, since Scripture also reveals that death is final (Hebrews 9:27), the dead cannot return (2 Samuel 12:23 and Luke 16:24-27), and demons cannot usurp or overpower God's authority over life and death (Job 1:10-12). 'A second view is that the witch did not really bring up Samuel from the dead, but a demonic spirit simply impersonated the prophet. Those who hold to this view say that certain verses indicate that demons can deceive people who try to contact the dead (Lev. 19:31; Deut. 18:11; 1 Chr. 10:13). This view is unlikely, because the passage seems to say that Samuel did in fact return from the dead, and that he provided a prophecy that actually came to pass. Further, it is unlikely that demons would have uttered God's truth, since the devil is the father of lies (John 8:44). 'A third view is that God sovereignly and miraculously allowed Samuel's spirit to appear in order to rebuke Saul for his sin. Samuel's spirit did not appear as a result of the woman's powers (since no human has this power), but only because God sovereignly brought it about. The fact that Samuel actually seemed to return from the dead supports this view (1 Sam. 28:14), and this caused the witch to shriek with fear (see verse 12). The witch's cry of astonishment indicates that this appearance of Samuel was not the result of her usual tricks. That God allowed Samuel's spirit to appear on this one occasion should not be taken to mean that witches have any real power to summon the dead. God had a one-time purpose for this one-time special occasion.' (From a post by Makarios, ID# 7801) |
||||||
1085 | What was the answer? | 1 Sam 28:12 | Radioman2 | 80157 | ||
You assert 'that Jesus the Christ took back the keys to death, hell and the grave' has much scriptural basis. Does it? Is there a clear verse of Scripture to indicate that Christ took back the keys or that Satan had ever taken possession of the keys? In the entire King James Version of the Bible, the word "key" appears in 6 verses. The word "keys" appears in 2 verses. Thus, "key" and "keys" appear a total of 8 times in the KJV. This is ALL the Bible has to say about key(s). Jud 3:25 And they tarried till they were ashamed: and, behold, he opened not the doors of the parlour; therefore they took a key, and opened them: and, behold, their lord was fallen down dead on the earth. Isa 22:22 And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder; so he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open. Lu 11:52 Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered. Re 3:7 And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth; Re 9:1 And the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit. Re 20:1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. Mt 16:19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Re 1:18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death. |
||||||
1086 | When did God change "mode" of baptism? | Bible general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 80130 | ||
Romans 6:4 'Whether the mode of baptism by immersion be alluded to in this verse, as a kind of symbolical burial and resurrection, does not seem to us of much consequence. Many interpreters think it is, and it may be so. But as it is not clear that baptism in apostolic times was exclusively by immersion so sprinkling and washing are indifferently used in the New Testament to express the cleansing efficacy of the blood of Jesus. And just as the woman with the issue of blood got virtue out of Christ by simply touching Him, so the essence of baptism seems to lie in the simple contact of the element (water) with the body, symbolizing living contact with Christ crucified; the mode and extent of suffusion being indifferent and variable with climate and circumstances.' Brown, David, D.D. "Commentary on Romans 6". "Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible". (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/JamiesonFaussetBrown) |
||||||
1087 | Baptism-What Does the Bible Teach? | 2 Tim 2:15 | Radioman2 | 80127 | ||
Baptism-What Does the Bible Teach? - - - - - - - - - - 'If you think you're on safe theological ground because of a pet verse, better look twice. Simple prooftexting has its perils.' - - - - - - - - - - 'Is baptism necessary for salvation? Is it necessary to be water baptized after one's profession of faith before one can receive the gift of forgiveness and new life through regeneration? Or is baptism a proper act of obedience after one becomes a Christian? 'In the first case the order would be faith, then baptism, resulting in salvation. In the second case the order would be faith, resulting in salvation, followed by baptism. 'Verses seem to support both sides. In Acts 2:38 we read, "And Peter said to them, 'Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.'" If the repentant believer is baptized "for the forgiveness of sins," then repentance and belief are not enough. The order here appears to be faith, then baptism, resulting in salvation. 'This verse seems very straightforward. To some, simply quoting it is enough. The problem comes when one flips over a few pages to Acts 10:44-48. (...) 'Notice what's happening. Peter preaches the Gospel to Cornelius and his household. In the midst of Peter's sermon, the Holy Spirit falls on those listening and they manifest spiritual gifts. 'This is irrefutable evidence to Peter that these Gentiles have "received the Holy Spirit just as [he] did." Other verses make it clear that possessing the Holy Spirit in the New Testament sense is proof of salvation (see Ephesians 1:13-14 and Romans 8:9). 'After these Gentiles are regenerated, Peter announces it is appropriate for them to be baptized. The order in Acts 10 is faith, resulting in salvation, followed by baptism. 'Here's the problem. Apparently Acts 2 teaches that salvation comes after water baptism, and Acts 10 indicates it can come before. This is a contradiction. Unless these passages are harmonized, merely asserting one verse against another actually does violence to the authority of God's Word. 'This is when we must ask our question: Are either of the passages equivocal? That is, are there any legitimate alternative readings? 'The Acts 10 passage seems completely inflexible in its meaning. The sequence of events leaves no question (though I'm open to suggestions) that the order is faith/regeneration/baptism. Peter's response is unmistakable. 'Further, when the Jews later take issue with Peter about his involvement with Gentiles, he simply recounted the event and they were satisfied (Acts 11:1-18). In this passage regeneration clearly follows faith, not baptism: 'If God therefore gave to them the same gift as He gave to us also after believing in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could stand in God's way?" And when they heard this, they quieted down, and glorified God, saying, "Well then, God has granted to the Gentiles also the repentance that leads to life." (Acts 11:17-18) 'Notice baptism isn't even mentioned here, only the salient details of regeneration: repentance, faith, and salvation. By all appearances, Acts 10 is unequivocal. Baptism isn't necessary for salvation. 'What about in Acts 2? Is it possible this passage means something different than it appears to at first? On closer inspection the answer is yes. The key is in the grammar. 'In Acts 2, the command to repent is in the plural, as is the reference to those who receive the forgiveness of sins (i.e., "All of you repent so all of you can receive forgiveness"). The command to be baptized, however, is in the singular (i.e., "Each of you should be baptized"). 'This makes it clear that repentance, not baptism, leads to salvation, since an individual's baptism cannot cause the salvation of the entire group. Individual (singular) baptisms do not result in corporate (plural) salvation. 'As it turns out, then, the phrase "for the forgiveness of sins" modifies repentance, not baptism. A more precise rendering might be, "Let all of you repent so all of you can receive forgiveness, and then each who has should be baptized." 'If there is any question about which translation of Acts 2:38 is appropriate, Acts 10 and 11 give us the answer. Clearly, Peter's Gentiles were not getting baptized in order to bring about their salvation. They were baptized as a result of salvation. The clear (unequivocal) teaching in Acts 10 and 11 informs the ambiguous (equivocal) nature of Acts 2:38.' - - - - - - - - - - To read the entire ariticle, go to: (http://www.str.org/free/solid_ground/SG9909.htm) |
||||||
1088 | Do you have to be baptized to be saved? | Rom 6:3 | Radioman2 | 80126 | ||
AMPLIFIED Romans 6:3 Are you ignorant of the fact that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? John Gill's Exposition of the Bible Romans 6:3 'Know ye not that so many of us as, etc.] You must know this, you cannot be ignorant of it, that whoever were baptized into Jesus Christ, were baptized into his death: and therefore must be dead to sin, and consequently ought not to live, nor can they live in sin. 'This does not suppose, that some of this church were baptized persons, and others not; but that some might be baptized in water who were not baptized into Christ: there is a difference between being baptized in water in the name of Christ, and being baptized into Christ, which believers in their baptism are; 'by which is meant, not a being brought by it into union with Christ, which is either secretly from eternity, or openly at conversion, and both before the baptism of true believers; nor a being brought by it into the mystical body of Christ the church, for this also is before it; 'but rather it designs a being baptized, or a being brought by baptism into more communion with Christ, into a participation of his grace and benefits; or into the doctrine of Christ, and a more distinct knowledge of it: the power of which they feel upon their hearts, and so have really believed in Christ, heartily love him, and make a sincere profession of him; 'though rather the true meaning of the phrase "baptized into Christ", I take to be, is to be baptized purely for the sake of Christ, in imitation of him, who has set us an example, and because baptism is an ordinance of his; 'it is to submit to it with a view to his glory, to testify our affection for him, and subjection to him, without laying any stress or dependence on it for salvation; such who are thus baptized, are "baptized into his death"; they not only resemble Christ in his sufferings and death, by being immersed in water, but they declare their faith in the death of Christ, and also share in the benefits of his death; such as peace, pardon, righteousness, and atonement: now this proves, that such persons are dead to sin, who are so baptized; 'for by the death of Christ, into which they are baptized, they are justified from sin; by the death of Christ, their old man is crucified, and the body of sin destroyed; besides, believers in baptism profess themselves to be dead to sin and the world, and their baptism is an obligation upon them to live unto righteousness.' (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/GillsExpositionoftheBible/) |
||||||
1089 | is fasting for today? | Luke 5:33 | Radioman2 | 80125 | ||
Fasting is nowhere commanded in the Torah. However, there is sufficient justification for fasting in biblical times and, in fact, in modern times as well. - - - - - - - - - - Fasting is defined as "abstinence from food and/or drink as an element of private or public religious devotion. Fasting is nowhere commanded in the Torah and, in fact, is never attested earlier than the time of the judges of Israel (cf. Judges 20:26). The fact that Jesus and the disciples sanctioned it by their own example (Matt 4:2; Acts 13:2-3), however, is sufficient justification for its practice in biblical times and, in fact, in modern times as well. (...) "Jesus equates supplication and fasting when he teaches that the removal of mountains comes about only by prayer and fasting (Matt 17:21). The godly prophetess Anna looked for the redemption of Israel with supplicatory prayer and fasting (Luke 2:37 ). Before Paul and Barnabas appointed elders for the various churches, they committed them to the Lord with prayer and fasting (Acts 14:23). In all these instances there is the clear implication that fasting is an effective adjunct to petition. "The purpose of fasting is never explicitly stated in Scripture but its connection to penitence, mourning, and supplication suggests a self-denial that opens one to God and to the immaterial aspects of life. Inasmuch as food and drink typify life in the flesh and all its demands and satisfactions, their absence or rejection speaks to the reality of a higher dimension, one in which the things of the spirit predominate. The theology of fasting, then, is a theology of priorities in which believers are given the opportunity to express themselves in an undivided and intensive devotion to the Lord and to the concerns of the spiritual life." Eugene H. Merrill Bibliography. John E. Baird, What the Bible Says About Fasting; R. D. Chatham, Fasting: A Biblical-Historical Study; Joseph F. Wimmer, Fasting in the New Testament: A Study in Biblical Theology. Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology . Edited by Walter A. Elwell. Published by Baker Books (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Dictionaries/BakersEvangelicalDictionary/) |
||||||
1090 | Only 144,000 virgins in heaven? | Revelation | Radioman2 | 80092 | ||
In plain English, The Watchtower organization (the Jehovah's Witnesses) is a cult. They deny the deity of Christ. They are teaching doctrine that is false and heretical. Their New World Translation of the Bible is obviously flawed and deliberately distorts scripture in an effort to defend their doctrines. They're not just another Christian religion. They're not a Christian religion - period. I've posted more than ample evidence to back up what I'm saying. (Use the search function. Under user name enter: "Radioman2"; under contain these words enter "Jehovah's Witness".) Moreover, you say "I find it sad that individuals listen to other people's opinions as to what other religions, who they haven't extensively studied (whether it be for just for research, to see why other's believe what they do, or out of their own personal search for the "true" religion) believe instead of researching it for themselves." Other people's "opinions"? May I point out that the sources I have cited quote Watchtower publications to show what JWs believe? If anyone believes my sources have misquoted anything or taken quotes out of context they need only to check out the references for themselves in the Watchtower publications cited. How one "feels" about the Bible is irrelevant. Being sincere in one's belief is not enough. One can take poison with the sincere belief that it is not harmful, but their belief does not change the fact that it is poison. If one has already decided that the JWs are just another religion, that their teaching is scriptural, then that person has a right to their beliefs. My motive and hope in posting the facts about the beliefs of JWs is to warn those who don't know any better, lest they, too, are deceived and caught up in error. I have no ill will toward you. Nor do I hate individual Jehovah's Witnesses. But the Watchtower organization is teaching lies that, if believed, will result in people spending eternity in hell. |
||||||
1091 | Will GOD his back on a constant sinner | Heb 13:5 | Radioman2 | 80085 | ||
No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God's seed abides in him, and he cannot keep on sinning because he has been born of God. [10] By this it is evident who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is the one who does not love his brother. 1 John 3:9-10 (ESV) You ask: "What if a person does wrong after wrong after wrong"? It is understandable why someone would want an answer to this question. I ask: A person who does wrong after wrong after wrong: Is he born of God? Is he a child of God? Remember, we do not base doctrine on individual case examples. We base it solely on the word of God. 1 John 3:6-10 (Amplified) 6 No one who abides in Him [who lives and remains in communion with and in obedience to Him—deliberately, knowingly, and habitually] commits (practices) sin. No one who [habitually] sins has either seen or known Him [recognized, perceived, or understood Him, or has had an experiential acquaintance with Him]. 7 Boys (lads), let no one deceive and lead you astray. He who practices righteousness [who is upright, conforming to the divine will in purpose, thought, and action, living a consistently conscientious life] is righteous, even as He is righteous. 8 [But] he who commits sin [who practices evildoing] is of the devil [takes his character from the evil one], for the devil has sinned (violated the divine law) from the beginning. The reason the Son of God was made manifest (visible) was to undo (destroy, loosen, and dissolve) the works the devil [has done]. 9 No one born (begotten) of God [deliberately, knowingly, and habitually] practices sin, for God’s nature abides in him [His principle of life, the divine sperm, remains permanently within him]; and he cannot practice sinning because he is born (begotten) of God. 10 By this it is made clear who take their nature from God and are His children and who take their nature from the devil and are his children: no one who does not practice righteousness [who does not conform to God’s will in purpose, thought, and action] is of God; neither is anyone who does not love his brother (his fellow believer in Christ). If they had been of us... AMPLIFIED 1 John 2:19 They went out from our number, but they did not [really] belong to us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us. But [they withdrew] that it might be plain that they all are not of us. |
||||||
1092 | Help on the 69th, 70th Week of Daniel | Dan 9:24 | Radioman2 | 80067 | ||
[Duplicate answer to duplicate question.] Daniel 9:24,27 (ESV) [24]"Seventy weeks are decreed about your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to put an end to sin, and to atone for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal both vision and prophet, and to anoint a most holy place." [27] "And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator." 'The year was approximately 539 BC. The 70 year exile to Babylon was about complete as Daniel had discerned from reading Jeremiah's prophecy (cf. Dan. 9:2). He was in prayer about the future of his people because it was their sin and transgression towards God that had sent them into exile. While in prayer, Daniel was visited by the angel Gabriel who had been sent by God to give him "insight and understanding" (Dan. 9:22) regarding a "70 week" program for his people and his holy city (Dan. 9:24-25). Upon completion of the 70th week, Israel's "transgression" would be finished, her "sin" ended and her "iniquity" would be atoned for. 'Four questions to be asked regarding Daniel's 70 Weeks are: (1) When did the 70 week program begin? (2) How long is "70 Weeks"? (3) Where is Israel now in that program? and, (4) What does Israel's return to her ancient homeland mean for the church? Let's look at these four questions because they have direct implication for believers today.' (...) [Because of space limitations I will only quote part of this article. To read the entire article, go to: www.solagroup.org/articles/faqs/faq_0028.html] '4. What does Israel's return to her ancient homeland mean for believers? 'Today, more than at any time in the last 2,000 years, the church can well expect the fulfillment of Daniel's "70th week" prophecy. With world conditions rapidly building to a point of readiness for the events of the 70th week, the church more than ever needs to get her spiritual house in order. With a plethora of prophetic teaching arising today, much of which is not biblically supportable, the believer needs to be a Berean (Acts 17:11) more than ever. With the potential beginning of the 70th Week at hand, it behooves the believer to know and understand what God has indeed said regarding the second coming of Christ. If the over 300 prophecies of His first coming were fulfilled literally, surely the prophecies of His second coming will be literal as well! This is a time for believers to know and understand what God has clearly said about the return of His Son. 'Will He come for His church (Bride) before the 70th Week begins? Will He come at the end of the 70th Week? Will he come sometime during the 70th Week? A face-value reading of the Scripture clearly reveals that Christ comes sometime during the second half of the 70th Week. Jesus taught that in the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24). Paul taught that in his writings (cf. 1 Thes. 4 and 5; 2 Thes. 2). Jesus taught that in Revelation 6 - 8. 'Is Daniel's "70 Week" prophecy nearly completed? Yes. The first sixty-nine prophetic years are now history and the 70th Week could begin virtually overnight.' (Is the prophecy of Daniel's Seventy Weeks nearly complete? By Rev. Bill Lee-Warner www.solagroup.org/articles/faqs/faq_0028.html) |
||||||
1093 | Help on the 69th, 70th Week of Daniel | Dan 9:24 | Radioman2 | 80066 | ||
Daniel 9:24,27 (ESV) [24]"Seventy weeks are decreed about your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to put an end to sin, and to atone for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal both vision and prophet, and to anoint a most holy place." [27] "And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator." 'The year was approximately 539 BC. The 70 year exile to Babylon was about complete as Daniel had discerned from reading Jeremiah's prophecy (cf. Dan. 9:2). He was in prayer about the future of his people because it was their sin and transgression towards God that had sent them into exile. While in prayer, Daniel was visited by the angel Gabriel who had been sent by God to give him "insight and understanding" (Dan. 9:22) regarding a "70 week" program for his people and his holy city (Dan. 9:24-25). Upon completion of the 70th week, Israel's "transgression" would be finished, her "sin" ended and her "iniquity" would be atoned for. 'Four questions to be asked regarding Daniel's 70 Weeks are: (1) When did the 70 week program begin? (2) How long is "70 Weeks"? (3) Where is Israel now in that program? and, (4) What does Israel's return to her ancient homeland mean for the church? Let's look at these four questions because they have direct implication for believers today.' [Because of space limitations I will only quote part of this article. To read the entire article, go to: www.solagroup.org/articles/faqs/faq_0028.html] '4. What does Israel's return to her ancient homeland mean for believers? 'Today, more than at any time in the last 2,000 years, the church can well expect the fulfillment of Daniel's "70th week" prophecy. With world conditions rapidly building to a point of readiness for the events of the 70th week, the church more than ever needs to get her spiritual house in order. With a plethora of prophetic teaching arising today, much of which is not biblically supportable, the believer needs to be a Berean (Acts 17:11) more than ever. With the potential beginning of the 70th Week at hand, it behooves the believer to know and understand what God has indeed said regarding the second coming of Christ. If the over 300 prophecies of His first coming were fulfilled literally, surely the prophecies of His second coming will be literal as well! This is a time for believers to know and understand what God has clearly said about the return of His Son. 'Will He come for His church (Bride) before the 70th Week begins? Will He come at the end of the 70th Week? Will he come sometime during the 70th Week? A face-value reading of the Scripture clearly reveals that Christ comes sometime during the second half of the 70th Week. Jesus taught that in the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24). Paul taught that in his writings (cf. 1 Thes. 4 and 5; 2 Thes. 2). Jesus taught that in Revelation 6 - 8. 'Is Daniel's "70 Week" prophecy nearly completed? Yes. The first sixty-nine prophetic years are now history and the 70th Week could begin virtually overnight.' (Is the prophecy of Daniel's Seventy Weeks nearly complete? By Rev. Bill Lee-Warner www.solagroup.org/articles/faqs/faq_0028.html) |
||||||
1094 | Why is Joyce Meyer allowed to preach? | Bible general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 80059 | ||
Joyce Meyer teaches "the necessity of Jesus having to pay for our sins in hell, under the torment of Satan and his angels -- a teaching both unsubstantiated by and contrary to Scripture." "Why is Joyce Meyer allowed to preach?" This, in itself, is a good question. Why indeed is Joyce Meyer allowed to preach? [Note: numbers in parentheses are footnote references.] "Joyce Meyer shares the platform from time to time with Word of Faith teachers like, for example, Kenneth Copeland, Jesse Duplantis, Benny Hinn, and T.D. Jakes.(5) Chrisitan Research Institute (CRI) is critical of and concerned with some of her practices and teachings. "In her 1991 booklet, The Most Important Decision You Will Ever Make, she teaches a hallmark doctrine of Faith theology, namely, that Christ had to suffer in hell to atone for our sins and be born again: "During that time He entered hell, where you and I deserved to go (legally) because of our sin….He paid the price there.…no plan was too extreme…Jesus paid on the cross and in hell….God rose up from His throne and said to demon powers tormenting the sinless Son of God, “Let Him go.” Then the resurrection power of Almighty God went through hell and filled Jesus….He was resurrected from the dead -- the first born-again man.(6) "Her assertions are not unlike those of leading Word of Faith proponent Kenneth Copeland, who also believes Christ’s death on the cross was not sufficient to atone for our sins, and that His work of redemption was completed by suffering in hell and being born again. According to Copeland, "When Jesus cried, “It is finished!” He was not speaking of the plan of redemption. There were still three days and nights to go through before He went to the throne….Jesus’ death on the cross was only the beginning of the complete work of redemption.(7) "[The] word of the living God went down into the pit of destruction and charged the spirit of Jesus with resurrection power! Suddenly His twisted, death-wracked spirit began to fill out and come back to life. He began to look like something the devil had never seen before. He was literally being reborn before the devil’s very eyes. He began to flex His spiritual muscles….Jesus was born again -- the first-born from the dead.(8) "According to a recently published interview with free-lance writer Ken Walker, however, Meyer contradictorily denies ever believing or teaching that Christ was born again in hell.(9) "Moreover, in her 1991 booklet, Meyer asserts that salvation is impossible without believing Jesus suffered in hell as the believer’s substitute. Meyer writes, “There is no hope of anyone going to heaven unless they believe this truth I am presenting. You cannot go to heaven unless you believe with all your heart that Jesus took your place in hell.”(10) "While historic Christianity has debated the issue of whether or not Jesus actually descended into hell (e.g., to proclaim the gospel, declare victory, etc. [1 Peter 3:18-19), no orthodox believer ever held to the belief that Christ suffered and atoned for our sins in hell, rather than on the cross. Yet, Word of "Faith teachers, including Joyce Meyer, teach the necessity of Jesus having to pay for our sins in hell, under the torment of Satan and his angels -- a teaching both unsubstantiated by and contrary to Scripture. The entirety of Christ’s atoning work (i.e., His suffering and death in our place) occurred on the cross (e.g., 1 Peter 2:24), ending with His proclamation, “It is finished” (John 19:30). The Christ of Faith theology literally had to become sin, taking on the nature of Satan while in hell, thereby needing to be born again in hell before His resurrection could occur." (To read the entire, uncut article quoted above, please go to: http://www.equip.org/search/ and in the search field enter the words Joyce Meyer.) |
||||||
1095 | Can GOD turn his back on you? | Heb 13:5 | Radioman2 | 80056 | ||
Assuredly not! Question (short): Can GOD turn his back on you? Answer (short): AMPLIFIED Hebrews 13:5b for He [God] Himself has said, I will not in any way fail you nor give you up nor leave you without support. [I will] not, [I will] not, [I will] not in any degree leave you helpless nor forsake nor let [you] down (relax My hold on you)! [Assuredly not!] [Josh. 1:5.] |
||||||
1096 | Can GOD turn his back on you? | Heb 13:5 | Radioman2 | 80055 | ||
Will GOD turn his back on you? It depends on who *you* are. You're either a believer or you're not. "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life." NASB John 5:24 AMPLIFIED Hebrews 13:5 Let your character or moral disposition be free from love of money [including greed, avarice, lust, and craving for earthly possessions] and be satisfied with your present [circumstances and with what you have]; for He [God] Himself has said, I will not in any way fail you nor give you up nor leave you without support. [I will] not, [I will] not, [I will] not in any degree leave you helpless nor forsake nor let [you] down (relax My hold on you)! [Assuredly not!] [Josh. 1:5.] AMPLIFIED John 5:24 I assure you, most solemnly I tell you, the person whose ears are open to My words [who listens to My message] and believes and trusts in and clings to and relies on Him Who sent Me has (possesses now) eternal life. And he does not come into judgment [does not incur sentence of judgment, will not come under condemnation], but he has already passed over out of death into life. AMPLIFIED John 10:27-29 The sheep that are My own hear and are listening to My voice; and I know them, and they follow Me. And I give them eternal life, and they shall never lose it or perish throughout the ages. [To all eternity they shall never by any means be destroyed.] And no one is able to snatch them out of My hand. My Father, Who has given them to Me, is greater and mightier than all [else]; and no one is able to snatch [them] out of the Father's hand. AMPLIFIED Romans 8:35 Who shall ever separate us from Christ's love? Shall suffering and affliction and tribulation? Or calamity and distress? Or persecution or hunger or destitution or peril or sword? AMPLIFIED Romans 8:38 For I am persuaded beyond doubt (am sure) that neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities, nor things impending and threatening nor things to come, nor powers, AMPLIFIED Romans 8:39 Nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation will be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. AMPLIFIED Philippians 1:6 And I am convinced and sure of this very thing, that He Who began a good work in you will continue until the day of Jesus Christ [right up to the time of His return], developing [that good work] and perfecting and bringing it to full completion in you. AMPLIFIED 1 Peter 1:4-5 [Born anew] into an inheritance which is beyond the reach of change and decay [imperishable], unsullied and unfading, reserved in heaven for you, Who are being guarded (garrisoned) by God's power through [your] faith [till you fully inherit that final] salvation that is ready to be revealed [for you] in the last time. |
||||||
1097 | How were Paul and Silas singled out? | Acts 16:38 | Radioman2 | 80053 | ||
Paul wrote: "I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin." (NASB Romans 11:1) NASB Acts 16:38 The policemen reported these words to the chief magistrates. They were afraid when they heard that they were Romans, Acts 16:38 does not say or mean that Paul was not a Jew. All it says is that he was Roman ("they were Romans" NASB). Speaking of himself, Paul wrote: NASB Romans 11:1 I say then, God has not rejected His people, has He? May it never be! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. 2 Cor. 11:22 (ESV) Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they offspring of Abraham? So am I. Philip. 3:4-5 (ESV) though I myself have reason for confidence in the flesh also. If anyone else thinks he has reason for confidence in the flesh, I have more: [5] circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee; |
||||||
1098 | Paul and Silas were not Jews. | Acts 16:38 | Radioman2 | 80052 | ||
I say then, God has not rejected His people, has He? May it never be! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. (NASB Romans 11:1) | ||||||
1099 | Paul and Silas were not Jews. | Acts 16:38 | Radioman2 | 80050 | ||
Actually, Paul was a Jew. (See Holy Bible: New Testament.) | ||||||
1100 | What is meant by "pray in the spirit". | Eph 6:18 | Radioman2 | 80049 | ||
Does the Holy Spirit pray *through* us? Good question. Whatever the answer may be, the Bible plainly says: "The Spirit Himself intercedes *for* us." (NASB, emphasis added) AMPLIFIED Romans 8:26 So too the [Holy] Spirit comes to our aid and bears us up in our weakness; for we do not know what prayer to offer nor how to offer it worthily as we ought, but the Spirit Himself goes to meet our supplication and pleads in our behalf with unspeakable yearnings and groanings too deep for utterance. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 ] Next > Last [66] >> |