Results 21 - 40 of 118
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: jesusfreak508@aol.com Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
21 | Christ dying only for elect? | Rom 5:6 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58482 | ||
Isn't Jesus pretty clear about how/why some will be saved and some won't in the parable of the sower? Matthew 13:4-9 and 18-23 When you have the words of Jesus Himself, why do you need to cling to Paul? |
||||||
22 | Christ dying only for elect? | Rom 5:6 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58493 | ||
Jesus restored to us the place where we were before Adam chose to not believe God. Now we get to make the choice for ourselves. But you can easily do just what Adam did and choose to not believe God. The only difference is that you are only responsible for your own fall. Think of it as sin is a debt (Jesus did say "It is finished" which is what the Romans put on the documents of debts, or sentences, when they were paid). A debt puts you on the negative side of zero on the number line. Jesus paid for our sins, putting us back at zero. Accept the "free" gift and you get a credit, salvation, and you are on the positive side of zero on the number line. |
||||||
23 | Christ dying only for elect? | Rom 5:6 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58495 | ||
John 3:16 says you have to believe. Jesus in His parables (in Matthew as it happens) says straight up that some just won't get it. And doesn't the Bible also say that many will love their flesh more than Jesus, even in the end of days when God is pouring out His wrath? There are your scriptures. |
||||||
24 | Christ dying only for elect? | Rom 5:6 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58504 | ||
Beautiful verse isn't it. But it's one verse surrounded by others that say we have to have fellowship with Him to be covered in His blood; 1John 1:9 has a great big "if" that makes it really clear. | ||||||
25 | Christ dying only for elect? | Rom 5:6 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58512 | ||
That was beautiful. Just beautiful. Do you know that beautiful actually means 'perfect timing'? Maybe you'll feel better if you don't think of it as infighting, but as vigorish (sp?) debate, and that this too is of the Spirit. Part of the plan to bring us together and make us realize we really are blessed that God loves us all so much. | ||||||
26 | Christ dying only for elect? | Rom 5:6 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58522 | ||
Created in God's image and likeness...yet totally depraved. Hmmm. Who has the view of a weak God? | ||||||
27 | Christ dying only for elect? | Rom 5:6 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58528 | ||
God knows everything. He doesn't exist in time like we do. Why do you have to have all these other absolutes? As Arminians and as Calvinists. You both presuppose that He made a plan and looked down through time and picked who would be on one side of the plan and who would be on the other side, like picking teams for kick ball! Doesn't it just make more sense that He looked down through time, saw who would make what choices and planned accordingly? I'm just glad my salvation isn't dependent on either of your points of doctrine. We do agree on that, right? I mean, I am born again, I do study the Word, it has pretty much taken over my whole life, I am filled with joy, and I must love both of you because all my maternal instincts are aroused. It's really very much like when my two oldest were teenagers and I wanted to knock both their heads together. Lovingly, of course. |
||||||
28 | Not my will? | Rom 5:6 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58633 | ||
We were created to rule the earth and everything in/on it. How do you rule without free will? God said it. You rule it, you name it. My Bible tells me Woman wasn't created when God gave the instructions about the fruit. So who changed God's Word and set her up to be successfully tricked into the sin of EATING it by telling her she was forbidden to eat it or touch it? Who named Woman and was the Head in their pairing? And as such stood as her spiritual leader, authority and protector? And where was he when the devil was leading her down the garden path? Genesis 3:6 says he was with her, so why didn't he open his mouth? Why is he just sitting there letting this snake get away with this? He had an obligation and responsibility to her that came with being the one to name her as well as the fact that she was bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh. Sounds to me like somebody used somebody as a poison-taster. When asked what she had done, Woman said, "The serpent deceived me, and I ate." I did it, but I was tricked. We'll just skip the fact that her Man stood right there and watched the whole thing, and I'll ask instead, what would have happened if Man had grabbed her arm and drug her butt off to God and said, "He tricked her! She had bad information and that snake tricked her! Once she touched it and nothing happened she figured the whole thing was bogus and she ate it! Yes, she thought she was being disobedient when she touched it, but she doesn't have the authority to make those kinds of decisions anyway. You gave that to me! I rule here!" But we'll never know. He didn't do that, did he? He ate the fruit. Nobody twisted his arm. Nobody talked him into it. Nobody told him to do it. She gave it to him and he ate it. When God confronted him, he said, "The woman you put here with me--she gave me some fruit from the the tree, and I ate it." I did it, but she gave it to me, and you gave her to me. So he wasn't just blaming Woman, he was blaming God too. It wasn't his fault. He was arguing he didn't have any responsibility or free will either. Somethings never change. And you argue that poor old helpless mindless no-will of his own Man was punished by God because he listened to Woman instead of God. Somethings really never do change. There you go adding stuff to the Word of God, too. My Bible says that he was punished because he listened to Woman. Period. He's the head remember? She's supposed to listen to him, not vice versa. I could be wrong there, but it makes more sense when you consider her punishment. She's going to give him babies and its going to hurt worse than anything she could ever imagine, so bad in fact that we don't really remember how bad it was until we start having the next one and so bad that it hurts the Man just watching it, yet her desire for him is going to keep her coming back for it again and again. Says pretty much without any doubt, 'Now are we clear who is RULER in this little pas de deux?' I've always thought someone who is deceived or tricked is by definition a dupe. Not too bright. But you think poor old mindless no will Man was doing just fine until the big bad too smart and strong for him Woman caused his wheels to start falling off. But God didn't say that either, did he? He said, "Cursed is the ground because of you." But that's just how a woman reads those verses. |
||||||
29 | Not my will? | Rom 5:6 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58634 | ||
We were created to rule the earth and everything in/on it. How do you rule without free will? God said it. You rule it, you name it. My Bible tells me Woman wasn't created when God gave the instructions about the fruit. So who changed God's Word and set her up to be successfully tricked into the sin of EATING it by telling her she was forbidden to eat it or touch it? Who named Woman and was the Head in their pairing? And as such stood as her spiritual leader, authority and protector? And where was he when the devil was leading her down the garden path? Genesis 3:6 says he was with her, so why didn't he open his mouth? Why is he just sitting there letting this snake get away with this? He had an obligation and responsibility to her that came with being the one to name her as well as the fact that she was bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh. Sounds to me like somebody used somebody as a poison-taster. When asked what she had done, Woman said, "The serpent deceived me, and I ate." I did it, but I was tricked. We'll just skip the fact that her Man stood right there and watched the whole thing, and I'll ask instead, what would have happened if Man had grabbed her arm and drug her butt off to God and said, "He tricked her! She had bad information and that snake tricked her! Once she touched it and nothing happened she figured the whole thing was bogus and she ate it! Yes, she thought she was being disobedient when she touched it, but she doesn't have the authority to make those kinds of decisions anyway. You gave that to me! I rule here!" But we'll never know. He didn't do that, did he? He ate the fruit. Nobody twisted his arm. Nobody talked him into it. Nobody told him to do it. She gave it to him and he ate it. When God confronted him, he said, "The woman you put here with me--she gave me some fruit from the the tree, and I ate it." I did it, but she gave it to me, and you gave her to me. So he wasn't just blaming Woman, he was blaming God too. It wasn't his fault. He was arguing he didn't have any responsibility or free will either. Somethings never change. And you argue that poor old helpless mindless no-will of his own Man was punished by God because he listened to Woman instead of God. Somethings really never do change. There you go adding stuff to the Word of God, too. My Bible says that he was punished because he listened to Woman. Period. He's the head remember? She's supposed to listen to him, not vice versa. I could be wrong there, but it makes more sense when you consider her punishment. She's going to give him babies and its going to hurt worse than anything she could ever imagine, so bad in fact that we don't really remember how bad it was until we start having the next one and so bad that it hurts the Man just watching it, yet her desire for him is going to keep her coming back for it again and again. Says pretty much without any doubt, 'Now are we clear who is RULER in this little pas de deux?' I've always thought someone who is deceived or tricked is by definition a dupe. Not too bright. But you think poor old mindless no will Man was doing just fine until the big bad too smart and strong for him Woman caused his wheels to start falling off. But God didn't say that either, did he? He said, "Cursed is the ground because of you." But that's just how a woman reads those verses. |
||||||
30 | Christ dying only for elect? | Rom 5:6 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58642 | ||
This forum feels like a church where I can't feel the presence of Jesus. Thankfully there are a few who just shine with Him and make it bearable. I have tried to leave it, but the Spirit keeps making me come back. Just like a church I can't leave because God doesn't give me the authority to judge my church. So I give up. Tell me what a Calvinist thinks God sees when He looks at you? Teach me to understand. I believe I am covered by the Blood. I think when God looks at me, He sees someone who has been cleansed in the Blood of the Lamb. I think I shine. I have been washed white as snow. I wear the righteousness of my risen Savior. How can I accept that He has done all this for me, then say I am totally depraved? I died in Christ! If I have given myself to Him as His servant, His slave, His child, His bride, and I say I am not changed and transformed by it, if I insist I am not a new creature altogether by it---is that not spiritual adultery? I keep praying and reading my Bible and the Spirit keeps bringing me to Scriptures testifying to the authority and love and forgiveness and compassion and justice and mercy of God, then I come back to the forum and get slammed by people who want me to grant Paul's words the same authority of Jesus's words, who want me to acclaim that I am filth, that God limits Himself, that evil is stronger than Him, and who want to convince me that the source of all my joy is actually a God who's walking around with a baseball bat just waiting for the opportunity to bash me or any of His other followers! That's Allah, not God! I'm so sorry. You didn't even do most of this yet I vent all over you. I really meant it, teach me, Calvinist. There is obviously something here God wants me to learn and it looks like you are elected. Oh thank goodness! I haven't lost my sense of humor. Elected; get it? God bless and I look forward to hearing from you. |
||||||
31 | Not my will? | Rom 5:6 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58680 | ||
lol I'm a stay at home mom with 5 children, 2 who are grown and have 2 grandchildren. We are active in our tiny little church and live on a horse farm. Our joy is in the Lord and He never disappoints. We are strong in Him and the power of His might even through our trials. My husband, kids, and church family are going to be as amused as I am to learn that anyone considers me a feminist! Especially as in my women's Sunday School class and the youth groups where I counsel submission to the Lord and women to their husbands and fathers and it always brings on lovely lively debates and discussions. But if you aren't up to the debate I perfectly understand. Ah well. I was actually hopeful for a time of having a lively learning debate here on this forum. Why is it that so many here only see this forum as a venue insult or condemn or just have their view points reaffirmed? Ah well. God bless. |
||||||
32 | Christ dying only for elect? | Rom 5:6 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58730 | ||
Well, I was washed in the Blood which makes me alive and cleansed. And if I seek God, persistently, I will be restored. I did, do everyday of my life, and even every hour of every day on many, many days, so I think I shine with my Savior's righteousness when God looks at me. One or the other of you are arguing that God is the one who planted the persistence in me and that its preordained that I would awaken to that one day/ somehow, causing me to seek. So basically we're talking here a 'which comes first, the chicken or the egg' argument and I don't know how we'd ever know who was right or wrong on that issue until our Lord comes back to claim His own. I do wonder how you work in the parable of the sower and the seeds in Matthew though. That was a legitimate inquiry by the way. I am considering this. And I also wonder how those on the side of only some being amongst the elect deal with Jeremiah 31:33-34 I also don't get how you think I am defending preconceived ideas since I only just came to the conclusion it was pretty awful with the post you read. In Christ, Melanie |
||||||
33 | Christ dying only for elect? | Rom 5:6 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58737 | ||
What Adam lost in his body is what Christ restored in His body. Adam was instructed. He chose not to believe God; not to believe those instuctions. He had that choice and he made it. We have been instructed. We each can choose not to believe, not to believe those instructions. That's our choice and we make it. The prophecy of Jer31:33-34 is what I believe was restored to our heart's by Jesus and it say "all" will get it. Paul says as all were brought to death through/by Adam, all are restored by Jesus. I believe it was that awareness of God that was restored. Adam had it, we didn't until Jesus. Now we do. Now we are like Adam. We have the choice. Adam was ignorant for he had no knowledge of death, but I'd have to argue his innocence. The Bible says Woman was deceived into sin, but Adam was with her so he was hearing the same arguments the devil was giving her. I'd say he lost his innocence when he listened to that snake and took the fruit from his woman. The decision was made to do it before he ever reached out his hand to take it. If you lust in your heart you are guilty of adultery, so why would that premise not be true here? You are saying Adam didn't know it was wrong. Or that he didn't know wrong, disobedience, was evil? He knew he wasn't supposed to eat that fruit and he did it. I'd just as soon not get into any more debates where the response is basically 'you stupid unbeliever, you're going to burn, you have no right, yada yada yada' so if you can't instruct gently, please don't respond. Trust in the Spirit that I'll get to Truth as long as I seek it deligently with prayer, and pray for me, but don't write! However, if you have a gentle spirit and a genuine desire to instruct me, I look forward to hearing from you. In Christ, Melanie |
||||||
34 | Christ dying only for elect? | Rom 5:6 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58738 | ||
Where does He say some can't get it? Genuine query. Don't bite my head off. Melanie |
||||||
35 | Not my will? | Rom 5:6 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58759 | ||
Ok. Let me get this straight. I don't have free will, because as long as I make no choices then I stand where God put me. Making a choice means I'm standing with the Devil, and which point that's free will but not? So, question 1: How did I get in right standing with God in the first place? As a Christian, I believe I heard about Jesus, and accepted Him, received Him--- I'm really struggling here not to use the word chose since you're telling me I didn't have a choice, Do you get why this is confusing to me? And I apologize too. I wasn't angry or anything when I wrote the former post, and I truly believe/meant everything I said/explained as how I see/read the Scriptures (this is a new habit for me. I feel like I've been amplified!---but I do want to be clear and not waste alot of time arguing about specific words/meanings as long as I'm getting my point across)to continue my apology--but I did write it with rather a snippy attitude. Pretty much the way/manner I used explaining my take on Gen3 when my 22 year old son had a go trying with me some of the chauvanism play he uses with his girlfriends. It wasn't meant to be ugly, but it was sardonic; genuinely held but delivered more sarcastically than it should have been. You weren't imagining it. I'm still hoping to have free will cleared up a bit. I'm thinking we're arguing semantics here, but that could be useful, too. Melanie |
||||||
36 | Not my will? | Rom 5:6 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58912 | ||
You've just listed many of my favorite verses. Yet I have always gone to them when I am feeling overwhelmed by the world. Drawing on them to give me strength when family, friends, or just circumstances are assailing me over some small or large thing. I am trying to understand this. I am wondering how backsliding falls within this as you would explain it. Thanks, Melanie |
||||||
37 | Not my will? | Rom 5:6 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 59131 | ||
I have always equated backsliding/backsliders with those Peter would rather not be in 2Peter 2:21. It seemed to me he is saying that he would rather to be one who just died ignorant of the Truth and just get tossed into the lake of fire on judgement day, then to be one who has been saved and stood to face God's judgement as a backslider. I was not equating backsliding with works though. I see your point. Thank you, Melanie |
||||||
38 | Not my will? | Rom 5:6 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 59132 | ||
I, too, read this thread and I would have to say the question/trap for me was my definition of backsliding. To me backsliding was sinning. It was troubling to me because I do still have my moments of sin when I do not respond as I know a Christian should whether they feel justified or not. (You don't have to comment on that.) I would have to be one of those Paul was referring to when he speaks of knowing what he wants to do (or was it should do??), then not doing it. Defining backsliding as turning away from the truth of the saving grace of Christ then I would have to say I don't even understand how it could be possible, but if it is then I know I am with Peter on it in 2Peter 2:21 because I don't believe you can lose your salvation, which means you would face God for judgement having to explain how you who knew the truth dared to deny it! |
||||||
39 | Women speak in church? | 1 Cor 14:34 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58546 | ||
The Law he is referring to is as noted above to have its reference in Gen 3:16. "To the woman He said, I will greatly multiply your grief and your suffering in pregnancy and the pangs of childbearing; with spasms of distress you will bring forth children. Yet your desire and craving will be for your husband and he will rule over you." Well, this says I will be ruled by my husband because my desire and craving will be for him. And its true. I have eaten in many a restaurant I don't like, because I invariably find myself letting him have his way. And I have shoes and outfits I don't like for the same reason. It is my desire (love) for him that makes me give in to him all the time on all kinds of issues. God said it, and I can testify that its true. But I submit because Jesus tells me to submit. And that's a two way street. No where though do I find in the Bible that says I should or that I have to submit to any man or every man. When I first read this verse and verse 35, I was devastated. I prayed on it for days! So in my Bible studies over the next few days, the Spirit started leading me around the Scriptures. First He took me to Jesus warning us to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees. Then He took me to Acts where He pointed out to me that Paul was a Pharisee. Then He took me to 1Corinthians 7:12 and 25, where Paul says outright that he is speaking from his own opinions and not from any revelation of the Lord. I was feeling better. That night I prayed over it, then the next morning I was led to 2Corinthians 5:16,17. In verse 16, dear Paul says that we should estimate and regard no one from a purely human point of view, in terms of natural standards of value.--- So how does he justify his 1 Corinthians order for women to be quiet "just as the Law says"? By his OT, Pharisee traditions it is "disgraceful for a woman to talk in church, for her to usurp and exercise authority over men in church." Yet by his NT 2 Corinthians 5:17 teachings, "Therefore if any person is ingrafted in Christ the Messiah he is a new creation, a new creature altogether..." Does this mean, except for women? We're still to be bound by the Law? Dead in our sin? NOT! I was feeling ALOT better by this point. Then I read 2 Corinthians 6:3 "We put no obstruction in anybody's way, we give no offense in anything, so that no fault may be found and our ministry blamed and discredited." -- Wrong! I and no doubt many, many women found fault and were offended. Then God took me to Mary, the first person to see Jesus after He rose. He pointed out to me that Jesus actually stopped on His way to ascending to His Father to comfort this WOMAN. There ended up being a reason for His telling me to speak through my husband in our church (specifically our Wed night Bible studies with our newly ordained young Pastor), and of course, He was right and it was best that I do it. I would have obeied irregardless, but it was really great the way that He comforted me. Because God really does love women; and I think Paul came around to understanding that before he finished his run. Oh, and you might also read Acts 1:13-14. Jesus had told them all, the men and the women, to go back to Jerusalem and wait, and in Acts 1:13,14, there they are, the men and the women, praying and worshiping and waiting together as they had been commanded. Even though that was against their Jewish/Temple Law--the same one which was the basis for Paul's saying above. It was only when they disregarded that Law and were obedient to Jesus, that the Holy Spirit came to them. Jesus told them it would, because He knew they would obey Him. That act of Faith and obedience breaking down prejudice and traditonal walls invited the Holy Spirit to work as it would.---So you want to go back to the Law? |
||||||
40 | Women speak in church? | 1 Cor 14:34 | jesusfreak508@aol.com | 58593 | ||
Paul did not contradict himself? In 1 Corinthians 7:25 Paul does have the grace to say that this is not from the Lord, but his own personal opinions (I think that confession was from the Lord!), but does claim that since he is who he is even his opinions should be considered trustworthy. Then he goes on to advise the married men to adopt the attitude of one who is not married! Contrary to God's commands on the same subject in Genesis and to the teachings of Jesus Himself. In that chapter, he tells the unmarried men and women that they should stay that way to better focus on the Lord, then in the chapter 14 verses says women shouldn't be even allowed to ask questions about the Lord except in their home from their husbands. Well, either he's contradicting himself or he's purposely trying to slap a tape over the mouth of at least that generation of women. And yes, I've heard that arguement before about it was just a problem he was trying to correct in that church. But I think chp 11 verse 16, puts the brakes on that notion. "If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice--nor do the churches of God." And would you not call it contradictory when the council at Jerusalem under James writing letters to the new Gentile converts tells them to not eat meat sacrificed to idols, then Paul writing in his letters tells them that it doesn't matter unless someone who thinks it is a sin is watching? 'My Bible' is an NIV student addition, a King James Version, an Amplified version, and a new historical "So That's Why" Bible. I pray constantly when I do my Bible studies and cross reference between all of them, and now I have this wonderful forum and a host of internet study sources, and the conflicting statements I find are in all of them. I have no instances where God makes any conflicting or contradictory statements, but I could give you a list of where PEOPLE in the Bible conflict with their own words, with each other, and more often conflict with what God teaches. Paul's falling back on the Law, or more accurately Temple traditions to support his views on women is a perfect example of that. And I know what Jesus Himself preached on the Pharisees and their attachment to their Traditions; even over God's Laws. I thank you for your comments though. Truly. If I sounded a bit snippy, I apologize. Teaching me to accept well-intended rebukes is one of the things the Spirit is working on with me at this point in my spiritual growth. As for eating habits and dressing, that I wouldn't put under submission or wisdom actually. I think of it more as an example of "God said it". Genesis isn't giving a command to women, God is just telling them the way it's going to be. Like it or not, we will be ruled over by our desires for our husband. He didn't say it would be a choice. I think any woman if she is honest will admit that like it or not we find ourselves doing things, some simple like restaurants and clothing, but some profound, some even damaging (a woman staying with a wife-beater) because we are ruled by our desire/love for our husband. Having said that, I am not saying women should stay with a boyfriend or husband who beats them or that God wants them to do such a thing. Actually I think that horrible situation is exactly why women should stay celibate until they are married and then should choose their husband very carefully, meaning a Godly man who stands willingly under God's authority and who delights in being in God's presence. Such a man is not going to harm or hurt his wife or children, and should the unthinkable happen, the wife has recourse through God. God made us ruled over by this desire for our man, and if we pick the wrong one and live with him under the wrong circumstances we are still ruled by that Genesis/Godly decree. Feminists may say no man rules me, but an honest woman will look at all the ways she gives into the man she desires/loves and realize its true whether she likes it or not. The woman staying with the wife-beater is just the most extreme example of it. oh boy. Hope that one doesn't get me in trouble. Melanie |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 ] Next > Last [6] >> |