Results 1181 - 1200 of 1239
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: jlhetrick Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1181 | Falling to Temptation is Being Deceived | James 1:14 | jlhetrick | 147048 | ||
Hello again Doc. I just want to give a short answer concerning myself personally. I think that temptation and deceit can be the same thing but are not necesarrily the same in every case. Personally, I regularly experience temptation where there is no deceit. In fact, for me, I think it's those temptations that I struggle with the most, because when it results in sin the guilt can be overwhelming. Like Paul, I keep doing those things that I know I shouldn't and very often don't do those that I know I should be doing. Very often I am tempted, and sometimes fall to the temptation, where I can not claim "I was deceived" which, in some cases is a cop-out. Webster's Dictionary defines deceit as ..."the misleading of a person; the leading of another person to believe what is false, or not to believe what is true..." I am ashamed to say, that I am often tempted and at times follow through with sin when I know, from the beginning of the temptation, that what I am thinking about doing, or doing, is sinful, and sometimes do it anyway. I would agree that in some cases there is deceit involved, both from the devil and that of deceiving myself (making excuses or rationalizing behaviors). I see this often in my patients. Deep down they know a behavior is wrong, but they have so rationalized it, so often and to the point at which they have taken on a sense of believing their own excuses. They have effectually deceived themselves. I think though that James 1:14 given as reference illustrates this. It certainly speaks of deception, but it appears that it's the person's on "lust" or "passion" that is involved in the deceiving. Thanks for posting a question that makes us consider this, I will be looking forward to seeing other responses and how others may view this. jlhetrick |
||||||
1182 | Must Christians follow OT Law? | James 2:10 | jlhetrick | 171295 | ||
Hi John, What part of Romans 7 do you base your satement: "What Christians are free from is not the Law itself, but free from the penalty of failing to keep the Law. Romans 7:6 (NASB95) 7:6 (NASB95) But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter. The word "released" in verse 6 is translated "delivered" (KJV), "discharged" (Amplified). Would this not clearly teach that Christians have been "freed" from the "Law itself"? If we are, as you accurately put it, "free from the penalty" are we not then freed from the law? If I am free from the penalty of the law, then the law no longer has power over me. I believe this is the teaching here in Romans 7. This is the understanding I have always had regarding Paul's statement in 1 Corinthians 6:12 12 All things are lawful for me, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be mastered by anything. (NASB) So, my understanding is that; Grace has freed us from the penalty of the law which has freed us from the law. What benefit is the Law to us now? It helps to demonstrate God's character. And the Law, being "holy" "righteous" and "good" (vs. 12) serves to guide us, but no longer to convict us. I invite other's to redirect my understanding in this area. I have struggled with understanding much of this chapter over the years and my above comments are where I am now in my understanding on the topic. Sincerely, Jeff |
||||||
1183 | Must Christians follow OT Law? | James 2:10 | jlhetrick | 171335 | ||
Hi Doc, Thanks for responding and for presenting from the london Baptist Confession of Faith. You wrote: "but we are saved unto perfect compliance with the law (we are imputed with the righteousness of Christ)." I have no disagreement here and Scripture plainly teaches this. But to elaborate for others, "perfect" compliance with the Law is what we strive for, but nothing any of us have attained. I don't believe that your were saying we have attained it; as I go from memory; you are not one who agrees with the teaching or notion of "sinless perfection". Just as well, my understanding of having been imputed with the righteousness of Christ is an issue of my right standing with God; by being identified in Christ as one who has received through Grace the gift of salvation. I am justified in Jesus Christ. I relate this specifically to having been freed from the "penalty" of the Law. Phi 3:9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith: The issue of "perfect compliance" with the law, as I understand it, is an ongoing work of Grace. It is something God is working in us, and as we agree, something we can only understand in light of having kowledge of the Law. As Paul puts it: "Phi 3:10 that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and may share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, Phi 3:11 that by any means possible I may attain the resurrection from the dead. Phi 3:12 Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own. So being freed from the penalty of the Law (Justified) the Law no longer has command over us, we are freed from it. As you say, there has not been a change in direction, but rather the law serves a new purpose. Not to condemn, but to guide. Having been justified, and having God's will revealed, we cooperate in the power of His grace to strive for perfection. Phi 3:13 Brothers, I do not consider that I have made it my own. But one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, Phi 3:14 I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. Christ's Love, Jeff |
||||||
1184 | Must Christians follow OT Law? | James 2:10 | jlhetrick | 171336 | ||
Hi John, Thanks for responding. Please refer to my post to Doc #171335 as it continues to elaborate on my understanding and position. Sometimes it is the failure to elaborate that brings doubt and question to our statements. Jeff |
||||||
1185 | Must Christians follow OT Law? | James 2:10 | jlhetrick | 171351 | ||
Hi Doc, "Day by day". Isn't that the truth; and some days are better than others. As I grow in my understanding of this topic, I confess that I truly become smaller and smaller; while all the while, the grace of God and the true reality of the work of Christ moves more and more into the foreground. This may be off topic a bit; but I can't believe how many years I spent as a Christian before gaining a true understanding of God's sovereignty and God's grace. Not the lip service that is often applied, but the reality of it. The truth is, one can't truly revere God with due diligence before beginning to understand His sovereignty and His gracious way of dealing with men. Thanks for taking the time to contribute to this. Through the dialogue, it appears to me that my understanding and Hobb's understanding are both in agreement, just articulated differently. Fortunately, in the end, Scripture is able to make the point. Christ's Love, Jeff |
||||||
1186 | Must Christians follow OT Law? | James 2:10 | jlhetrick | 171371 | ||
I can't imagine though I try. I heard a message this morning on the way to work (Dr. David Jeremiah, Turning Point) "Where do people go when they die". It was part of a current series he is doing on Heaven. Just about the time he had my mind filled with all kinds of wonderful truths, he brought it all to a screaching halt to focus on the most important point. The Lord Jesus will be there. We talk the talk and we work so hard at walking the walk. In the process, He creates a change in us. He is making us new. We are coming to know Him better. But thinnk of it. One day, soon, we will actually see Him. Literally see Him. Talk to Him and hear His audible voice. Will I touch Him? Will He touch me? My best attempts at imagining fall far short I'm sure. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
1187 | Kill your brother and drink strong drink | James 2:10 | jlhetrick | 211078 | ||
Pete- welcome to the forum! you wrote: "I do not get drunk with wine or strong drink. I am not a thief, covetous, reviler or swindler. I have never been and never will be a drunkard. When I drink my wine or margarita with my dinner I enjoy a buzz that relaxes me and allows me to feel the goodness of God's blessings. It is a wonderful euphoria to behold the majesty of God's creation." Why would you believe that the physiological effects of alcohol is in any way allowing you to "feel the goodness of God's blessing"? From what portion of Scripture do you believe alcohol intoxification results in or in any way involves "a wonderful euphoria to behold the majexty of God's creation"? What we can be sure of, with nothing left to doubt, is the command of Scripture NOT to involve in this experience, as John pointed out- Ephesians 5:18. You're not disputing the clear teachings of Scripture....are you? |
||||||
1188 | getting a tattoo and is this a sin? | James 4:17 | jlhetrick | 169209 | ||
Hello ck, Welcome to the forum. God bless you. It is a good thing that you desire a way to show your faith in God. However, to echo others, how would a tattoo do that? I want to give an example of how your question presents itself. The bible says thou shalt not lie. Does this mean I can't lie? This is really a foolish question in light of what I know about what the bible says, wouldn't you agree. Of course, the answer is, NO. It does not mean I can't lie. It means I should not lie. It means that if I do lie I dishonor and disobey God. It means that if I do lie I sin. As Christians we are no longer slaves to sin (Romans 6:6). This does not mean we will never sin, it means that we no longer have to obey the sinful desires of our flesh. We have, through the power of God, the Holy Spirit living in us, the ability to resist sin. We best honor God and best demonstrate our faith in God when we live in accordance with His will. We learn what His will is for us by reading and understanding what the bible says to us; not by looking for an angle around what is written. Someone said it is a "personal" choice or decision. He was right. It is your choice to let what is written be your guide, or to find away around what is written. Which do you believe honors God and best demonstrates your faith? One more thing. It is likely that you already know the answser to your own question. I base this on the fact that you are struggling with this decision. Why do you think that is? Might it be that you already know in your heart that this is really something you want for yourself, and not really something you believe will honor God and demonstrate your faith? Just asking, not accusing. God loves you. Love Him back in the best way you can. A good place to start is to honor Him and demonstrate your faith in Him by following what is written in His word the best you can. I hope this helps, Jeff |
||||||
1189 | Praise and Testimony | James 5:14 | jlhetrick | 172109 | ||
Hey Tim, Thanks for the praise report. We know that God can and sometimes does heal those who are sick. Praise Him when He chooses to do this and when He chooses not to. Thanks be to God on both occassions. Hey, do you know the purpose of the annointing with oil? How does it fit into the healing seen in James 5:14? God bless, Jeff |
||||||
1190 | Holiness | 1 Pet 1:15 | jlhetrick | 160271 | ||
Hello Ashlyn, I would recommend the bible as your first resource for what God expects from you. Particularly the teachings of Jesus himself found in the Gospels, MATTHEW, MARK, LUKE, JOHN. Also read Paul's letters which are very focused on Christian responsibility regarding life-style and behavior. Personally I love the book of Romans and never get enough of reading it. Jeff |
||||||
1191 | information on waiting on GOD | 1 Pet 3:19 | jlhetrick | 220512 | ||
Will you be more specific? This is a topic that is covered extensively through all of Scripture. I'm trying to connect your question with the referenced verse but having trouble. | ||||||
1192 | in Prisons | 1 Pet 3:21 | jlhetrick | 191735 | ||
Rabban- Regarding your statement: "These ‘spirits in prison’ were the angels who sinned in the time of Noah (Genesis 6.1-2)" Would you please provide biblical support. I find nothing in Scripture that suggests that these "spirits" were angels. I'm not aware of any biblical reference showing that the gospel is preached to angels but understand it only as a truth relevant only to the salvation of humans. The context seems to rule out angels as the following verse (1Peter 3:20) clearly relates to the loss of all "human" life with the exception of the eight. Verse 18 is clearly talking about mankind as is verse 20. I couldn't figure a way to misunderstand verse 19 as referring to something else, angels. As I understand it, Scripture does not teach the possibility of fallen angels being saved from their fallen state. If that were the case, we would pray for fallen angels to include Satan himself. If that were the case, the Scripture would teach of salvation being accomplished for and offered too angels as well as mankind. In verse 19 Christ is making a "proclamation" to the "spirits". A proclamation of what? Salvation is the context. There is no Scriptural support that I am aware of that supports that He offers salvation to angels. I am always willing to have my understanding corrected by Scripture. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
1193 | in Prisons | 1 Pet 3:21 | jlhetrick | 191747 | ||
Rabban- perhaps I offended you, not my intention. It may have been a simpler thing for you to have just provided scriptural support for your position, if that were possible. The question was not what you were answering in your response, but simply a request for you to provide biblical support for your declaration concerning verse 19. It's the way we go about bible study on the forum. But to avoid being distracted from the point again I will copy and paste your statement that left me with concern. You wrote: "These ‘spirits in prison’ were the angels who sinned in the time of Noah (Genesis 6.1-2). Human beings are never spoken of in this way (as 'spirits' without qualification), while 2 Peter 2.4 confirms Peter’s interest in the angels who sinned in the time of Noah." So that I don’t take up forum space and my time (or yours) repeating my earlier post you may choose to reread it and address it as you determine appropriate. Something else I would ask is that you help me in understanding what you mean by 2Peter 2:4 “confirming Peter’s interest in the angels who sinned in the time of Noah. 2 Peter 2:4 (ASV) For if God spared not angels when they sinned, but cast them down to hell, and committed them to pits of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; This seems to clearly relate to the “Fall” and not to any angel sinning that might have been going on in Noah’s day. Do I have it wrong? Let’s widen it out a bit: 2 Pe 2:4-6 4For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to pits of darkness, reserved for judgment; 5and did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a preacher of righteousness, with seven others, when He brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly; 6and if He condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction by reducing them to ashes, having made them an example to those who would live ungodly lives thereafter;” When we evaluate this it becomes clear that the writer is describing separate events. First, what we commonly refer to as “the Fall”, then the “Flood”, and then the events of Sodom and Gomorrah’s destruction. Without context we might be tempted to make the individual verses say whatever conveniences our premise. Might I say that it matters little how qualified our Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, or even English scholarship might be measured if this is to be our approach. Your explanation might be a satisfactory one if we could first establish that it is in fact angels that are referred too. However, I would still have a hard time finding in scripture where angels have “fallen” more than one time. That one fall that I am aware of was, as I understand it, significantly before Noah’s time. I’m unaware of another. If your unwilling (or unable) to provide support for such statements I can accept that but please allow me to point out that requests to have statements clarified and biblically supported is within the forum guidelines as is the expectation that members will honor those requests. Sincerely and God bless, Jeff |
||||||
1194 | in Prisons | 1 Pet 3:21 | jlhetrick | 191749 | ||
Rabban- I have responded to your other post to me. I will respond to this one briefly but fear the interaction may become argumentative or appear that way to others so I proceed with caution. I might fairly state that when approaching a disputed passage the first important thing is to examine the English and not the Greek text as you assert. Unless, that is, your first language is Greek. We might be well reminded that the English text we read has been translated by scholars more worthy than ourselves (though my own assertion would depend on what translation your using perhaps). You see, when the established doctrines and immediate and wider contexts are considered a lot of the guess work is easily ruled out. At once I was amazed by those who seemed to take the position that one need be a scholar of the original languages in order to truly read and comprehend the Scriptures. It’s familiar to others who posit that one must hold a certain, assigned title before the Holy Spirit will reveal the hidden truths of Scripture to him. Now I’m simply saddened by the notions. My faith is that my God has sufficiently (if not conveniently) kept the promise He made in Isa 55:11. I suppose that He has chosen to do that through allowing men to translate His word into the various earthly languages. My reason for such a position is that His church has for centuries been about the business of doing just that. Otherwise, He would have us about the business of all learning Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic and reading, learning, and teaching only from the original languages. I surmise that it was He who chose not to make a scholar of every man. Your points are well considered and your right to them appreciated and respected. Sincerely and God bless, Jeff |
||||||
1195 | in Prisons | 1 Pet 3:21 | jlhetrick | 191767 | ||
Rabban- thanks for the response brother. I agree with your points to include believing that the original languages are the only inspired writings we have. I'm afraid though that you may not be reading my posts closely as the focus continues to drift. I'm sorry you feel I "failed to take note of the fact" that your statement was about ;disputed texts' only. My post clearly referred to disputed text specifically; but no matter- it has become an unproductive dialogue I would agree. Thanks for the interaction. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
1196 | in Prisons | 1 Pet 3:21 | jlhetrick | 191842 | ||
Hello Rabban, Please bear with me in my continued efforts. When you wrote that “it is a waste of time to argue over something that has been disputed for 2000 years…” you sort of hit the nail on the head. As my original post was not transparent enough let me say clearly that this was part of my concern. All public forums that I am aware of have their own written and unwritten rules, so to speak. The standard on SBF is to avoid controversial issues that have long-standing points of disagreement, especially where no definitive biblical text can rule one side in or out. When I say “avoid” I particularly mean the avoiding of posting such opinions as definite or factual. It is customary, and I believe more scholarly, to at least offer that there is a differing opinion on the issue so that others less learned have the opportunity to consider. With that said, it is obvious to me from reading your posts that you are, and apparently have for some time been, a serious student of the Bible. I respect that and see that to the advantage of the forum as well as myself personally. My point in asking you to support your argument biblically was really to illustrate that you could not. Not in order to embarrass you or create an argument, but rather to show that we have a responsibility to not declare what Scripture does not. To your points on Scripture and the “Fall” of angels I have this in short response. This, as I understand it, does not fall into that category of ‘disputed’ texts or doctrines. The long-held, orthodox view of the Fall is established from a common sense, logical, and contextual approach to Scripture. Satan is described in Scripture as the “Father of Lies” for example. The serpent in the Garden, with Adam and Eve accomplished its goal through deception. If the serpent was not Satan actually, it was the result of Satan’s work specifically; a fallen Lucifer that is. A common sense, logical approach to Scripture requires that conclusion and amounts to more than “the briefest hint”. For sake of time and space I will not attempt to correct the obvious errors such as, for example, stating “the New Testament writers never give any hint of believing in ‘a fall of angels’ outside of Revelation” while at the same time (in the same post) you very clearly give NT reference to where they have done just that very thing (2Peter 2:4 as one obvious example) In short- the rhetoric does nothing to support your position but plenty to avoid offering the biblical support requested. With that, I do agree to disengage from the discussion. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
1197 | in Prisons | 1 Pet 3:21 | jlhetrick | 191870 | ||
Rabban- Following my pattern of behavior is what I had hoped to have persuaded you to do; that is, insisting that you support your statements with scripture and that you not qualify as true what is not biblically qualified as true. In any event, you have refused to do so and there is really nothing more I can do to help you in that area. I would like to suggest though, that since we are both easily recognized as falling far short of scholarly, we both make it a point always to allow Scripture to speak for itself. And please do not speak of another’s responsibility to courtesy when it was of you yourself that had been originally and fairly requested to support your argument and you yourself who refused to do that. I should expect absolutely that you refrain from misrepresenting my words. Nowhere did I "admit" that I was "seeking to find fault". But that statement further supports that your not really interested in what I was attempting to do. It is the standard on the forum that when one reads an unqualified statement to ask for biblical reference (even when one knows there is none) in order to point the other writer to their error. Usually these efforts lead to responsible interaction that either corrects the questioner or redirects the original error. And don't think it so easy to avoid responsible participation by asking others not to question your OPINIONS. With that said I will make one more statement in hopes it will help and then promise not to respond to you again on this topic. That way, you are welcomed to have the last word; I promise to read any further response you make. My last point is this. Never be mistaken to believe that “statistics” are in any way sufficient in and of themselves to establish the meaning of a word or phrase. If you are able to apply that to any part of your response to me, you are well on your way. If you are to continue on the forum, I look forward to more productive communication with you. Please remember that it is Scripture that has and is the authority here. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
1198 | Sanctification Evidences Justification | 2 Pet 1:10 | jlhetrick | 240130 | ||
Amen! | ||||||
1199 | peopl should read the bible b4 they ask | 2 Pet 2:3 | jlhetrick | 180008 | ||
Hello Brad, I don't know that I would include Hinn's name in the same paragraph with Gill, Spurgeon, Whitfield or Edwards (oh! wait a minute, I just did didn't I). Great points you make here brother. The difference between Hinn and those proven teachers is that Benny makes them feel good while he's taking their money. The teachers of God's word that have gone before us and left us with wonderful teachings called sin sin without hesitation and preached Christ crucified. It's unfortunate that there are so many out there who are lead astray and into following and believing in a produced scam. On this Thanksgiving Day, let us remember that the gifts of God, while received in faith, are the direct works of His GRACE. Even that faith through which we receive is a gift of His grace and not an effort of our own believing. God bless and Happy Thanks Giving, Jeff |
||||||
1200 | Is sinless perfection possible on earth? | 1 John 1:8 | jlhetrick | 228754 | ||
Good Questions Ed. Doc - at a very early age (8 or 9 yrs old) I believed and repented and in the years adding up to my now 46 years I have always understood the difference between a forgiven sinner and a damned one. I guess someone did a fine job of explaining the Scriptures to me, even when I was a child, and the Holy Spirit obviously gave me the truth regarding my sin and the finished, saving work of Christ. I'm thankful that I don't have to be forgiven over and over again as I continue to be in this not yet glorified body. I was a young adult the first time I ever heard the notion of sinless perfection. Even though this topic was being "preached" to me by a older (in age and in the amount of time he had confessed Christ) I easily dismissed it as having no Scriptural support (to the degree and then understood and especially when considered in the context of Scripture as a whole and not single words or verses). I do admit that I was distracted by it for some time, unfortunately, and in all I studied I never could figure from Scripture what some seemed to take from it - "sinless perfection". Probably the most important FACT that I ever weighed against such a notion was the fact that we have absolutely no example in Scripture (and I have not a single one personally and know of no one who does) of a man (other than Christ) who lived sinless before or after conversion. Not one. Your points were very well made here to include the one about accessing the centuries of study by those who have gone before. It is troubling to see that this is even a topic of discussion when the Scripture is so definite. I realize that even the words of Paul (Romans chapter 7) have been removed from even their immediate context in order to support the argument for sinless perfection. I don't get it. As you know and continuously affirm, we should never ignore what doesn't fit our position and, obviously, should never add to what Scripture already says. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 ] Next > Last [62] >> |