Results 21 - 40 of 58
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: inHzsvc Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
21 | Christ dying only for elect? | Rom 5:6 | inHzsvc | 6350 | ||
Nolan, Your attitude is so bad. Do you think before you type? If you'd quit "thinking" I'm wrong and study the Scriptures with an open mind, you might see some of these blessed truths. You can still be a witness and have a great missionary zeal for the Lord and be a Calvinist. The Calvinist believes, as you do, that everybody who trusts in Christ as their personal Savior will be eternally saved. We differ on who Christ died for, yes. If He atoned (please study this word) for the sins of all mankind, all mankind will be saved. But, He only atoned for the sins of believers. Unbelievers will suffer for their sin eternally. May God bless you. |
||||||
22 | Christ dying only for elect? | Rom 5:6 | inHzsvc | 6112 | ||
Amen, and Amen.... I hate to say it, but, many of my Sovereign Grace Baptist friends have gone into more of a prideful attitude than humble. Always good to hear a friend speak as you do. God bless you and yours. |
||||||
23 | Christ dying only for elect? | Rom 5:6 | inHzsvc | 6044 | ||
Joe, I have found, as I am sure that you have, that the Arminian feels that he has lost control of himself if he concedes to the Doctrines of Grace. If God saved him, what control does he have? .....and that won't allow many of even the Lord's own people to see the truth. What sin do we call that? Pride. God bless you and thanks for your comments. |
||||||
24 | Christ dying only for elect? | Rom 5:6 | inHzsvc | 6043 | ||
What you are doing is limiting the power of the blood of Christ. You are saying that it was not sufficient in itself to save sins--it had to have the faith of people added to it. Your limiting of the atonement is far worse than the Calvinistic limiting of it. The Calvinist believes that Christ surely "saved His people from their sins"(Mat. 1:21). You're reasoning says that Christ's death actually accomplished nothing and it will only accomplish if man will "let" God save him. Where is the Scripture where God ever "tried" to save somebody and they wouldn't Him? Where is the Scripture that says anybody whom Christ paid their sin debt will die and go to Hell? Again, what will the people be in Hell for--unbelief? Is this not a sin that Christ died for? I am not the one saying sins will be paid for twice. They will not. Either Christ died for them or the sinner will suffer for them eternally. May God add His richest blessings to His Word. |
||||||
25 | Christ dying only for elect? | Rom 5:6 | inHzsvc | 5931 | ||
You must understand the legal part of the whole. Sin is "illegal." If Christ paid for our sins, God would be requiring double payment if we died and went to hell. If somebody paid off your home mortgage, it would be paid--you'd owe nothing more. If Christ paid for all of the sins of all men, what will some be in hell for? Unbelief? Is that not a sin that Christ died for? I hope so--we were all born in unbelief. So, again, what are some going to be in hell for? Because they didn't "accept" the payment? Does that matter if the debt has already been paid? Again, Christ legally died for some and they will be saved. All are responsible for rejecting because they did exactly what they wanted to. God bless. |
||||||
26 | Christ dying only for elect? | Rom 5:6 | inHzsvc | 5889 | ||
Ro 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) Ro 9:12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. Ro 9:13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. Ro 9:14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. Ro 9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. Ro 9:16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. From your post, it is apparent that you are trying to humanize your beliefs rather than taking the Word of God. I don't say this to offend--we all do this from time to time. I am sure that you grew up hearing the Arminianism that you believe preached as most have. However, you need to consider some things. Man is so evil, that he could never and would never choose God of his own free will. I Cor. 2:14 tells us, "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." Man, in his natural state, will NEVER choose God--he doesn't have the ability and he doesn't have the desire. That is called Total Depravity. Man is not partially depraved, but, totally depraved. So, man deserves hell and desires to be separated from God. However, we serve a gracious God who, by and through His grace, saves some. Now, as to the blood of Christ (which is of the utmost importance). For whom did Christ die? He either, 1) paid for every sin of every human being who has ever been born--if this is so, all will be saved because, legally, they do not owe a sin debt--it has been paid. 2) paid for some of the sins of all men--if this is so, all will be lost because they still owe a sin debt. 3) paid for all of the sins of some men (the elect)--if this is so, some will be saved and others will pay for their sin debt eternally--we know, this is the truth. Everybody limits the atonement. You limit the power of it in that it doesn't saved--it merely makes salvation "possible". I limit it as to extent because I believe Christ's atoning blood saved some. Many passages refer to Christ dying for "many", "his people", his "sheep", etc. There's a reason the Word of God is specific. God bless. |
||||||
27 | Is Jesus the 'Eternal Father'? | Is 9:6 | inHzsvc | 5331 | ||
He is manifested in the way that you speak and He is One God. However, at the baptism of Christ, we see all three separated--the Father spoke from Heaven, the Son was baptized on Earth, and the Spirit descended upon Him like a dove. They are One, but, at times we see them separate. Do I understand this? Absolutely not!!! God bless. |
||||||
28 | Is Jesus the 'Eternal Father'? | Is 9:6 | inHzsvc | 5301 | ||
I agree with the word "persons." In fact, I generally use that term. I don't know why I said "personalities." | ||||||
29 | How many daughters did Lot have? | Gen 19:14 | inHzsvc | 5298 | ||
Tim, I had considered this possibility. It is interesting, however, that many Jewish scholars believe he had two daughters who perished in Sodom. By the way, the NIV and NASB don't rely on the received text. So, you must take them with a grain of salt. God bless. |
||||||
30 | Women speak in church? | 1 Cor 14:34 | inHzsvc | 3507 | ||
Still yet, charis, we have no right to add to God's Word, or, perhaps more precisely, change it to fit today. When we do so, we can make anything truth and nothing is absolute. God gave us what we needed. What was good for Corinth, Thessalonica, Ephesus, etc. is good for us today. "Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, today, and forever" God bless. inHzsvc |
||||||
31 | succorer neutral gender | 1 Cor 14:34 | inHzsvc | 3496 | ||
Ver. 5. "But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth", Not that a woman was allowed to pray publicly in the congregation, and much less to preach or explain the word, for these things were not permitted them: see "1Co 14:34,35 1Ti 2:12" but it designs any woman that joins in public worship with the minister in prayer, and attends on the hearing of the word preached, or sings the praises of God with the congregation, as we have seen, the word prophesying signifies. This was written by a commentator (John Gill--highly respected by the way) between 1746 and 1766. As you can see, he plainly explains that singing is considered prophesying. In Christ, as far as being saved, we are all one. But, there is a difference between the sexes. I Cor. 11:1-3 is quite plain on that. Different instructions are given to men than are given to women. You can't take Gal. 3:28 and bend it to say what you want it to. It's simply saying that salvation is for both sexes in every race--no respecter of persons with God. This has nothing to do with being stuck on myself as you rudely imply. I simply desire to follow the CLEAR teaching of the Word of God. God bless. |
||||||
32 | Women speak in church? | 1 Cor 14:34 | inHzsvc | 3494 | ||
Charis, It's not that I "think I know" "what God speaks on this issue". I just know that is the only side presented in the Word of God. If there were any other indication that women ever held an authoritative position in any church or there were ever one statement where a writer claimed it was OK, then, I'd submit to the teaching. But, there isn't. I do desire for the people in my church to follow the proper authority--the Bible. If we do that, and that alone without any extra ideas on our part, women will remain silent in the public mixed assemblies because that's the only way the Bible speaks of it. As for Easter, you are right about the heathen origin of the name. However, the bunny, the egg, and several other points concerning it are of a heathen origin. That word is only mentioned once in Scripture and that word was translated passover every other time except that once--interesting. You should pick up a book, "The Two Babylons" by Alexander Hislop---very interesting. God bless. |
||||||
33 | Women speak in church? | 1 Cor 14:34 | inHzsvc | 3485 | ||
Joel, That is absolutely true, in most places. However, in the church I am a member of, the men still take the authoritative role. If you aren't in one, trust me, there are still some out there. God bless. |
||||||
34 | Women speak in church? | 1 Cor 14:34 | inHzsvc | 3483 | ||
Charis, I would much rather stand on "thus says the Lord" or "the Scripture says" than "I think." You must say that according the the Scripture cited, women should be silent after the church is called to order--that is, when the floor is opened for the speaker. There is absolutely NO Scripture anywhere to prove that women ever audibly spoke during church. If so (apparently in the case of the Corinthian saints), they were corrected. Again, I will take the Scripture over any figuring. It just is too plain on this subject. As I study older commentators, I see that they felt the exact same way. God bless. |
||||||
35 | Women speak in church? | 1 Cor 14:34 | inHzsvc | 3471 | ||
You said "you think" Paul was addressing a specific situation at Corinth. Yet, Paul said "let your women keep silence in the churches."--not church, but churches. He goes on to say "it is a shame for women to speak in the church." How else can this be taken. I'm sure the Holy Spirit assumed some would say what you are saying so He inspired Paul to also tell Timothy, "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp athority over the man, but to be in silence"(I Tim. 2;11,12). There is absolutely no way to take this but that women are to be in silence. Paul is here writing to a young preacher instructing him how to act in any church. The man is the head of the woman(I Cor. 11:2,3). This is not popular, but, it is Scriptural. These liberal times that we live in are the problem. | ||||||
36 | Does Scripture mean what it says? | Gal 3:28 | inHzsvc | 3453 | ||
many people have, with good intentions, violated the Scripture.... |
||||||
37 | Is man a 'triune' creature? | Heb 4:12 | inHzsvc | 2381 | ||
One statement you said bothers me somehow. You said "God is not flesh." Jesus is God and He definitely was God in the flesh. However, He was, and is, not fleshly. I suspect that is what you meant? God bless. |
||||||
38 | Is man a 'triune' creature? | Heb 4:12 | inHzsvc | 2296 | ||
charis, this is the position I used to hold. the thing that gave me problems is, after man is saved, this theory would make him have body, soul, spirit, and Holy Spirit--4 parts. i do agree that man died in the fall and must needs be regenerated. you departed from the "i believe" and "i think" language that I used. you went to the "i am sure" and "I don't think" language. isn't it funny how we can't seem to get away from that. God bless. |
||||||
39 | did the wine from the water make you dr | Bible general Archive 1 | inHzsvc | 2266 | ||
Amen. It should also be noted that he doesn't reprimand them for using wine--he merely tells them that they shouldn't be getting drunk. Only the unleavened fruit of the vine(fermented wine) can rightly represent the sinless blood of Christ as the unleavened bread represents the sinless body of Christ. Many people don't realize that grape juice naturally contains leaven. However, that leaven is burned up during the process of fermentation. By His Grace. inHzsvc |
||||||
40 | did the wine from the water make you dr | Bible general Archive 1 | inHzsvc | 2164 | ||
Actually, they had no way of preserving grape juice in those days. The wine got to be very strong. I am told that they added water to their wine in many cases just to make it drinkable. I believe Christ turned the water into fermented wine. There are many reasons for this, but, I'll simply give one that goes with the text. The people there said that He saved the best until last. Drunk people wouldn't have been too happy about grape juice. They wanted more wine. God bless. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 ] Next > Last [3] >> |