Results 41 - 57 of 57
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: jamison Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
41 | Divorced Do Christians Get Remarried? | 1 Cor 6:9 | jamison | 205375 | ||
Hello John, I have seen you put IMHO in a number of posts. What does this stand for? jamison |
||||||
42 | Divorced Do Christians Get Remarried? | 1 Cor 6:9 | jamison | 205378 | ||
That's a big fat 10-4!!! jamison |
||||||
43 | Theological Term: Predestination | Eph 1:5 | jamison | 204708 | ||
I think the problem with predestination (or at least the problem we have in accepting it) is due to the logical consequences it entails. If God is literally going to burn people in hell forever and ever, then anyone He doesn't choose or predestine, He is in a sense choosing for them to be tortured forever. We don't like to put that on God as it cannot be reconciled with His love for us or His desire that none should perish. The fact that we cannot reconcile it, does not mean it is not true. But it makes it very difficult to view God this way. Certainly those whom He has predestined would love and praise Him, but then you step back and look at those whom He does not choose and you wonder, "Does He not love them? How great and merciful can He be if He chose to torture them forever even before they were born or did anything wrong or right." And what if it was your children that He was choosing to not predestine. Does He love your little boy or girl less than you do? It is difficult for many to view God in this light, whether or not it is true. Just because we don't understand it doesn't mean it isn't true, but it certainly makes it more difficult. Of course, that assumes these are the only two possibilities. Does anyone have a third or fourth possibility? jamison |
||||||
44 | Theological Term: Predestination | Eph 1:5 | jamison | 204750 | ||
Doc, Thank you for the 4 possibilities. I did not look them up, but merely assumed their meaning from their name. It appears to me that Particular Predestination and Particular Reprobation are the same thing. If one is true, the other is automatically true. Correct me if I am wrong on that one. Also, I didn't see an option for Free Will choice, or whatever. I think it is certainly an option. The thing that gets me is that I think we are missing something. Predestination seems quite clear in certain passages, especially Romans 9. However, it also seems that God does not want any to perish, as Val and Tim have pointed out. The two seem to be in direct opposition, but both have substantial merit in Scripture. That is why I was looking for another option. It isn't like we are going to resolve this 2000 yr debate (or older), but maybe someone had an idea that I/we had not considered. PS, I did look up the universal predestination. That goes against everything I was taught, but provided a way of reconciling predestination with God's love. Most of it hinged on translating the Greek in to "eternal" or "everlasting" into English, but I don't know Greek. And a flag goes up when you start messing with the translations (ie Jehovah's Witness). However, it does seem to solve the biggest issue I have with predestination. God's Love. jamison |
||||||
45 | Just out of curiosity. | Phil 1:23 | jamison | 205158 | ||
Hello Steven, I did not get to see your response before it was removed. I would appreciate it if you would email it to me. jamison2u@gmail.com. jamison |
||||||
46 | Help, parents need encouragement! | 2 Tim 3:16 | jamison | 201375 | ||
Justme, I am sorry that I do not have anything to offer you. I am not familiar with any book of this type, though I am sure they exist. I tried googling it a few different ways but couldn't find anything that looked good. However, I probably shouldn't say anything, but I feel like I should. I think it is sad that you keep asking and virtually no one wants to help you find this Christian book/author. It is ironic that they even quote from a Christian author when telling you that you don't need a Christian author. Why do we read commentaries if the Bible is good enough? Because we hope that someone else's knowledge and experiences might be able to teach us something that we have missed in the Bible, correct? Then is it not possible or even practical that we should, in addition to our study of the Bible, seek the counsel of others in other matters as well? I wish you well in your search, and I hope those reading this will attempt to help you in your search as well. Jamison |
||||||
47 | Help, parents need encouragement! | 2 Tim 3:16 | jamison | 201386 | ||
WOS, You have made the question an either/or. But Justme makes it clear that they are in the Word. It isn't either/or. Can you not do both? Prov 1:5, 11:14, 12:15, 19:20 talk about listening to the advice of others. Isn't the whole forum about us learning from each other? Yes, the Bible can help them with their problem and with every other problem. But might it not be beneficial for them to learn from someone who has went through this before? No one has suggested replacing or forgoing the Bible. Jamison |
||||||
48 | What Jesus meant Matt 10:23.16:28 26:64 | Rev 17:10 | jamison | 204380 | ||
RC, I am interested in hearing more. I do not have the answer to your question above, but I have always wondered about the Matt 24 and the corresponding Mark and Luke passages. It looked to me like it was talking about the destruction of Israel and the temple as well, but I couldn't make sense of the Son of Man coming. How does the coming of the Son of Man fit in? jamison |
||||||
49 | What Jesus meant Matt 10:23.16:28 26:64 | Rev 17:10 | jamison | 204395 | ||
OK, I am with you so far. Like I said before, I thought it had to do with the destruction of the temple, but couldn't grasp the coming of the Son of Man. I have not looked any further into what you have proposed, but it seems plausible. Now for The Revelation, do you contend that this has ALL happened already, or that some is still to come? If more is to come, is there a break in the book between past and present. For example, everything before chapter 18 is past and 19-22 are future or whatever. jamison |
||||||
50 | What Jesus meant Matt 10:23.16:28 26:64 | Rev 17:10 | jamison | 204419 | ||
RC, I thought the Millennial Kingdom was to last 1000 years. Is that not accurate? jamison |
||||||
51 | What Jesus meant Matt 10:23.16:28 26:64 | Rev 17:10 | jamison | 204448 | ||
RC, Alright, I went back and looked at "thousand" in Scripture. It is used in 395 verses. It is overwhelmingly used as an accurate number or at least an approximation to number men or cattle or shekels, etc. There are a number of instances, though few, where I think it does in fact just mean a long time or a great number. Your quote from Psalms is one and there are a few others, such as 1000 years as one day, be ye mindful always of his covenant the word which he commanded to a thousand generations, etc. So maybe this would work, but I am not quick to accept that. Putting that aside for now, help me look at Rev 20 up to verse 10 which is supposed to be past. In verse 3, is Satan no longer deceiving the nations? If not, how is it different now than when he was deceiving them? Also, verse 7 talks about when Satan is loosed, but this hasn't happened yet, or has it? Lastly, who are those that have part in the first resurrection, true followers of Christ or just those that rose when he was crucified or someone else? Thank you in advance for your thoughts on these matters. jamison |
||||||
52 | What Jesus meant Matt 10:23.16:28 26:64 | Rev 17:10 | jamison | 204522 | ||
RC, I am reposting this in case you missed it earlier. Thank You... RC, Alright, I went back and looked at "thousand" in Scripture. It is used in 395 verses. It is overwhelmingly used as an accurate number or at least an approximation to number men or cattle or shekels, etc. There are a number of instances, though few, where I think it does in fact just mean a long time or a great number. Your quote from Psalms is one and there are a few others, such as 1000 years as one day, be ye mindful always of his covenant the word which he commanded to a thousand generations, etc. So maybe this would work, but I am not quick to accept that. Putting that aside for now, help me look at Rev 20 up to verse 10 which is supposed to be past. In verse 3, is Satan no longer deceiving the nations? If not, how is it different now than when he was deceiving them? Also, verse 7 talks about when Satan is loosed, but this hasn't happened yet, or has it? Lastly, who are those that have part in the first resurrection, true followers of Christ or just those that rose when he was crucified or someone else? Thank you in advance for your thoughts on these matters. jamison |
||||||
53 | What Jesus meant Matt 10:23.16:28 26:64 | Rev 17:10 | jamison | 204561 | ||
RC, Thank you for the response. Yeah, I guess it is kinda humorous how I mentioned accurate and approximation. I just mean though that they probably rounded. Like if it said a guy had 1000 sheep and 500 goats, he might actually have 1014 sheep and 492 goats. They just rounded it. I don't think that if he had 1976 sheep that they would have said one thousand. I expect it would have been rounded to 2000. That is what I meant by approximation, that it wasn't just a general number that meant a "whole lot". But not really looking to argue it, it has been used to mean a "whole lot" in some passages, it is just not the norm. But The Revelation is not the norm book either, so though I don't agree as of yet that it is a generalization, I can certainly see it as plausible and would like to continue further if you would. Help me look at Rev 20 up to verse 10 which is supposed to be past if I understand correctly. In verse 3, is Satan no longer deceiving the nations? If not, how is it different now than when he was deceiving them? Also, verse 7 talks about when Satan is loosed, but this hasn't happened yet, or has it? Lastly, who are those that have part in the first resurrection, true followers of Christ or just those that rose when he was crucified or someone else? Thank you in advance for your thoughts on these matters. |
||||||
54 | What Jesus meant Matt 10:23.16:28 26:64 | Rev 17:10 | jamison | 204562 | ||
John, I am inclined to believe it is a thousand as well. Or at least very close to it. Not twice as much or more. However, as I have disputed with others, I am not quick to shoot down an opinion I have not encountered before. I think The Revelation is misunderstood alot. I know I don't understand it, so I will see what RC has to say. Maybe he is on to something. You are welcome to keep throwing in the two cents though. Never hurts to hear both sides. jamison |
||||||
55 | What Jesus meant Matt 10:23.16:28 26:64 | Rev 17:10 | jamison | 204641 | ||
RC, You mentioned an 8 page study you would send me. Please do so. jamison2u@gmail.com. Thank you. I will look over it. jamison |
||||||
56 | What Jesus meant Matt 10:23.16:28 26:64 | Rev 17:10 | jamison | 204761 | ||
Hello RC, Just a little reminder. I haven't received that paper yet. Looking forward to it. jamison |
||||||
57 | What Jesus meant Matt 10:23.16:28 26:64 | Rev 17:10 | jamison | 204776 | ||
RC, I got it! I skimmed it quickly and it looks like you got some good points. Of course, I will have to research it more in depth. Thank you again. jamison |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 ] |