Results 81 - 100 of 801
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: jlhetrick Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
81 | SEARCHING FOR THE TRUTH | Bible general Archive 4 | jlhetrick | 210905 | ||
Dear Brad- the tree possibles that you gave ("wishing on fish" for example) are just as good as the real meaning of WOF (Word of Faith)as it pertains to the heretical Word of Faith "Movement". WOF is not having faith in the word, as the WOF folks would have you believe. Instead, it's a heretical false teaching that is totally contrary to the truth of Scripture regarding faith. It declares that the individual believer has the "authority" and "right" to "name and claim" anything in faith and have it. They even teach that specific promises in Scripture that were not made to and are not about them can be claimed. It goes on to demand that God is "obligated" to give you what you ask for, including financial wealth, because you demand it in faith. Probably should stop here so as not to drift from the purpose of SBF as a bible study forum. After doing some research, to include exploring the site sister Azure pointed to, we might come back and ask particulars that can be explored in light of Scripture. Also try to search box. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
82 | How to convince a personneed for chirst | Bible general Archive 4 | jlhetrick | 210903 | ||
Yes sister- the yoke is easy and the burden is light. Especially when we focus on our part and have faith in Him to do His. I'm guessing that you too may have had those early experiences of trying to convince others. I say early experiences, but the truth is, I'm not immune to slipping back in that direction at times. I believe that one way we can measure that is when we feel frustrated in the effort. Then we might see that we are trying to do more than we are called to do and, of course, more than we are cabable of doing. I'm going through that right now with family members so I believe I might understand where ircochran is coming from. Pray faithfully and believe just as faithfully and know that His will, will be accomplished. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
83 | Why is communion a sin for sinners? | Luke 22:19 | jlhetrick | 210709 | ||
Mike- thanks for your input and welcome to the forum. You wrote: "I too thought you couldnt be a believer and take communion but then a Pastor told me that Jesus served Judas communion at the last supper and he was certainly not a believer" I've never considered it before and don't have time right now but I'm interested now in reading the accounts of the "Lord's Supper" in Scripture again. I'm not sure but I believe Judas had already left the place prior to the breaking of the bread, Satan having already entered into him. You might have an opportunity to look into that before I do as I am at my office and about to start my work day. The thing to remember regarding the passage in 1Corinthians is that it is not speaking to the church as being responsible for qualifying individuals, but instead, the individual to ensure he/she is living in obedience to God. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
84 | Why is communion a sin for sinners? | Luke 22:19 | jlhetrick | 210642 | ||
Great keliy- you show maturity and humility when you allow the word of God to correct your thinking and your position. Great job. I actually have been in the same boat with Walley, but thanks, I too am glad I am no longer in that condition. Jeff |
||||||
85 | Are old words proper for Scripture? | Bible general Archive 4 | jlhetrick | 210629 | ||
Where does that quote come from? You have lost me, or I have lost me, or something like that. How does this answer my question? sorry I'm not following. Jeff |
||||||
86 | Are old words proper for Scripture? | Bible general Archive 4 | jlhetrick | 210623 | ||
I believe your partly confused because you seem not to understand the difference between God's word (Scripture) and man's language. You wrote: "If god never uses old words,..." so your premise is flawed. Where does the thought that God "never uses old words" come from? God has used and continues to use the language of men to communicate. The inspired writings of Scripture were written in the language of the writers. They have been translated and transliterated into other languages. It has little or nothing to do with old verses new words. Language and meaning is the focus. I wouldn't want my secretary to send out a memo to my staff in Hebrew (old or new). I'm thankful someone translated Scritpure into English... I both enjoy and benefit from both the old and the new. |
||||||
87 | Why is communion a sin for sinners? | Luke 22:19 | jlhetrick | 210607 | ||
Keliy- I'm afraid you're in error here. You, of course, are free to disagree with me and any citation of Scripture that you wish, but that falls far short of any rational approach to the issue and points made here. The question here... your question here was: "If someone had un-confessed sin, would it be wrong for them to do break bread in remembrance of our Savior's sacrifice for our redemption?" Remember that the context specifically regarded communion. My "citation of Paul's letter to the Corinthians" was... is, a, the direct answer to your question. Not my answer or opinion... God's answer. As far as Wally feeling judged, my friend, let us never avoid Scriptural truth or attempt to water it down in order to pacify someone’s feelings, including our own. If the word of God convicts us (gives us reason for guilt) then we are guilty. That is, after all, exactly what the word of God accomplishes. It serves to convict us of our guilt and point us to the cross, the salvation of Christ through faith in Jesus Christ…the grace of God. Any attempt to rationalize that away by suggesting that the truth of Scripture is applicable exclusively to a time in history, geographical location, and specific group of people is as far away from good application as we might arrive at. You wrote: "Now the teaching contained in Paul's letter is to be considered, within the context of the history and the behavior of the Corinthians that was forcing Paul to upbraid them. I am of the mind that we are wrong if we try to apply these words to all churches and believers everywhere. If we all do that, we have as many biblical interpretations as we have churches, and we miss the message inspired in the original author that our Lord was attempting to convey to us." It would be difficult for me to imagine a more ridiculous statement my friend. You won't find Scripture more straight forward than the passage sighted in 1Corinthians. You’re mistaken when you point toward the sin of the city... Paul was not speaking to the city but to believers. You are correct in pointing toward the wrong attitudes and condition in how they treated the fellowship. You begin to move toward an understanding there. Where you miss the point, I believe, is in somehow assuming that their sin is any different than Wally's. Whatever the sin is, it is sin.... and it serves to impair our ability to fellowship with God. As for your comments regarding "fearful believers should not hesitate from attending this holy ordinance by hearin these words", (speaking of the words of Scripture) let me once again point you to Scripture friend. Not my words, but the word of God: 1 Corinthians 11:27-32 (NKJV) Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. For this reason many are weak and sick among you, and many sleep. For if we would judge ourselves, we would not be judged. But when we are judged, we are chastened by the Lord, that we may not be condemned with the world.” It's not an issue of your disagreeing with my use... it's whether or not you agree with Scripture. If you don’t get anything else from this exchange, please, get this point. We are to never interpret Scripture, include Scripture, leave Scripture out, or in any way attempt to apply convenient meaning to Scripture in an attempt to relieve ourselves or others of the guilt of sin. In other words, you're opinion that believers with unconfessed sin should not hesitate to take in communion, you’re simply in opposition with Scripture. Scripture doesn’t just teach that they shouldn’t, it demands that they don’t . Hope this is helpful. Please consider it before any response. I'm inclinded to believe that feeling convicted by the truths of Scripture is the reason countless thousands choose to avoid church participation. Let it never be the reason we avoid teaching the truth of God's word. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
88 | do we have authority to forgive sins ? | Mark 16:17 | jlhetrick | 210310 | ||
CDBJ- you responded to liezonis' post but addressed me so I'm not sure if your response was to me or not. In any case, please see my post 210309. Thanks, God bless, Jeff |
||||||
89 | do we have authority to forgive sins ? | Mark 16:17 | jlhetrick | 210309 | ||
BradK- very good pointing out the distinction, thanks. Because I know you I knew exactly where you were coming from but didn't want to speak for you. As believers we are to forgive others when they sin against us (and so we have the authority to do so). As I understand it, this has as much (if not more) to do with effecting us as it does the one we forgive (Mark 11:25, Hebrews 12:15). Regarding Matthew 16:19, 16:18 I understand these as speaking to the authority of the Church and not the individual believer (accept in so far as he/she is a functioning part of the Church). Our forgiving has no function in saving; agreed. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
90 | do we have authority to forgive sins ? | Mark 16:17 | jlhetrick | 210303 | ||
Welcome to the forum! Well put! Jeff |
||||||
91 | was the ten commandments done away with | Matt 22:40 | jlhetrick | 210082 | ||
Val- I can only say that you're study of Romans will be a blessing the first time around as well as the second and third and so-on. While this is true of all Scripture, the book of Romans is such a faith building study that it's impossible for most not to return to it again and again for in-depth study. My first true study of Romans was when I was leading a bible study at my local church; a verse by verse of the book of Romans. I'm sure I was blessed more than any who sat in the class with me. My second real attempt at the book was a private study and I came to realize just how shallow my teaching of the book had been to the adult class. Finally, as it stands now I wouldn't feel qualified to teach the book to a room full of adults simply because I've discovered it's depths beyond my ability. Praise the Lord that His word is true and the one source for saving faith. A fair scratching of the surface will change a person's life. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
92 | was the ten commandments done away with | Matt 22:40 | jlhetrick | 210077 | ||
Hello Val, no need to apologize. You’re probably not nearly as simple-minded as you think you are; I’ve seen some really good posts from you that demonstrate pretty good insight and intellectual capacity. I wasn’t disagreeing that the law serves to give guidance, to include God’s expectations of how we are to treat others. I included the Scripture references to help point toward the greater purpose of the Law as declared by Scripture. I assumed you would have followed that and perhaps read more of the context there and not been left misunderstanding. The Scripture gives us a clear teaching of what the law was/is for and the resulting consequences. As I understand it, the law serves two very important functions that are more related to who God is and who we are in relation to Him. The law revealed sin but also the abounding grace of God that is far greater than, and able to overcome, any degree of sin. Take a look at Romans chapter 7 as well, start at verse 7 and read on. I suspect you’re well familiar with it but perhaps didn’t have it in mind and so didn’t catch on that I was building on your statement, not disagreeing with it; an expected and usual consequence of the limitations of this type of communication. Not that I’m not thankful for the Forum. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
93 | was the ten commandments done away with | Matt 22:40 | jlhetrick | 210072 | ||
Val, you wrote: "The law was given to them when they came out of Egypt. It was to show them how to treat one another." Rom 5:19 For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous. Rom 5:20 The Law came in so that the transgression would increase; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, Rom 5:21 so that, as sin reigned in death, even so grace would reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. |
||||||
94 | Follow up. Was it REALLY Samuel? | 1 Samuel | jlhetrick | 210023 | ||
Yes! | ||||||
95 | Follow up. Was it REALLY Samuel? | 1 Samuel | jlhetrick | 210020 | ||
Luke 16:26 (NASB) 'And besides all this, between us and you there is a great chasm fixed, so that those who wish to come over from here to you will not be able, and that none may cross over from there to us.' |
||||||
96 | Follow up. Was it REALLY Samuel? | 1 Samuel | jlhetrick | 210019 | ||
It’s important to consider whether or not we would want “recognition” as the qualifier in saying the spirit, called up by the witch, was Samuel or not. The passage never says that the witch recognized the spirit as Samuel but it seems a fair conclusion that she did based on verse 12 and so she would have been quite shocked that her familiar spirit did not appear instead. Still it would be a bit of a stretch for us to conclude that it was actually Samuel simply because Saul believed it based on the testimony of the witches description. Some other things to consider; Saul disguised himself initially fooling the witch into believing he was someone else. Fallen angels too can disguise themselves. 2 Corinthians 11:14 (AMP) And it is no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light; We want also to be cautious when considering the apparent authority with which the spirit spoke. Satan himself spoke with an assumed authority when he offered our Lord all the kingdoms of the world. I do believe the one who presented to Saul was in fact Samuel. I believe this only because the text seems to say so. “Then Samuel said to Saul,…” verse. 15 “and Samuel said…” verse. 16 Hope this helps, Jeff |
||||||
97 | how can we minister to homosexuals | Bible general Archive 4 | jlhetrick | 209860 | ||
Thanks Doc for the response.... sorry to have delayed so in my response. I'm currently working very long hours at the hospital. Quoting me you wrote: "Had you asked if the behavior differs NOW, for the one who ONCE practiced it (referring to the saved) then the answer would be yes. Their behavior is different. The unsaved is continuing in sin while the saved is no longer continuing in the sin." You responded: "Which is exactly what I've been saying. If we tell the unsaved who is continuing in their sin that it is possible that they are now saved, then we have given them false assurance. We have judged according to Biblical standards." In no place at no time have I even suggested that "we tell the unsaved who is continuing in their sin that it is possible that they are now saved". Go anywhere (everywhere) in this thread and point to where I have said anything close to that. If I have mis-typed or misrepresented my intending meaning I will desire to correct that. I have carefully read and reread my own words here and honestly can't imagine how they can be so mistaken as to suggest that my "choice of words...could have been used by the lost to justify their continued lifestyles". I honestly find that ridiculous. "Could have been" is hypothetical so I appreciate the point your making as I understand it, but, you yourself said that you "knew that isn't what you meant" referring to my posts. I appreciate our need/responsibility to challenge each other in order to prevent "corrupt communication" especially considering the limitations of posting and reading words on a screen. I have no problem with that and more than that, I appreciate and depend on it. My thoughts, perhaps from my simple, less scholarly perspective (said with sincerity), is that our being good stewards is best attained by more straight-forward, specific, and simple as need be responses; especially when we consider the varying degrees of intellect our readers and participants posses. It is, in my opinion, essential in the public forum. A perfect example of being clear (taken from this thread) is your asking how I thought the behaviors of those "who once were" DIFFERED from those who "are now". As we are agreeing to uncorrupt the corrupt communication I believe I see the problem in your original question as it relates to my response (or vice versa). Had you asked how I believe the behavior DIFFERS my answer would have been very different. How it differed(past tense applied to both)? It did not. The behaviors were exactly the same (regarding their sinfulness). How it differs (present tense applied to both)? The unsaved continues in the behavior. The saved person does not. Acknowledging semantics here, I'm almost sure we're in agreement on the whole issue. So it's not left unsaid and my position is clear here please understand this. In my years on the forum I have encountered a very few who I respect and trust regarding their doctrine as I much as I do you. With that said, some have been instrumental in teaching and guiding me in discovering the truths of Scripture, but none here more than you. I pray that the way I express myself is never interpreted as a attempt to be intentionally argumentative. I pray I never twist and turn my words or the words of others to continue to insist I'm right and another is wrong nor to avoid admitting I'm wrong. I pray others do the same. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
98 | Obey Father and Mother | Bible general Archive 4 | jlhetrick | 209616 | ||
God bless and never forget that He is sovereign and able to do in the heart of you child what you never can. He loves the child more than you do if that makes sense. Knowing that allows us to model for our children the best we can, love them, discipline them, protect them, hold them accountable, etc. etc. We can trust God with them. Just as our obedience to God is a process in which we are allowed to make mistakes and He disciplines us (Hebrews 12:6) so will our children grow in response to our disciplining them. Jeff |
||||||
99 | how can we minister to homosexuals | Bible general Archive 4 | jlhetrick | 209615 | ||
Doc- yes, I asked "do you think they were different?" Thanks for sharing the anecdote, but, would you answer the question please? So it's easier to follow here is what you asked.. "How do you think those folks who ONCE WERE practicing drunkenness, adultery, deception, thievery, sorcery, and idolatry differed in behavior from the lost guys that ARE NOW practicing drunkenness, adultery, deception, thievery, sorcery, and idolatry? :-)" My answer was of course no. When someone who ONCE practiced a particular sin practiced it, his behavior did not differ from the one who NOW practices it. They were both practicing the same sin. Had you asked if the behavior differs NOW, for the one who ONCE practiced it (referring to the saved) then the answer would be yes. Their behavior is different. The unsaved is continuing in sin while the saved is no longer continuing in the sin. If I sound thouroughly confused at this point perhapse I am. I'm not sure why you asked the question and not sure why you didn't answer my question in response. I appreciate the link and will follow up with it later... for now I have a long list of honey-doe's that starts with the garage and ends somewhere in the back yard. Jeff |
||||||
100 | how can we minister to homosexuals | Bible general Archive 4 | jlhetrick | 209614 | ||
Well Doc, thanks for your concern brother, however, pretending not to understand what I have said in order to get me to say it the way you think it should be said isn't helpful; at least it isn't helpful to me. My worry certainly was about being judgmental. And it was about being too jugemental. In other words... too judgmental that we would in fact be sinful (which I have plainly laid out) and too judgmental that we would not think it necessary to witness to any individual and/or group. I can't think of a more doctrinally precise way of saying anything than to let the Scriptures say if for me as I have done well here. Thanks, Jeff |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [41] >> |