Lockman - Bible questions and answers

Results 1 - 16 of 16
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Tim Sheasby Ordered by Date
Results		Verse	Author	ID#
1	What is 'the fruit of the vine'?	Matt 26:29	Tim Sheasby	239388
	It has been several years since I first posted this question and started this debate here. Now I find that in many ways I have come full circle and have a different, perhaps unique, outlook on the fruit of the vine. In my search for a good, biblical answer I found some interesting things and made an interesting connection. I decided to look at words translated "fruit" in the old and new testament and see if there were different concepts behind these roots. Words translated fruit either refer to the fruit itself, or to the origin of the fruit. In the case of the fruit of the vine, I now believe, Jesus was emphasising the source of the fruit rather than the product of the fruit. The interesting connection I made was the Jesus' discourse after the supper on the way to the garden where he said "I am the vine, and you are the branches". Having just eaten the supper where Jesus emphasises the importance of the source of the fruit of the vine, he now tells them he is the vine. Without connection to him we have no life. The fruit of the vine is defined by its source. In the same way Jesus' blood is important because it is his blood, not because it is merely blood. I no longer believe Jesus was trying to say that the fruit of the vine has to be wine, but that it must come from the vine. Blood of bulls and goats, though it was blood, was not the blood of Christ -- not the fruit of the vine!
2	What is 'the fruit of the vine'?	Matt 26:29	Tim Sheasby	226692
	I return 9 years and many hours of study later to put new light on my own question. Someone once said to me "What if you have missed something? Will you change your view?" to which I answered that honesty would demand that of me. I continued to study the issue of the fruit of the vine from a linguistic point of view. I looked at how the Greek translators of the Septuagint translated the Hebrew word for fruit. I also considered the root idea in the greek word for "fruit" in the Lord's supper accounts. I finally came to the conclusion that the force of the Greek word _genema_ was to emphasise the origin of the fruit rather than the fruit itself. What was important about the fruit of the vine was where it came from rather than what it was. Jesus, in John's gospel, said "I am the vine". Since this discourse was within hours of the last supper, I thought, could there be a correlation? What is important about the blood of Christ that cleanses us from our sin is not that it is blood but that it is Christ's blood. The source is more important than the element itself. My revised view now is that in partaking the fruit of the vine, whether grape juice or wine, I remember the source – the vine. I remember where the saving blood comes from instead of the blood itself.
3	Discipleship	NT general Archive 1	Tim Sheasby	34485
	I can highly recommend the book "Purpose Driven Youth Ministry" by Doug Fields (Published by Zondervan). Actually shows how you need to disciple people at their own level. Although this is a book aimed at youth ministers I have found it of great benefit in terms of general congregaional discipleship. There is another book (which I have not yet read) by the senior pastor at Doug Field's church called "The purpose driven church" that might also be of help.
4	What does baptism consist?	1 John 5:6	Tim Sheasby	23307
	Unlike most members of this forum, I believe that baptism is an essential part of God's plan of salvation. It does not save in and of itself (As the Roman Catholic church teaches) but at the same time, according to James 2:24 we are not justified by faith alone either. Our actual salvation derives from the redeeming blood of Jesus but water baptism is a symbol of our death to self and sin rather than a symbol of our resurrection and new life (Romans 6). The gospel is the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. We have to go through those same steps spiritually and those steps are belief and repentance (death), baptism in water (burrial) and then we rise to walk in newness of life. Tim Sheasby
5	Per 2Thes 2:3 isn't the rapture postrib?	2 Thess 2:3	Tim Sheasby	22833
	Re-Posting: I did a posting on Matthew 24 that deals with my personal view on tribulation. I don't use the term rapture personally but assuming you are referring to the second coming then I believe this to be post tribulation since I believe we are already living in post tribulation times. Tim
6	anti-christ revealed before rapture?	2 Thess 2:3	Tim Sheasby	22830
	From another posting of mine with slight revisions: One of my brethren believes the man of lawlessness to be the antichrist to be the Pope had an interesting argument based on his own linguistic studies. He said that the word antichrist is made up of the name Christ prefixed with the Greek preposition 'anti'. Anti, he said, does not mean 'against' in Greek but rather 'in the place of'. Since the Pope claims to be 'The Vicar of Christ' (or the one who stands in the place of Christ) he points out that it logically follows that the Pope is the antichrist. Further to this he expressed the idea that the "beast" of Revelation is the Catholic Church. I do know that they no longer preach the gospel as it is written in the Bible and believe the Pope has authority to supercede the Bible. The Pope has, according to their doctrine, the power of spiritual life and death. Is this not 'anti'-in the place of-Christ? Is this not the man of lawlessness? The jury is still out for me as I study further but if this conclusion is true then the man of lawlessness has already been revealed a long time ago. In Christ Tim Sheasby
7	Will there be Muslims in heaven?	John 14:6	Tim Sheasby	22702
	If they have not obeyed the gospel call of Jesus they cannot be saved. Their children who have died in innocence may be there, but I do not believe they will be. You see we all deserve condemnation and it is only the blood of Christ that can save us from our sins. Tim Sheasby
8	Why don't women have long hair?	1 Cor 11:6	Tim Sheasby	22474
	Should women have long hair? And if so why? I grew us in an "anti" congregation of the church of Christ. This is an ultra conservative, legalistic, fundamentalist, splinter group of the church of Christ. In my late teens my whole family went through considerable trauma, both emotional and spiritual, which led us to re-evaluate some of our beliefs. One of the most sacred of these was the doctrine of the head covering. At our assembly hall we even had a rack at the entrance with several scarves or veils for visiting women to wear should they come without their own. We were almost offencive about it some times to the extent of pushing the covering into the hands of the offending women. That's background. What finally convinced me to change my mind? I attended Southern Africa Bible School, in Benoni, Gauteng, South Africa where students before me had done an in-depth exegesis of the passage in question. Without going into all the intricacies of that study it was interesting to note that the only place in the entire passage that an artificial covering was actually mentioned (in the original Greek this is) was in the very last verse -- 1 Cor 11:15 "but if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her? For her hair is given to her for a covering." NASB. The covering in this verse is a veil but in all the other verses it is a generic 'covering'. The word 'for' in this verse is the Greek word for 'instead of'. So what this says is that a womans hair is given to her instead of a veil. The rest of the passage shows a distinction between long and short hair so this leads to the final conclusion that a woman who has long hair is effectively veiled and covered. Women must have long hair, men must have short hair. How long long is and how short short is is a matter of discernment perhaps but that, in a nutshell is my view. In Christ Tim Sheasby
9	MEN ARE THE HEAD OF THE WOMAN NOT THE EN	1 Cor 14:34	Tim Sheasby	22469
	A point of interest. The proscription against a woman speaking is "in the church". What does this mean? I believe this is not necessarily speaking about ANY and EVERY public gathering of the church but of gatherings specifically for the sharing of the Lord's Supper on the first day of the week. There were certainly many women who preached in the early church -- but not at the weekly gathering to break bread. When Paul gives instructions to Timothy he says 1 Tim 2:12 "But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet." Some have said that this means a woman cannot teach a man but the Greek here shows that she cannot teach AT ALL! But the context of this passage is again "in the church". Why do I say this? Because in 1 Timothy 3:15 Paul tells Timothy what his preceding writings are about -- conduct in the church. Many of my brethren will probably take issue with me on this point but if we accept that "in the church" relates to the specific gathering to break bread then there are times when women can teach men publicly. If we do not accept this view of "in the church" then Paul says a woman can never teach - anyone, any time - and this is unacceptable for why would God make some women prophets if they could never prophesy? Still studying this for myself so these views are not final but a kind of reasoning in progress. In Jesus Christ who saves us Tim
10	Is vegetarianism okay with God?	1 Cor 8:13	Tim Sheasby	22465
	I am new to this forum and I know this is an old discussion but here are my 2 cents worth. What does the Bible say? Rom 14:2-3 says "One person has faith that he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats vegetables only. The one who eats is not to regard with contempt the one who does not eat, and the one who does not eat is not to judge the one who eats, for God has accepted him." NASB I have vegetarian friends who become quite obnoxious about the eating of meat. This is wrong. At the same time there are those who are equally obnoxious to the vegetarians for being so strict about what they will or will not eat. Equally wrong. There are times we have to put our own liberty aside to help one who has less understanding or a different understanding. This is what Paul speaks of in this passage. Remember though that this context is not simply about meat but rather about meat that has been offered to idols. Paul is saying that he will never again eat meat offered to idols (in the context of this passage) rather than that he is becoming a vegetarian. Still, if you feel that a vegetarian diet is better for you personally then that is no problem. It only becomes a problem when you try to bind your life choice on others. Be true to your conscience! In Christ, Tim Sheasby
11	unaffordable annulllment-How to?	Bible general Archive 1	Tim Sheasby	22316
	This sounds like a question from a Catholic? I am divorced myself but have never had to go to anyone for an "annullment" or had to pay for such a thing. Here are a few things I do know: 1. God hates divorce (Malachi 2:16) 2. God is a divorcee! (Jeremiah 3:8) 3. If you are married again after a divorce your marriage bed is still undefiled (as long as you and your new partner remain faithful to each other). The divorce itself may have been a sin (if no adultery had already destroyed the marriage in God's eyes) but that can be forgiven. The Catholic doctrine of Annullment is, as far as I can determine, not biblically based.
12	What 's "The Rapture" mean?	1 Cor 15:52	Tim Sheasby	22314
	Rapture is a man made term and is based on misunderstanding of Matthew 24 (The so-called signs of the times). If you read the passage that this discussion is based on you will see that this is talking about the final end of creation. I am sorry to disillusion you but the tribulation took place nearly 2000 years ago already. A careful study of Matthew 24 along with historic writings of the time will show how the destruction of the Jewish temple preceded a time of terrible tribulation as has never been seen since. That marked the final end of the Jewish people as the chosen ones of God. The signs of the times mentioned in that passage also have been misunderstood. It says that people will SAY the end is near because these things are happening. We know though that Jesus said that NO ONE knows the time except God so how can we presume to be able to work it out?
13	Who may receive the baptism of the H.S.?	Acts 2:38	Tim Sheasby	22303
	There are only 2 recorded events in Scripture that relate to "Baptism of the Holy Spirit". The firs at Pentecost and the second when Peter preached to the first Gentiles (Cornelius and his family) in Caesarea. This is not the same as a) the gift of the Holy Spirit you receive at baptism (the seal spoken of in Ephesians 1) or b) gifts of the Holy Spirit given by the laying on of Apostles hands (see for example Acts 8).
14	Receive Spirit with salvation or later?	Acts 2:38	Tim Sheasby	22299
	In the same context as John 3:15 -- John 3 starts out discussing the fact that you must be born again. You must be born of water and spirit. True belief always results in obedience and this obedience or the obedient spirit is what saves you in one sense. James speaks extensively about faith verses works and how the two are in fact inseparable. If you truly believe you WILL be baptised for the remission of your sins as did the 3000 on the day of Pentecost. And to forestall any arguments about "what if" situations where a person cannot get baptized -- I also believe implicitly in the providence of God. I do not believe He will allow one who truly believes to die without the opportunity to be baptized ... even in the middle of the Sahara desert!
15	Prosperity/Stewardship?	Matt 25:29	Tim Sheasby	22201
	This is clearly a Stewardship issue to me. Remember it was not their own money they had, but their masters. The good stewards used the money FOR THEIR MASTER and were rewarded with more money. Why? Because the master knew they would use this money to generate more FOR THE MASTER. If, as Christians, we are blessed with the ability to make money this ability is good stewardship only if we return this wealth to the Master who gave it to us in the first place.
16	When will the rapture occur????	1 Cor 15:52	Tim Sheasby	22199
	Rapture is a man made term and is based on misunderstanding of Matthew 24 (The so-called signs of the times). If you read the passage that this discussion is based on you will see that this is talking about the final end of creation. I am sorry to disillusion you but the tribulation took place nearly 2000 years ago already. A careful study of Matthew 24 along with historic writings of the time will show how the destruction of the Jewish temple preceded a time of terrible tribulation as has never been seen since. That marked the final end of the Jewish people as the chosen ones of God. The signs of the times mentioned in that passage also have been misunderstood. It says that people will SAY the end is near because these things are happening. We know though that Jesus said that NO ONE knows the time except God so how can we presume to be able to work it out?

Search for your Bible question and answer here: