Results 1 - 20 of 63
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Unanswered Bible Questions Author: Stultis the Fool Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | MUST the training come from the offices? | John 13:34 | Stultis the Fool | 128332 | ||
Thank you for the reply, Morant61! You wrote: "I would say that love should be the compeling force in every ministry." I must agree! You wrote: "However, Eph. 4 makes it clear that the purpose of these ministries is to bring the body of Christ to maturity. Individuals need training and instruction to grow in Christ." I must agree! You wrote: "Individuals need training and instruction to grow in Christ." I ask if that training MUST, for CHRISTIANS, come from the offices you have reffered to? Please consider 1 John 2:27 "As for you, the anointing which you received from Him abides in you, and you have no need for anyone to teach you; but as His anointing teaches you about all things, and is true and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you abide in Him." I look forward to your response! |
||||||
2 | Your thoughts? | Matt 12:32 | Stultis the Fool | 128331 | ||
tgc, I am pleased you chose to respond! You wrote: "Good Afternoon Stultis, I am glad to see I was missed last night...LOL. In answer to your question I belive that Steve has done an excellent job in his post and the only thing I would add is especially in the Matthew passage 12:32 if you back up to verse 22 and read foward to verse 32 and consider the context that only an unbeliver will fit." Thus I will post to you the same response I provided for Steve. Steve Wrote: "On the surface that verse (Heb 10:29) is an adequate description. But it begs the question: To whom does it rightly apply? Since the context of both Matt 12:32 and Heb 10:29 are speaking of unbelievers, it must only be unbelievers that would do such a thing." Actually, Hebrews 10:29 is part of a disertation to believers promoting the idea of assembling together: Hebrews 10:23-31 "Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful; and let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds, not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near. For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a terrifying expectation of judgment and THE FURY OF A FIRE WHICH WILL CONSUME THE ADVERSARIES. Anyone who has set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know Him who said, "VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY." And again, "THE LORD WILL JUDGE HIS PEOPLE." It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God." Matthew 12:32, by direct indication, is speaking to everyone and anyone, though it is the Pharisees that prompt the rebuke: "Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come." Take notice that Christ's words declare "WHOEVER." Additionally, though based on Christ's usage of the word "whoever" it is unneccesary to do so, I would put forth that the Pharisees, while not (to use popular nomenclature) "regenerate" believers, knew good and well just who they were speaking to. I look forward to your response! Your thoughts? |
||||||
3 | Your thoughts? | Matt 12:32 | Stultis the Fool | 128330 | ||
You wrote: "On the surface that verse (Heb 10:29) is an adequate description. But it begs the question: To whom does it rightly apply? Since the context of both Matt 12:32 and Heb 10:29 are speaking of unbelievers, it must only be unbelievers that would do such a thing." Actually, Hebrews 10:29 is part of a disertation to believers promoting the idea of assembling together: Hebrews 10:23-31 "Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful; and let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds, not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near. For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a terrifying expectation of judgment and THE FURY OF A FIRE WHICH WILL CONSUME THE ADVERSARIES. Anyone who has set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know Him who said, "VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY." And again, "THE LORD WILL JUDGE HIS PEOPLE." It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God." Matthew 12:32, by direct indication, is speaking to everyone and anyone, though it is the Pharisees that prompt the rebuke: "Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come." Take notice that Christ's words declare "WHOEVER." Additionally, though based on Christ's usage of the word "whoever" it is unneccesary to do so, I would put forth that the Pharisees, while not (to use popular nomenclature) "regenerate" believers, knew good and well just who they were speaking to. Your thoughts? |
||||||
4 | Does this all help you? | John 13:34 | Stultis the Fool | 128314 | ||
EdB, thank you for all the scripture you quoted. If I have asked you to post it elswehere, please refer me in those threads to this post, or just repost what you have written here. Additionally, I appologize if I have lead you to believe that faith is unnecesary. I assume those who I converse with here on this forum (in particular, in this case, YOU) to have faith, as this is the rock upon which we all must stand. I will certainly concede that faith is the first stone of building, and without it, we have nothing. I must conclude by stating that my discussions of love are precluded by the notion that they are directed at individuals that have and understand faith. I appologize for not stipulating this. Again, my discussion is not geared toward the unbeliever (without faith), but to the believer (with faith). I hope this helps clear the air. You wrote: "Further more I never said or implied that someone motivated by love would perpetuate an act of malice or evil against his neighbor so why suggest that I did?" No, but you did state or otherwise imply that we CAN love and NOT display our love by "deeds" or works. I tell you plainly that anyone who behaves this way DOES NOT love, and is a liar. If I TRULY love, I will most certainly perform the works of a loving person. Does this help clarify the matter? You wrote: "Yes 1 John 3:18 "Little children, let us not love with word or with tongue, but in deed and truth." does say exactly what I mean. And I’m also sure you have known that for some time. Which makes me ask, why act like you didn’t know what I was saying?W hy the accusations? Why challenges? Why do you always try to stir the pot? What is your agenda?" I refer you to the previous answere, as describing true love verses someone who just lies about their love. Additionaly, I reply in the manner I reply because of your use of the word "junk," and your comparison of (my interpretations?) to John Lennon's guru. What you write there is really just a method of avoiding using profanity to describe what I wrote, while making all the same implications. It is nomenclature that is directly beligerant, and expressed vehemently, and I wish to reply to it in a sound fashion that will bring us both to truth. Which brings me to another question; You wrote: "Why do you always try to stir the pot? What is your agenda?" My agenda is to edify, and I really wish you hadn't accused me of "stirring the pot." I will point out that my response to your first post was one of approval, quoted here: "Good verses, EdB... more of the same!" I appologize if you took this as a slight. To conclude, You wrote: "While no one is denying that Love is essential if you notice it’s placement, first we must believe then we should allow love to motivate our actions, service, obedience, maintaining our faith. That is why saying all we need is love is patently false we first must have salvation through Jesus Christ. And once we have salvation if we don’t put action to our love we have nothing more than a word." I now understand thouroughly the confusion we share in this discussion, and I gladly point out that my exhortations to love are to the FAITHFUL Christians, and not directed towards the unfaithful, who obviously need faith! Does this all help you? Let's continue this conversation and really come to such agreement as we are commanded through love! I look forward to your reply! |
||||||
5 | Can you please provide them again? | John 13:34 | Stultis the Fool | 128310 | ||
EdB, you wrote: "If you do not know where God demands faith, service, action and obedience then I think this discussion is has ran it course. I gave you each in verse quotes in this thread." I appologize, I must have missed these verses. Can you please provide them again? |
||||||
6 | Is this an adequate interpretation of..? | John 13:34 | Stultis the Fool | 128309 | ||
EdB, thank you for the various replies. I believe you confuse love with lies when you qualify your position with statements such as: "First what I said was love is an emotion, a motivator, an attitude. Love in itself does nothing. If a man says he loves a women and does nothing, nothing is exactly what he will have." "I can love my neighbor to death but if he was in the water drowning and unless I was willing to risk all and reach out my hand to save him my love would be nothing." "We see it all the time in marriages two people love each other, but they also happen to love themselves more and the marriage dissolves." If I am claiming to love, and I behave in these methods you have described, I do not love at all, and I am a liar. Is this an adequate interpretation of what you wish to express? If I behave as prescribed in 1 John 3:18 "My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth," will I avoid the wickedness you described earlier? Consider the words in John 2:21 "But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God." EdB, if this is not the case, please tell me what wickedness will be wrought by someone who loves "in deed and in truth." I look forward to your reply. |
||||||
7 | Do you agree that if this is the case? | John 13:34 | Stultis the Fool | 128307 | ||
Steve, thank you for the Reply! I appreciate you quoting these scriptures that I requested! I am excedingly glad to see how much of a role Love plays in each of the scriptures regarding "faith/obedience/service/action!" You wrote: "Paul gave quite a list of those things that could be done without the motivation of love: 1 Cor 13:1-3 (ESV) If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels...if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains...if I give away all I have, and if I deliver up my body to be burned..." Paul concludes this thought by saying someone who has all these things but does not have love has "nothing." Do you agree that someone who has "nothing" does not have Christ? Do you agree that if this is the case, these passages, by neccesity, do not refer to a Christian? I look forward to your reply! |
||||||
8 | tgc will reply to this question? | Matt 12:32 | Stultis the Fool | 128306 | ||
New Creature, thank you for the reply! I am also hoping "tgc" will reply to this question, so I am going to post it again here: tgc, you wrote: "Yes I am one who belives in the eternal security of the beliver but more than that I firmly belive the unpardonable sin is to reject what Christ did for us on the cross. This is the ultimate blashemy of the Holy Spirit rejecting the conviction He puts on ones heart and rejecting Christ payment for ones sins." Do you feel that the following verse is an adequate description of rejecting "what Christ did for us on the cross?": "How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace?" [Hebrews 10:29] |
||||||
9 | Perhaps this will help? | John 13:34 | Stultis the Fool | 128305 | ||
My question is awkward. Perhaps this will help: Do these offices serve a purpose that is a direct result of our desire to love one another, or do these offices serve some other purpose that cannot be quantified with the passage in Romans? |
||||||
10 | Will you please offer an answer? | John 13:34 | Stultis the Fool | 128304 | ||
Very well, if I am mistaken, I sincerely appologize. Since I am most certainly confused, may I ask as to what you refer to as "junk" from John Lennon's guru? Additionally, I posed several questions in previous posts which you have not answered. Will you please offer an answer? Thank you. |
||||||
11 | You are saying that our command to...? | John 13:34 | Stultis the Fool | 128210 | ||
You wrote: "This is same junk John Lennon learned and picked up from his guru." The only verse in question is Romans 13:8-10. You are saying that our command to love is "junk." Perhaps what you mean to reply with is 1 John 3:18 "Little children, let us not love with word or with tongue, but in deed and truth." According to your train of thought ("love is an emotion, an attitude a motivator"), what wicked deed will a man who loves his neighbor just as Christ loves each of us be motivated to perpetrate? You wrote: "God does demand love but He also demands faith, obedience, service, action." I ask you to please provide scripture supporting this thought. Additionally, I challenge you to demonstrate an act of faith/obedience/service/action that a CHRISTIAN would perform that IS NOT motivated by love. Finally, if you feel as you do, disprove this statement from the above verses [Romans 13:8-10]: "Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law," and demonstrate the evil a loving person will perpetrate upon another whom he loves. I can find no such verse qualifying faith/obedience/service/action in the same capacity. |
||||||
12 | Is this an adequate description? | Matt 12:32 | Stultis the Fool | 128207 | ||
tgc, you wrote: "Yes I am one who belives in the eternal security of the beliver but more than that I firmly belive the unpardonable sin is to reject what Christ did for us on the cross. This is the ultimate blashemy of the Holy Spirit rejecting the conviction He puts on ones heart and rejecting Christ payment for ones sins." Do you feel that the following verse is an adequate description of rejecting "what Christ did for us on the cross?": "How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace?" [Hebrews 10:29] |
||||||
13 | What was this sin...? | Matt 12:32 | Stultis the Fool | 128204 | ||
Perhaps Hebrews 10:26-31 is a better refference (still contextually similar to the refference in Hebrews 6:4-6): "For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a terrifying expectation of judgment and THE FURY OF A FIRE WHICH WILL CONSUME THE ADVERSARIES. Anyone who has set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know Him who said, "VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY." And again, "THE LORD WILL JUDGE HIS PEOPLE. It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God." Consider specifically the final result of the course of sin defined in verse 29: "How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace?" Can there be any denying that the author of this passage ultimately refers to the Holy Spirit when he writes the phrase "Spirit of grace?" Based on the full passage, can there be any denying that the sin perpetrated here is unpardonable? According to the passages in Matthew, blasphemy is only "unpardonable" regarding the Holy Spirit. This passage directly refers to "insulting" the Spirit. I cannot imagine what deed the Pharisees may have performed in Matthew 12:24 that was not a direct insult to the Spirit. Now I ask: What is the answere to the question you posed, "What was this sin...?" in your previous post. |
||||||
14 | You are saying that our command to...? | John 13:34 | Stultis the Fool | 128203 | ||
EdB... thank you for the reply! You wrote: "This is same junk John Lennon learned and picked up from his guru." The only verse in question is Romans 13:8-10. You are saying that our command to love is "junk." Perhaps what you mean to reply with is 1 John 3:18 "Little children, let us not love with word or with tongue, but in deed and truth." According to your train of thought ("love is an emotion, an attitude a motivator"), what wicked deed will a man who loves his neighbor just as Christ loves each of us be motivated to perpetrate? You wrote: "God does demand love but He also demands faith, obedience, service, action." I ask you to please provide scripture supporting this thought. Additionally, I challenge you to demonstrate an act of faith/obedience/service/action that a CHRISTIAN would perform that IS NOT motivated by love. Finally, if you feel as you do, disprove this statement from the above verses [Romans 13:8-10]: "Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law," and demonstrate the evil a loving person will perpetrate upon another whom he loves. I can find no such verse qualifying faith/obedience/service/action in the same capacity. |
||||||
15 | Your thoughts? | John 13:34 | Stultis the Fool | 128188 | ||
I understand your thought. Now I ask why these offices are appointed? It seems to me that they were appointed for the building up of the body through love. This thought is mirrored twice in the verses you quote! Additionally, I do not see that these are offices appointed to a specific church, though we do use the nomenclature regarding some in our local churches, and I offer as evidence to this end that these "offices" are to "build up the body," which we both know is the one true church to which all Christians belong! My question remains: Is there a correlation between these appointments and the passage in Romans? Based on the scripture referenced, I must agree. Your thoughts? |
||||||
16 | I agree. How can we love one another...? | John 13:34 | Stultis the Fool | 128177 | ||
You wrote: "I would say that it is one of the primary reasons for gathering together, but not the only one." Considering Romans 13:8-10, what other reason might there be? Can you explain "Scripture also tells us that God has established certain 'offices' in the church. One cannot be under the ministry of these ministers unless one gathers together," within the bounds of Romans 13:8-10? Also consider 1 Corinthians 16:14 "Let all that you do be done in love." I do not disagree with the notion, but I believe it must be summed up as Paul presented the notion in Romans! You wrote: "My main point with these verses was simply that Scripture never pictures what some have called 'lone ranger Christians'. Christians are always spoken of as gathering together and doing certain things for 'one another'." I agree. How can we love one another if we insist on being a "lone ranger?" |
||||||
17 | Who do you love that you are unwill...? | John 13:34 | Stultis the Fool | 128175 | ||
Good verses, EdB... more of the same! The reason we ought to "equip" one another is because we ought to love one another. Who do you love that you are unwilling to "equip," and who do you "equip" that you are unwilling to love? Once again, we see Romans 13:8-10 in action! "Owe nothing to anyone except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law. For this, "YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY, YOU SHALL NOT MURDER, YOU SHALL NOT STEAL, YOU SHALL NOT COVET," and if there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this saying, "YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF." Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law." |
||||||
18 | Your thoughts? | John 13:34 | Stultis the Fool | 128072 | ||
Morant61... You quoted some excellent and VERY pertinent scripture. If we apply the idea behind each of the many passages you chose, to verses like Romans 13:8-10, "Owe nothing to anyone except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law. For this, "YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY, YOU SHALL NOT MURDER, YOU SHALL NOT STEAL, YOU SHALL NOT COVET," and if there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this saying, "YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF." Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law." we find quite readily that there is no reason BUT that given in John 13:34 for us to assemble together. This thought is mirrored in Hebres 10:24 "and let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds," which is directly contextual to fellowship. Your thoughts? |
||||||
19 | Hope this helps? | John 10:34 | Stultis the Fool | 127777 | ||
I am still perplexed by your question. I regard God, from whom all spirits come [Ecclesiastes 12:7]. Hope this helps. | ||||||
20 | Are you? | Is 7:16 | Stultis the Fool | 127676 | ||
"Yes, as that is what the Jews believed in if I am correct." It begs the question: Are you? |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 3 4 ] Next > Last [4] >> |