Results 1 - 19 of 19
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Unanswered Bible Questions Author: seeking4truth Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | How is Jesus' death substitutionary? | Eph 2:1 | seeking4truth | 102289 | ||
So what Paul was saying is that physical death came upon all men because of Adam's sin? If that is the proper understanding, then how does Jesus' death on the cross do anything for us? I.e. I have heard, since I was a kid, that Jesus' death is "substitutionary." But it would seem that if Jesus died in my place, then I wouldn't have to die. Yet, Christians STILL die. So how is His death substitutionary? Thanks. seeking4truth |
||||||
2 | Death? | Eph 2:1 | seeking4truth | 102139 | ||
In Romans 5:14, is this "death" that reigned spiritual death or physical death or both? seeking4truth |
||||||
3 | What about man's spiritual condition? | Eph 2:1 | seeking4truth | 102086 | ||
The Bible seems to teach that we are born into this world "dead in trespasses and sins". As I understand it (and I may misunderstand it), Adam's fallen spiritual nature is passed on to every human being born since? Is this an accurate understanding? seeking4truth |
||||||
4 | Born again. Giving or receiving? | John 3:3 | seeking4truth | 101722 | ||
Ken, I appreciate your exhortion to "grow up" in Christ. And I see some of the distinction you have made between being a child and being a son. At the same time, I think that we might need to consider that growing up does not make us more or less of a son. Sons (and daughters) are born, not made. I have two sons. Both of them were born to me as sons though one is now a man and the other is 4 years old. It is their birth, not their performance or maturity, that makes them related as sons to me. To me, being born again entails a few similarities to natural birth. But it is only different. I did not have a choice as to my natural birth. But I seemed to have some type of choice in my new birth (if indeed I have been born again). No matter what you want to call it, I somehow acknowledged it. But what I struggle with is that, it seems to me, new birth is new life and I think we have, in many cases, missing that point. I hear almost every week in my church that we need to give our lives to God. Why? As I understand it, according to Ephesians, we have NO life to give. Jesus didn't say that He came to get OUR lives FROM us, but to give HIS life TO us (John 10:10). Granted, Jesus did say that we must lose our life if we want to save it. But I think that perhaps it is more important to understand that, in being born again, we receive NEW life from God, not just make a bunch of commitments to improve our old lives. I can't help but wonder if we don't often come to God asking Him to wash or improve our dirty rags instead of letting Him cloth us with Himself. seeking4truth |
||||||
5 | Questions and more questions? | Luke 14:26 | seeking4truth | 101654 | ||
Searcher, I will ask you to forgive my ignorance before-hand as I don't know the original languages. But please allow me to examine this from a couple of different angles to see if I understand. "to have one's mind changed so that he lives a new life and one conformed to the will of God" As I understand it, repentance also means "to change one's mind." So what is the difference between repentance and being born-again? Also, could you clarify this concept a little concerning who does what? In other words, I could change my mind or God could change my mind. But is it proper to say that I can cause myself to be born-again or is it something that God does for and in me? What is my role in the event? Do you think that being born-again is merely a non-substantive change in the way one thinks or do you think that there is actually a substantive (although not physical) change in the nature or spirit or soul? In other words, is being born-again really being a "new creation" in Christ or is it just a new-improved creation or is it just the same old creation who tries to think and act differently? I know that these are alot of questions. But I do wonder about the meanings behind much of "Christianese" and what we really believe when we say something. (I wish there was a way to "bump" this to a new thread. This could turn into a rather lengthy discussion.) seeking4truth |
||||||
6 | Insufficient grace? | Luke 14:26 | seeking4truth | 101625 | ||
Good verses, Aixen. Can I probe a little bit? (I promise to be gentle.) When I was 12, I was presented the "Roman Road." I would suspect that most of the folks on this forum are familiar with this formula for evangelism. So as I began to understand that my sin and my being a sinner separated me from a holy God, I naturally asked questions. It went sort of like this: "My sin separated me from God because He is holy and pure?" YES, THAT'S RIGHT. "So how do I get myself clean so that I too am holy and pure like God." SON, THERE IS NOTHING YOU CAN DO TO CLEAN YOURSELF FROM SIN. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. THERE IS ONLY ONE THING THAT CAN CLEAN YOU FROM SIN - THE BLOOD OF JESUS. "But Pastor, don't I have to clean up my act before I can come to Jesus?" NO, SON, YOU CAN'T CLEAN YOURSELF. ALL OF YOUR RIGHTEOUSNESS IS AS FILTHY RAGS IN GOD'S SIGHT. ONLY JESUS BLOOD CAN CLEAN YOU. "Let me see if I understand: God is perfectly holy and righteous. I am a sinner and unclean. There is not ONE thing that I can do to make myself clean before God. All I can do is to trust Jesus?" THAT'S RIGHT, SON. IT'S NOT ABOUT YOU - IT'S ABOUT JESUS. YOU TRUST JESUS AND HE WILL PURIFY YOU. YOUR SINS WILL BE WHITER THAN SNOW. (seeking4truth trusts in Jesus as Lord and Savior) "Wow, Pastor, Jesus has washed me whiter than snow?" THAT'S RIGHT. "Now what do I do?" NOW, SON, YOU NEED TO KEEP YOURSELF CLEAN BY NOT SINNING AND IF YOU SIN, YOU GET YOURSELF CLEANED UP THROUGH CONFESSION AND YOU NEED TO PURIFY YOURSELF AND YOU NEED TO LIVE HOLY AND YOU NEED TO SANCTIFY YOURSELF AND YOU NEED TO... If I could go back 30 years, I would say, "Wait a minute, Pastor, BEFORE I came to Jesus, it was all about HIM and what HE has done. Now that I have come to Jesus, why is it all about me and what *I* must do?" Funny, evangelicals tell folks that they can't possible make themselves pure enough to be acceptable to God or to enter His kingdom. "It is finished!" we say. But after "conversion", the focus dynamically shifts 180 degrees to our standing being completely dependent upon what WE do or don't do. To me, this effectively means that the grace (a gift of God) that is sufficient to initially save us is powerless to keep us clean and pure before God AFTER we become saved. It would seem that "sinners" are saved by grace but that "saints" are perfected (purified) by works. Something smells fishy and fleshly to me. Any thoughts? seeking4truth |
||||||
7 | What is "born again?" | Luke 14:26 | seeking4truth | 101622 | ||
Okay, Ken, I am interesting in discussing this "perfecting" if you are willing. But... First, can you explain to me (without theological gymnastics and conjugating 50 verbs) what, in your opinion, being "born again" means? I have heard many explanations over the years but I would like to hear yours. seeking4truth |
||||||
8 | Ken, are you sure? | Luke 14:26 | seeking4truth | 101538 | ||
Hi Ken, You wrote: For your consideration, let's see what the scriptures have to say: Psalm 30:2-3 - O Lord my God, I CRIED to You for help, and You healed me. O Lord, You have brought up my soul from Sheol; You have kept me alive, that I would not go down to the pit. Psalm 40:1,6 - I waited patiently for the Lord; and He inclined to me, and heard my CRY... Sacrifice and meal offering You have NOT desired; My ears You have opened; Burnt offering and sin offering You have not required. Psalm 50:13-15 - "Shall I (GOD) eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of male goats? Offer to God a sacrifice of THANKSGIVING and pay your vows to the Most High. CALL upon Me in the day of trouble; I shall rescue you, and you will honor Me." Psalm 51:16-17 - For You do not delight in sacrifice, otherwise I would give it; You are not pleased with burnt offering. The sacrifices of God are a BROKEN SPIRIT; A BROKEN AND CONTRITE HEART, O God, You will NOT despise. Micah 6:6-8 - With what shall I come to the Lord and bow myself before the od on high? Shall I come to Him with burnt offerings, with yearling calves? Does the Lord take delight in thousands of rams, in ten thousand rivers of oil? Shall I present my firstborn for my rebellious acts, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul? He has told you, O man, what is good; and what DOES the Lord REQUIRE OF YOU but to do justice, to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God? Post by seeking4truth, scriptures by God |
||||||
9 | The Son of Man? | Num 23:19 | seeking4truth | 101471 | ||
First off, please allow me to state that I am NOT saying that Jesus Christ is not God. I have given a considerable amount of time and study to His deity and I have every reason to believe that Jesus Christ was fully God and fully human. Jesus' favorite term that He used to refer to Himself was "the Son of man." He used it repeatedly during His three years of public ministry, more than any other title. So my question is: how do we reconcile our understanding of this reference verse - that God is NOT the son of man - with Jesus' claim that He IS the Son of man? Any thoughts? (Other than burning me at the stake?) seeking4truth |
||||||
10 | Hebrew idioms? | Luke 14:26 | seeking4truth | 101428 | ||
Hi Emmaus, Thanks for you answer. That would certainly seem to be the general concensus. Can I humbly ask, where do you find that "hate your family" is a Hebrew idiom for "love your family less." I would appreciate seeing clear support for this. Why do I ask? Because I could (if I wanted) use this technique on other scripture: "Jesus claim that He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life is a Hebrew idiom that He is one of many ways to God." "Jesus teaching on loving your neighbor as yourself is a Hebrew idiom that says that we are only to love those just like us." "Jesus' teaching on loving your enemies is a Hebrew idiom that means we should respect them but not associate with them." I want to be careful that I don't go too far down the road of saying that Jesus did not mean what He said. So I would appreciate it if you could offer some type of Jewish documentation that supports this view. Please translate it into English first, though. :) (Didn't we meet on the road somewhere? :)) seeking4truth |
||||||
11 | Christ and Christians? | Luke 14:26 | seeking4truth | 101426 | ||
I wanted to thank you for the time, effort, consideration, and thoughtfulness that you have put into your answers to this question. I can tell that you, too, are seeking to understand the truth as best as we can. I especially appreciate that you are stressing the importance of context. The more I study my Bible (and the less I find I know), the more important that context becomes. If I understand your answer correctly, you are advocating a principle, not only of considering context, but of considering that not everything written in the Bible is written directly for us. And you have cited excellent examples to show where we should determine who is speaking, to whom, and the relevance of whether what is being said applies to all persons at all times. This technique is close to what I suppose the Bible scholars call "dispensationalism" - that God deals with different people in different times in different ways. This method of interpretation can certainly seem to be helpful. It allows us to, though you may not like the term, "pick and choose" what parts of the Bible apply to us and what parts do not. For instance, I don't see many Christians taking a lamb to the church on Sunday morning to be sacrificed at the altar. Why not? Because a thorough study of the scriptures seems to support that the old sacrificial system has been done away with and, as Hebrews says, there is no longer a sacrifice for sins. So, in this particular case, it would seem that the scriptures themselves support that God's methods change over time. The signs that Jesus lists in Mark 16 become a little sticker don't they? I wouldn't have much opposition if I said that an animal sacrifice is no longer necessary (although those of Judaism would probably disagree with me). But if I start to say that the signs that Jesus gave are no longer applicable to the church, then my assertion becomes much more tenuous because: 1. Christians claim to follow Christ and His teachings, YET they themselves are picking and choosing WHICH of His teachings apply to them and which ones don't. 2. And, to the best of my knowledge, I don't recall Jesus saying that all of these signs were only for a particular group (other than believers). It would be similar if I claimed to be a follower of Buddha but did not believe that ALL of his teachings applied to me. Most Christians operate under some form of this "a la carte" Christianity. I am not saying that it is right nor wrong to do this. But I am curious as to WHY Christians do what they do. After all, most Christians claim to follow the teachings of their leader. But if pressed about this (as in Mark 16), many (if not most) of the Christians in the circles that I travel would say, "Yes, that is what Christ taught but it doesn't apply to me." So my question is, how can we claim that we are followers of Christ if we do not follow His clear teaching? What gives the disciples the right to determine which teachings of their teacher apply to them and which ones don't? That, my friend, is where I am at. I am looking at the specific teachings of Jesus and trying to determine, as best I can, whether or not I should even wear the name of Christian and say that I believe in Jesus. It is difficult for me to say that Jesus is my Lord if I am not willing to do what He says. It is difficult for me to say that He taught the truth if I am willing (and sometimes eager) to relegate His truths to other people and other time periods. But in the end, I find that I have to do this or His teachings make no sense. For instance, at one point Jesus sends out His disciples ONLY to the house of Israel. They are to take His gospel to the Jews only. Is this His true command? Certainly. But He seems to revise this command later in Matthew 28 when He gives out the great comission, doesn't He? There, His disciples are told to go into all the world. This "change" is substantiated by the scriptures themselves. Many of the other teachings of Christ are much more ambiguous. Are Christians on shakey ground when they claim to believe in Jesus Christ but either limit or dismiss some of His teachings? I am not questioning Christ's person at this point. But I am curious to what extent I can call myself a Christian if I disregard the clear teachings of the one I claim to follow. seeking4truth |
||||||
12 | George, do you believe? | Luke 14:26 | seeking4truth | 101378 | ||
Hi George, Thanks for your "exhortation in Christ." What I do know of the original Bible languages is that some of it is Hebrew (OT), some is Aramaic, and some is Greek (OT). Do I know any of these languages? No. I am doing well to understand English. :) Yes, George, I am IGNORANT. Thanks for reminding me. George, you state: "THE Word SAYS WHAT THE LORD MEANS AND MEANS EXACTLY WHAT IT SAYS." Can I ask if you truly believe this? Here is the test from another one of my posts here: Jesus said: "These signs will accompany those who have believed: in My name they will cast out demons, they will speak with new tongues; they will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover." - Mark 16:17,18 "Behold, I have given you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing will injure you." - Luke 10:19 So let me ask you, George, seeing as Jesus said what He means and means what He says, do you personally: 1. Cast out demons? 2. Speak with a new tongue? 3. Pick up serpents? 4. Drink poison without ill effect? 5. Heal the sick by the laying on of hands? 6. Tread on serpents and scorpions? 7. Exercise power over Satan continually (I think a valid practical demonstration of this would be the complete cessation of sin in one's life)? Believe me, George, if I believe the Bible, I know I will stand before one judgement seat or another. I have been reminded of it for 30 years now and your "exhortation" does nothing to further impress this warning upon my mind. Thanks anyway. But enough about me, my ignorance, and my lack of faith. How about you? Are you a true believer in Jesus Christ by HIS standards? Do you believe ALL of the Bible in this regard? Do you continually prove to the church and to the world that you are a believer in Jesus by demonstrating the signs that He Himself said would follow those who believe in Him? seeking4truth |
||||||
13 | True Disciples - eternal importance | Luke 14:26 | seeking4truth | 101376 | ||
Thanks, Pastor Glenn. I will try to keep those things in mind. But in my particular case, I am not a good discerner of what things are of eternal importance and what things are of temporal importance. As I stated earlier, it seems to very much depend upon who one talks to as to the priority of things. Some would list all of these things as of eternal importance: water baptism, speaking in tongues (otherwise you are not indwelt by the Spirit), using a particular translation (otherwise you don't have the Word of God), doing good works (to prove your faith), keeping the Law, being Reformed, being Calvinist, being Arminian. All these are criteria that some use as eternal "measuring rods." I find it difficult to know which ones are truly valid and scriptural and which ones are not. (Side-note: The Calvinist would say that the Arminian is not saved because the Arminian does not believe in a sovereign God. So his "disbelief in the sovereignty of God" is used to prove that the Arminian does believe in the God of the Bible and, therefore, is not saved. I am just using this as an illustration, please don't anyone take up sides here and pursue this subject in this thread. The subject of this particular thread is much more important to me.) But, Pastor Glenn, if I may, can I demonstrate how touchy this subject of matters of eternal importance can be? Humor me here for a couple of minutes and if you have a good, solid answer, please don't hesitate to share it. Jesus gave some criteria for those who would follow Him (i.e. Christians). We can debate all day long on the standards that WE want to use for judging "true" disciples of Christ. But let's consider what Jesus said: "These signs will accompany those who have believed: in My name they will cast out demons, they will speak with new tongues; they will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover." - Mark 16:17,18 Here in this passage, Jesus Himself list some of His criteria that true believers would be known by. He lists 5 specific things: 1. They will cast out demons 2. They will speak with new tongues 3. They will pick up serpents 4. They will drink poison without ill effect 5. They can heal the sick by the laying on of hands Forum members, please note that I am NOT saying that these are MY criteria. These are criteria that Jesus Himself said would characterize those who believe in Him. Let's look at a similar passage: "Behold, I have given you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing will injure you." - Luke 10:19 Here Jesus says that His followers can tread on serpents and scorpions. And He notes that they have power over who I would take to be Satan. Again, these are not my words. These are the words of Christ Himself. But I have to ask, is this the same criteria we use to judge whether or not others are believers? I don't think so. I wouldn't (just being honest here). I am not going to try to cast out devils, pick up poisonous snakes, drink poison, step on snakes and scorpions, I have never spoken in tongues, and I am very careful what liberties I take in my "authority over Satan." Now, please allow me to demonstrate my dilema. By the standards of Jesus Christ Himself, I am not a true believer. By the standards of most conservative, fundamental Christian, I am not a Bible-believing Christ myself because I do not personally adhere to this teaching of Christ in the Bible nor would I ever exhort anyone on this board to "prove" his/her discipleship through these tests. So what does that make me? I surely don't know. Yes, I've said a "sinner's prayer." But one cannot find that formula in the Bible. To my knowledge, Jesus never once told someone to invite Him into their heart. He knocks on the door of one of His churches in the book of Revelation but that presumes that He is already in their hearts. So I have to confess to God that I don't exhibit the signs that Jesus gave whereby His true followers and disciples would be known. Pastor Glenn, it would seem that being a disciple of Christ is an eternal issue. But, frankly, sir, I don't measure up to Jesus' own criteria. And to be honest, I don't have the faith to prove my discipleship the way that He demands. What am I to do? Sincerely, seeking4truth |
||||||
14 | Resource for "hate"? | Luke 14:26 | seeking4truth | 101347 | ||
SBF members, In regards to my question on Jesus' teaching on "hating", would most of you agree that the seeming contradiction is directly related to our interpretation of the word "hate"? If I were going to explain this concept to someone else, what resource(s) would I use to substantiate that "hate" does not mean "hate" as we understand it? (Side-note: I am all for literal translations but I suppose that they can sometimes pose a problem.) seeking4truth |
||||||
15 | Purpose of this forum? | Luke 14:26 | seeking4truth | 101291 | ||
Aixen, I understand your obvious concern for my soul. But can I share something openly and honestly? As to my relationship with God, if/when I am "saved" is between him and myself. This forum is, as I understand it, a Bible study forum, a place to hopefully find some answers to scriptural questions, is it not? Is it a "get saved" forum? I think not. I have read quite a few of the posts here. I don't have all of the answers, obviously. Otherwise, I wouldn't ask questions. I am not trolling to cause trouble either. I am no genius, but if this were a "come and get saved" forum, this would be one of the most confusing places to do so. Why? Because one person would insist that I need to be baptized in water to be saved, another would insist that I need to be Reformed, another would insist that I be an Arminian, another would insist that I join their denomination, another would insist that I speak in tongues, another would insist that I use only the KJV. Some would insist that I am saved for all eternity and some would insist that I can lose my salvation. So what is salvation? What is truth? I made a profession of faith in Christ when I was 12 years old. I ask gently, does that ease your mind? It does not mine. From my exposure to the church, evangelicals are concerned about other's salvation for 2 primary reasons: 1) so that they can have another notch on their gun for bringing another Christian to Christ (more rewards, as I understand it) and 2) so that they are reprieved of the responsibility of having the weight of someone else's salvation from resting upon their shoulders. Either way, their primary concern is themselves. Granted, I have met a few Christians who seem generally concerned for others for more than the sake of achieving a "sinner's prayer." It is these Christians, who actually care about developing a lasting friendship, who have most influenced me to consider Christianity. But the majority have turned me off to God. I will not go into all of the reasons here as it detracts from this topic. So I ask you, gently, to please leave the issue of my personal salvation between me and God. He alone knows my heart. If I am saved, it is to God's credit and glory. And if I burn in hell, it is my sole responsibility. I do not ask nor require anyone to be responsible for my spiritual state. Again, I am getting of the subject. But, in brief, I professed a faith in Christ as a youth. But it was a blind faith exercised out of the fear of burning in hell. It was coerced. Now, as an adult, I am trying my best to investigate the faith that I once professed in order to see if it is worthy of serious consideration. Does that make me unsaved or a ridiculer? Judge me if you like, but God (if he is truly there) is my final judge. And if he is anything like I hope that he is, he is not afraid of a serious question and of my efforts to be a Berean to see if what I have been taught all these years is the truth and stands up to the scriptures. If my approach offends the moderator(s), then please ban me from this board and I will take my questions somewhere else. But I thought, maybe falsely, that a Bible study forum would be the best place to get my Bible-centered questions answered. Was I wrong? Sincerely, seeking4truth |
||||||
16 | Any literature? | Luke 14:26 | seeking4truth | 101263 | ||
Thanks, DL5. Your response at least gives me some hope. If you have counseled people in these matters, could you recommend some literature or a website that goes in-depth at explaining some of these contradictions. My life, as everyone's is, is important to me. Jesus said that we should consider the cost of following him. I am trying to do that. If I am to fully trust him, then he must stand up to the test of a prophet in not contradicting prior revelation. And that is why I am questioning his teachings. If he truly is the son of God, then his teachings should in no way contradict the prior teachings of God through the other prophets. So I would like a well-reasoned explanation as to why some of his teachings seem to do this. I doubt I will get to ask my questions here, though, as a few of these responses tell me that neither God or Jesus or the Bible are open to serious questioning. Some are insisting on blind faith instead of reasoned faith. But it is blind faith that leads into cults and I have no desire to join one. Can you recommend any literature? Thanks, seeking4truth |
||||||
17 | Family commitment? | Luke 14:26 | seeking4truth | 101219 | ||
Thanks for your reply. It is interesting the different viewpoints put forth in the Bible, isn't it? On one hand, Paul says that a man who doesn't take care of his own household is not fit to serve in the church in an official capacity and to love his wife as Christ loves the church. On the other hand, Jesus teaches to leave your wife and children to follow Him. Sure has me confussed. It doesn't sound to me like they were preaching the same gospel. Any thoughts? seeking4truth |
||||||
18 | I'm skeptical | Luke 14:26 | seeking4truth | 101218 | ||
Thanks, George. Yes, the issue about calling no man "father" seems to be another point of contention, doesn't it? As is women keeping silent in the church. I am a skeptic, I will admit that. But I run into alot of "Bible-believing Christians" who, quite simply don't believe the Bible. Jesus said to call no man "father" and we do anyway. Paul said that women should keep silent in the church and I've never seen that exhortation put into practice. If we interpret the word "hate" as "to love less" then it becomes a sticky situation with God loving sin less or God loving divorce less or God loving Esau less. So I struggle with the fact that the Bible cannot be taken at face-value (it doesn't mean what it says). As soon as we open that Pandora's box, that the Bible doesn't mean what it says, then how are we ever to know what it DOES mean? Then it becomes one persons opinion against another and who is to say who is right? Anyway, yes, I am seeking truth. But I have trouble trusting something which people swear is without contradiction, even when the contradiction is as plain as the noses on our faces. And it cases of this sort, it seems like "Bible-believing Christians" pick and choose what parts they want to believe and what parts they don't. Here is another issue that I would seriously like an answer to: God says to love our enemies and to do good to those who spitefully use us. But He swears that He will destroy His enemies. Now I guess God is God but this certainly seems like a "do as I say, not as I do" approach. Any thoughts? seeking4truth |
||||||
19 | Did Jesus teach hate? | Luke 14:26 | seeking4truth | 101193 | ||
Hi, I understand that the NASB is the most accurate word-for-word translation in the English language, so maybe some of you can help me with this question. This verse says that Jesus taught that his followers should hate their father, mother, wife, children, brothers, and sisters. Given that the 10 Commandments said that we are to honor our father and mother, why did Jesus violate the Law here? As I understand it, Jesus came to fulfill the Law. So why the contradiction? I have looked up this question in the archives and have not seen a satisfactory answer. It was mnetioned that "hate" may be used as a comparative value. But having a face-value approach to the Bible, I feel that if Jesus had meant "does not love Me more," then he would have said so. Can anyone help? seeking4truth |
||||||