Results 1 - 20 of 154
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: stjones Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | An Unknown God? | Acts 28:2 | stjones | 157876 | ||
Hi, Robin; I think you and Kalos are looking at two sides of Romans 1:18-20. The passage in Acts is an illustration of Romans 1:20 ("For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse"). I think that the Greeks, knowing that none of their all-too-human gods could really account for what "has been made", saw evidence of the God of the Bible, but didn't know Him. The Muslims do not worship an unknown god evidenced by Creation; they worship a god revealed in the Qur'an. Unlike the God whom the Greeks sensed but didn't know, Allah is the creation of Muhammad. He reflects none of the "invisible qualities" that Paul wrote about. Indeed, since the Biblical revelation was complete by Muhammad's time, it could be said that Islam is an illustration of Romans 1:18-19 ("The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.)" Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
2 | How can I show the Bible is truth? | John 14:6 | stjones | 132558 | ||
Hi, winged1; I've given a sermon a couple of times on why I believe the Bible is indeed God's Word. Maybe this excerpt will be useful to you: http://www.kokomobeach.com/docs/excerpt_from_the_letter.htm Keep praying for your friend! Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
3 | old testiment of use today | 2 Tim 3:16 | stjones | 132503 | ||
Hi, BSC; I dunno about that. Jesus taught from the OT and quoted it often. If it was good enough for him, it's just fine for me. Besides, while the NT is about Jesus, the OT is about God the Father and his chosen people (Jesus' earthly family). So are your associates saying that they can ignore the Bible Jesus used or are they saying they don't need to know the Father better? The OT is a treasure trove for anyone who will sincerely dig there. Just my two cents' worth. Peace and grace Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
4 | Denounce militant Islam? | Matt 5:44 | stjones | 131712 | ||
Hi, Norrie; Pardon me of this is well-plowed ground; I've been away. I'm not sure it's accurate to say that Muslims are zealous for God. They are zealous for Allah whom they believe is God, but Allah is not God. Christians should always remember that whoever spoke to Muhammad in his cave denied Christ. That message could hardly have come from God; that leaves only the Father of Lies as the source. "a voice came from the cloud: 'This is my Son, whom I love. Listen to him!'" (Mark 9:7) "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning." (John 1:1-2) "Jesus is like Adam in the sight of God. He created him from dust and then said to him: 'Be,' and he was" (Qur'an 3:59) Wanting to be a good, tolerant, open-minded American, I've struggled with Allah's true identity. But I can't find any other explanation for what the Qur'an says about Jesus. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
5 | What is the New Covenant and where do I | Luke 22:20 | stjones | 114492 | ||
Jeremiah 31:31-34 "The time is coming," declares the LORD, "when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them," declares the LORD. "This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time," declares the LORD. "I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. No longer will a man teach his neighbor, or a man his brother, saying, 'Know the LORD,'because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest," declares the LORD. "For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more." The old covenant (the Law) is spoken of in the first part of Jeremiah's prophecy. In the second part, you can see the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, our personal relationship with God, God's grace, and the forgiveness of sins. This is tne new covenant Jesus referred to. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
6 | Was Adam and Eve's fall a good thing? | Bible general Archive 2 | stjones | 109046 | ||
Hi, dat; Paraclete has probably given you the Mormon spin. I don't know if his explanation accurately reflects Mormon teaching or not. Perhaps it will help you to understand your husband's error. It appears that your husband (like Paraclete) has been misled by Joseph Smith, who said of the Book of Mormon: "I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book." If your husband has fallen for this monstrous lie, I don't know if an explanation based on God's word will do much good. Your time might be better spent in prayer that God will release him from his bondage and open his eyes to the truth of the Bible. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
7 | 2Tim 2:15 Study dispensationally? | 2 Timothy | stjones | 108948 | ||
Hi, Ken; Why do you say it is a fact that one needs to study the Bible dispensationally? Is there a scriptural directive to approach it this way? In the interest of full disclosure, I am skeptical about this. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
8 | v18-20 refers to church leaders? | Rom 1:18 | stjones | 108879 | ||
Hi, Wanda; Paul doesn't leave much doubt who he is writing about - "men who suppress the truth by their wickedness". This could be anybody but he is mostly writing about the gentile Romans. He probably did not expect any of these folks to read his letter! Later on in the chapter, Paul provides two examples of the kind of willful stupidity he is talking about - "they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile" (v. 21). The first example is in v. 23, where he writes about people who "exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles". Paul is asking, in effect, how could people be so stupid as to believe that an object of their own creation could have god-like powers? The answer is, they can't really be that stupid, they are that wicked. The second example of this willful stupidity is found in the famous diatribe against homosexuality in v. 26-28. It is obvious just by looking at men and women what God's intent was. To engage in homosexual behavior is to ignore God's clear and unmistakable will. This is a further example of "men who suppress the truth by their wickedness". And although I have used the words "stupid" and "stupidity" to describe these folks' behavior, Paul makes it clear that ignorance is no defense - "men are without excuse". They became stupid on purpose, urged on by their own wickedness. Hope this is helpful. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
9 | Why not see for yourself? | Heb 10:14 | stjones | 108207 | ||
It should be obvious that I'm not taking your word for it. ;-) The passage does not say those who have been perfected now live a sinless life. We are perfected before God by Jesus' sacrifice. We approach earthly perfection because we strive to live a sinless life with the help of the Holy Spirit indwelling us. We fall short because we aren't Jesus, because our sinful nature is spriritually dead, crucified with Jesus, but physically alive. My victory is assured; I'm not worried about it. I hate to keep repeating myself, but I'm not perfect because I am not in perfect submission every moment and I do not have perfect knowledge of God's will every moment. I don't know anybody who is perfect. The alternative to perfection is sin. You still can't have it both ways. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
10 | Funny thing to take comfort in. | Heb 10:14 | stjones | 108205 | ||
Ok, I misunderstood your meaning. I guess this means we aren't friends after all.... -Indy |
||||||
11 | No greater bond than a common enemy? | Heb 10:14 | stjones | 108197 | ||
Excellent! We do indeed have a common enemy. I need to remind myself of that more often. Thanks. -Indy |
||||||
12 | My conscience is clear | Heb 10:14 | stjones | 108133 | ||
Hi, Gal5:16; Thanks for the reply. I agree that there are people who use grace as an excuse to sin. I know very few people like that and I don't think it is typical of most Christians. I also agree that it is God's intent to mold us into his Son's likeness and that our submission is required for that to happen. I don't agree that anyone has achieved such a perfect state of submission and such a perfect knowledge of God's will that God's job is finished. Everyone who falls short of that perfection (which is everyone but Jesus) is a sinner, plain and simple. If your conscience is clear, then you mispoke yourself in your original post; you must indeed be perfect. If you aren't perfect, you're a sinner just like the rest of us. You can't have it both ways. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
13 | Why remain defeated? | Heb 10:14 | stjones | 108099 | ||
Greetings, Gal5:16; I probably shouldn't respond because such judgmental, prideful posts always put me in a bad mood. I find messages that purport to tell the reader what he or she is thinking particularly annoying. But a couple of points just cry out for comment: You said "One question I always ask people to which they cannot respond is if perfection is not humanly possible, then how did Jesus do it." I can't imagine who you've been asking; the answer is simple. Jesus was fully God. He was not a human infused by the Holy Spirit as ordinary Christians are. If I'm not mistaken, there hasn't been another since - not me, not you. But as I read the rest of your post, I see that contrary to your initial claims, you too seem to "remain defeated." You do not "claim to perfect." If you are not perfect, then "you do what is sinful." And as John says, "No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him" (1 John 3:6) Unless God has started grading on a curve, you are failing right along with the rest of us miserable sinners. I hope you'll let us know when your knowledge of God's will is perfect every second of every day and your obedience to his will is perfect every second of every day. Until then, I suggest you trust in Jesus to cover your sins - even those you commit today. See? I told you such posts make me grouchy. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
14 | virgin birth | Matt 1:19 | stjones | 108010 | ||
Hi, schimc; Like love, belief is a commitment. Sometimes when the going gets tough, commitment is the only that carries you through. A closed mind isn't necessarily a bad thing; some people's minds are so open that every new breeze blows the contents away. -Indy |
||||||
15 | Is the Virgin Birth of Jesus a myth? | Matt 1:19 | stjones | 107964 | ||
Hi, schimc; I'm not sure what "discovery" you are referring to. There is certainly no reason to believe that Matthew made anything up. Matthew, Mark, and Luke all refer to Isaiah 7. I doubt that all three misunderstood Isaiah's prophecy. I do, however, think that we may misunderstand what it means to fulfill prophecy. If you read Isaiah 7, it is pretty clear that this was not a direct reference to Jesus. The boy named Immanuel was to be a sign to King Ahaz during his lifetime. But that does not mean that Matthew and the others are wrong. A New Testament scholar and seminary professor whom I have the utmost respect for (conservative, evangelical) offered his explanation to a class I was in. In the Hebrew world, the fulfillment of prophecy meant that a prior word or event was brought to perfection. We tend to think of prophecy as a kind God-ordained forecast - the prophet says thus-and-so will happen and when it happens we say that the prophecy has been fulfilled. We can also say that the prophet's words were brought to perfection. For exmaple, if I say the drought will end because it's going to rain tomorrow, that's nice; it may remind someone to take their umbrella, but it won't water the crops. When it does indeed rain, those words are brought to perfection and the crops are in fact saved. The words have been made perfect in physical reality. But an event can also be prophecy. The birth of the boy Immanuel is an example. His name was to be Immanuel ("God with us") because his birth was a sign to King Ahaz that God would be with him in an upcoming battle. But the idea of a boy being born who would embody the promise of "God with us" was brought to perfection in the birth of Jesus. There can be no more perfect example of "God with us" than Jesus, who was God and was (and is) with us. Given the ancient Hebrew understanding of what it means to fulfill prophecy, we can see that it was proper for the three Gospel writers to refer to Isaiah 7, even though the boy named Immanuel had been born and died long before. As others have mentioned, the Hebrew word that Isaiah used to describe Immanuel's mother does not necessarily mean a virgin in the modern sense. Assuming she was just a young, unmarried woman, we can see that Mary, who truly was a virgin in the modern sense, was the perfection of the idea of a pure young woman bearing a son who would fulfill God's promise. Sorry to be so long-winded. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
16 | When were we a Christian Nation? | 2 Chr 7:14 | stjones | 107865 | ||
Hi, justme; Alas, the United States never was a Christian nation. The founding document - the Constitution - makes no mention of God. Some of the colonies were distinctly Christian, but that did not carry over to the United States. The Constitution does reflect some philosophical principles that arose from Christianity but it embodies none of the theology. Perhaps the biggest difference between now and then is that those politicians who were Christians seemed to be a bit more open about it and were more willing to be guided by their Christian values. And people were not horrified to learn that a politician might read the Bible and be guided by Biblical principles. That is not to say that the great promise in this passage is irrelevant. It just means that it is up to individual Christians to apply the Great Commission to our own neighborhoods, cities, and states. If we make this a Christian nation - not politically but one convert at a time - I'm sure God will indeed heal our land. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
17 | Was God the Protector of the Israelites? | Ex 13:21 | stjones | 107781 | ||
Hi, punkiedo; Well, I believe that God was in the pillar of cloud and in the pillar of fire as Exodus 13:21 says. Why do you ask? Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
18 | Would I submit? | Prov 3:5 | stjones | 107777 | ||
Fair enough. Probably time to let it go. - Indy |
||||||
19 | Is it true? | Prov 3:5 | stjones | 107733 | ||
Hi, Aixen7z4; You can't have it both ways. You say that the questioners "could be aggressive in expressing their thoughts", yet you object to that very behavior today. How will you compel questioners to end by "asking the 'experts' how those thoughts squared with Scripture"? As for the Bereans, they were indeed exceptional. So was Jesus. Should Christians not strive to be exceptional? We would do better to encourage all visitors to test every word rather than spoon feed them with "expert" answers. You said "I do fear that if we abridge the freedom of the participants to come on and pontificate, that they may not come at all." I wonder if you can make the same statement reversing the "we" and "they": "I do fear that if they abridge the freedom of the participants to come on and pontificate, we may not come at all." Are you among those who pontificate? Do you see yourself as a questioner or an "expert"? Indeed, I would like everyone who is calling for "experts" to state unequivocally that they would submit to the judgment of the "experts" if they were not among the chosen few. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
20 | why is Acts 2:44 not practiced today | Acts 2:44 | stjones | 107709 | ||
Greetings, rcreasy53; I think the answer is found in your question - that was the first Christian church. All the believers, together with the apostles, were in one place. The majority of them probably knew each other or had friends in common. Those who weren't eyewitnesses to Jesus' ministry, death, or resurrection were rubbing shoulders with people who were. That kind of gathering won't happen again until we are all together in Heaven. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ] Next > Last [8] >> |