Results 1 - 20 of 42
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Hiskid84 Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Is it ever o.k. to say no to a brother | Bible general Archive 2 | Hiskid84 | 125745 | ||
kalos: great answer! I have to admit, your example concerning grown children hit a little too close to home for me. I think as a mother it's especially difficult to stifle that desire to shelter our kids, even from their bad choices. (And even harder when the fate of our grandchildren is involved) And though I struggle with this issue, you gave some excellent advice on this and helping people in general. I think both of your principles regarding (1) creating dependency and (2) interfering in God's instruction, go hand in hand. These are definitely areas where we need to exercise great caution. I would like to add a couple of thoughts: 1) Pray for those in need. Ask God what He would have you do to help them (if anything). For some people, it's easier to give money as a quick fix than it is to come along side a person and help them look for long term solutions to financial problems. In other words, it's easier to give of our money than it is to give of our time. (Example: could you provide reliable transportation to someone who is unable to work due to lack of transportation? Could you provide emergency babysitting services? Help them find affordable transportation or childcare if you are unable to offer those things?) 2) Don't be disheartened if you give to someone and discover you have been taken advantage of. God may use your gift to change their heart or He may use it to bless yours (and teach you wisdom in discernment in the process). Anything is possible with God! However, we don't have to see what He's doing to know that He is working. I'd rather err on the side of giving than withholding. hisown_07: you asked about taking money that was meant to pay an obligation and using it to help another person. It seems like the obvious answer would be "no" when in reality it may depend upon many variables. Here are a couple: a) Are others depending upon you (ie., spouse, children) to meet these obligations? I believe God would have us make those dependent upon us for their care our first priority. (Insert Scripture here. Anyone?) However, b) Is the other person's need a true emergency? (Unexpected illness, loss of job, car repairs causing them to face dire circumstances? Or has laziness or foolish spending brought them to this point?) If it is a true emergency and helping them would put you in somewhat dire circumstances, you might need to help them seek other sources of aid. If it is a true emergency and helping them would be an inconvenience in some way (having to pay late fees on the earmarked bill) or would cause you to put in a few extra hours at work, then I would say the decision would be based on how much you believe that you should help this person. I guess what I'm trying to say is this: Carefully weigh all the factors. Just as carefully, pray for godly wisdom and direction. Sorry this was so long! It was my first post and I got carried away! Karen (Mrs. Doc) |
||||||
2 | What is God's major attribute? | Bible general Archive 2 | Hiskid84 | 129556 | ||
tgbishop, Thank you for sharing about yourself. It really does help to know something about the person when you address their question. (Not that I can talk... it took me over a month to fill out my profile) When I responded to another question you asked I might have phrased it somewhat differently if I had know more about you. For instance, having been a single mother and knowing what a struggle that can be, I probably wouldn't have asked if your desire was to "keep up with the Jones" (Jones'? Joneses? Jones's? Jones'es? Ack...why couldn't the person that coined that phrase have said "keep up with the Smiths?" Please don't tell anyone I homeschooled my children!). Anyway, your questions are interesting to me as I like to challenge myself to support what I believe with Scripture and not just because it's my opinion or my experience. So thanks for asking them! May God richly bless you in your pursuit to know Him better. :) Your "sista" in Christ, Karen |
||||||
3 | What is God's major attribute? | Bible general Archive 2 | Hiskid84 | 129559 | ||
Hi, Steve. Thank you for posting about God's attribute. Having considered it for a while I couldn't see a way to make one stand out above the others. I imagine from God's perspective they are all equal. It sure is hard to wrap our finite minds around the things of God! Anyway, it is interesting that, of all the attributes of God, holy is the only one that is repeated (to my knowledge) 3 times (Isa 6:3 and Rev 4:8). I hope others will respond as well. It certainly makes for an interesting discussion. In Him, Karen |
||||||
4 | SHOULD WOMAN BE PRECHING | Bible general Archive 2 | Hiskid84 | 130133 | ||
Hi, Searcher. Thank you for your contribution to this thread. I often wonder if the people that have been on the forum for a long time ever get tired of answering the same questions over and over. (Perhaps it is evidence of the fruit of the Spirit; love, patience, kindess, etc) The person that posted this question (jehova4130) seemed to be having difficulty getting the question just right. First was posted this question, "what does it mean in chpt2 11,12?". I responded by asking, "What book??". (Though I had a feeling the question was refering to 1 Tim, I opted to use 2 Tim for the verse I had to post in order to even respond to this person) Then the person posted a second question (which was the same as the first) and which started this thread. After starting this thread, the person then went back to the original question they posted (what does it mean...) and responded to my question of "which book??" with the reply, "1 Tim. 2:11-12". So the person has clarified which book, which verse and what the question is. Unfortunately, all of this is done in bits and pieces as part of two different threads. And if I have you totally confused, my work here is done. :-) In Him, Karen |
||||||
5 | cremation or burial of the body | Bible general Archive 2 | Hiskid84 | 130711 | ||
Reminds me of how the Moslems had heard about the story of Messiah, so when they were in control of Jerusalem, they studied the prophecy carefully. Knowing that Jews avoid cemetaries, they carefully built one right in front of the gate that Messiah would have to enter on the foal of a donkey. They went to great pains, and that cemetary is still there. However, they built it around the 1300's. :-) Doc (on my far-better-half's computer) |
||||||
6 | How can incest be forbidden? | Gen 3:3 | Hiskid84 | 129813 | ||
Ed: please don't shoot my husband! Doc: please stop speculating in your posts directed to Ed! Both: truce? It seems your dialogue has ceased to be beneficial to either of you. Perhaps your time and energy could be put to better use by moving on. May we glorify God together, Karen |
||||||
7 | Pragmatism is of the World | Job 21:15 | Hiskid84 | 129570 | ||
Hi, mommapbs. I should probably think about this more before posting this but since I'm impulsive I'm going to throw it out here anyway. :) (Actually I've been thinking of it off and on since you posted it but now it's almost time to leave for church) The other day as I was thinking of some ways that I have grown (mostly in trusting God and understanding that one can experience His peace even in the midst of intense heartache but also in learning to keep my mouth shut when it wouldn't be beneficial to say what is on my mind), I realized that every single good thing that comes out of me is not of me. It's all HIS work in me. So even if some good "works" come out of me or I am able to minister to someone or do anything of eternal benefit, I can't claim it. Certainly not here and I doubt it in the hereafter. How can I, when it's all His work and none of mine? So I had this vision of giving back my crown(s) when I stand (or kneel or lay prostrate) before Him and understanding that they rightly belong to Him not me. The surprise came when I went to look up the verse that says we will throw our crowns at His feet and discovered that (according to Rev. 4:10) it is the four and twenty elders that are casting their crowns at His feet! So I'm not sure if I will be given the opportunity to give my crown back to Him but I do know that this knowledge I've been given, that it is His work and not mine, causes praise to well up in my heart each time I see Him at work and instead of patting myself on the back I am able to truly give Him all the glory. Hope this makes sense! My one other (quick!) thought is this: Our "service" to Christ can't have only eternal benefits when we are so blessed by His work in us here as we seek to do His will. In Him, Karen |
||||||
8 | Pragmatism is of the World | Job 21:15 | Hiskid84 | 129626 | ||
Hi, Ray. Thank you for sharing your thoughts. :) Though it was my impression that Hank's post was strictly tongue-in-cheek, you posted some interesting things to think about. I was curious about this statement you made: "How about us? Are we going to make Him King of our lives? This is an important pronoun of Deity. It is a thing (pronoun) to consider carefully, pragmatically." Now I have to admit, not being as knowledgeable as some on the forum I am still trying to understand the term "pragmatism" and get a general idea of what it encompasses. For that reason I can't really address that entire statement. However, I am curious as to your thought that somehow we have the ability to make Christ the King of our lives. It seems to equal Country Girl's statement that Hank was replying to. Please don't think I am nit-picking here. (That's a weird phrase...has anyone ever really picked a nit? What IS a nit? Is that like those tiny things monkeys like to eat?) I honestly do believe that I understand what it is you (and Country Girl) are wanting to convey (and please correct me if I'm wrong). I'm just wondering if this might be a better way to express it: Jesus Christ is the eternal King. He is Ruler over all things. He is King of my life. As such, I acknowledge His kingship through my obedience to His commands. (1 Tim 1:15) This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief. (1Tim 1:16) However, for this reason I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might show all longsuffering, as a pattern to those who are going to believe on Him to everlasting life. (1Tim 1:17) Now to the KING eternal, immortal, invisible, to God who alone is wise, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen (1 Tim 6:13) I urge you in the sight of God who gives life to all things, and before Christ Jesus who witnessed the good confession before Pontius Pilate, (1 Tim 6:14) that you keep this commandment without spot, blameless until the appearing, (1 Tim 6:15) which He will manifest in His own time, He who is the blessed and only Potentate (Sovereign), the KING of kings and Lord of lords, (1 Tim 6:16) who alone has immortality, dwelling in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see, to whom be honor and everlasting power. Amen. NKJ He IS the King. To say that I must make Him king of my life is to say that failure to do so makes Him NOT king of my life. I do not possess the power to either place Him on any throne (whether my heart or elsewhere) or to dethrone Him (since He already is King). So the real issue is not whether I make Him king of my life (something already existing) but to what degree I submit my life to His kingship. Or so go my thoughts on the subject. I hope they make sense. If not, please see Hank. :) In Christ, Karen |
||||||
9 | Pragmatism is of the World | Job 21:15 | Hiskid84 | 129732 | ||
Hello, Ray. Thank you very much for taking time to respond to my post and for giving me some new things to think about. :) After I posted to you yesterday, I went back and reread your post a couple of times. I realized that I was missing (what I believe was) the key point that you were trying to make and knew that it had to do with the upper and lower case use of the letter "k" in the word king. So first of all, I will confess to you (and everyone else) that I realize I am hypersensitive towards anything that hints at a "works" gospel. I won't apologize for that but I will apologize if it causes me to misinterpret the main idea someone is wanting to express (as in the case yesterday). The only way I can see to deal with this "problem" I'm having is to acknowledge the main idea, derive any benefit from it (the opportunity to learn), and ask about the statements that I believe are in opposition to what the Bible teaches. With those things in mind, I address the latest post by you (directed to me: 129690). I want to preface anything I write henceforth by saying that even if a statement is within the context of the main idea (which, of course, it would be), if, on its own, it is something I believe to be false I will question it. Okay, now to the heart of this post: I am very sincere in giving thanks to you for giving me some things to "chew on". After looking at the verses in John 18 (37-38) and seeing Jesus acknowledging He is "a king" I am now very curious as to His statement. Though it may be painfully obvious to some, I am trying to understand how He was/is a king in the lower case sense of the word. To say He is THE King (King over all, uppercase K) is easy. His Word makes that plain. And yet, I am struggling with the concept of Him being a king in the earthly sense of the word (a male sovereign over a group of people). I would be very interested in anything you (or others) would like to share on the subject. Though I have a little bit of difficulty getting it totally straight in my mind, I can understand the concept of Him being the Light (though I'm not sure if I would equate "enlighten all men" with "gives light to every man"...I'll have to get back to you on that). And I can easily see that Jesus was indeed a man as well as the second Adam. However, would you please explain (if time permits) how He was a savior, lower case, if the definition of that word is, "A person who rescues another from harm, danger, or loss." Again, it is simple to see Him as Savior, upper case form. I'm also having the same difficulty with the word, "rock". In what way was He a "fortress, stronghold" in the earthly sense of the word? To help you understand my perspective, I am looking at all these things from the point of them equating to His earthly ministry. How else can we apply any lower case word to Him except to apply it to His humanity (as opposed to His diety)? Help, please! My brain is hurting! With all of that addressed I will now move on to my "nit-picking" for today. Your statement was: "So I do not want you or anyone to make Him king of your life. I want us to make Him King of kings, and Lord of lords. That is accomplished by accepting the things, the truths, of God's word; even knowing the Truth." Please help me to understand how we can possibly make Christ anything. If I fail to accept the truths of God's Word, even "knowing the Truth", is He no longer King of kings? Or are you meaning that we are to acknowledge Him for who He is? Part of my confusion is in the phrase, "I want us to MAKE Him King of kings..." Your definition above of "make" is, " "to do" something, to accomplish a thing." Ray, please believe me when I say it is not my intention to cause dissension. I truly want to understand your position. I hope you can help me. In Him, Karen |
||||||
10 | Pragmatism is of the World | Job 21:15 | Hiskid84 | 129751 | ||
Aaron, Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts. :) They did help bring some things into perspective for me. I was wondering if you could answer a question for me (since it appears that I cannot post without asking at least one). Knowing that God cannot lie, Jesus must have been (or still is?) truly the king of the Jews (according to your statements above). You wrote that He did not claim to be "THE King" but "a king" the "king of the Jews (an earthly king)". Could you define His (earthly) kingship over the Jews if you have time? Thank you so much for your help! In Him, Karen |
||||||
11 | Pragmatism is of the World | Job 21:15 | Hiskid84 | 129804 | ||
Greetings, Ray. I pray that your daughter and new son-in-law will draw close(r) to Christ in their union and that God will use the gift of marriage to give them, on a more personal level, insight into His relationship with the Church (especially the depth of His love for us as revealed in Eph 5:22-33). I pray that your daughter's husband will nourish and cherish her, following Christ's example, and that your daughter will submit to Christ with respect and honor towards her husband. May He be greatly glorified today and may it be a truly joyous occasion! I know this can be a highly emotional event, even for a dad, so I pray that both you and your wife will find God's grace to be more than sufficient as you give the care of your daughter over to her new husband. I look forward to a continuation of our discussion, as time permits, and hope you are able to address my questions. In Christ, Karen |
||||||
12 | follow-up question. | Is 9:6 | Hiskid84 | 129433 | ||
Hi, Country Girl. I have a question about your statement: "Absolutely none of us could hold a candle to what Christ did or even the Apostles did; mainly because they had the Spirit of God to assist them." We cannot "hold a candle to what Christ did" because He is the Son of God and sinless perfection. However, though I would not dare to compare myself to an Apostle, do we not have that same Holy Spirit to assist us? Thank you for your explanation to flordeliz. As is usually the case, they (and we) had their eyes on earthly things rather than heavenly. The Jews were looking for relief from their bondage to the Romans (physical) rather than relief from their bondage to sin (spiritual). Just as when Jesus said in John 2:19, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up," the Jews thought He meant the actual building and He was speaking of the temple of His body (John 2:21). Though the Holy Spirit guides us into all truth, many times we still don't see the "heavenly perspective" because our eyes are on the earthly. For example, in Romans 8:28 we read that "all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose." From our earthly perspective we expect God to take difficult circumstances and make something good out of them in such a tangible way that we can point to the "good" and say, "See what God has done for us?" This helps to "explain" away the "bad" things that come our way. However, if we view it from a "heavenly perspective" (God's view) we can rest in knowing that in all circumstances God is conforming us to the image of His Son. We may not be able to see it and yet, we can KNOW it because He has told us so. "Lord, help me to get my eyes off of the temporary, physical realm that focuses on me and help me to put them on You and things eternal." In Him, Karen |
||||||
13 | Does God judge nations directly? | Obad 1:2 | Hiskid84 | 130709 | ||
This is easy to answer: we take the literal stuff as listeral and the symbolic stuff as symbolic. The only trick is when the text does not lend itself to clear identification. I've never been a big fan of eschatology. Probably because I see so many people all wrapped up in it instead of pursuing holiness. I have a solid confidence in seeing my Lord. How He chooses to manifest Himself will, no doubt, be different than I am able to conceieve. That said, I find that Revelation is a powerfully symbolic book. There are dragons and beasts etc. etc. Some is or must necessarily be symbolic. The millinial reign possibly falls into the catagory. One reason is that there is mention of sacrifices being made. Since Christ is our sacrifice, fully fulfilling our every need for sacrifice, what can this mean? If you really pin me down, I tend to fall on the more literal view of the millenial reign. I'd be considered pre-mill post-trib. But there are a lot of dead theologians out there, who are a whole lot smarter than I am, who don't see a millenial reign at all. in the face of such opposition, I just can't seem to get onto the Hal Lindsey band wagon. If that makes me foolish, then its your fault for dragging it out of me! :-) If you'd left it well enough alone, maybe my foolishness would have been in question! :-) Doc (On my far-better-half's computer) |
||||||
14 | Do we receive *holy *spirit as a gift? | Luke 11:13 | Hiskid84 | 130188 | ||
Hi, Ray. Thank you very much for explaining your thoughts to me in such a way that I think I understand what it is you are wanting to convey. I must admit though, it didn't come easy! I only have a few moments to write this reply but hopefully I will be able to cover everything I want to point out. You say that you are "...merely suggesting that there is a holy spirit in Scripture as well." We know there is a spirit. Romans 8:16 speaks of "the Spirit" and "our spirit" in the same sentence. I guess my response to your statement would have to be; do you believe our spirit (obviously after conversion) is holy? If we are to walk "according to the spirit" it would seem, by necessity, it would have to be holy. The same is true of verse 9. If we are "in the spirit" because the Spirit of God dwells in us" and being "in the spirit" means we are not walking in the flesh, our spirit would have to be holy. So this is why you are wondering if the "gift of the Holy Spirit" is really the "gift of the holy spirit" or God giving us the gift of making our spirit holy. Yes? No? You wrote: "2) Verse 6, NKJ, "For to be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace." Verse 6, NASB, "For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace." We have to decide whether the Scripture is talking about being spiritually minded or be thinking of the Spirit. Is it speaking of spirit or Spirit?" I believe that verse is saying (in both forms) that we are to have our minds set on the things of the Spirit. Wouldn't being carnally minded mean our minds are focused on the things of the flesh? Why we would want our minds focused on the things of the spirit? To use spirit in this way we would have to say our minds are focused on the things of OUR spirit, wouldn't it? Even if our spirit was holy, why would we be told to focus on the things of our spirit rather than God's? Because our spirit now looks like His? What would it mean for our spirit to be holy? What would it "look like"? Isn't holiness the absence of sin? If you could define "holy" that would help. Because to say our spirit is without sin is to say that part of our being has already attained a form of perfection. (I can't wait to hear the "Be ye holy as I am holy" quotes!) Unfortunately, my brain functions at an even slower pace at this time of night so I have to quit for now. The more I try to reason this out the more I get tangled in my circles. I just want to add one last thing. In verse 6 of the NKJ it speaks of being "spiritually minded". I don't think it's in error to equate this with setting our minds on the things of the Spirit. To be godly (lower case) minded still means to have our mind toward the things of God. In the same way, to be spiritually minded would mean to have our mind toward the things of the Spirit. Your turn. :-) In Him, Karen |
||||||
15 | why was the thief saved without baptism? | Luke 23:43 | Hiskid84 | 129923 | ||
Hi, Hank. You asked, "Do we seek in Scripture ways to justify our preconceptions and misconceptions, or do we found our faith and practice solely on Scripture?" As is the way of the forum I would like to ask a question (or 4 1/2) in response to your question. How can we tell the difference? How can we know if what we believe to be biblical truth is, in fact, erroneous? Would anyone admit to using Scripture to justify their incorrect beliefs? Wouldn't (most) everyone claim that THEIR faith and practice is founded solely on Scripture (regardless of reality)? Solely on Scripture. Isn't that known as...never mind. :) Inquiring minds would like to know. Karen |
||||||
16 | why was the thief saved without baptism? | Luke 23:43 | Hiskid84 | 129969 | ||
Greetings, Brother Hank. Thank you for a very insightful reply. I appreciate your truthfulness, clarity and humility. (Just don't let it go to your head) :) You ended your post with the question, "How would you answer your question?" Why, I would borrow your answer, of course! "Your question is tough. It makes me think, and I don't like that." (Is this beginning to feel like a game of "gotcha last"?) Seriously, you did a wonderful job. There's not really anything I can think of to add. Your guidelines in the quest for truth were right on. Your comment, "Man loves to gussy up the plain gospel message with "user-friendly" dross; to dilute its power to convict sinners and feed the saints by sprinkling in a big dose of I'm-O.K.-you're -O.K. humanism" reminded me of something my pastor said in his sermon last week. In preaching on Ephesians 3:7-12, and specifically on grace as it was exhibited in Paul's life, he was showing some of the ways that God's grace has become less than amazing in today's modern world. We must have an accurate understanding of our fallen state. God gives grace to the humble--humility comes through comparison of our true selves to the holiness of God. (Sorry my sermon notes are a little choppy) Then he made this statement, "We need to stop trying to get people saved and get people lost." Hopefully you'll make the connection. Thanks again for putting thought and effort into your reply. Your sis, Karen |
||||||
17 | Does asking in His name ever work? | John 14:13 | Hiskid84 | 129980 | ||
Hi, Emmaus. You did a very good job of answering. In fact, you said everything I was going to! :) I just want to add one thought. I know many times I have prayed for something and it seemed God did not answer. However, later I realized that He had indeed answered but in an unexpected way. To give a very basic example: I pray a prayer for God to change me and make me more like Him. I'm expecting to see an obvious answer. After all, I'm certain that my prayer isn't being asked amiss. So I'm looking for an opportunity to help someone, or maybe gain some new insight into the Bible or understanding of God. Some "confirmation" that God has answered my prayer. In the meantime, something comes along in my life that I don't handle very well and find myself asking God, "Why has this happened?" Far too often I realize, after the fact, that in this "event" I had opportunity to change and be more like Him. Did I? No. I took my eyes off of Him and fixed them on the problem. If I had kept my eyes on Him I might have learned to trust Him more. I could have meditated upon Philippians 4:13 and relied upon His strength and not my own. I could have put 1 Thess. 5:16-18 into practice, knowing I was fulfilling His will for me. Would these things have produced growth and change in me? It's very likely. Would that have been a direct answer to my prayer. Most definitely! Did God cause something bad to happen in order to bring about His answer? No way. However, He has this wonderfully unique way of taking unexpected things and using them for our good (growth) and His glory. So sometimes He uses circumstances to answer prayer. We just have to be open to whatever way He may choose to reply. Just my 0.02 worth. Karen |
||||||
18 | Human Power? | John 15:5 | Hiskid84 | 129174 | ||
Country Girl, I know your posting time is limited but I was wondering how you explain Ephesians 1:13-14. "(Eph 1:13) In Him you also trusted, after you heard the Word of Truth, the gospel of your salvation, in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, (Eph 1:14) who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory." These verses say that, when we are saved the Holy Spirit (who was promised to come) has come to dwell within us. This indwelling of the Holy Spirit is God's seal upon us, signifying that we are His. This same Holy Spirit within us GUARANTEES our inheritance. Do you read it some other way? Another verse I am curious about is John 6:44, which says: "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day." These are the words of Jesus Christ and they are saying that those who come to Him will be raised by Him AT THE LAST DAY. In the surrounding verses I find nothing about exceptions. It seems that if there were exceptions it would have been written, "I will raise him up at the last day UNLESS..." What is your interpretation of this verse? Thank you for any reply you may be able to give. In Him, Karen |
||||||
19 | Human Power? | John 15:5 | Hiskid84 | 129399 | ||
Country Girl, It appears that you are replying to this post by Mark: "Hi Country Girl, I'm glad you brought this up. To me, this verse (Rev 3:20) ties together several current threads. Salvation IS conditional, and the condition rests with us. God has already said He wants in. IF anyone hears His voice and opens the door..." Is this correct? I'm curious because in the following post BradK replies that the statement above ("salvation IS conditional and the condition rests with us") is unscriptural. In the next post Mark agrees and retracts that statement. Your post says: "I appreciate your speaking up. Sometimes, it gets lonely defending the truth. Preach on, dear friend, preach on." My question then is, did you make the statement above in response to Mark's original post to you (the one quoted above)? If so, was it in response to his post in its entirety or were your remarks only directed to the portion of his post that was not retracted ("God has already said He wants in. IF anyone hears His voice and opens the door...")? I'm sorry I seem to be in the minority of those to whom it is not (pretty) clear. Unfortunately, your Gal. verses didn't even tie it all together for me. Thanks for any help you can give. In Him, Karen |
||||||
20 | Human Power? | John 15:5 | Hiskid84 | 129403 | ||
Hi, Hank. I just wanted to share my interpretation of Acts 5:1-11. (I really hope I'm not opening a can of worms here) Please keep in mind that I am not attempting to use this as a proof text for losing or keeping salvation. Just trying to interpret the passages in context and curious as to your thoughts. I always read Acts 5:1 to be a continuation of what was going on in the last section of Acts 4. Acts 4 ends with Barnabas having land, selling it, bringing the money and laying it at the apostles feet (Acts 4:36-37). Acts 5:1 picks up with the word, "But", and begins to tell the story of Ananias and Sapphira doing (basically) the same thing as Barnabas, with the exception of keeping part of the money and lying to God. Now, if you were to back up to the beginning of the text that includes the story of Barnabas you would find yourself at Acts 4:32, which begins: "Now the multitude of those who believed were of one heart and one soul; neither did anyone say that any of the things he possessed was his own, but they had all things in common. And with great power the apostles gave witness to the resurretion of the Lord jesus. And great grace was upon THEM ALL (emphasis mine). Nor was there anyone among them who lacked; for all who were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the proceeds of the things that were sold, and laid them at the apostles feet; and they distributed to each as anyone had need." Acts 4:32-35 I always thought that it was keeping in context to say that Ananias and Sapphira were included in the "all" mentioned above (Acts 4:33). Verse 32 says "the multitude of THOSE WHO BELIEVED". Okay, so with that in mind, this has been my take on the whole thing with Ananias and Sapphira: They were both believers (sinners saved by grace). Though they may have been the first, I'm certain they were not the last Christians guilty of the sin of greed or of trying to hide their sinful deeds from God. I always figured God used them as an example to the rest of the believers. After all, it says, "great fear came upon all those who heard these things." God definitely had their attention as the early church was being established. However, taking the lives of Ananias and Sapphira doesn't (in any way) mean that they lost their salvation. God could have removed them from the scene, both to give a warning and to prevent them from doing worse. (I know, I know..."incoming flak") To sum it up, I guess one could say that Ananias and Sapphira's sin was punishable by death. However, if they were saved I know their salvation wasn't lost. If they were not saved, it's kind of interesting that they were punished (by death) for the sin of greed and lying to God. Although it may just be that it's past my bedtime, it seems like the lesson would have carried more weight among the believers if God had been punishing believers for bringing shame to His name and upon His church than for punishing non-believers for sin. Anyway, those are just my humble thoughts. I didn't intend to put speculation in there but it happened anyway. So, pull out a worm and tell me what you think. :) In Him, Karen |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 3 ] Next > Last [3] >> |