Results 1 - 20 of 361
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Bill Mc Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Let unite in prayer believers in Christ! | Not Specified | Bill Mc | 15937 | ||
Fellow brothers and sisters in Christ, Let's start praying for the tragedies that are happening at the Pentagon, the Twin Towers and the threat at the White House. Many people have died, are dying, or will die as result of these attacks. Many souls are going into eternity this morning. Let put aside any differences we have and ask our Lord to intervene during this time of crisis. |
||||||
2 | How do we live the 'Christian life'? | Not Specified | Bill Mc | 18117 | ||
Do these verses describe how the Christian is to live the 'Christian life'? We, as believers, claim to follow, to imitate Christ. We say we want to do what He did. Then why do we not have His attitude? Acts 2:22 "Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which GOD PERFORMED THROUGH HIM in your midst, just as you yourselves know--" John 5:30 "I CAN DO NOTHING ON MY OWN INITIATIVE. As I hear, I judge; and My judgment is just, because I DO NOT SEEK MY OWN WILL, but the will of HIM who sent Me." John 14:24 "He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the WORD WHICH YOU HEAR IS NOT MINE, but the FATHER'S who sent Me." John 12:49 "For I DID NOT SPEAK ON MY OWN INITIATIVE, but the FATHER Himself who sent Me has given Me a commandment as to WHAT TO SAY and WHAT TO SPEAK." John 8:28 So Jesus said, "When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am He, and I DO NOTHING ON MY OWN INITIATIVE, BUT I speak these things as the FATHER taught Me." John 7:16 So Jesus answered them and said, "MY TEACHING IS NOT MINE, BUT HIS who sent Me." John 5:19 Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, THE SON CAN DO NOTHING OF HIMSELF, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner." John 20:21 So Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you; as the Father has sent Me, I ALSO SEND YOU." John 15:5 "I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit, for APART FROM ME YOU CAN DO NOTHING." Apart from Him, we can do NOTHING. Is this true or was Jesus lying? In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
3 | Sir Pent and GeneralWas, notice please. | Bible general Archive 1 | Bill Mc | 14515 | ||
Sir Pent and GeneralWas, I'm responding to this thread in order to clarify a possible misconception - mainly because my online ID was used. If you have read any of my postings, you'll find that, except for scripture, I refrain as much as possible from "cut and paste" responses. I feel that if I can't explain my opinion with my own words or thoughts, then I should not respond to a question. Your question seems to imply that possibly GeneralWas and Bill Mc are the same person. I assure you, they are not. Unfortunately, there is no profile for GeneralWas so I couldn't email him. While, I did post the link in a previous thread (responding to a question from JVH0212) I will not "copy and paste" theological points of view to this forum. In fact, if you check some of my prior discussions with other members, you'll see that I have asked others to use that technique sparingly. I would also NEVER create a false online ID to mask my identity. GeneralWas, could you please confirm this? Christians on this forum can follow the link as curiosity and the Spirit leads. In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
4 | Sir Pent and GeneralWas, notice please. | Bible general Archive 1 | Bill Mc | 14549 | ||
Sir Pent, there was no offense taken whatsoever. Please don't feel that I've taken any. I just wanted to make it very clear that I have no ties with GeneralWas (as far as I know). To be honest, that link was forwarded to me from another forum poster and I have not even read anything on it concerning Fowler's theory of the Trinity. The Trinity issue, for me, is something that I (rightly or wrongly) have never been able to comepletely understand and I accept it as fact by faith. Go in grace, brother. In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
5 | Sir Pent and GeneralWas, notice please. | Bible general Archive 1 | Bill Mc | 14607 | ||
GeneralWas, thanks for your confirmation. To make your search easier, the web site link is www.christinyou.net You make a very good point about the "search for truth." To me, truth is what God says. God says that we would know it because the Spirit would take the things of Christ and make them known to us. There are many wonderful Christian brothers and sisters that post on this forum. But there is also a tendency for some to reply to questions with a 'cut and paste' answer from their commentaries. While I agree that a commentary can be a great tool, it can also become a crutch. As you said, the Holy Spirit will lead us into all truth of scripture interpretation as we rely on Him to reveal the meaning. In my opinion, many Christians know what scripture SAYS but they are clueless as to what it MEANS to them because they rely on the theologians and commentaries first instead of letting the Spirit and other scripture interpret scripture. Continue to be a Berean and thanks for your reply. In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
6 | GeneralWas and Bill Mc? | Bible general Archive 1 | Bill Mc | 14608 | ||
Question was replied to. | ||||||
7 | How can Christ return be imminent? | Bible general Archive 1 | Bill Mc | 14670 | ||
Greetings CDBJ and Tim, same here. Pre-wrath is the only position that lines up with all scriptures dealing with the second coming and rapture. I was pretrib for most of my life just because that's what I was taught. One of the problems I have with explaining prewrath to my fellow brothers and sisters who hold to pretrib is that they want to view the rapture and the 2nd coming as 2 separate events. I try to explain it this way: What did the 1st coming of Christ entail? 1. His birth 2. His earthly ministry 3. His death 4. His burial and resurrection 4. His ascension. All separate events but they together constitute His first coming. Likewise, His 2nd coming will entail: 1. the rapture 2. the great tribulation 3. the wrath of God/start of the Day of the Lord 4. the battle of Armeggedon 5. His triumphal return (White horse) 6. Setting up the millenial kingdom. All separate events but together they constitute His second coming. What do you think? In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
8 | How can Christ return be imminent? | Bible general Archive 1 | Bill Mc | 14715 | ||
Dear Debbie, The study of the rapture and Christ's second coming is, as you know, surrounded by much debate. And it's difficult to 'convince' anyone by just citing one or two verses and saying, "see there?" That is why, after looking at ALL the verses that deal with this subject, I found that the prewrath theory is the only one, for me, that stands up to close scrutiny. But I will try to answer your questions in brief. I'm at work, so I won't be able to list all the verses necessary to support this view. But one of the sources of confusion in this topic is the labeling of events. If we look at what scripture has to say, the 7 week period is NEVER called the Tribulation period. It is called Daniel's 70th week and it is divided into two three-and-one-half periods. The first 3.5 years is the time Christ calls 'labor pains'. The last 3.5 years contains what Christ calls the 'Great Tribulation' and the Day of God's Wrath. The great tribulation is also known as the time of Satan's wrath - against the church and the nation of Israel. This time period is cut short by God's wrath upon Satan and unbelievers. But before God's wrath is poured out on the world (the 7 bowls), believers, as you rightly discerned, His children are pulled out (the rapture). God's children are NEVER subject to His wrath because Christ took it for us. So, we will be spared the wrath of God. And, as you said, God performed the plagues in Egypt and delivered His children (Jews) from them. God performs the plagues in the Day of the Lord, and He delivers His children (believers) from them. My friend, this is only a summary and not at all comprehensive. If you would like to check out a couple of books that go into detail on this view, click on my name, email me, and I'll be happy to share them with you. Or email me if you would just like to discuss it further. Take comfort in the fact that we are never destined for God's wrath. I personally believe that God will protect most Christians through the time of Satan's wrath (the great tribulation) unless they willing step forward to proclaim the gospel and willing lay down their lives for the Savior of their own accord. I hope and trust that I didn't further confuse you. In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
9 | Greek scholars, please help. | Bible general Archive 1 | Bill Mc | 14716 | ||
Brothers and sisters in Christ, Does anyone have any insight into the Greek behind Revelation 3:10? Debbie cites this verse as a comfort that Christians will not have to go THROUGH the great tribulation. My understanding is that the phrase "from the hour of testing" can also be interpreted "through the hour of testing". Would any of you Greek scholars care to share your view on this verse's tranlation? Thank you. In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
10 | Greek scholars, please help. | Bible general Archive 1 | Bill Mc | 14738 | ||
Thanks. Debbie, see above definitions. These gentlemen were gracious enough to supply the info I was searching for. They both seem to agree that the correct interpretation of "from the hour of testing" implies 'a protection through'. This would be in keeping with what happened druing the plagues of Egypt and the Passover. In God's deliverance, He did not physically remove His children (the Jews) from harm, but, rather, He protected them in the midst of harm. He often does this to show His power and glory. Remember the Hebrew children and the fiery furnance, Daniel and the lion's den, Jonah and the whale, etc. God often shows His love and protection 'in the midst of'. I hope this comforts you, sister. I personally believe that Christians will go THROUGH (protected in the midst of) the great tribulation but not God's wrath - the start of the Day of the Lord, where the bowls are poured out. Thanks, brothers, for your help. Blessings in Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
11 | Where does one start who has never reall | Bible general Archive 1 | Bill Mc | 15485 | ||
Dear Nomad, the gospel of John is a wonderful book to start with. John (one of Christ's disciples) does a wonderful job of portraying why Christ came. As you read, notice (in fact, underline if you don't mind marking up your Bible) all the references where Jesus talks about the new life that He came to give. And, as Tim has recommended, ask God to reveal Himself to you as you read. He will! The Bible is the only book we read in order to get to know the Author of it. God bless you as you begin your new life! In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
12 | Eternal Security? | Bible general Archive 1 | Bill Mc | 15498 | ||
Dear Tim, My reply is more of a question than an answer. Sorry. I'm trying to figure it out, too. I'm only going to reference 1 Cor 15:1 here. Anyway, is the following understanding possible and/or reasonable? We know that when Paul wrote his letters to the churches, that they (the letters) were circulated from house to house (in fact, the churches did, too), congregation to congregation. They did not have the huge edific...uh, buildings (I can't spell worth a flip) that we have nowadays. The meeting places, back then as now, were made up of both believers and non-believers in Christ. What I am saying is that, although the letter is addressed to 'the church at Corinth, those sanctified, saints by calling', there were still unbelievers and undecided at their meetings, weren't there? How else would they hear the gospel message? Could Paul be addressing them, too? Or could Paul be addressing people that said they believed concerning the facts of the gospel but still kept living the same old way? (The church of God at Corinth SHOULD NOT be a blueprint for the modern church) In other words, they believed the facts of the gospel but they did not have the body of the New Testament writings to show them how Christ's death, burial, and resurrection should be 'lived out.' That being said, see my modification to the verse in parentheses. Note: I AM NOT TRYING TO REWRITE IT, just understand it. Would it be proper to look at this verse in the light of: Now, brothers (is this fellow believers or Jewish brothers?), I want to remind you (all, professing believers, unbelievers, and undecided) of the gospel I preached to you (all) which you (professing believers) received and on which you (believers) have taken your (believers) stand. By this gospel you (anyone who hears) are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you (hearing the truth of the gospel - vs. 3 and 4 AND put faith in it, let it change your life). Otherwise, you (anyone who just hears) have believed (said you believed but never put faith in it) in vain. Please don't crucify me here. I admit the text may not allow for this understanding at all. I'm just trying to understand it too. I feel, as you know, that John uses the same literary device (an editorial we) in 1 John. There he says in verse 1:3 'our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ.' Then he turns around and says a couple of verses later 'if we say that we have fellowship with Him (in fact, he just did) and yet walk in darkness (unbelief about Christ), we lie and do not practice the truth.' We (you and I) know that John didn't lie and did practice the truth. What do you think, Tim? In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
13 | Are Sovereignty and Free Will Exclusive? | Bible general Archive 1 | Bill Mc | 15521 | ||
Hey Guys! Can I muddy the waters? I've already stated elsewhere that I know nothing of Calvinism and Armenism (or however it is spelled), but here's what I think. Of course, my opinion is always subject to 1) being wrong 2) being right 3) being corrected by those who know more than I and 4) being ridiculed by those who know it all. :) Here goes: I hardly know anything of the Sovereignty/Free Will debate. But I do believe that God is both sovereign and that we have free will. I don't think that they are mutually exclusive. I think that Philippians 2:6-8 gives us a small glimpse of that. Here we see that although Jesus was completely God, He chose to set aside His divine right (sovereignty, complete control), as God, and become a servant (a man with free will). He was, I believe, completely God and completely human. He had both God's Spirit in Him and a human spirit. He had a soul. And He had a will that He chose to submitted to His Father's will (not only in the garden but throughout His earthly ministry. He did only what His Father told Him to do). I know this may sound crazy (not my first time), but I think that God, being sovereign, can chose to set aside exercising that sovereignty in order to permit human chosing. What do you think? How far off the bubble am I? In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
14 | What is 'being saved' here? | Bible general Archive 1 | Bill Mc | 15525 | ||
Dear Tim, Thanks for the reply. It was a thought. A little convoluted maybe, but still a thought. One important consideration though, is the word 'saved.' My studies have led me to believe that salvation or deliverance is a 3-fold process. I believe that my spirit is saved (delivered from the penalty of sin - spiritual death) at conversion. My human spirit was united with Christ's divine Spirit which is spiritual life. I believe that my soul (mind, will, and emotions) is in a process of being saved (delivered from the power of sin - sanctification). This is where God is renewing my mind with His Word to conform my behavior to the truth of His Spirit in me. And I believe that one day my body will be saved (delivered from the presence of sin - resurrection). It sure needs it. But, my true identity, who I am, is determined by my birth in Christ. That is who I truly am and therefore, if I physically die, I will be absent from my body and present with the Lord. So I am, at the deepest level of my being, truly saved (past tense). I am also, in my behavior, being saved (present tense). And one day (soon I hope), my body will be saved (future tense). Do you feel that any of this might apply to Paul's use of the term "being saved"? In Him, Bill Mc |
||||||
15 | Are Sovereignty and Free Will Exclusive? | Bible general Archive 1 | Bill Mc | 15526 | ||
Tim, agreed! And I'm not even Armenian! Mostly Irish. Does it show? Thanks. | ||||||
16 | Are Sovereignty and Free Will Exclusive? | Bible general Archive 1 | Bill Mc | 15529 | ||
All seriousness aside...I'm glad we don't take ourselves too seriously. Especially on such a 'heavy' subject. Blessings in Him, Bill Mc | ||||||
17 | Are Sovereignty and Free Will Exclusive? | Bible general Archive 1 | Bill Mc | 15530 | ||
Big Mac is Calvinist, isn't it? The Whopper is where you can get it 'your way.' I better shutup now. | ||||||
18 | What is 'being saved' here? | Bible general Archive 1 | Bill Mc | 15546 | ||
My post (Bill Mc) was convoluted. That is the post I was refering to, not Tim's. And you're right, mine was convoluted. That is what I was admitting. | ||||||
19 | What do you think of 1 Cor 1:18? | Bible general Archive 1 | Bill Mc | 15547 | ||
Hi Tim, Without straying too far from your subject (please forgive me), what about 1 Cor 1:18? Do you think that this in any way substantiates the, as I put it, 'soul salvation' of being (progressively saved)? Thanks, Bill Mc |
||||||
20 | Does a rose always smell as sweet? | Bible general Archive 1 | Bill Mc | 15551 | ||
Dear Tim, I don't know Greek but you have forced me to get out my interlinear - I may never forgive you :). I have another thought about these passages and wanted to run it by you. The whole crux of the matter here seems to rest upon the one little word "if" - you are saved IF; IF you continue in the faith; IF you do these things. This word is 'ei' in the Greek. If you look closely at this word 'ei', sometimes it is translated 'if' and sometimes it is translated 'since', especially in the NIV. See Col 2:20; Col 3:1. Here I believe that the NIV has captured the meaning of the verse even better than the NASB (oh, my, Bill's REALLY in hot water now). Paul says, "Since you have died with Christ..." and "Since, then you have been raised with Christ..." The NASB's usage of 'if' in these phrases can make it sound, to English ears, like it is conditional. In the English language, there is usually quite a difference between 'if' and 'since'. 'If' sounds like a condition. 'Since' sounds like a conclusion is drawn. And sometimes, to complicate matters, even when it is translated 'if', it means 'since.' Consider the temptation of our Lord when Satan said, "If you are the Son of God..." Satan knew good and well Jesus was the Son of God. Satan's 'if' was not asking Christ to prove Himself. He was saying, "Since you are the Son of God, turn these stones to bread...throw Yourself down." I believe Satan knew all along who Christ was (he tried to have Him killed shortly after birth, didn't he?) Can we use the word 'since' in the three passages you have given us? I don't know. I tried plugging 'since' into the verses and, to me, it completely changes the meaning. Oh, the wonderful interface of Greek and English. What do you think, dear brother? In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [19] >> |