Results 101 - 119 of 119
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Unanswered Bible Questions Author: Bill Mc Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
101 | Lionstrong, this is not universalism. | Eph 3:6 | Bill Mc | 18921 | ||
Dear Lionstrong, Let me try to clarify my view here. I'll summarize as much as possible: 1) Salvation is not just being forgiven for sins (unrighteous acts). Salvation is being saved by the indwelling life of Christ, not by reconciliation - Rom 5:10. Therefore, Christ's propitiation for the whole world is NOT salvation. It is forgiveness for all sins (unrighteous acts) for all people for all time. It is reconciliation. Now, if I believed that salvation was only the forgiveness of sins, then I would be supporting universalism - everyone is saved because everyone is forgiven. I AM NOT saying that at all. 2) The forgiveness that Christ provided at the cross is received at conversion. It is part of redemption - Eph 1:7; Col 1:14. Though it was provided at the cross, not everyone has accepted Christ's redemption (reconciliation) and appropriated the forgiveness that has been provided - Rom 5:11. 3) Therefore everyone in the world for all time is forgiven for their unrighteous acts but not for unbelief in Christ. Unbelief in Christ cannot be forgiven - it must be repented of. This is the world's sin (not sins, plural) - John 16:8,9. This is what God's wrath will be poured out on as 1 Thess says, unbelief in Christ. 4) So there is no contradiction. The cross provides reconciliation for all but we need to receive it. Christ's death provides forgiveness. And Christ's resurrection, imparted to us through the Holy Spirit, provides life to His formerly dead creation. So we are forgiven and then given life. The we are saved. Does this help? In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
102 | Joe, how righteous are you? | Eph 3:6 | Bill Mc | 19122 | ||
Dear Joe, I agree that justification is a legal declaration, but that does not mean that it is not practical or real. You rightly speak of our records of wrong and Christ's record of righteousness switching places. So, in practical terms, I am declared righteous before God. This means that that is how God sees me, right? It would not benefit me in the least if God declared me righteous and then said, "Well, Bill, I've declared you righteous, but you're not really that way. I'm just pretending that you are for legal purposes." God, brother, does not pretend. God does not see something that is not there. God's view is truth. If God declares you righteous, it is because that is how He sees you -righteous. He declares you righteous because that is what He makes you, not because He is pretending. Say that I stand before God guilty of all my sin. God says, "Bill, the wages of sin is death and that is what you deserve. My standard is complete righteousness and you do not meet it. So I sentence you to death and you will be separated from Me forever." Then, from the sidelines, Christ speaks up and says, "Father, because I love Bill, I will take Bill's sentence. You may declare Me guilty in his place and exact his death sentence upon Me...but in return, because I am innocent and righteous, You must declare Bill innocent and righteous." God, being a just Judge, says that that trade is equitable. So Christ takes my sin and punishment and God declares me innocent and righteous. Now, when I leave that chamber, am I innocent and righteous in God's sight? Christ was made to be sin that I might become His righteousness, right? To imply that just because a truth is a legal declaration, that it is not practical is an insult to the judge and jury. If a judge and jury finds that an accused person is not guilty of a crime and they make that pronouncement 'not guilty', then that person is for all purposes, legally, practically, positionally, experientially 'not guilty.' The very reason that the accused is not guilty is because the jury or judge has made that determination. He is pronounced 'not guilty' because that is what he is, not because the judge and jury are pretending or 'just see Him that way.' Can I ask, out of curiosity, how righteous are you, Joe? If, perchance, God called you home right now, only the righteous can enter heaven, right? So how righteous are you right now on Oct 14, 2001? By Bible, not my church, not my pastor, not DTS, not dispensationalism, says that righteousness is a gift - Rom 5:17. Joe, have you received that gift? If you have received it, how can you make yourself more righteous than what Christ has made you? By Bible, not my church, not my pastor, not DTS, not dispensationalism, says that Christ's obedience has made me righteous - Rom 5:19. When does that happen, in your opinion? By Bible, not my church, not my pastor, not DTS, not dispensationalism, says that I have become the righteousness of God in Christ - 2 Cor 5:21. If I am in Christ, then I am what He is. Are you in Him, Joe? If so, how righteous are you? By Bible, not my church, not my pastor, not DTS, not dispensationalism, says that my new self has been created in righteousness and holiness of the truth - Eph 4:24. Was your new self (2 Cor 5:17) created this way, Joe, or are you seeking to establish your own righteousness? By Bible, not my church, not my pastor, not DTS, not dispensationalism, says that my righteousness is not from my own works but that I have received it through faith in Christ. It comes FROM God to me, not from me because of my works - Phil 3:9. Joe, if you are not currently righteous, why not? It is a gift, it is free, it comes from Christ (not the Law), He made you that way. Have you received it? Righteous in Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
103 | How do we live the 'Christian life'? | Phil 2:5 | Bill Mc | 18125 | ||
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 |
||||||
104 | Did Paul have 'Christ's attitude'? | Phil 2:5 | Bill Mc | 18131 | ||
Ray, thanks for your response. Phil 2:5 is a great verse! Do you think Paul was stating a view similar to Christ's when he said in Gal 2:20 - "It is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me."? Or how about Phil 4:13 - "I can do all things through Him who strengthens me."? What do you think Paul meant by these statements? Do you think that he was expressing his reliance upon Christ similarly to Christ's reliance upon His Father? Paul did encourage us to have Christ's attitude. How would this play out in our lives? In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
105 | Great answer, kalos! My two cents... | Col 3:17 | Bill Mc | 16958 | ||
Great answer, kalos! We often use 'in Jesus' name' as a Christian form of 'over and out' but your explanation makes it clear what the basis of this phrase is. Many Christians think that is they ask for something 'in Jesus' name', whether it's a new Cadillac, a house, etc., then God is obligated to answer that prayer regardless of motive. Many think 'in Jesus' name' is a magical incantation we use to get what WE want. Your comments clarify that we need to be agreeing with God concerning what HE wants. BTW, what significance do you see in our Savior's name as far as whether it is Jesus, Jesus Christ, etc.? He has many more names than these - Wonderful, Counselor, Prince of Peace, Holy One, Lamb of God, Emmanuel, Word of God, etc. I could go on (I frequently do...) But, in Bible times names described character and function. We have lost that in modern times. Names mean very little to our culture. Anyway, what point were you trying to make concerning His name? Blessings, Bill Mc |
||||||
106 | What is the composition of man? | 1 Thess 5:23 | Bill Mc | 13943 | ||
What is man's composition? Spirit, soul, and body? This is primarily a response to a question asked by JVH0212, although all comments are welcome. You asked, brother, for some reference to substantiate the difference between spirit and soul. Along with the references I used (1 Thess 5:23, Heb 4:12), here is a link that further explains (using scripture and logic) the composition of man as God created Him. Let me know what you think. Is this what you have been searching for? http://www.christinyou.net/constman.html In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
107 | What do YOU think, fellow Berian? | 1 Thess 5:23 | Bill Mc | 14115 | ||
Hi Nicodemus, Thanks for your input, brother. Although I greatly respect Charles C. Ryrie (I, too, have one of the study Bibles), I believe we need to excercise caution when refering to the study notes. Yes, Ryrie does make the statement: "5:23-24 spirit and soul and body should NOT be understood as defining the parts of man, but as representing the whole man." (1 Thess. 5:23) (emphasis mine) My question is, upon what evidence does he base his conclusion? Please don't misunderstand me. I have nothing against Ryrie. What I don't understand is - what has happened to critical thought in the 'Christian community'? Many questions on this forum are answered with 'copy and paste' answers out of one study Bible or another. And, while I agree that a good study Bible is a fine supplement to understanding scripture, I don't believe that it's commentary ever carries the divine inspiration we have in the Word of God. I believe that the scripture we have is our sole source for God's revelation to men. Yes, I believe that God, in His grace, has 'illumined' scripture down through the ages through various Christians. But I view their contributions as supplementary, not substitutionary. All that being said, the Greek DOES make a distinction in these two passages between spirit and soul as you have noted, the spirit (pneuma) and the soul (psuche). Ryrie says that he feels that a destinction SHOULDN'T be made, Nelson's says that a distinction is IMPLIED, and the Scofield says they ARE divisible and distinguished (in certain cases). It seems our 'theologians' are not in agreement. So, brother, what do YOU think? I can read my Ryrie, Nelson, Scofield, NIV Study, Matthew Henry, etc. for myself. But what do YOU think? I would appreciate LIVE interaction with fellow brothers and sisters on these issues. One last disclaimer (humor me). I am just as guilty. The web address that I posted does have a 'theologian's' interpretation there. I understand and accept that that is what it is. I'm just curious as to what other 'live' Christians may think? In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
108 | Why are we so quick to take offense? | 1 Thess 5:23 | Bill Mc | 14232 | ||
Hi Nicodemus, Brother, perhaps you misunderstood my posting. I was not 'belittleling' anyone. I was not dismissing anyone 'on a whim.' I was not saying not to use resources that you are comfortable with. I was not saying that these theologians were not LIVE Christians. I was trying to get some input and opinions from fellow believers. I can consult my commentaries anytime. They are a great resource to me, especially at trying to understand the meaning behind the original languages. But are we becoming like many believers in the church at Corinth? (I am of Apollos, I am of Cephas, I am of Paul). Questions are posted and many answers are "Ryrie says," "Scofield says," - end of subject - no further discussion. Yes, these men have spent great portions of their lives studying the Bible. But they do, at times, disagree. (See Scofield's creation 'gap' theory) So what do we do when they disagree or say that they are not sure of the exact meaning or give us a range of interpretations? Or, as many Catholics believe, are we not allowed to interpret the scriptures for ourselves? Permit me to reverse the questions: (Please use scripture to support your answer) What qualifications do I need to understand God's Word for what it says? How prepared do I need to be to answer specific Bible questions? How much of my life do I need to spend interpreting scripture before I can know it's meaning? Nicodemus, you did answer my question. You said you agreed with Scofield. Thank you. That was what I was seeking. I did not intend to offend you. In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
109 | Joe, what is Paul and Hebrews 'the Law'? | Heb 6:4 | Bill Mc | 17912 | ||
Joe, out of curiosity, upon what basis do you make the statement that only the civil and ceremonial laws are passed away? Paul's writings and the author of Hebrews do not divide the Law into 1) moral law 2) civil law 3) ceremonial law when speaking of the Law being made obsolete or concerning the fact that believers are not under Law. They simply state 'the Law','the letter', the ministry of death, the ministry of condemnation, 'the Law of Moses'. If they make no distinction, then why do you? What scriptures do you use to support this 'dismantling' of the Law? It appears that by breaking it up into smaller pieces, then you can be the one to decide which parts to keep and which parts to discard. James refers to 'the whole Law'. In other words, if you want to be under ANY of it, then you have to be under ALL of it. Any thoughts? In Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
110 | Whatever happened to John 17:21? | Heb 6:4 | Bill Mc | 17916 | ||
BTW, those nice, neat little boxes may appear to be helpful but I feel that they are damaging to the body of Christ. The Holy Spirit did not baptize us into nice, neat little boxes but into one Body - Rom 12:5, 1 Cor 12:13,27; Eph 5:30; Col 1:24. Our identity, as Christians, is His body, the church. We are children of God. Nothing more and, certainly, nothing less. Our beliefs about who we are and what we believe should rest on Christ and scripture alone. To categorize believers into Calvinist, Armenian, Dispensationalist, Baptist, Catholic, Reformed, and any of a thousand other names is neither warranted nor supported by scripture. In fact, this was one of Paul's rebukes to the church at Corinth. "I hear that divisions exist among you...for there must also be factions among you." Then he went on to reitterate how the Lord's body, the church, is one loaf but consists of many members. He pegs modern Christianity in 1 Cor 1:12: "Now I mean this, that each one of you is saying, "I am of Paul," and "I of Apollos," and "I of Cephas," and "I of Christ." Only we say, "I am of Calvin, I am of Armenius (or whatever his name was), I am of Luther, I am of the Westminister Confession." These things are, but they should not be. The end result is that when a person comes to this forum seeking an answer from the Bible, we resort to: 'As a Calvinist...' then an Armenian has to reply, 'As an Armenian...' So instead of getting an answer straight from the Bible, we post responses from other people. This is because we do not trust God to reveal Himself to US through scripture. We think that you have to be a Scofield, a Ryrie, a Luther, a Calvin to correctly understand scripture. The Holy Spirit said that He would lead us into all truth. Do we believe this? I think not or we wouldn't be so quick to identify ourselves with others whom God has spoken to. I mourn for the church of Jesus Christ because most of us have no idea who were are. When will we understand that you are either in Adam or in Christ? When we will reply, "As a child of the living, true God, here is what the scripture says concerning this issue...?" When will we come out from behind our false identities, leave behind our platitudes, and respond with truth in love? This is not meant as a personal rebuke against you, dear Reformer Joe. This is meant as an observation for all those who name the name of Christ. I hope and pray as Christ did in John 17:21 - "that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me." A child of God only by His grace, Bill Mc |
||||||
111 | Where is our unity to help? | Heb 6:4 | Bill Mc | 17943 | ||
This thread has proven my point. JohnK came here seeking answers as to his security. Although many good answers were given, this thread has turned into an Armenian/Calvinist and Grace/Law debate. I am just as guilty. JohnK has not responded to any of the answering posts. He probably figured that if the user's of the most accurate, literal translation in the English language couldn't help and can't agree, than there is no way for him to know if his is saved or not. Shame on us, myself included. JohnK, if you're reading this, I'm sorry. Please seek help from a godly person who genuinely cares for your soul. We are too often concerned with whether or not we are right and proving our points rather than helping those in true need. It is no wonder that the world is dying and going to hell. We can't even agree on what salvation is or whether it is assured. Still, in Christ, Bill Mc |
||||||
112 | What is 'perfect for all time?' | Heb 10:14 | Bill Mc | 12977 | ||
What does it mean 'perfect for all time?' When does this happen? Please use scripture to support your answer. |
||||||
113 | What is this perfect standing? | Heb 10:14 | Bill Mc | 13005 | ||
Thanks, Nolan, for your answer. What does this 'perfect standing before God' mean? Does it mean that I am sinless? If so, does this 'perfect standing' change the moment that I, as a believer (after salvation), sin? Or does it just mean that I am saved? Is this a one time standing that I lose when I sin or does God always see me as the righteousness of Christ? In Him, Bill Mc |
||||||
114 | Am I still a sinner? | Heb 10:14 | Bill Mc | 13158 | ||
Nolan, so, if God sees Christ in me, or maybe better, me in Christ, am I still a sinner? In Him, Bill Mc |
||||||
115 | Where will you get your righteousness? | James 2:10 | Bill Mc | 19316 | ||
Joe, To see what the yoke of slavery is, you need to look back to chapter 4. Paul says in 5:1 'therefore', this means that he is drawing a conclusion from what he has already stated, not from what he is about to state. So what is this yoke of slavery from chapter 4? Gal 4:21 - under law, the law Gal 4:24 - (One covenant) proceeding from Mount Sinai - the Law "It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery." Circumcision is not a yoke of slavery. (Talk about poor exegesis :)) Circumcision is merely a sign that you are under the Old Covenant - the Law. Also, what is it about the death of your body, merely dust, a temple, which will not EVER stand before God, that makes you righteous before God? I agree that we will have a new resurrected, redeemed body when the rapture happens. But what is it about your 'shell', your house, that determines your right-standing before God? Can you cite any scriptures that speak of your body being your source of righteousness? I thought you said the Christ was your source of righteousness? Isn't He in you now? You said in another post that one day you will stand before Him with your own righteousness. How did you attain this? How does the death of your body cause you to be spiritually righteous? If, as you say, your spirit is not righteous now, how does the death of your body make it so? Always curious, Bill Mc |
||||||
116 | Joe, who is ya, man? | James 2:10 | Bill Mc | 19324 | ||
Joe, So you would say that you have a 'new self' and also an 'old self'. (My Bible says that my 'old self' the 'old man' was crucified with Christ - Gal 2:20, Rom 6:6) So you are a new creation in Christ - 2 Cor 5:17, but you are still the same old sinner. This would explain much of the reason you are confused, dear brother. A house divided against itself cannot stand. Well, it can for a while, but it will be unstable in all ways. Hmmm...interesting theology. A new creation but still a sinner. A new self but still an old self. Created in righteousness but still striving for it. Under grace but under law. In Adam but also in Christ. A slave to sin but also a slave to righteousness. Given righteousness as a gift but you don't posess it. Psychology would say that you are suffering from split personality disorder. Of course, very little psychology is biblically based. But I would say that the effect is the same. You don't know who YOU are in Christ. Oh, you know who Christ is in you. But you don't know who He has made you. As a stated, my old self, my old man WAS (past tense) crucified with Christ. That old fallen 'in Adam' spirit is dead and gone. He was crucified and buried with Christ 2000 years ago. Then Christ gave me a new spirit created in righteousness and holiness that is permanently joined with Him. Now, granted, my new spirit indwelt by Christ's Spirit lives in the same old body. And it still has to work through my unredeemed soul - mind, will, and emotions. And it still has my 'flesh', my self-sufficiency to deal with. But these things are not ME. They are in the members of my body, but they are not ME - Rom 7:18. Thanks be to God that though I was a slave of sin (I had no choice), I became obedient (past tense) from my heart to that form of teaching that was committed to me (the gospel, Christ in me) and, having been freed from sin (no longer a slave to it, the old sinful self was crucified) I became (past tense) a slave of righteousness...but now that I have been (past tense) freed from sin and now enslaved to God, I derive my benefit (Christ in me, my hope of glory), resulting in sanctification, and the outcome, eternal life - Rom 6:17,18,22. Yeehaw! Still a new creation, Bill Mc |
||||||
117 | Joe, I agree with you here. | James 2:10 | Bill Mc | 19347 | ||
Joe, I agree with what you say here. You have stated that the Law itself is not means to attaining a righteousness of our own in addition to or apart from Christ's work on the cross. I agree 100 percent. So why do you and I cross ways? Confused, Bill Mc |
||||||
118 | How do we partake of the divine nature? | 2 Pet 1:4 | Bill Mc | 12964 | ||
How are we partakers of the divine nature? How many natures does the Christian have? Please support your answer with scripture. |
||||||
119 | What is eternal life? | 1 John 5:13 | Bill Mc | 16627 | ||
What do you understand eternal life to be? What are the characteristics of it? When does it start? Can it be lost? If it can be lost, is it still, by definition, eternal life? All responses are welcome. I am interested to see (without argument from my particular point of view) what the forum believes about the eternal life that John says we, as believers, can know that we have. If you read this question, please respond with an answer. It would be interesting to observe what we, as a forum, think about eternal life. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 ] |