Results 101 - 120 of 130
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Unanswered Bible Questions Author: EdB Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
101 | Tell me more about your worship | Acts 5:34 | EdB | 7702 | ||
Steve wow! You have my interest what do you mean by your statement, “For example, most of the church teaches wrongly about worship. They misdefine worship.”? Maybe we want to take that part of the discussion to another thread but I sure would like to know exactly what your referring to here. Second part you said you found a minister counseling a married man and his fiancé on their upcoming wedding. You infer the Pastor mistakenly thought it was okay. Steve if you find a minister who is counseling a married man and another woman on marriage I think you can safely say the minister either knows exactly what he is doing or he was too stupid to be a Pastor. Nobody that has ever read the Bible can be that ignorant of God’s thoughts on the subject. I think the fact he called someone else to verify what you had told him proves the latter. I’m not be mean here just honest, if the man didn’t know that what he was doing was against everything God intended marriage to be, he was way to stupid to be allowed to pastor a church. Tell me more about your ideas on worship |
||||||
102 | Show me scripture that says we can sin | Acts 15:11 | EdB | 143071 | ||
Are we getting caught up in a snare set by the adversary? My first understanding of a Christian was person that came to saving grace in Christ as a repentant sinner. There were repentant liars, repentant murders, repentant thieves, repentant adulterers, repentant horse thieves, all had fallen short but had repented and turned to Christ for salvation. Today we try to define Christians as anyone the believes in Christ, they can be liars, murders, thieves, adulterers, horse thieves, anyone that falls short but has come to Christ for salvation. We neglect one word repentant. The definition of repentant is some one demonstrating repentance. The definition of repentance is the process of repenting. The definition of repenting is the process of changing ones thinking based on the regret of having committed past sins. To abjure or recant past sins, to turn away from. Is repentance necessary for salvation? My Bible says it is! Jesus said we must repent. Peter in his first two sermons said we must repent. Repentance and the need for repentance is woven all through the New Testament. Now the question really becomes does a truly repentant person willfully and with forethought continue to lie, commit murder, steal, commit adultery, and steal horses? Can you show me in scripture where it says that? And further can anyone show me in scripture where is says a Child of God washed in the blood can continue to sin with impunity? |
||||||
103 | Is there middle ground? | Romans | EdB | 7877 | ||
I came across this quote and I had to append it to the forum after all the discussion on Election – Free Will and Calvinism - Arminianism “… in Romans 9, which deals with one of the thorniest theological problems in the Bible: predestination. It comes on very strongly on the side of divine election, which may lead you to conclude that Paul was a Calvinist and not an Armenian. I, however, believe he was both. You see, I believe that in most of the great theological controversies that have separated the Church, there has been light on both sides. Each side quotes the Scriptures that support them and ignores the Scriptures that are against them. I personally believe that it is logically possible to find an interpretation that affirms both truths. I believe it is the inevitable choice you have to make if you believe the whole Bible.” Quote by Derek Prince in the Summer 2001 issue of Christians for Israel Today. Could we all search for that middle ground Derek Prince talks about? I like his last sentence it is something you have to do if you believe the whole Bible. |
||||||
104 | Please explain your position | Rom 5:6 | EdB | 6333 | ||
I have a question inHzsvc. What do these three verses mean to you? Do you not see God delaying judgement? Giving every opportunity every chance for yet more to be saved? Doesn't the word ALL mean just that ALL? 1 Tim. 2:4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. 2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance. Rev. 2:21 'I gave her time to repent, and she does not want to repent of her immorality. |
||||||
105 | Can you mean this? | Rom 5:6 | EdB | 6391 | ||
inHzsvc, John Gill must be a lawyer (getting paid by word count) :). Obviously I'm of not of the Calvinistic bent, in that I believe God makes us choose, either to follow Him or the lies of Satan. Since you believe we don't have a choice would you explain what Satan is doing? I mean if we can't be deceived because we don't have a choice then what is Satan doing by seeking whom he can deceive? Also Matthew 25:41 seems to imply, at least to me, that the lake of fire was made for Satan and his demons and humans only go there should they reject the gospel of Jesus Christ. You on the other hand must believe that not to be true. If we logically think through your position God created the Lake of Fire for Satan, his demons, and the whole race of people God created to throw in there also. So much for mercy! | ||||||
106 | Can you see my position? | Rom 5:6 | EdB | 6434 | ||
See here is the problem you said you read scripture and it says your right. I say you read scripture wrong. Example 2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance. I see "all" and to me "all" means all. You say however that "all" only means the ones that God elected. Now we can debate this scripture from here until tomorrow and I will probably continue to see all will see only those called. Who is wrong? If your in my camp you are. If your in your camp I am. Does that mean one of us is in sin. I think not that means one of us sees a passage different. It really doesn't change anything as far as the work of the cross. It just makes us think the other can't read. |
||||||
107 | What does dead to sin in Roman 6:2 mean | Rom 6:2 | EdB | 228642 | ||
What does the term we who died to sin mean? What actually changes in the person life? Are they still tempted? Can they still sin? If the continue in the sin not seeking forgiveness will they be eternally damned? If we say yes to those above answers what is different in a person that is not dead to sin? |
||||||
108 | The significance of Communion | 1 Cor 10:14 | EdB | 225436 | ||
I have been pondering 1 Cor. 10:14-22 for a while and I wanted some other takes on it. In this passage Paul is teaching on staying away from Idolatery. As you know eating food sacrificed to idols was one of the three prohibitions given to the gentiles by the council of Jerusalem in Acts 15:29. In the 1 Cor passage Paul in his warning to not get involved with idols uses the analogy to communion. In it Paul is saying eating food offered to idols brings us into the similar relationship with demons just as taking communion does with Christ. The Greek word Koinonia used here means communion, partaker, or to form a partnership. I guess you are wondering where I'm going with all of this. Well in Protestant church we view communion as ceremony of rememberance. This is based mostly on 1 Cor. 11:25 nowever this passage in 1 Cor 10:14-22 infers a much deeper meaning of communion. Just as eating food sacrificed to idols puts the eater into a relationship with demons, taking communion puts the participant into a relationship with Christ. It is this relationship and what really transpires in our spiritual lives when we take communion is something I think has been grossly overlooked or at least not fully taught. To the early church all indications are that the act we now call communion had a much richer, much fuller, much more important meaning. In fact Paul in 1 Cor 11:27 warns aboout taking of Communion in an unworthy manner. Many claim this means with unconfessed sin but I when read in connection with 1 Cor. 10:14-22 I now believe it means in an ignorant or manner where we don't realize the full significance of the action. Thoughts????? |
||||||
109 | What is your idea? | 1 Cor 14:34 | EdB | 9344 | ||
Okay I'll bite! Schwartzkm, what is your idea? Ed |
||||||
110 | The River of No Return part 2 | Eph 4:1 | EdB | 21833 | ||
Yesterday Hank asked the question about denominations. See "The River of No Return". We all had a chance to answer in our own wisdom. Now let me ask a follow up. How do you think Jesus feels about denominations and the various disputes within the church? |
||||||
111 | denominations. | Eph 4:3 | EdB | 148727 | ||
How do we justify denominations in light of John 17:20-23 (NKJV) 20 "I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; 21 that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. 22 And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: 23 I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me. Which in effect is calling for unity and says the world will know Jesus is authentic by the unity it sees in the believers. Then we move to 1 Corinthians 1:13 (NKJV) 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? 1 Corinthians 12:25 (NKJV) 25 that there should be no schism in the body, but that the members should have the same care for one another. |
||||||
112 | Looking of resources on Altar Ministry | 1 Tim 2:1 | EdB | 229300 | ||
I'm looking for resources on Altar Ministry or Praying for Others. Does anyone have any suggestions? |
||||||
113 | Is God so shortsighted? | 1 Tim 2:11 | EdB | 9418 | ||
Prayon I have created this separate thread so as to not eliminate your question/comment. Let me give one point for you to ponder. I think we all agree the Bible was for all people, all societies, both past and present. Do you really believe we must understand a Biblical society to get the full revelation of the scripture. Your hypotheses is that we don’t take into consideration the situation of the time therefore we come to the wrong conclusion. Would God be so short sighted not to include an important piece of information, without which we would make a wrong conclusion? |
||||||
114 | Is God so shortsighted? | 1 Tim 2:11 | EdB | 9428 | ||
Without trying to start a war is it fair to assume both yours and JVH0212's answer to my question is yes? Are you both saying I couldn't hand a pagan a Bible written in his own language, leave him alone to digest it all and then come back expecting him to have correct doctrine because God allowed some important details out? |
||||||
115 | Is Steve really all wrong? | 1 Tim 3:2 | EdB | 6974 | ||
I think this response is a little harsh and maybe even wrong if it was directed, as I suspect, at Steve. I asked a question awhile back in the forum “Should the Bible be taken literally?” Nearly everyone wanted to place a qualifier to my question. No one that I recall would give a black and white answer except Steve. Yet scripture tells us to let our yea be yea and nay’s be nay. (For everyone that is ready to jump, yes, I know I took this out of context, bear with me a moment). I belong to a denomination that allows men that were convicted murderers to become ordained ministers, provided they committed the murder before they were saved. However no divorced man can ever be a Pastor. No matter if the divorce happened before salvation or not. I always thought that to be wrong or at least unfair. I was talking about my feelings on this subject to a man one day and he said, “Yes in man’s eyes that is categorically unfair, however God has an excellent reason for insisting on the standards He did. If we do what seems right in our eyes we are weakening what God intended. God’s standards are much higher than ours, His ways are different than ours, His ways are always right.” “Maybe too much of man’s “fairness” has gotten into the church and that may be one of the reasons the church instead of being the dominate force of society it was meant to be, finds itself defending its every move.” There was wisdom in that man’s response! I’m not ready to take everything quite as literally as Steve does, but open your thought process, is there not some validity in what Steve is saying? Could it be God has a reason why He wanted a man that was to be the leader of a local body to know exactly what is was like to have a wife and children? So that man could have real compassion and understanding of marital problems or what it is really like to have kids. To hear the person you love most in the world standing before you with their little twisted up faces and shout I hate you. The argument that Paul wasn’t married and didn’t have kids, I don't think stands here. He was an Apostle on a mission not a pastor of a local work. Also we have made being a pastor a profession rather than a calling. We in our human wisdom say should a man not be allowed to follow his chosen profession just because he never married? May be we should. Maybe the man himself should reexamine what it is God has called him to do. Maybe he was called to be a teacher, missionary, an evangelist, social worker, and the list goes on. Think about this discussion. If we rightly divide the scripture is it all wrong to take the Bible literally? Throughout history every society or age has placed it’s assumed meaning to Bible passages. The results of this many times has been far less than desirable and many times even disastrous. Is it time we get back to where God is? Where is that, some may ask? May it be in the literal interpretation of the bible? Is it all wrong to hold a pastor’s calling in such high esteem that not every person is qualifies? If your going to respond to this question please respond to the questions I asked and points I made not to the examples I used. I intended no offense by anything I said, please take none. Be blessed and be a blessing |
||||||
116 | Can you be a husband without marriage? | 1 Tim 3:2 | EdB | 6982 | ||
Please excuse me I’m not trying to be argumentative. If God was conveying the idea, as many suggest, that elder must have sexual purity or at least the lack of immorality, don’t you think He would have said that? God has no problem conveying the idea of sexual purity in Revelation chapter 21 for instance. Instead the scriptures say he should be the husband of one wife. Again not wanting to split hairs how does one become the husband of a woman without marriage? See what has happened? In an effort to explain God we really have changed what he said. I think there are two qualifications here, one the man is to be a husband. Two he is to have sexual purity in his marriage. I know most people disagree with this, and we have men and women filling the position that are single, married, divorced, remarried, and etc. Again can I submit a point for thought, could this be the reason the church today doesn’t hold the place it once did? Is the church sending the wrong message to the world? Has the church suggested that compromise is okay? As to the example using the money issue. I know many poor people or people without money that are lovers of money. But I don’t know any husbands without wives. Please excuse the sarcasm but I hope it would make you think. |
||||||
117 | How do we pull marriage out? | 1 Tim 3:2 | EdB | 6992 | ||
Thank you my brother I thought I was destined to the abyss by tone some of the responses to my comments. Maybe there is hope for me. Praise the Lord! Here is an answer I would have hoped for. Notice it doesn’t say I’m wrong (therefore my emotions aren’t charged) It presents the writer’s opinions which everyone is entitled to. However I would like to know how the writer came to his opinion. In the passage in question the word husband and wife are both used. These two words are synonymous with marriage. If we are going to eliminate marriage as a requirement how are we getting around this obvious verbal connection? We have to forget what we have been taught or feel on this subject and analyze what is being said. Doesn’t the use of the words ‘husband’ and ‘wife’ force the issue of marriage? How do can we linguistically reduce it down to meaning sexual purity? I think this passage also eliminates any person that has been divorced since again we see the requirement of ‘one’ here. However death and remarriage since I believe the scriptures teach death ends the original marriage contract or vow, would be permissible. |
||||||
118 | Why is this a problem? | 1 Tim 3:2 | EdB | 7003 | ||
Guys you keep skating around the real issue. Why did God chose to use the words husband and wife if all he intended was a man or woman of sexual purity? God doesn’t have a problem coming to the point other places 1 Thes. 4:3 For this is the will of God, your sanctification; that is, that you abstain from sexual immorality; Why do you insist God is talking so cryptic here? Using words like husband and wife that everyone seems to maintain means merely sexual purity. |
||||||
119 | Doesn't make you wonder | 1 Tim 3:2 | EdB | 7007 | ||
Hank my brother again forgive me for appearing to be so much like a donkey. Your answer “the consensus among wiser men than me says thus and such.” Yet when I used that same rebuttal point in another thread I was told we can’t do that we have to go by what the Bible says. I’m trying to show a double standard here, one place we say we must go by the Bible literally and others we say we yield to wiser men. Look at the message we are giving the world, here this verse and this verse has to be taken literally. However this verse and this verse can’t be. What does the world really see? Doesn’t it see the church living by laws they are comfortable with yet condemning the world for living by laws it is comfortable with. I have always held this passage by the interpretation you just gave. I had formed that interpretation not by what I had read in the Bible but rather by what I had been taught. However after reading what Steve had said, I noticed God had gone out of his way to mention husband and wife rather than saying sexually pure or abstained from immorality, and I began to wonder why. Doesn't that even make you wonder? |
||||||
120 | But didn't He? | 1 Tim 3:2 | EdB | 7014 | ||
But didn't He? Just by the fact that God used terms that are so synonymous with marriage. Doesn't husband and wife at least infer if not insist on marriage? | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ] Next > Last [7] >> |