Results 101 - 120 of 189
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: keliy Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
101 | Keliy, can faith be predetermined? | Eph 2:8 | keliy | 213140 | ||
Hello KcabmI4 Very Good question, but it is a little vague to me, so I can only try my best for you. I will run through some parts of your query and try to sum up at the end. Part 1, Is this saying: A person that is not being saved cannot be having Faith? -Not sure. But I do believe that the devil has faith in God, probably knowing the Bible better than us. The devil believes, as he trembles. Part 2, Is it also saying to a saved person? The Statement, made by Paul, who is saved contains "we" so I see him including himself, with his kinsmen. Part 3, If you are trying to live a life towards God by trying to keep laws your faith is then shut away again. That, is hard to answer, brother. Does a person attempt salvation through the law while maintaining a faithful relationship with God? Did he have a saving faith? What God was he trying to please by keeping the law? I am sorry to answer a question with a question, But Verse 24 says, "Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster [to bring us] unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. So, the law convicts us of our sin, and our need for a Savior. Part 4, We are having the choice to either be keeping of the Laws. Or we can be having Faith. Let me go to Matt 19:16-22. A young man went to Jesus asking what could he do that he may have eternal life. Jesus said, "...keep the commandments" to which the man replied I have kept these from my youth, what do I lack? Jesus said "to be perfect, sell what you have, give it to the poor, and follow me." The young man walked away sorrowful. Jesus knew the man's heart. The man's first mistake was to think that there was something he could DO to gain eternal life. Jesus answered, "If thou wilt be perfect..." So, the standard that must be met is God's standard of perfection. That is humanly impossible. There is no choice to either keep the laws Or to have faith. The law did not ever teach of gaining salvation through the law. But by the sacrifices, it was pointing to Christ, so the law was simply a servant of Christ. Verse 24 calls it "a schoolmaster." Who is a schoolmaster employed by, the school, or the students? (the students do not sign his paycheck) Weymouth New Testament translates v.23 thusly: Before this faith came, we Jews were perpetual prisoners under the Law, living under restraints and limitations in preparation for the faith which was soon to be revealed. I am not sure how to apply that verse in Galatians to our selves today, but there certainly are parallels. Many today continue to live in darkness because they love their sin and also their idols of this world. They are blinded by their pursuit of pleasure, so they attempt to shut the light out. But the sinner that opens his eyes to the light discovers his miserable condition. Then he is able to understand in his own heart that the grace of God and His mercy are the only hope. The letters of the law are signs that show us our need for forgiveness, and bring us to Christ. After that we can use the law for judging ourselves and we begin to depend upon our Savior for strength and wisdom. I hope I answered your questions well enough. Did I miss anything? I will be here if you need something more. Lord Bless, keliy |
||||||
102 | God always gets what he desires? T or F | 1 Tim 2:3 | keliy | 213129 | ||
Hi, I think this might make it easier on you. 7 translations. Just add this, (2:4) to the verse 2:3, above. who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. NASB Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. KJV for he wants everyone to be saved and to understand the truth. NLT who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. NIV who doth will all men to be saved, and to come to the full knowledge of the truth; Young's who desires that all men should be saved and come to [the] knowledge of [the] truth. Darby's Who will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth. Webster's "thelo" is the Greek word that follows 'Who', and here is the def. for you: 1) to will, have in mind, intend a) to be resolved or determined, to purpose b) to desire, to wish c) to love 1) to like to do a thing, be fond of doing d) to take delight in, have pleasure Blessings, keliy |
||||||
103 | Love for all, judge not anyone | OT general | keliy | 213115 | ||
Hello KcabmI4 I agree with you that the person writing to the paper doesn't have a clue. But neither do the ones who are reading his blather. Many who have unformed opinions will agree with him. You asked what was the agenda, There it is. The sad part is, you can't unring a bell. Yes, the words have been unleashed, and whatever damage is done, our Lord knows. But there is something you can say to answer him. We are not defeated. You said if we answer him, satan will only bring more. Exactly. That is our service in this world, and our service will be judged in the refiner's fire. I once wrote a reply to a local column by Joel NcNally, and the paper published it. My reply was longer than his original column, and I prayed over my submission, that my bell would ring louder than his. I felt I had done my part. Most of the other times that Joel raised my ire, I let my fellow christians know about it, and that accomplished nothing. Is anything known about the author, you ask? No, and it does not matter. His name is printed as Solmon Smith,and he is just one in a long line, prowling about while serving the enemy, who seeks out whom he may destroy. Remember, "we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high [places]. " (Eph 6:12) The only way to defeat this foe is by using the Word of God. It was the only weapon used by Jesus in Matt 4, when the tempter came to him after a 40 day fast, In an attempt to lure Jesus into sin, said, "If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread" Jesus simply answered, "It is written...." -to all 3 powerful enticements, and satan was defeated. So as Solomon Smith said in his published letter, "Can Christians be any more clueless about what the bible says? This is the fault of Christians, not Mr. Smith. We as the Lord's servants are ordered to "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." (2 Tim 2:15) And the Old Testament Command: "And these words which I command you today shall be in your heart. "You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, when you walk by the way, when you lie down, and when you rise up. "You shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. "You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates. (Deu 6:6-9) This is how we must answer people like Smith who call us "shallow" as he proclaims,"The truth is human decency and compassion are what guide us in following the universal law of love. It comes from the heart." We as Christians know "The heart [is] deceitful above all [things], and desperately wicked: who can know it?" Jer 17:9 So, we must be diligent in our studies. Thank God for forums such as this, where we can fortify ourselves against these relentless onslaughts. God Bless, and Bless God! keliy P.S. if, as you say, we are unable to legislate morality, then lets take all police officers of the force, because they are wasting taxpayer's money. |
||||||
104 | Keliy, can faith be predetermined? | Eph 2:8 | keliy | 213100 | ||
Norton, Please remember that we are not dealing with the original language in the verse you are referring to. There is no language that translates 100 percent into any other language. -This means You are placing your understanding at the mercy of an interpretation. "You Have Been" is one interpretation, that is all it is. For instance, the KJV renders it, "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God" There are many nuances in the original Greek that can only be covered here in specifics by one who is more knowledgeable than I. But if I may suggest to you, there are moods, tenses, and genders of words that all play a part in proper interpretation. Translation is not just a science, but an art as well, because language is flexible and changes over time. For instance, what would you think, as you are called upon from another country in another time, and you are looking at a phrase such as "let's eat a hot dog" or, "care to join me in a butter burger?" I think it may increase your understanding if you were to look into hermeneutics. a good start would be to go to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermeneutics I am in agreement with you on Grace. No works can be attached. These works will not survive the refiners fire, but will be burned up like hay. Thank you for your time as well. (o: !! keliy |
||||||
105 | Faith a gift? | Eph 2:8 | keliy | 213085 | ||
Thanks Brad, Excellent post. No apology necessary, we all are torn from what we wish we could do, in order to comply with the demands placed upon us through this life. May the Lord bless you keliy |
||||||
106 | Faith a gift? | Eph 2:8 | keliy | 213076 | ||
Hi Brad, I am sorry to disagree with your answer, but I feel it is difficult to prove a point by plucking out a verse without looking at the verses that precede, or follow the thoughts we are trying to interpret. Romans 10:17 is offered as the prooftext, but looking a little closer, verse 17 is a continuation of a passage that begins in verse 13, "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." Although there are many that do hear the Word yet do not believe. So,this thought goes much deeper than the simple statement so it is continued, for clarification in v. 14. "How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?" Verse 15 continues with the connecting word "But" (I am in the KJV) and again, v.16 begins with "But" and verse 17 begins with "So then" -meaning the author is going to sum up the words that came beforehand. Paul is saying that the word preached is the ordinary way of gaining faith and those that believe have first heard the Word. Yes, Faith cometh by hearing. So what does Jesus have to say, since not all those who hear do actually believe? The different responses to God's Word are not dependent upon grace, for we all receive grace. So as Jesus declares "no one can come to Me unless it is granted him by the Father." (John 6:65) He further relates in the same passage: " all that the Father gives to Me will come to Me." (John 6:37) Now, both phrases have in common the words, "Come to Me" -which simply mean to believe in Him. So taken together we can learn that no one can believe in Him unless God grants it, and also everyone that God grants to believe, will believe. I am of the mind that this interpretation lines up closer to your second verse, that of Rom 12:3 According to these verses then, God grants faith, a faith that will with no doubt arise in the hearts of those to whom He has given His Son. Lord Bless, and grant us faith keliy |
||||||
107 | Ananias and Sapphira paid for their sin | Acts 5:9 | keliy | 213061 | ||
Hi Val, It is always a pleasure to discuss topics with you. This is the definition from Webster's, explaining what I meant about apologetics. 1 : systematic argumentative discourse in defense (as of a doctrine) 2 : a branch of theology devoted to the defense of the divine origin and authority of Christianity On the judging note, I said in my post that I was not being judgemental. - I did know these workers on a personal level for a long time, and when the conversation continued, I told him that going to church for an hour a week is not what gets you to heaven, if you are not going to give it another thought for the rest of the week. And, his response was, No. That is not the way it works. So, he is standing upon a works based doctrine, thinking that church attendance will gain him admission into heaven. And, if you saw the pictures posted above his desk, and the material in the drawers, you would agree. What I meant by the forgiveness reference was to get back to the original question. Why were Annanias and Sapphira not forgiven their sin? Was not the Blood of Christ sufficient to save them? Is that how our Father chastens the children He loves? By stopping their heart on the spot, the very instant of an infraction? I am not pretending to know the spiritual level of Annanias and Sapphira, so I suppose it is another possibility that the Lord cut them down to prevent them from committing the unpardonable sin. But, again. We will know the answer to this biblical difficulty when the perfect comes and all that is imperfect disappears. Thank you, Val. May God Bless you and yours. keliy |
||||||
108 | Ananias and Sapphira paid for their sin | Acts 5:9 | keliy | 213059 | ||
Hi Val, thank you for your response. I have looked for the answer for some time now, then I felt the Forum could be of help. My Big Book of Bible Difficulties (Geisler, Howe; Baker Books) does not even touch this verse.) Annanias and Sapphira were actually wrong on many different levels. One, they were trying to exalt themselves as far as their standing among church members. Yet, the path to greatness is always that of humility. "He that exalteth himself shall be abased. He that humbles himself shall be exalted"(Luke 14:11). While you say since they were in the church, you presume them to be Christians, I might ask you if all who attend church are Christians? I have co-workers who say they are Christians because they go to church every Sunday, and my response was "does going to a garage make you an automobile? (I knew them personally, and that they did not discipline themselves for the other six and one half days every week) I was not judgemental, just trying to shed some light in the darkness. This brings us to the parable of the wheat and the tares which I show partially here: "The slaves of the landowner came and said to him, 'Sir, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have tares?' "And he said to them, 'An enemy has done this!' The slaves said to him, 'Do you want us, then, to go and gather them up?' "But he said, 'No; for while you are gathering up the tares, you may uproot the wheat with them. (Mat 13:27-29) The salvation of the pair is not mentioned in the Bible, so we should not fill in the blanks on our own. Their sins are numerous, but I will begin with pride, and greed. Yet, the sin for which they gave their lives was not the sin of holding back, because God did not require, or even ask them to give everything. The sin that likely caused their death was the sin of hypocrisy--they pretended to give all to God while they were holding back from God. Christ was building His church through His Holy Spirit and it was expanding very fast. Our Lord's exposed wisdom likely deemed that the hypocrites could not remain. He showed us that He was sovereign, and the church was quickly purged from their hypocrisy. As Jesus said, "Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees which is hypocrisy." And Paul told the Corinthian church years later to "purge out the leaven therefore." I basically was looking for an apologetic answer to the brother who was belittling the wisdom of the Bible, which says all are made righteous in the eyes of God through the Blood of Christ. As Jesus said, we must forgive not seven times, but seventy times seven, there must be a reason why the Holy Spirit felt it necessary to include this story that seems to conflict with what we have been taught in other verses, such as Acts 5:31 "He is the one whom God exalted to His right hand as a Prince and a Savior, to grant repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. All of this Val, and there is no answer to the question, and I expect I might not find the answer in this life. Lord Bless, keliy |
||||||
109 | Ananias and Sapphira paid for their sin | Acts 5:9 | keliy | 213056 | ||
Thank You, Cheri, I appreciate that you took time out of your schedule at work to send your thoughts. (that was very thoughtful of you :o) I also want to thank you for the link for the Torah Class mp3 studies, I listen everyday, and enjoy it very much. Praise God. I do believe this couple's sin goes back, as all sin does, to the beginning, concerning lust and pride. They were covetous of worldly wealth, and distrustful of God's providence. So in their attempt to serve God and mammon, they attempted to deceive the apostles. Trying to shortchange God, they shortchanged their very souls. My question, Cheri, had to do with why did the Blood of Christ not cover their sin? This was proposed to me by a brother who has been saved about 30 years before I. And though we were acquaintances, he (still) belongs to a church that does not accept the Word of God as the final authority for his life. So, his question, in trying to belittle the inspired Word of God deserves the best answer that the Spirit will lead me to. The convo was actually about how there is no remission of sin w/out the shedding of blood. In the OT, it was the blood of animals. In the NT, the blood of Christ put an end to the necessity of animals blood. I believe that Jesus had the final 3 words to say towards the salvation of mankind when He said, "It is finished." and the temple veil proved it. Thank you once more, in listening to the Torah Class just today, I heard the explanation of the difference between the New Testament and the New Covenant. As Tom Bradford puts it, the New Covenant was explained in the OT, and it is testified of in the New Testament. Shalom, keliy |
||||||
110 | Ananias and Sapphira paid for their sin | Acts 5:9 | keliy | 213028 | ||
Thank You, Brad. part of your answer somewhat echoes a teaching of my very knowledgeable pastor, your post stated, "...it was the first time that believers had issued such a challenge to God, so it was important for God to act clearly and decisively..." My thoughts were that the church had not been formed yet, so Ananias and Sapphira were judged from the rule of the OT, and certainly not from the teaching of the NT, as found in Rom 8:1 Yet my theory holds no water, since the birthday of the Church is in 2nd chapter of Acts, and the purging of Ananias and Sapphira from the church is not until chapter 5. I was actually hoping someone could shed some further light, but as they say, we will all know soon enough :o) keliy |
||||||
111 | The United Stated in the Bible | Bible general Archive 4 | keliy | 213024 | ||
Hello Allen, Here is an interesting passage for your consideration, as well as other members. Daniel's dream of four beasts. (7:3-7) The first, as I have heard from one interpretation, is the lion, national symbol of Britain. ( This was during a recent time of Bush and Blair's newsworthy alliance.) The wings of an eagle were said to be from the national bird of the U.S. The bear, was said to be Russia, and the leopard was left undescribed, which I later presumed to be Africa. Again, this is for consideration, I am not trying to draw any parallels that were not meant to be there. Here is the passage: Dan 7:3) "And four great beasts were coming up from the sea, different from one another. Dan 7:4) "The first was like a lion and had the wings of an eagle. I kept looking until its wings were plucked, and it was lifted up from the ground and made to stand on two feet like a man; a human mind also was given to it. Dan 7:5) "And behold, another beast, a second one, resembling a bear. And it was raised up on one side, and three ribs were in its mouth between its teeth; and thus they said to it, 'Arise, devour much meat!' Dan 7:6) "After this I kept looking, and behold, another one, like a leopard, which had on its back four wings of a bird; the beast also had four heads, and dominion was given to it. Dan 7:7) "After this I kept looking in the night visions, and behold, a fourth beast, dreadful and terrifying and extremely strong; and it had large iron teeth. It devoured and crushed and trampled down the remainder with its feet; and it was different from all the beasts that were before it, and it had ten horns. blessings, keliy |
||||||
112 | The United Stated in the Bible | Bible general Archive 4 | keliy | 213000 | ||
I beg your pardon Doc, but could you please enlighten us on what the United States and hermeneutic principles have in common? Lord Bless, keliy |
||||||
113 | Trouble with Pronouns | Is 63:11 | keliy | 212938 | ||
Thanks Cheri, for your kind response. I actually enjoy it when I am "stopped in my tracks" as you say. It sort of lets me know that the Holy Spirit is telling me, "whoah, you are moving too fast, slow down or you miss the point." Besides that, it is a nice feeling to know that He is with us in our studies, Amen? By the way, Young's Literal Translation (YLT) has the He in the uppercase, which firms up the 'mistake theory' in diligence, (2Tim2:15) keliy |
||||||
114 | ... | Ex 31:16 | keliy | 212896 | ||
Yes, you are right. If I may make make a slight correction. According to Judaism 101:Jewish Calendar, The Jewish calendar coordinates all of three astronomical phenomena. The rotation of the Earth about its axis (a day); the revolution of the moon about the Earth (a month); and the revolution of the Earth about the sun (a year). Months are either 29 or 30 days, corresponding to the 29½-day lunar cycle. Years are either 12 or 13 months, corresponding to the 12.4 month solar cycle. http://www.jewfaq.org/calendar.htm I however, think that the biblical evidence points to a complete week of 7 days. keliy |
||||||
115 | ... | Ex 31:16 | keliy | 212845 | ||
Hello awanee Welcome to the forum, and thank you for the question. My recollection of the history is a bit vague, so I will not try to get into many details at this point. The church is not attempting to command feasts or holydays -at least in my eyes. The question to you, is, "Who is the church?" My answer would be that the church is the Body of Believers of who Christ is the Head, and as such we are commanded to obey all authority, as I suppose they did under Constantine, who was not necessarily a practicing Christian. King Constantine was not the 'Church' when he commanded the changing of the Sabbath into Sunday, because this is not how it happened. The Romans tried to beat down Christianity but failed King Constantine, in order to expand his territory (approx 313 AD) decided to allow Christianity which was, up until that time, an unlawful practice. This was quite a bold move for his time yet was quite successful. Actually the Jews, since 70 AD had no more Temple to make sacrifices in order to observe 'the Law'. And, Jesus said, I came not to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it." The Jews made sacrifices in the OT because there was no remission of sin without the shedding of blood. Jesus' Blood put an end to blood sacrifices because there was nothing to add to the completeness of His work on the Cross. This is His New Covenant. It was the Apostles who knew Jesus inimately that began celebrating the day of His resurrection as 'The Lord's Day' This is not Protestants, or any believer contradicting any law or precept or even themselves. This was a New Cause to celebrate and remember that Jesus death and Resurrection has fulfilled the Law and released us all from its rule. So, this is not the institution of a festival, it is just keeping a time for remembrance. Jesus said, "Do this in remembrance of Me." Again, this is just how I remember, and I welcome any additions or corrections. Lord Bless, keliy |
||||||
116 | 13Who among you is wise and understandin | James 3:18 | keliy | 212818 | ||
Thank You, Lisa, your response edifies me as I begin my day. Yes, now that you mention it, worldly wisdom is quite an oxymoron, isn't it. So do not fizzle out, but stay in the Word, and keep enough oil in your lamp. Psa 119:105 keliy |
||||||
117 | What is sin? How is sin commited? | Rom 14:23 | keliy | 212811 | ||
Hello KC, If you will allow me to add to Doc's wonderful post, there are actually three different words used for sin in the Bible. They describe the same thing, -yet with a difference. The word 'sin' literally means missing the target, like an arrow that veers off to the side. But God's standard is perfection, which would amount to a perfect bullseye every single time. 'Transgression' refers to rebellion as we fight against God's absolute standards and His right to be in control. 'Iniquity' is straying off of the path. God's path is marked by truth, and we cannot improve or add to truth. But there are many distractions in the world that cause us to become sidetracked or stray from the straight path that God has marked out for us. Thy word [is] a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. (Psa 119:105) Grace and strength, keliy |
||||||
118 | TRUE HEART OF WORSHIP | Bible general Archive 4 | keliy | 212748 | ||
Hi Val, Yes contrition is certainly true to the heart, but if I may suggest, brokenness brings to my mind penitence, such as Psalm 51. Of course, that is also a very authentic form of worship. Blessings, keliy |
||||||
119 | TRUE HEART OF WORSHIP | Bible general Archive 4 | keliy | 212745 | ||
Thanks again Doc, for the embellishment. I agree with you in that God is providing us with the worship, He is the author and is our all in all. Your words reminded me of a study on the Lord's prayer, as to the beginning where it says, "hallowed be thy name". This means that God's name is hallowed, with or without any effort on our part, because there is nothing that we can add to the word 'be'. And we are not righteous enough to improve any of God's attributes. Amen. keliy |
||||||
120 | TRUE HEART OF WORSHIP | Bible general Archive 4 | keliy | 212742 | ||
Hi Doc, I guess you just refined it for me. (o; Or, for Brittany for that matter. In any case, thank you for the edification. keliy |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ] Next > Last [10] >> |