Results 101 - 120 of 2030
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: mark d seyler Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
101 | What was the purpose of the law? | Gal 3:23 | mark d seyler | 187489 | ||
Hi Hopalong, I think, if I may be so bold, that you are endeavoring to answer a different question than what Searcher is actually asking you. While we know that all Scripture will be in harmony if we have a correct understanding of its teaching, we also know that any correct doctrine will do no harm to the exact teaching of a passage in its context. Personally, I think that many stretch to reach a doctrine before correctly understanding a verse. I think that if we focus on simply understanding a verse, that then a doctrine will present itself when we have understood All of it's foundation stones individually. There is the underlying presupposition that if the human heart is incurably corrupt, that salvation can come only if God first acts upon it, and in this I believe that you and I would agree. But there is another underlying presupposition which says that were God to act upon the human heart, the only possible action that He would perform would be to effect a complete and full regeneration. Is it not possible that God could act upon the human heart in such a manner as to permit the understanding of the Gospel, while still allowing that each individual would make their own choice of whether or not they were willing to yield to God? Of course it's possible. This is a valid alternative, and serves to address many of the objections within this debate. I believe that this subject is often arbitrarily limited to two alternates when more exist. Next the argument is made, well, look at all these people who say its not so. This is another fallacy, as we do not determine truth by head count, but rather by the exact teaching of Scripture. Now, lest I be misunderstood, I have a great deal of respect for those who have gone before me, and who teach the Scripture, but I must compare what they say with what the Bible says, and be willing to hold to Scripture when it disagrees, no matter how greatly I may respect a given commentator. Then there is another error often introduced, that of mis-characterizing one's opponent's argument, then arguing against that mis-characterization. This is often manifested as claiming that the one who believes that God allows man the choice to receive salvation or not believes that man somehow "saves himself". This is akin to saying that the one who cashed the million dollar check from Bill Gates has enriched themself by their own works, or that the one who went willingly under the surgeon's knife gave themself a heart transplant. "Well, you only have yourself to thank, so the praise goes to you!" Right. Tell me that my choice to have a heart translant has any significance without the ability and willingness of the surgeon. Semi-Pelagianism, I think, will be the label against this notion, claiming that salvation is somehow a joint effort between God and man, that somehow God's work of salvation is inadequate without my help. That God can't save man unless man permits it. But this again is a mis-direction, as there is no disagreement that salvation is entirely a work of God. What we are talking about here is the criteria He uses in choosing who it is that He alone saves. In all the passages that address personal salvation, including such matters of election and predestination, the only ones that speak specifically of the criteria God uses speak of those that receive Him, those that are willing, "as many as received Him, to them. . ." These issues must be addressed and answered if we are to have a real and meaningful discussion on this topic. They need to be answered without mis-direction, mis-characterization, and without skirting difficult passages. All alternatives need to be considered, and and above all, we have to accept the plain teaching of Scripture, even it is seems strange, and even if it means we have to change our views. Ok, obviously I'm answering more than just your short post. I will allow this to be my reply to some others I have recently read as well. Thank you for bearing with me! Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
102 | God grant repentance? | Gal 3:23 | mark d seyler | 187486 | ||
Hi Hopalong, You wrote: "The unsaved individual ,not only does not esteem the God's Word, but he cannot even bear listening to it," I didn't notice that in the quoted passage. Did you have a different passage in mind, that says "the unsaved cannot even bear listening to God's Word"? Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
103 | Who and why..... must be a reason? | Is 43:7 | mark d seyler | 187485 | ||
Hi Psalm 25, If you wish to, email me at markdseyler@yahoo.com. Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
104 | Christians? | Matt 7:21 | mark d seyler | 187484 | ||
Hi John, Actually, my point was that I think sometimes an English word will actually convey more than was intended in the Hebrew or Greek word, such as this exemplifies. So while the English "repentance", as you say, covers the bases, we would have to go back to the Hebrew to actually distinguish if what is being said is a feeling or regret, or a change of behavior. The English translation of "repentance" doesn't tell us which it is, while determining which Hebrew word was used would tell us that information. So while I say the English translation doesn't "steer us wrong", we can get a little closer to the target with a little more homework. Since the Bible wasn't written in English, English words only serve well to the extent that they correctly transmit the exact meaning of the original communication. Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
105 | Christians? | Matt 7:21 | mark d seyler | 187396 | ||
Hi John, Doesn't it strike you as a sound practice to compare the English translations to a more in-depth study of the original lanuages? This is a good example, since the Webster definition of Repentance actually combines the two different Hebrew words that are translated as Repentance, "nacham", which is more the feeling of regret, and "shub", which is to change your direction. One refers to an emotional or mental state, and the other is behavioral. The Greek Metanoia is different still, refering to a change of mind. Since all of these are translated by the single word Repentance, I don't see how we are able to fully differentiate the exact statement that is being made without bringing to bear the original meanings of the original languages. Oh, not that if we read "repentance" in the KJV we'll be steered in a wrong direction, but doesn't it strike you as a sound practice to define our theology by the languages it was expressed in? It does me. Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
106 | gifts of Healing and Miracles for today. | 1 Cor 12:9 | mark d seyler | 187282 | ||
Hi Steve, It is the Scripture that calls these people a gift, I am merely quoting it. Naturally it is the LORD giving that makes such a one a gift. Nowhere do I say that the foundation is not laid, or that there needs to be a correction to it. I merely point out that the Scripture says God gives us such people to build us up until we are perfected. As far as Revelation 21:14, that there are 12 foundations of the city, named for the 12 apostles, by implication may reinforce the idea that the 12 apostles are the foundation Eph 2 is speaking of. The reason I bring up others, such as Barnabas, who is called an apostle, is exemplified in this. I am thinking that Barnabas is not named on a foundation of the New Jerusalem. What do you think about that? Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
107 | gifts of Healing and Miracles for today. | 1 Cor 12:9 | mark d seyler | 187201 | ||
Hi Steve, I'd like to simply highlight a couple of places from chapter 4: Ephesians 4:11-13 (11) And indeed He gave some to be apostles; and some prophets; and some evangelists; and some pastors and teachers; (12) with a view to the perfecting of the saints for the work of the ministry, for the building up of the body of Christ, (13) until we all may come to the unity of the faith and of the full knowledge of the Son of God, to a full-grown man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, He gave some to be apostles, prophets, etc, for the completing of the saints, building up of the body of Christ, UNTIL we all come to the full measure of the stature of Christ. This isn't that the apostles have a gift, they are the gift, given until we are completed. My point was that there seem to be different apostleships. Barnabas, for instance, is called an apostle, yet was not one of the 12. The apostles and prophets given then do not remain with us today, they remain with the LORD, but not here with us. Even if you say, well, this actually refers to their writings, that's not what it says, and even so, we don't have writings from all the apostles. Or all the prophets. Phillips daughters prophesied, but their prophecies were not recorded. How do you, for instance, understand Barnabas' apostleship? Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
108 | can someman today be an apostle | 3 John 1:7 | mark d seyler | 187189 | ||
I am not aware of any Scripture that tells us we should label ourselves as apostles or bishops. "Apostle" means "one who is sent." What is important is that if the LORD send you, that you go. Faithful service is what the LORD requires of us, not that we take titles of grandeur to ourselves. Do you want to be great in God's Kingdom? Learn to be everyone's slave. That's what the Bible teaches. Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
109 | gifts of Healing and Miracles for today. | 1 Cor 12:9 | mark d seyler | 187167 | ||
Hi Steve, I agree with you that the Cornerstone, Jesus Christ, is set once, not to be re-set, as it were. And the foundation, the Apostles and Prophets, are established, upon which the church is being built. This is the Word of God, Christ Himself, and the Bible. But what do we do with Ephesians 4? Ephesians 4:11-13 (11) and He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as proclaimers of good news, and some as shepherds and teachers, (12) unto the perfecting of the saints, for a work of ministration, for a building up of the body of the Christ, (13) till we may all come to the unity of the faith and of the recognition of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to a measure of stature of the fulness of the Christ, Here, the "perfect", "perfecting" is specified: the perfecting of the saints. Til we measure up to Christ. I don't think that has happened yet, at least, it sure doesn't seem like it to me! There is the question of how we are look at these words, prophets, those who speak God's words, and apostles, sent ones. There are the 12 Apostles, but there are also other apostles. Barnabas was an apostle (Acts 14:4), and actually, "apostle" simply means "sent one", so all who where sent were apostles. There are other less specific verses that indicate there may have been others who were considered apostles. The seventy that Jesus sent out, in Luke 10, were apostles. Jesus "apesteilen", sent them, they were "apostelos", sent ones. They are considered "temporary" apostles, having been sent for a particular purpose. And of the Prophets, Saul prophesied among the prophets (1 Samuel 10), yet his prophecies were not recorded. And many times in Scripture, we read of prophets who prophesied, but their prophecies were not recorded. So are there more prophets than those given to provide the foundation for our faith? It would seem that not all prophecies were appointed for that purpose, since we do not have a record of them. But they were still prophecies from God, still needful, still useful, still building up. I would say that 1 Cor 12 speaks of the foundation, while Eph. 4 speaks of the construction. This is my understanding anyway. Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
110 | Why is it not relevant today? | Matt 12:31 | mark d seyler | 186878 | ||
Hi WOS, While it seems to me more likely that people who disbelieve would sooner ignore the Scriptures than blaspheme the Holy Spirit, I tend to agree with you that one could accept the historical veracity of the gospel accounts, and make the same attribution as the Pharisees did, and in so doing, commit the same sin. I do think the Scripture is clear about this sin being to blaspheme (vilify) the Holy Spirit, in effect, to claim that God's Spirit is an "evil spirit". (Even writing this gives me the willies!) It seems to me that the sin itself isn't dependent upon a specific circumstance, but rather on an action performed. Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
111 | No reprobates in the Bible? | Matt 12:31 | mark d seyler | 186876 | ||
oh, how I would like to edit my posts. . . Ok! I'm not complaining! What I should have written was either "an inceptive action initiated last week" or "a punctilliar action completed last week". Well, either way . . . |
||||||
112 | No reprobates in the Bible? | Matt 12:31 | mark d seyler | 186875 | ||
Note: It's aorist indicative passive, and is a "one time action." Hope this clarifies? This is why I am asking. How does an Aorist verb specify action in "eternity past"? Wouldn't we need more to go on to know its not talking about, say, a punctilliar action initiated last week? Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
113 | What is a fatal sin? | Matt 12:31 | mark d seyler | 186874 | ||
Hi Psalm 25, Did you in mind 1 John 5:16? "If anyone sees his brother sinning a sin not unto death, he shall ask; and He shall give life to him, to the ones not sinning unto death. There is a sin unto death. I do not say that he should ask about that." Since Koine Greek does not have an Indefinate Article, to my understanding, translators can either insert one or not as they understand the passages. It seems that there are several on both sides of this fence. 1Jn 5:16 (ALT) If anyone sees his brother [fig., fellow believer] sinning a sin not [leading] to death, he will ask, and He will give to him life, to the ones sinning [a sin] not [leading] to death. [There] is sin [leading] to death; not concerning that [sin] am I saying that he should urgently ask. (ASV) If any man see his brother sinning a sin not unto death, he shall ask, and God will give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: not concerning this do I say that he should make request. (Bishops) If any man see his brother sinne a sinne not vnto death, let hym aske, and he shal geue him life for them that sinne not vnto death. There is a sinne vnto death: I say not that thou shouldest pray for it. (ESV) If anyone sees his brother committing a sin not leading to death, he shall ask, and God will give him life--to those who commit sins that do not lead to death. There is sin that leads to death; I do not say that one should pray for that. (Geneva) If any man see his brother sinne a sinne that is not vnto death, let him aske, and he shall giue him life for them that sinne not vnto death. There is a sinne vnto death: I say not that thou shouldest pray for it. (KJVR) If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it. (LITV) If anyone sees his brother sinning a sin not unto death, he shall ask; and He shall give life to him, to the ones not sinning unto death. There is a sin unto death. I do not say that he should ask about that. (MKJV) If anyone sees his brother sin a sin not to death, he shall ask, and He shall give him life for those that do not sin to death. There is a sin to death, I do not say that he shall pray for it. (WNT) If any one sees a brother man committing a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask and God shall give him life--for those who do not sin unto death. There is such a thing as sin unto death; for that I do not bid him make request. (YLT) If any one may see his brother sinning a sin not unto death, he shall ask, and He shall give to him life to those sinning not unto death; there is sin to death, not concerning it do I speak that he may beseech; These are the ones I have quick access to, plus, of course, our host: 1 John 5:16 If anyone sees his brother committing a sin not leading to death, he shall ask and God will for him give life to those who commit sin not leading to death. There is a sin leading to death; I do not say that he should make request for this. Its my understand that the word "tis" is sometimes used as an Indefinate Article, but it's absence doesn't mean that the noun is necessarily definite. Again, could I ask you what your foundation is for saying that this is speaking of a "continuous life-style of sin", rather than a particular sin, or a particular type of sin? I appreciate your clarifications! Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
114 | No reprobates in the Bible? | Matt 12:31 | mark d seyler | 186868 | ||
Hi Psalm 25, You wrote, "In the Greek "sealed in Him" is an action from eternity past to eternity future." Since "you were sealed" is translated from the single word "esphragisthete", which is an aorist tense verb, how is this an action "from eternity past"? I don't understand how this comes out of this passage. Would you mind clarifying that for me? Thank you! Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
115 | eph 1:4-5 what is predestination, chosen | Bible general Archive 3 | mark d seyler | 186179 | ||
Hi Edwin, There is none who understands. God must do something so that people will understand. Now, some will say that this thing He does is to regenerate a person, to create them anew, and that this happens to those He has preselected, and the rest continue to not understand. I think that God does this to everyone, and that as each person, at some point in their life adequately understands that they have the option to receive or reject, if they recieve, then they are regenerated, or born again. None seek after God. God seeks after us. But I don't believe that God only seeks the preselected, but that He comes to each of us, desiring that each would be saved. Election is to be chosen by God. Predestination is to place limits or boundries in advance. Election is thought of by many as happening at an individual level, as God goes down the roster of humanity and circles certain names to be reborn. I think of election as when God chose Christ to be His Servant. All who are baptized into Christ are righteous as He is righteous, and chosen as He is chosen. I do not believe that God has preselected some for salvation and some for condemnation, but that God desires all men to be saved, but only saves those willing to be saved. I think Election is a benefit we receive in Christ with all other benefits we receive in Christ. The Bible never says we are predestined for salvation, nor does it say we are chosen for salvation. Being saved, we are among the elect, because we are in Christ, and we are predestined to be conformed to the image of Christ. Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
116 | what does the verse mean? | Ezek 47:5 | mark d seyler | 186178 | ||
Hi Searcher, Perhaps if you re-read what I wrote: "I would have no difficulty using this description as a picture of the outpouring of God's Spirit." If I were to describe to someone the outpouring of God's Spirit, there might be a number of ways I might do that. One way could be to use imagery familiar to my listeners. Jesus did this in His teaching. "Learn the parable from the fig tree. . ." He said. He may have pointed to one. He would have been surrounded by them when He said this. Now, did God cause those fig trees to grow there in order to teach the signs of the coming of Jesus? I'd say probibly not. But they sure are useful as a picture of what Jesus is saying. In the same manner, I might use this picture of a river that flows out from the temple of God, growing wider and deeper, bringing healing to the land, as the outpouring of God's Spirit, and His work in our lives. Does this help clarify what I am saying? Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
117 | what does the verse mean? | Ezek 47:5 | mark d seyler | 186144 | ||
Hi Cheri, I see . . . there was a second question on the same verse. I would have no difficulty using this description as a picture of the outpouring of God's Spirit. Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
118 | Had Satan known.... | John 10:18 | mark d seyler | 186142 | ||
Hi Cheri, Perhaps you are thinking of this passage? 1 Corinthians 2:6-8 (6) But we speak wisdom among the perfect, but not the wisdom of this age, nor of the rulers of this age, those being brought to nothing. (7) But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, having been hidden, which God predetermined before the ages for our glory, (8) which none of the rulers of this age has known. For if they had known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory; I hope this helps! Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
119 | what does the verse mean? | Ezek 47:5 | mark d seyler | 186140 | ||
For myself, I take a literal view of this passage, and that the Jews will build this temple with all the rooms and patios and doorways, and everything described, and that from it will flow a river, that gets deeper and wider as it goes, becoming enough to purify all the land and sea. I always look at prophetic passages in the same way as other passages, as describing real events and such, unless there are specific instructions to take it symbolically, and the symbols are defined. Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
120 | eph 1:4-5 what is predestination, chosen | Bible general Archive 3 | mark d seyler | 186139 | ||
Hi Edwin, I don't know that the Bible actually says why God chose Isaac over Jacob, but it does seem to say that it was not because of a difference between Isaac and Jacob, at least as far as anything that they would do, that is, Romans 9:11. Now, I don't think that this choice had anything to do with Isaac's or Jacob's salvation, but rather, who would father the nation. It seems to me to be saying that God chose to favor Isaac, and not favor Esau, and while He doesn't tell us what His criteria is, He tells us what it's not, and it's not either Jacob's or Esau's works. I believe God is fair, and I likewise believe that none have merit. I think God intervenes in each of our lives, and we have a choice to make, whether to accept His intervention, or reject it. But I don't think that is what is being talked about in Romans 9:11. I think that was more about the establishment of the nation. Does this help explain my view? Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ] Next > Last [102] >> |