Results 1141 - 1160 of 1309
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Radioman2 Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1141 | What exactly must a person to be saved? | Bible general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 79589 | ||
Never let anyone tell you that you are not saved unless and until you go before an altar and "profess [yourself] to Jesus Christ". Public confession is a false addition to faith in Jesus Christ, which is stated as the single condition for salvation in the NT (John 1:12; Acts 16:31). "Confession is a normal result of being saved, though it may also accompany the initial act of believing. Nowhere is public confession required. In this connection, prayer may be helpful in clinching a decision, but it is not in itself a requirement for salvation" (Ryrie Study Bible, Charles Caldwell Ryrie, Moody Press, 1976, 1978). Once again we are not saved by surrender, baptism, repentance, or public confession. Neither does our prayer save us. |
||||||
1142 | What exactly must a person to be saved? | NT general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 79587 | ||
Good point. No one needs to consult any history books to answer the question, "What must I do to be saved?" The Bible is the only -- repeat ONLY -- inspired and, thus, authoritative book we need to answer that question. | ||||||
1143 | What exactly must a person to be saved? | Bible general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 79570 | ||
That you yourself neither study nor believe in studying is quite apparent from reading your postings. But I suppose one who cannot read with comprehension would find it difficult to study. | ||||||
1144 | ever neccessary/permissable to deceit? | Luke 24:31 | Radioman2 | 79568 | ||
Has anyone here ever served in the Armed Forces? Has anyone here ever fought in an actual war (World War II, Korea, Vietnam, etc.)? If so, what do you veterans think? If a soldier lies to the enemy in the line of duty in order to protect the lives of himself or others, is he sinning? What do you all think is more urgent -- dying and taking pride in the fact that you didn't lie OR the survival of your fellow soldiers or civilians? Why would you feel obligated to tell the enemy everything you know? Also, the idea of sacrificing the lives of innocent women and children so you can boast of your sinlessnesss doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I'm not talking about situational ethics. I'm talking about what has more value -- your pride in your rigid obedience to the letter of the law or the lives of innocent people? Man was not made for the Law; but the Law was made for man. |
||||||
1145 | What's this about the Rapture? | Rev 4:1 | Radioman2 | 79565 | ||
You write: "If christians are around when the anti-christ and other things happen, they could Stop them from happing." Actually, regardless of WHEN the rapture takes place, there will be believers on earth when the Antichrist and other things happen (Revelation 6:9-11; 7:9, 13-14). These believers cannot and will not stop the Antichrist. You write: "There is an Order of Presedence. In other words i.e. God had to send Moses...then had to stop the Egyptians...split the waters...and so on." God sent judgment upon the Egyptians in the form of the ten plagues WHILE the children of Israel were still dwelling in Egypt -- before the Exodus. |
||||||
1146 | What's this about the Rapture? | Rev 4:1 | Radioman2 | 79561 | ||
'The misrepresentation of John being the church. [Duplicate reply to duplicate question.] 'It is said that the church is not present during the events of Revelation because in chapter 4:1, John is called to "come up here". John is said to be a picture of the church, and therefore it (the church) is in heaven during the days of the 70th week of Daniel. But is that a valid inference? Nowhere in all of the New Testament is there warrant to apply the understanding that John represents the church in Rev. 4:1. The context clearly implies that "John" refers to... John, and no one else. He is simply given a heavenly perspective of what is going on behind the visible world and what will take place during the last days. Nothing else. To say otherwise is to grasp at straws to try to support a hollow argument." - - - - - - - - - - - - - 'Why is the church not mentioned in Revelation 4-22? 'By Rev. Charles Cooper 'It is assumed by pretribulationists that the church is not present on earth during the events spoken of in the majority of the book of Revelation. This thinking is based primarily on the absence of the word "church" from Revelation 3:22 to Revelation 20:16. If the "church" is not mentioned, it is concluded, she must have been raptured prior to the events written about. Further, it is assumed that the invitation to the apostle John in Revelation 4:1 to "come up here" is a picture of the rapture of the church preceding the events of the 70th week. 'It is important to examine these assumptions because they clearly attempt to place the rescue of the righteous (the rapture) before Daniel's 70th week and not after. If that is so, it should be clearly taught in Scripture. 'For several compelling reasons, it is a false conclusion to assume that the church will be raptured before the 70th week of Daniel (and for that reason is not mentioned between chapters 4 and 20): '1. The plain teaching of Scripture. Jesus, in the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24:3-31), outlines the sequence of events in the last days relative to the church. Verses 3-14 parallel Revelation chapter 6 and depict those events from the beginning of the 70th week to the rapture. Then, in verses 15-28, He focuses on the middle time period of that future week (the final 7 years) and emphasizes two key events: (a) a time of great persecution, and (b) the "cut[ting] short" of "those days" of persecution for "the sake of the elect". Finally, in verses 29-31, He highlights what it is that will "cut short" that persecution, the rescue of the elect (the rapture). 'Paul echoes this same teaching in his 2nd letter to the Thessalonians 2:1-12: (a) the apostasy comes first, (b) the revealing of the man of lawlessness, (c) the "challenge" to all who will not bow down to him and worship him "as being God", and (d) the coming of the Lord to "gather together" believers unto Himself. 'In Revelation 6-8, we have the same sequence repeated: (a) the 70th week begins, (b) the pressure builds [seals 1-3], (c) the midpoint [seals 4-5] and apex of the persecution (against the "saints") arrives, (d) the "cut[ting] short" of that persecution with the same cosmic announcement [seal 6] as Jesus spoke of in Matthew 24:29-31 followed by the rapture of the saints (Revelation 7:9ff). There is absolutely no teaching either by hint or by direct instruction that the church will not be present during the 70th week of Daniel. (...) '5. The argument from silence. It is maintained that since the word "church" isn't used again from 3:22 until 22:6, she is absent from the events unfolding during that time period. That's an argument from silence. If we apply that same argument to the gospel of John, we have to conclude that the gospel of John isn't for the church because the word church isn't even mentioned in all of its chapters. Can that be true? 'The overwhelming evidence is that the church is indeed present during the 70th week of Daniel regardless of whether the word is used or not. What one believes must be squarely built on what the Bible clearly says, not on what we might like it to say for whatever reason. What we believe about the last days will have tremendous implications for our lives should we enter those days. Let us be Bereans, searching to see if these things are so. (Acts 17:11)' (http://www.solagroup.org/articles/faqs/faq_0027.html) |
||||||
1147 | What's this I | Rev 4:1 | Radioman2 | 79559 | ||
'The misrepresentation of John being the church. 'It is said that the church is not present during the events of Revelation because in chapter 4:1, John is called to "come up here". John is said to be a picture of the church, and therefore it (the church) is in heaven during the days of the 70th week of Daniel. But is that a valid inference? Nowhere in all of the New Testament is there warrant to apply the understanding that John represents the church in Rev. 4:1. The context clearly implies that "John" refers to... John, and no one else. He is simply given a heavenly perspective of what is going on behind the visible world and what will take place during the last days. Nothing else. To say otherwise is to grasp at straws to try to support a hollow argument." - - - - - - - - - - - - - 'Why is the church not mentioned in Revelation 4-22? 'By Rev. Charles Cooper 'It is assumed by pretribulationists that the church is not present on earth during the events spoken of in the majority of the book of Revelation. This thinking is based primarily on the absence of the word "church" from Revelation 3:22 to Revelation 20:16. If the "church" is not mentioned, it is concluded, she must have been raptured prior to the events written about. Further, it is assumed that the invitation to the apostle John in Revelation 4:1 to "come up here" is a picture of the rapture of the church preceding the events of the 70th week. 'It is important to examine these assumptions because they clearly attempt to place the rescue of the righteous (the rapture) before Daniel's 70th week and not after. If that is so, it should be clearly taught in Scripture. 'For several compelling reasons, it is a false conclusion to assume that the church will be raptured before the 70th week of Daniel (and for that reason is not mentioned between chapters 4 and 20): '1. The plain teaching of Scripture. Jesus, in the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24:3-31), outlines the sequence of events in the last days relative to the church. Verses 3-14 parallel Revelation chapter 6 and depict those events from the beginning of the 70th week to the rapture. Then, in verses 15-28, He focuses on the middle time period of that future week (the final 7 years) and emphasizes two key events: (a) a time of great persecution, and (b) the "cut[ting] short" of "those days" of persecution for "the sake of the elect". Finally, in verses 29-31, He highlights what it is that will "cut short" that persecution, the rescue of the elect (the rapture). 'Paul echoes this same teaching in his 2nd letter to the Thessalonians 2:1-12: (a) the apostasy comes first, (b) the revealing of the man of lawlessness, (c) the "challenge" to all who will not bow down to him and worship him "as being God", and (d) the coming of the Lord to "gather together" believers unto Himself. 'In Revelation 6-8, we have the same sequence repeated: (a) the 70th week begins, (b) the pressure builds [seals 1-3], (c) the midpoint [seals 4-5] and apex of the persecution (against the "saints") arrives, (d) the "cut[ting] short" of that persecution with the same cosmic announcement [seal 6] as Jesus spoke of in Matthew 24:29-31 followed by the rapture of the saints (Revelation 7:9ff). There is absolutely no teaching either by hint or by direct instruction that the church will not be present during the 70th week of Daniel. (...) '5. The argument from silence. It is maintained that since the word "church" isn't used again from 3:22 until 22:6, she is absent from the events unfolding during that time period. That's an argument from silence. If we apply that same argument to the gospel of John, we have to conclude that the gospel of John isn't for the church because the word church isn't even mentioned in all of its chapters. Can that be true? 'The overwhelming evidence is that the church is indeed present during the 70th week of Daniel regardless of whether the word is used or not. What one believes must be squarely built on what the Bible clearly says, not on what we might like it to say for whatever reason. What we believe about the last days will have tremendous implications for our lives should we enter those days. Let us be Bereans, searching to see if these things are so. (Acts 17:11)' (http://www.solagroup.org/articles/faqs/faq_0027.html) |
||||||
1148 | Only 144,000 virgins in heaven? | Revelation | Radioman2 | 79519 | ||
You write: 'The comment in the previous note that "The Witnesses believe they are the only "true" Christians can be applied to most religions. Most religions believe that the beliefs of their people is the right one or "the truth". I don't know that criticizing any religion is what we can find most beneficial' - - - - - - - - - - According to Jehovah's Witness' teaching, 'Throughout history there have been faithful Jehovah's witnesses who have managed to keep The Truth in spite of the "demonic" doctrine of Trinitarianism that has permeated the Christian church in "Christendom." Christendom is filled with pastors who are antichrists, in churches run by Satan, and who support the earthly governments which are all of the devil. In other words, all of Christianity is false and only the Jehovah's Witness "theocratic" organization lead by several men in Brooklyn, New York, is true.' (http://www.carm.org/jw/nutshell.htm) |
||||||
1149 | freewill or predestined? | Eccl 12:14 | Radioman2 | 79510 | ||
"You did not choose Me" "You did not choose Me but I chose you, and appointed you that you would go and bear fruit, and that your fruit would remain, so that whatever you ask of the Father in My name He may give to you." (NASB John 15:16 ) "He chose us in Christ" Even as [in His love] He chose us [actually picked us out for Himself as His own] in Christ before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy (consecrated and set apart for Him) and blameless in His sight, even above reproach, before Him in love. (AMPLIFIED Ephesians 1:4 ) But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth. (NASB 2 Thessalonians 2:13 b) * * * * * * * * * * * * 1 Pet 1:2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied. 'Election, Summary: In both Testaments the Hebrew and Greek words are rendered "elect," "election," "choose," "chosen." In all cases they mean, simply, "chosen," or "to choose"; and are used of both human and divine choices. '(1) In the latter use [divine choices] election is: (a) corporate, as of the nation of Israel, or the church Isaiah 45:4 and (b) individual 1 Peter 1:2. '(2) Election is according to the foreknowledge of God 1 Peter 1:2 and wholly of grace, apart from human merit ; Romans 9:11 ; 11:5,6. '(3) Election proceeds from the divine volition John 15:16. 'Election is, therefore: '(1) The sovereign act of God in grace whereby certain are chosen from among mankind for Himself. John 15:19 . '(2) The sovereign act of God whereby certain elect persons are chosen for distinctive service for Him. Luke 6:13 ; Acts 9:15; 1 Corinthians 1:27,28.' Bibliography Information Scofield, C.I. "Scofield Reference Notes on 1 Peter 1". "Scofield Reference Notes (1917 Edition)". http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/ScofieldReferenceNotes/ |
||||||
1150 | A bit confused regarding tongues | 1 Cor 14:22 | Radioman2 | 79508 | ||
The Baptism in the Holy Spirit [Note: (http://www.ag.org/top/beliefs/baptism_hs/baptmhs_00_questions.cfm) At the above website the document "Assemblies of God Beliefs" answers the following questions:] Questions about the Baptism in the Holy Spirit Do Christians receive the Holy Spirit when they are saved? If so, how is this experience different from the baptism in the Holy Spirit? Can a person receive eternal life in heaven without the baptism in the Holy Spirit? If so, why should we be baptized in the Spirit? Once a person is baptized in the Holy Spirit, why is it necessary to be refilled later? What is the difference between "speaking in tongues" when one is baptized in the Spirit and "speaking in tongues" publicly? Also, what is the advantage of "praying in tongues" in one's private prayer life? When tongues are exercised publicly according to the Biblical standard, should there always be an interpretation? Who should give the interpretation? For whose benefit and for what purpose are there utterances in tongues followed by interpretations? Is it possible for an interpretation of tongues to run contrary to the teachings of the Bible? As humans do we play a role as to whether or not tongues and other gifts will operate in the church? Can a person be filled with the Holy Spirit without speaking in tongues? In the first outpouring recorded in the New Testament, there were tongues of fire and the sound of a violent wind. Why does this not occur today? Is it possible to be saved and baptized in the Holy Spirit at the same time? First Corinthians 13:8 says "Whether there be tongues, they shall cease" (KJV). Wouldn't this indicate the baptism in the Holy Spirit was only for those first followers 2,000 years ago? Since Paul suggested in 1 Corinthians 14:19 that it is better to speak intelligible words in church than to speak in tongues, doesn't it follow that the experience of tongues in unnecessary today? Is there proof that the outpouring of the Holy Spirit experienced today is genuinely biblical? Why do Pentecostals emphasize speaking in tongues when this is only mentioned a few times in Acts and 1 Corinthians 12 to 14? Who should be baptized in the Holy Spirit? When a person is filled with the Holy Spirit, is he in a semi-conscious state, or is he totally coherent and aware of what is happening? Why are some people baptized in the Spirit immediately, while other seek so long without receiving the experience? When an individual is seeking the baptism in the Holy Spirit, can anything be done to prepare his life or environment that will quicken the infilling? Is tongues the only evidence of the infilling of the Holy Spirit? Will there be any significant changes in one's attitudes and actions after being baptized in the Spirit? |
||||||
1151 | A bit confused regarding tongues | 1 Cor 14:22 | Radioman2 | 79507 | ||
'8. The Initial Physical Evidence of the Baptism in the Holy Ghost 'The baptism of believers in the Holy Ghost is witnessed by the initial physical sign of speaking with other tongues as the Spirit of God gives them utterance. 'Acts 2:4 [KJV/NIV] The speaking in tongues in this instance is the same in essence as the gift of tongues, but is different in purpose and use. '1 Corinthians 12:4-10 [KJV/NIV] 1 Corinthians 12:28 [KJV/NIV]' From "Assemblies of God Beliefs" (http://www.ag.org/top/beliefs/truths.cfm#8) - - - - - - - - - - 'Can a person be filled with the Holy Spirit without speaking in tongues? 'First let us examine the Scriptures. On the Day of Pentecost the Holy Spirit fell upon the assembled believers and "all of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues" (Acts 2:4). Later, as Peter was preaching at the house of Cornelius, "the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message" and they were "speaking in tongues and praising God" (Acts 10:44, 46). Again, as the apostle Paul was ministering to the Ephesian disciples, "the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied" (Acts 19:6). It is evident also that Paul himself was filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17) and spoke in tongues (1 Corinthians 14:18). These Scriptures clearly show that speaking in tongues is the initial physical evidence of being baptized in the Holy Spirit. 'When the early believers were filled, they spoke in other tongues, and the same holds true today. Millions of believers worldwide share the exact testimony: when they initially were baptized in the Holy Spirit they spoke in unknown tongues. This is the truth which Pentecostals consistently affirm. The prophecy of Joel 2:28, 29, cited by Peter in Acts 2:16, 17, links today's Spirit-filled believers with those who were filled with the Spirit on the Day of Pentecost. The Spirit's fullness, evidenced initially by the phenomenon of speaking in other tongues, is the common experience all celebrate with joy. 'There are those who give testimony to a dynamic and life-changing encounter with the Holy Spirit who have never spoken in tongues. Nevertheless it cannot be said that they are filled with the Spirit in the New Testament sense of the term. There is an essential link between that experience and speaking in other tongues, as pointed out above. 'We affirm and teach these truths because they are based upon the pattern from God's Word. We do not look upon speaking in tongues as a proof of superior spirituality. It simply is a precious promise written in God's Word and fulfilled in our lives. To ignore it is to miss a great blessing and come short of the New Testament pattern. 'All who are hungry for the "filling" should be encouraged to trust the Lord for the overflowing evidence of that "filling"; namely, speaking in other tongues.' (http://www.ag.org/top/beliefs/baptism_hs/baptmhs_09_filledwotongues.cfm) |
||||||
1152 | What exactly must a person to be saved? | Bible general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 79505 | ||
Face value interpretation You write: "However, I feel that we must take nothing at face value. Then we along with the holy spirit will know what is right." - - - - - - - - - - "The text of Scripture can be understood when taken at FACE VALUE, making allowances for obvious figures of speech, near/far interpretations, its context, and comparative passages of Scripture that harmonize with it, without contradiction." 'By employing a FACE VALUE method of interpretation, the reader of Scripture attempts to discover the normal, natural, customary sense of the text as it was intended by the Author/author (God/human) at the time that it was written. (...) 'TWO CONDITIONS FOR INTERPRETATION '1) Understand that we are working with English translations of texts originally written in other languages. '2) Scripture never contradicts Scripture. 'FIVE PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION '1) Seek to discover the Author/author's intended meaning. '2) All Scripture is to be taken in its proper context be it words, phrases, passages, chapters, books,etc. Remember, "a text taken out of context is a pretext." '3) All Scripture is to be compared with other Scripture. "The best interpreter of Scripture is other Scripture," said Martin Luther. '4) Determine the literal reference of figures of speech. '5) Recognize that many passages of Scripture, in both Testaments, have both near and far implications and applications. 'The text of Scripture can be understood when taken at FACE VALUE, making allowances for obvious figures of speech, near/far interpretations, its context, and comparative passages of Scripture that harmonize with it, without contradiction. '"Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, handling accurately the word of truth." (2 Timothy 2:15)' (http://www.solagroup.org/) (Emphasis added) |
||||||
1153 | What exactly must a person to be saved? | NT general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 79458 | ||
If there is something we can or must do, something we must add to our faith, to gain salvation, what would that be? Over a period of time on this forum we have ruled out surrender to the lordship of Christ (this is not a condition for salvation); baptism (this has been discussed here ad nauseum); and repentance (a false addition to faith when understood as a prerequisite, requiring the cleansing of the life FIRST in order to be saved. (See page 1950, MacArthur Study Bible.) We have said hundreds of times: Good works are the result, not the cause of salvation. Remaining faithful is the result, not the cause of genuine saving faith. So what must we DO to be saved? Keep the commandments? Obey the law? AMPLIFIED Acts 13:39 And that through Him everyone who believes [who acknowledges Jesus as his Savior and devotes himself to Him] is absolved (cleared and freed) from every charge from which he could not be justified and freed by the Law of Moses and given right standing with God. AMPLIFIED Romans 3:20 For no person will be justified (made righteous, acquitted, and judged acceptable) in His sight by observing the works prescribed by the Law. For [the real function of] the Law is to make men recognize and be conscious of sin [not mere perception, but an acquaintance with sin which works toward repentance, faith, and holy character]. AMPLIFIED Romans 3:28 For we hold that a man is justified and made upright by faith independent of and distinctly apart from good deeds (works of the Law). [The observance of the Law has nothing to do with justification.] AMPLIFIED Galatians 2:16 Yet we know that a man is justified or reckoned righteous and in right standing with God not by works of the Law, but [only] through faith and [absolute] reliance on and adherence to and trust in Jesus Christ (the Messiah, the Anointed One). [Therefore] even we [ourselves] have believed on Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the Law [for we cannot be justified by any observance of the ritual of the Law given by Moses], because by keeping legal rituals and by works no human being can ever be justified (declared righteous and put in right standing with God). [Ps. 143:2.] AMPLIFIED Galatians 3:11 Now it is evident that no person is justified (declared righteous and brought into right standing with God) through the Law, for the Scripture says, The man in right standing with God [the just, the righteous] shall live by and out of faith and he who through and by faith is declared righteous and in right standing with God shall live. [Hab. 2:4.] So whatever it is that we must do to be saved, keep our salvation or add to our salvation, it is not surrender, baptism, repentance, keeping the law, good works or holding on and holding out. If one finally is saved and makes it into the kingdom of God it will be because God held on to that person, not the other way around. GOD DOES THE SAVING. GOD DOES THE KEEPING. SALVATION IS OF THE LORD. |
||||||
1154 | Women and hair | 1 Cor 11:5 | Radioman2 | 79446 | ||
You write: "I don't know why Paul wrote what he did about women. I only know that it contradicts most of what he wrote about the work and roles of all Christians." So are you saying that the apostle Paul, writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, contradicts himself? Are you saying that God, the Holy Spirit, contradicts Himself? |
||||||
1155 | What exactly must a person to be saved? | NT general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 79440 | ||
You ask: "What exactly must a person do to be saved?" In the book of Acts, the Philippian jailer asked the same question. The Bible gives a clear and straightforward answer. AMPLIFIED Bible Acts 16:30 And he brought them out [of the dungeon] and said, Men, what is it necessary for me to do that I may be saved? Acts 16:31 And they answered, Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ [give yourself up to Him, take yourself out of your own keeping and entrust yourself into His keeping] and you will be saved... John 3:16 For God so greatly loved and dearly prized the world that He [even] gave up His only begotten (unique) Son, so that whoever believes in (trusts in, clings to, relies on) Him shall not perish (come to destruction, be lost) but have eternal (everlasting) life. "Belief in the N.T. denotes more than intellectual assent to a fact. The word (Gk. pistis, noun; pisteuo, verb) means *adherence to, committal to, faith in, reliance upon, trust in* a person or an object, and this involves not only the consent of the mind, but an act of the heart and will of the subject. "Whosoever believeth in him" is equivalent to "whosoever trusts in or commits himself to him [Christ]." Belief, then is synonymous with faith, which in the N.T. consists of believing and receiving what God has revealed" (New Scofield Reference Bible, Oxford, 1967). "Salvation is conditioned solely on faith in Jesus Christ. Nearly 200 times faith, or belief, is stated as the single condition in the N.T. (John 1:12; Acts 16:31). That faith must be placed in Christ as one's substitute for and Saviour from sin" (p. 1950, Ryrie Study Bible, Moody Press, 1978). |
||||||
1156 | Originals? | Rev 22:18 | Radioman2 | 79439 | ||
'Salvation Without Conversion?' John Hagee "...believes that Jewish people do not need to be saved, since they are under a different covenant' (http://www.equip.org/free/DE405.htm). - - - - - - - - - - - - - Reformer Joe: Thank you for pointing out that "...many contemporary Christians are so theologically confused that they think that somehow all Jews are God's people and are somehow going to be saved apart from Y'shua their Messiah." John Hagee is one who not only believes, but also propagates, this false doctrine: 'Salvation Without Conversion? 'Hagee is recognized as a fierce foe of anti-Semitism... 'While his bold stance against anti-Semitism is certainly praiseworthy, Hagee’s zealousness for the Jewish people and their cause has led him to commit a most serious doctrinal error — salvation for the Jews without conversion to Christianity. One newspaper account puts it this way: 'Trying to convert Jews is a “waste of time,” he [Hagee] said. . . . 'Everyone else, whether Buddhist or Baha’i, needs to believe in Jesus, he says. But not Jews. Jews already have a covenant with God that has never been replaced with Christianity, he says. '“The Jewish people have a relationship to God through the law of God as given through Moses,” Hagee said. “I believe that every Gentile person can only come to God through the cross of Christ. I believe that every Jewish person who lives in the light of the Torah, which is the word of God, has a relationship with God and will come to redemption. '“The law of Moses is sufficient enough to bring a person into the knowledge of God until God gives him a greater revelation. And God has not,” said Hagee . . .[9] '“There are right now Jewish people on this earth who have a powerful and special relationship with God,” declares Hagee in one of his books. “...Let us put an end to the Christian chatter that “all the Jews are lost” and can’t be in the will of God until they convert to Christianity! . . . there are a certain number of Jews in relationship with God right now...” [10] 'Hagee also affirms: “If God blinded the Jewish people to the identity of Jesus as Messiah, how could He send them to hell for not seeing what he had forbidden them to see?”[11] He continues, “All people will gain entrance into heaven through Christ. The question is one of timing.” [12] 'Such rhetoric raises some thorny questions. When Hagee says “all people will gain entrance into heaven through Christ,” he is either advocating universalism (literally all people — Jewish and Gentile — will be saved), or he believes that all Jews will be saved. In either case, both positions are in serious error, but the latter is more consistent with his other statements' (http://www.equip.org/free/DH005.htm). To read the footnotes go to: (http://www.equip.org/free/DH005.htm). |
||||||
1157 | Originals? | Rev 22:18 | Radioman2 | 79434 | ||
Yes, perhaps by rating the NWT I do give it a degree of credibility -- right under the Koran! :-) | ||||||
1158 | Originals? | Rev 22:18 | Radioman2 | 79381 | ||
How would I rate the NWT as far as accuracy, honesty, and trustworthiness? On a scale of 1 to 10, with the KJV, NASB, Amplified being 1 and the Koran being 10, I would give the New World Translation a rating of 11. | ||||||
1159 | Can the rapture happen anytime? | Matt 24:3 | Radioman2 | 79373 | ||
2 Thes. 2:1-3 (KJV) Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, [2] That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. [3] Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; |
||||||
1160 | Originals? | Rev 22:18 | Radioman2 | 79368 | ||
Tim: You're right. There is no manuscript evidence whatsoever. I see a lot of speculation and conjecture, but no evidence. The Watchtower organization claims that Jehovah "must" have been and "should" have been in the original Greek texts of the NT. But MUST be and SHOULD be do not equal IS. The NWT translates on the basis of what the JWs think "should" have been there. The KJV, NKJV, RSV, ASV, NASB, NIV, etc. translate on the basis of what IS there. "One need only look at the word-by-word English that appears under the Greek text in the Society's own Kingdom Interlinear Translation to see that the name JEHOVAH is not there in the Greek.'" (http://www.watchman.org/jw/nwt.htm) |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 ] Next > Last [66] >> |