Results 121 - 140 of 305
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Radioman Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
121 | Created and Placed | Gen 2:8 | Radioman | 18907 | ||
Meditation and Fantasy "meditation" is defined as "a discourse intended to express its author's reflections or to guide others in contemplation" "fantasy" is defined as "the power or process of creating especially unrealistic or improbable mental images in response to psychological need (an object of fantasy); also : a mental image or a series of mental images (as a daydream) so created" (www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary) |
||||||
122 | Lanny are we at the same topic | Deut 32:22 | Radioman | 18495 | ||
Since this is not a general question for everyone, but is directed to one individual, perhaps it might be more appropriate to post this as a Note rather than an Answer. Thank you. |
||||||
123 | Opinions of J. Falwell on WTC attack. | Rom 3:23 | Radioman | 16855 | ||
I have read your selected quotes of what Falwell said. So, what is your point? --Radioman |
||||||
124 | Should Christians practice nonresistance | Lev 26:6 | Radioman | 16137 | ||
No, no, no, no, no. It does NOT say "do not kill." A more accurate translation is "Do not murder." Read the NT book of Revelation. Any killing going on there? | ||||||
125 | Did you forgive the Tuesday terrorists? | Matt 6:14 | Radioman | 16136 | ||
Have I forgiven the terrorist organization or person(s) who planned and executed the attack on America? Or do I forgive Palestinians gleefully dancing in the streets over the loss of innocent American life? Not yet. If and when the above person(s) a) repent and ask for forgiveness; b) change their present intentions to murder Americans; and c) cease and desist their murderous attacks, then and only then will I be obligated to forgive them. |
||||||
126 | How inspired is the NAS Bible today? | Bible general Archive 1 | Radioman | 15432 | ||
INSPIRATION. Definition. Inspiration is God's superintending of human authors so that, using their own individual personalities, they composed and recorded without error in the words of the original autographs His revelation to man. Your view, the third perspective, has no basis in fact, no supporting evidence. This is the first, and hopefully the last, time I have ever encountered this view of inspiration. Additionally, the doctrine of inspiration, which would include its definition, is NOT a secondary issue. It is one of the essentials of the Christian faith, a basic Bible doctrine. |
||||||
127 | What is eternal life? What is saved? | John 6:37 | Radioman | 15389 | ||
Re: the post " Hank, Your analogy of the lost son is ..." Hank, is this Note even worth answering? The arguments presented are so tiresome. The first sentence in the other Note is "Your analogy of the lost son is innaccurate." That sentence itself is laughably inaccurate. You very accurately called Luke 15:11 and following the "parable of the lost son." The theme of the chapter is not "sinners that need to repent." It is more than obvious from reading the chapter that it contains three parables concerning joy over repentance. Does John 15 have to do with the judgment of sinners? For everyone's information, lost souls are not gathered up in bundles to be burned. God deals individually with souls. Then we jump to the subject of man's much-touted ability to choose. Hello? While not denying human responsibility, can we at least acknowledge that divine sovereignty has something to do with our salvation? Then the writer of the other Note says: "I have seen those committed to Christ turn back to the world..." No, you haven't. You've never seen any such thing. This whole idea of proving the Bible by case histories or the experiences of people was adequately addressed in another submission posted yesterday. I quote yesterday's post for those who missed it. "I'll make my answer short. You write: "There are those that say, well, he was never REALLY saved, but how do we know?" How do we know? "1 John 2:19 (NIV) They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us. "Faith that endures is the only legitimate saving faith. Consider Matthew 13:20. Some people make an emotional, superficial commitment to salvation in Christ, but it is not real. They remain interested only until there is a sacrificial price to pay, and then abandon Christ. "Always remember: we do not prove the Bible nor do we build doctrine on the experience(s) of people, whether the experiences are ours or belong to others. We do not establish Bible doctrine on case examples. On the contrary, we prove or disprove experience by the Bible." Finally, the other post uses the same old tired and false argument twisted from 2 Peter 2 to "prove" that it's possible for a blood bought, blood washed, born-again, Holy-Spirit sealed and indwelt child of God to "fall from grace and lose his salvation." Who is being spoken of in 2 Peter 2: false teachers or born-again Christians? The answer is simple to ascertain. Verses 20-22 use the word "they" a number of times. They is a pronoun. Every pronoun has an antecedent. If one keeps backing up until he find the pronoun's antecedent in 2:1, he will see that the chapter is talking about false teachers. False teachers, not believers. There is no magic or guesswork here. This conclusion is arrived at by the application of the rules of English grammar. Oh, did I forget to mention? This question and the arguments from John 15 and 2 Peter 2 have been asked, answered and refuted a number of times. Anyone who can read will note before he posts a question that the instructions plainly say: "Please search for your question before asking it?" Merely following the directions would have shown that this question has already been debated to death here on the forum. |
||||||
128 | What proof? | Gen 1:1 | Radioman | 15338 | ||
More than 30 Questions, Notes and Answers to address one question. That must be a question of earth-shaking importance. Does the answer to this question have any bearing on the Trinity, the Deity of Christ, salvation by grace through faith? No, no and no. Is it a question that affects my eternal destiny, my walk with the Lord, possible loss of rewards at the judgment? No, no and no. Does it have anything to do with heresy, apostasy, a great falling away, the date of the Second Coming? No, no, no and no. Well, then, what is so colossal, sensational, stupendous, and tremendous that the question causes such a stir? The question is: Whom did Cain marry? Was it a younger sister, an older sister, an aunt, a niece, a descendant of his maternal grandmother? We MUST know. Inquiring minds want to know: Did Cain marry his niece? With the Mideast on the brink of war, euthansia, stem cell research, abortion, eliminating God from the public schools, gay and lesbian rights, AIDS, S.I.D.S, STDs, increasing violent crime, mothers murdering their own babies, the church all but dead in the Laodecian age, etc., the greatest issue of our day, the answer to which we await with bated breath, is: Whom did Cain marry? Everything depends on the answer to this most crucial of all questions. Please don't keep us in suspense any longer. All you speculators, Lone Rangers, armchair experts, and other serious students of the Bible, please tell us if you know. (Re-posted.) This is the most asinine, irrelevant, trivial, unedifying, useless, unprofitable debate I've ever seen. Who knows who Cain married? Who cares? The theory that Cain married his sister, a later daughter of Adam, is unsupported by the Bible? Unsupported? FYI: Who Cain Married is NOT one of the essentials of the Christian faith. To my knowledge, no church ever split over the issue of who Cain married. No wars were fought over it. No Reformer had five minutes to devote to the issue. I can't imagine why anyone would be so dogmatic and fanatical as to waste his time trying to push this. The man in the street, the cop on the beat, the butcher, the baker, the pastor, the president -- NOBODY cares who Cain married. Nobody, that is, except for one or two Lone Ranger Internet self-appointed Bible experts. Quit worrying about the nameless wife of a man who lived approximately 6,000 years ago. |
||||||
129 | Does this apply to Christians? | Matt 6:15 | Radioman | 15307 | ||
I strongly disagree with you... Bill Mc: I regret to inform you that I must strongly disagree with something you wrote in your first paragraph. At age 42, you are hardly "an old dog." I only wish I were a young man of 42 again. :-) Happily, I find myself in agreement with what you write, especially in the paragraph that begins "Unfortunately, many people hear what they want to hear..." You have stated it well. Now that the misunderstanding is cleared up, I can see that we are allies in the cause of Christ and the kingdom of God. It's a pleasure to get to know you here on the forum. Go with God, Radioman |
||||||
130 | Does this apply to Christians? | Matt 6:15 | Radioman | 15305 | ||
The Amplified Bible: 1 John 1: 8 If we say we have no sin [refusing to admit that we are sinners], we delude and lead ourselves astray, and the Truth [which the Gospel presents] is not in us [does not dwell in our hearts]. 9 If we [freely] admit that we have sinned and confess our sins, He is faithful and just (true to His own nature and promises) and will forgive our sins [dismiss our lawlessness] and [continuously] cleanse us from all unrighteousness [everything not in conformity to His will in purpose, thought, and action]. 10 If we say (claim) we have not sinned, we contradict His Word and make Him out to be false and a liar, and His Word is not in us [the divine message of the Gospel is not in our hearts]. The Amplified New Testament, (La Habra CA: The Lockman Foundation) 1999. Bill Mc: You write: "Radioman, could you do me one more favor before leaving this subject? I would greatly appreciate it if you could post 1 John 1:8-10 in the 'amplified' Bible here for myself and other readers to see. Ultimately, each one of us must decide for himself/herself what the truth of the issue of forgiveness is. That is where the Spirit will lead us into (not always instantaneously impart) ALL truth." Bill: I count it my privilege and pleasure to do you a favor. Any time. Radioman |
||||||
131 | Should the Bible be taken literally? | Bible general Archive 1 | Radioman | 15302 | ||
EdB: As has been said before, the fact that the 'experts' don't agree on every last little point is proof that they are not hatching one giant conspiracy for the purpose of deceiving and defrauding the reading public. The fact that evangelical authors of Bible reference books generally agree on the essentials is proof that each of them is not off on a separate planet doing his own thing. Ed, I honestly do not mean you when I say this: I agree that some seem to think that anyone who gets a book published is an expert. It is also true that: 1) None of these publishers is infallible, but Zondervan, Nelson, Moody Press, Foundation Publications, etc. do not publish books written by fools, ignoramuses, kooks, crackpots, cultists, etc. None of us will agree with every last word published by the above named publishers. But, the publishers have a reputation for sound doctrine and reliability to uphold. When they publish a book, they don't intentionally publish trash. 2) There are also some people who seem to think that since you author a book, the book is automatically trash and its author subject to suspicion. 3) I think that with some, and again, Ed, please believe me, I do NOT mean you when I say this. But, some of our chronic expert bashers are motivated by envy, a contrary and excessively critical spirit, or just plain ego -- arrogance and ignorance wherein they are wiser in their own eyes than 100 recognized authors and teachers. Take no personal offense, Ed, for none was intended. While I may not always agree with everything you write, I most certainly do believe you are a decent and honorable man, one deserving of my respect. Radioman |
||||||
132 | I'm still not sure? | Ex 30:14 | Radioman | 15299 | ||
For further light on the significance of the number twenty, may I suggest: Go to askjeeves.com or MSN search or your favorite search engine. Enter the word "numerology" and see what you can come up with. |
||||||
133 | What is eternal life? What is saved? | John 6:37 | Radioman | 15296 | ||
Norrie, you are truly one of my favorite people on the Forum. You have a great attitude. If I were in need of prayer, I think you would be at the top of the list of people that I would ask to pray for me. So, although I disagree somewhat, what I write here is by no means intended to criticize or offend you. I'll make my answer short. You write: "There are those that say, well, he was never REALLY saved, but how do we know?" How do we know? 1 John 2:19 (NIV) They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us. Faith that endures is the only legitimate saving faith. Consider Matthew 13:20. Some people make an emotional, superficial commitment to salvation in Christ, but it is not real. They remain interested only until there is a sacrificial price to pay, and then abandon Christ. Always remember: we do not prove the Bible nor do we build doctrine on the experience(s) of people, whether the experiences are ours or belong to others. We do not establish Bible doctrine on case examples. On the contrary, we prove or disprove experience by the Bible. There are biblical evidences of genuine saving faith. Maybe we'll get into those soon. I hope this helps. Go with God, Radioman |
||||||
134 | Where are the scriptures, believers? | Matt 6:15 | Radioman | 15294 | ||
Bill: I think you are probably better off NOT knowing what an Arminian or a Calvinist is. Involuntarily, I learned from the forum way more than I ever wanted to know about Calvinism, which emphasizes divine sovereignty, and the opposite belief, Arminianism, which emphasizes human responsibility and all but dismisses the sovereignty of God. All any of us need to know is *the Bible doctrine of election.* I also found out (the hard way) that here on the forum one dare not even use the word "election" lest he be accused of being a Calvinist. Another forum member posted much information on the Bible doctrine of election. People villified him as a Calvinist, EVEN THOUGH the man never once in his postings used the word Calvin or Calvinism. (Except later on to answer those who themselves brought up the word and accused him of being a Calvinist.) Nor was he espousing the pure Calvinist doctrine of election. I admire the fact that you esteem and rely upon the Scriptures as your authority in doctrinal matters. Bless you, Radioman |
||||||
135 | May I share a simple story to help? | Bible general Archive 1 | Radioman | 15291 | ||
You obviously did not understand a word of what I posted previously. To say that "there are no gaps at all" is absurd and contrary to reason. |
||||||
136 | Does this apply to Christians? | Matt 6:15 | Radioman | 15288 | ||
1 John 3:9 (Amplified Bible) No one born (begotten) of God [deliberately, knowingly, and habitually] practices sin, for God’s nature abides in him [His principle of life, the divine sperm, remains permanently within him]; and he cannot practice sinning because he is born (begotten) of God Bill Mc: Having read your post (the one to which this is a reply), I think I now have a better understanding of your position. Stated as it is here, I believe I agree with you far more than I disagree. According to the Scriptures, I believe that when I was saved -- born again, received justification in the eyes of God -- at that time ALL my sins were forgiven -- past, present and future. I do not see my salvation as being dependent upon a works-righteousness system in which God keeps a record of every sin and then I must go through the proper formula and ritual of penance in order to maintain my salvation. That is not at all what I believe. Further, I find it interesting that whenever the Eternal Security/Eternal Insecurity debate is brought up, people pull out many favorite Scriptures to support their beliefs. But one Scripture that is never even mentioned is, I believe, a very relevant Scripture that should be considered in the debate. And I think this Scripture will shed further light on the topic in this thread. I would that all of the Forum readers read the following from 1 John prayerfully and carefully. Try to see what it is saying and notice how the Amplified defines key words in the text, especially the words sin, sinning and commits sin. Once again, thank you Bill for trying one more time to get people like me to understand your position. :-) I am glad to see that you and I are not at all on opposite sides. The Scripture quote immediately follows my signature. In Christ, Radioman 1 John 3:4-10 Amplified Bible 4 Everyone who commits (practices) sin is guilty of lawlessness; for [that is what] sin is, lawlessness (the breaking, violating of God’s law by transgression or neglect—being unrestrained and unregulated by His commands and His will). 5 You know that He appeared in visible form and became Man to take away [upon Himself] sins, and in Him there is no sin [essentially and forever]. 6 No one who abides in Him [who lives and remains in communion with and in obedience to Him—deliberately, knowingly, and habitually] commits (practices) sin. No one who [habitually] sins has either seen or known Him [recognized, perceived, or understood Him, or has had an experiential acquaintance with Him]. 7 Boys (lads), let no one deceive and lead you astray. He who practices righteousness [who is upright, conforming to the divine will in purpose, thought, and action, living a consistently conscientious life] is righteous, even as He is righteous. 8 [But] he who commits sin [who practices evildoing] is of the devil [takes his character from the evil one], for the devil has sinned (violated the divine law) from the beginning. The reason the Son of God was made manifest (visible) was to undo (destroy, loosen, and dissolve) the works the devil [has done]. ***9 No one born (begotten) of God [deliberately, knowingly, and habitually] practices sin, for God’s nature abides in him [His principle of life, the divine sperm, remains permanently within him]; and he cannot practice sinning because he is born (begotten) of God.*** 10 By this it is made clear who take their nature from God and are His children and who take their nature from the devil and are his children: no one who does not practice righteousness [who does not conform to God’s will in purpose, thought, and action] is of God; neither is anyone who does not love his brother (his fellow believer in Christ). |
||||||
137 | Darkness vs. Light | Matt 6:15 | Radioman | 15267 | ||
2 Cor 13:5 (NASB) Test yourselves [to see] if you are in the faith; examine yourselves! Or do you not recognize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you--unless indeed you fail the test? 1 John 1:8,10 If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us . . . If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us. |
||||||
138 | Are Christians To Be Activists? | Esth 4:14 | Radioman | 15255 | ||
John 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. |
||||||
139 | Are you forgiven? | Matt 6:15 | Radioman | 15250 | ||
"Sin interrupts, but confession restores fellowship." John 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. What it is to "walk in the light" is explained by 1 John 1:8-10 . "All things. . .are made manifest by the light" (Ephesians 5:13). The presence of God brings the consciousness of sin in the nature (1 John 1:8) and sins in the life (1 John 1:9,10). The blood of Christ is the divine provision for both. To walk in the light is to live in fellowship with the Father and the Son. "SIN INTERRUPTS, BUT CONFESSION RESTORES THAT FELLOWSHIP. Immediate confession keeps the fellowship unbroken." (Emphasis added.) Scofield, C.I. "Scofield Reference Notes on 1 John 1". "Scofield Reference Notes (1917 Edition)". (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/ScofieldReferenceNotes/). 1917. |
||||||
140 | Are you forgiven? | Matt 6:15 | Radioman | 15246 | ||
John 13:6-10. If this passage is not about forgiveness, then what in the world was Jesus talking about in verses 8-11, especially verse 10? "Peter . . . spoke up in indignation that Jesus would stoop so low as to wash his feet. He failed to see beyond the humble service itself to the SYMBOLISM of spiritual cleansing involved. (Sound familiar?) Jesus' response made THE REAL POINT of His actions clear: Unless the Lamb of God cleanses a person's sin (i.e., as portrayed in the SYMBOLISM of washing), one can have no part with Him. "The cleansing that Christ does at salvation never needs to be repeated -- atonement is complete at that point. But all who have been cleansed by God's gracious justification need constant washing in the experiential sense as they battle sin in the flesh. Believers are justified and granted imputed righteousness, but still need sanctification and personal righteousness" (Emphasis added. 1997, Word Publishing). |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ] Next > Last [16] >> |