Results 1261 - 1280 of 1309
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Radioman2 Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1261 | What is the definition of porneia? | 1 Thess 4:3 | Radioman2 | 77332 | ||
This subject has already been dismissed. Don't dismiss this here. |
||||||
1262 | The definition of porneia | 1 Thess 4:3 | Radioman2 | 77317 | ||
What is the definition of porneia? NASB 1 Thessalonians 4:3 For this is the will of God, your sanctification; that is, that you abstain from sexual immorality; AMPLIFIED 1 Thessalonians 4:3 For this is the will of God, that you should be consecrated (separated and set apart for pure and holy living): that you should abstain and shrink from all sexual vice, srwoland: Your question: What is the biblical - New Testament definition of fornication? Answer: porneia [Strong's #4202] Definition: 1. illicit sexual intercourse a. adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism b. sexual intercourse with close relatives; Lev. 18 c. sexual intercourse with a divorced man or woman; Mk. 10:11 |
||||||
1263 | What is the definition of porneia? | 1 Thess 4:3 | Radioman2 | 77316 | ||
NASB 1 Thessalonians 4:3 For this is the will of God, your sanctification; that is, that you abstain from sexual immorality; AMPLIFIED 1 Thessalonians 4:3 For this is the will of God, that you should be consecrated (separated and set apart for pure and holy living): that you should abstain and shrink from all sexual vice, srwoland: Your question: What is the biblical - New Testament definition of fornication? Answer: porneia [Strong's #4202] Definition: 1. illicit sexual intercourse a. adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism b. sexual intercourse with close relatives; Lev. 18 c. sexual intercourse with a divorced man or woman; Mk. 10:11 |
||||||
1264 | I'm still unclear about "fallen away", | Heb 6:6 | Radioman2 | 77250 | ||
"Fall away." (Hebrews 6:6) "This Gr. term occurs only here in the NT. In the LXX, it was used to translate terms for severe unfaithfulness and apostasy. It is equivalent to the apostasy in [Heb] 3:12. The seriousness of this unfaithfulness is seen in the severe description of rejection within this verse: they re-crucify Christ and treat Him contemptuously (see also the strong descriptions in 10:29). "The 'impossible' of v. 4 goes with 'to renew them again to repentance.' Those who sinned against Christ in such a way had no hope of restoration or forgiveness. The reason is that they had rejected Him with full knowledge and conscious experience (as described in the features of vv. 5,6). With full revelation they rejected the truth, concluding the opposite of the truth about Christ, and thus had no hope of being saved. They can never have more knowledge than they had when they rejected it. They have concluded that Jesus should have been crucified, and they stand with his enemies. "There is no possibility of these verses referring to losing salvation. Many Scripture passages make unmistakably clear that salvation is eternal (compare John 10:27-29; Rom. 8:35,38,39; Phil. 1:6; 1 Pet. 1:4,5). Those who want to make this verse mean that believers can lose salvation will have to admit that it would then also say that one could never get it back again." (Note at Hebrews 6:6, MacArthur Study Bible, Word Publishing, 1997. For all Scripture references, see the MacArthur Study Bible.) |
||||||
1265 | James is contradicting Apostle Paul | James | Radioman2 | 77244 | ||
Does James 2 contradict Romans 4? 'The most serious problem these verses pose is the question of what James 2:24 means: "You see that a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone." Some imagine that this contradicts Paul in Romans 3:28: "For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law." John Calvin explained this apparent difficulty: 'It appears certain that [James] is speaking of the manifestation, not of the imputation of righteousness, as if he had said, Those who are justified by faith prove their justification by obedience and good works, not by a bare and imaginary semblance of faith. In one word, he is not discussing the mode of justification, but requiring that the justification of all believers shall be operative. And as Paul contends that men are justified without the aid of works, so James will not allow any to be regarded as Justified who are destitute of good works. . . . Let them twist the words of James as they may, they will never extract out of them more than two propositions: That an empty phantom of faith does not justify, and that the believer, not contented with such an imagination, manifests his justification by good works. [Henry Beveridge, trans., John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion 3:17:12 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1966 reprint), 2: 115.] 'James is not at odds with Paul. "They are not antagonists facing each other with crossed swords; they stand back to back, confronting different foes of the gospel." [The New International Commentary on the New Testament] In 1:17-18, James affirmed that salvation is a gift bestowed according to the sovereign will of God. Now he is stressing the importance of faith's fruit--the righteous behavior that genuine faith always produces. Paul, too, saw righteous works as the necessary proof of faith. 'Those who imagine a discrepancy between James and Paul rarely observe that it was Paul who wrote, "Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? May it never be!" (Rom. 6:15); and "Having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness" (v. 18). Thus Paul condemns the same error James is exposing here. Paul never advocated any concept of dormant faith. 'When Paul writes, "by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight," (Rom. 3:20), 'he is combatting a Jewish legalism which insisted upon the need for works to be justified; James insists upon the need for works in the lives of those who have been justified by faith. Paul insists that no man can ever win justification through his own efforts. . . . James demands that a man who already claims to stand in right relationship with God through faith must by a life of good works demonstrate that he has become a new creature in Christ. With this Paul thoroughly agreed. Paul was rooting out 'works' that excluded and destroyed saving faith; James was stimulating a sluggish faith that minimized the results of saving faith in daily life. [D. Edmond Hiebert, The Epistle of James (Chicago: Moody, 1979), 175.] 'James and Paul both echo Jesus' preaching. Paul's emphasis is an echo of Matthew 5:3: "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." James's teaching has the ring of Matthew 7:21: "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven." Paul represents the beginning of the Sermon on the Mount; James the end of it. Paul declares that we are saved by faith without the deeds of the law. James declares that we are saved by faith, which shows itself in works. Both James and Paul view good works as the proof of faith--not the path to salvation. 'James could not be more explicit. He is confronting the concept of a passive, false "faith," which is devoid of the fruits of salvation. He is not arguing for works in addition to or apart from faith. He is showing why and how, true, living faith always works. He is fighting against dead orthodoxy and its tendency to abuse grace. 'The error James assails is faith without works; justification without sanctification; salvation without new life. 'Again, James echoes the Master Himself, who insisted on a theology of lordship that involved obedience, not lip-service. Jesus chided the disobedient ones who had attached themselves to Him in name only: "Why do you call Me, 'Lord, Lord,' and do not do what I say?" (Luke 6:46). Verbal allegiance, He said, will get no one to heaven: "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven" (Matt. 7:21). 'That is in perfect harmony with James: "Prove yourselves doers of the word, and not merely hearers who delude themselves" (1:22); for "faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself" (2:17). [Excerpted from Faith Works] (www.gty.org/IssuesandAnswers/archive/james2.htm) |
||||||
1266 | Restorations??? | Heb 6:4 | Radioman2 | 77232 | ||
"It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened . . . if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance," Hebrews 6:4,6 NIV __________________________ Hebrews 6:4-6 NIV [4] It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, [5] who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, [6] if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace. 1 Cor. 3:6-7 (ESV) I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the growth. [7] So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God who gives the growth. |
||||||
1267 | is baptism necessary for salvation? | Bible general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 77212 | ||
Acts 2:38 (NET Bible) Peter said to them, “Repent, and each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for[5] the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." Footnote 5. translators' note. 'There is debate over the meaning of eij" in the prepositional phrase eij" a[fesin tw'n aJmartiw'n uJmw'n (eis afesin twn Jamartiwn Jumwn, “for/because of/with reference to the forgiveness of your sins”). Although a “causal” sense has been argued, it is difficult to maintain. D. B. Wallace, Exegetical Syntax, 369-71, discusses at least four other ways of dealing with the passage: '(1) The baptism referred to here is physical only, and eij" has the meaning of “for” or “unto.” Such a view suggests that salvation is based on works—an idea that runs counter to the theology of Acts, namely: (a) repentance often precedes baptism (cf. Acts 3:19; 26:20), and (b) salvation is entirely a gift of God, not procured via water baptism (Acts 10:43 [cf. v. 47]; 13:38-39, 48; 15:11; 16:30-31; 20:21; 26:18); '(2)The baptism referred to here is spiritual only. Although such a view fits well with the theology of Acts, it does not fit well with the obvious meaning of “baptism” in Acts—especially in this text (cf. 2:41); '(3)The text should be repunctuated in light of the shift from second person plural to third person singular back to second person plural again. The idea then would be, “Repent for/with reference to your sins, and let each one of you be baptized…” Such a view is an acceptable way of handling eij", but its subtlety and awkwardness are against it; '(4)Finally, it is possible that to a first-century Jewish audience (as well as to Peter), the idea of baptism might incorporate both the spiritual reality and the physical symbol. That Peter connects both closely in his thinking is clear from other passages such as Acts 10:47 and 11:15-16. If this interpretation is correct, then Acts 2:38 is saying very little about the specific theological relationship between the symbol and the reality, only that historically they were viewed together. 'One must look in other places for a theological analysis. For further discussion see R. N. Longenecker, “Acts,” EBC 9:283-85; B. Witherington, Acts, 154-55; F. F. Bruce, The Acts of the Apostles: The Greek Text with Introduction and Commentary, 129-30; BAGD 229 s.v. eij" 4.f.' (http://www.bible.org/cgi-bin/netbible.pl#note_5) |
||||||
1268 | The choice to abstain from alcohol | Bible general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 77068 | ||
It has been my experience and observation on this forum that a Note posted as a Note and not addressed to any particular thread often (usually?) goes unnoticed. Further, it seems that in order to receive a response to one's primary post, it is often necessary to post it as a Question. And if one's "Question" is addressed to a post in an existing thread, it is even more likely that it will receive a response. I see no point in posting a Note only to have it buried in the archives. |
||||||
1269 | The choice to abstain from alcohol | Bible general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 77048 | ||
"Careful biblical interpretation, however, requires that the choice to abstain [from alcohol] be made for reasons other than the demand of the biblical pattern." __________________________ 'The term "abstinence" is often identified with the question of the use or nonuse of alcoholic beverages. The Bible consistently condemns drunkenness, but it cannot be viewed as teaching total abstinence from fermented wine. The linguistic, historical-cultural, and contextual aspects of Scripture are often abused by those who claim that the Bible requires total abstinence. The primary Hebrew terms are yayin [Iy:y], tiros [v/ryiT], and asim. All three may refer to fermented wine in a negative connotation (cf. in order Prov 23:31; Hosea 4:11; Isa 49:26) and all three refer to the expected positive use of fermented wine (yayin [Iy:y] - Lev 23:13; Num 6:20; 28:14; Deut 14:26; Psalm 104:15; Isa 55:1; Itiros [v/ryiT] - Deut 14:23; asim - Joel 3:18). All three are used interchangeably and no hard-line distinctions for a linguistic reference to unfermented as opposed to fermented wine can be sustained for any term. The Greek word oinos [oi\no"] commonly translates all three terms in the Septuagint and is the common term for wine in the Greek period and in the New Testament. Paul cites oinos [oi\no"] as a nonissue equivalent to the meat offered to idols in Romans 14:21. The less-used Greek term gleukos [gleu'ko"], "new wine, " may also mean fermented (cf. Acts 2:13). The ancient world often diluted wine with water for a more or less fermented effect, although this could be viewed as an insult (cf. Isa 1:22). 'The historical setting of Israel as one of the leading and most respected wine-producing nations in their part of the ancient world is well documented. The blessings of this product are recorded in the Bible along with the evils that come from its abuse. Wine is a major image of joy and blessing (cf. Gen 27:28; Psalm 104:14-15). The messianic era is depicted as a time of great blessing via this imagery (Joel 3:18; Amos 9:13; Zech 9:17). The destruction of wine is noted as a calamity in the life of Israel (Deut 28:30-39; Isa 62:8; 65:21; Micah 6:15; Zeph 1:13). 'Believers in any given time period or geographical location may choose total abstinence from alcoholic beverages for numerous reasons. One may use certain passages of Scripture to warn against abuse just like ancient Israel did. The abuse of strong drink has plagued all cultures and reasons to abstain abound. Careful biblical interpretation, however, requires that the choice to abstain be made for reasons other than the demand of the biblical pattern.' Gary T. Meadors Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology. Edited by Walter A. Elwell Published by Baker Books. (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Dictionaries/BakersEvangelicalDictionary/) |
||||||
1270 | Who is God over all? | Rom 9:5 | Radioman2 | 76931 | ||
"Christ, who is God over all." . Romans 9:5 NIV Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen. "Christ, who is God over all." . Romans 9:5 NLT Their ancestors were great people of God, and Christ himself was a Jew as far as his human nature is concerned. And he is God, who rules over everything and is worthy of eternal praise! Amen. "Christ himself was a Jew...And he is God." . Romans 9:5 HCSB The forefathers are theirs, and from them, by physical descent, came the Messiah, who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen. "Messiah, who is God over all." . Romans 9:5 NET Bible To them belong the patriarchs, and from them, by human descent, came the Christ, who is God over all, blessed forever! Amen. "Christ, who is God over all" |
||||||
1271 | What command governs giving today? | 2 Cor 9:7 | Radioman2 | 76863 | ||
2 Corinthians 9:7 (Amplified) Let each one [give] as he has made up his own mind and purposed in his heart, not reluctantly or sorrowfully or under compulsion, for God loves (He takes pleasure in, prizes above other things, and is unwilling to abandon or to do without) a cheerful (joyous, "prompt to do it") giver [whose heart is in his giving]. 2 Corinthians 9:7 (NLT) You must each make up your own mind as to how much you should give. Don't give reluctantly or in response to pressure. For God loves the person who gives cheerfully. |
||||||
1272 | He does not wish for any to perish... | 2 Pet 3:9 | Radioman2 | 76752 | ||
2 Peter 3:9 (NET Bible) The Lord is not slow concerning his promise, as some regard slowness, but is being patient toward you, because he does not wish for any[4] to perish but for all to come to repentance. Footnote 4. "He does not wish for any to perish." '...the literary context seems to be against the Arminian view, while the historical context seems to be against (one representation of) the Calvinist view. The answer to this conundrum is found in the term "wish" (a participle in Greek from the verb boulomai). It often represents a mere wish, or one's desiderative will, rather than one's resolve. Unless God's will is viewed on the two planes of his desiderative and decretive will (what he desires and what he decrees), hopeless confusion will result. The scriptures amply illustrate both that God sometimes decrees things that he does not desire and desires things that he does not decree. It is not that his will can be thwarted, nor that he has limited his sovereignty. But the mystery of God's dealings with humanity is best seen if this tension is preserved. Otherwise, either God will be perceived as good but impotent or as a sovereign taskmaster. Here the idea that God does not wish for any to perish speaks only of God's desiderative will, without comment on his decretive will.' (http://www.bible.org/cgi-bin/netbible.pl#note_3) * * * * * * * * * * * * * (Although this post is not a question, I have chosen to post it under the heading of Questions for this reason: Often a person will not respond to a Note unless it is addressed specifically to that person. However, the same person may respond to a post that is labeled as a Question. In other words, I posted this as a question in hopes that it will not be ignored or overlooked.) Radioman2 |
||||||
1273 | Have you been baptized right? | 1 Cor 12:13 | Radioman2 | 76746 | ||
Yes, I have been baptized for the remission of my sins. Acts 2:38 (NET Bible) Peter said to them, “Repent, and each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for[5] the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." Footnote 5. translators' note. 'There is debate over the meaning of eij" in the prepositional phrase eij" a[fesin tw'n aJmartiw'n uJmw'n (eis afesin twn Jamartiwn Jumwn, “for/because of/with reference to the forgiveness of your sins”). Although a “causal” sense has been argued, it is difficult to maintain. D. B. Wallace, Exegetical Syntax, 369-71, discusses at least four other ways of dealing with the passage: '(1) The baptism referred to here is physical only, and eij" has the meaning of “for” or “unto.” Such a view suggests that salvation is based on works—an idea that runs counter to the theology of Acts, namely: (a) repentance often precedes baptism (cf. Acts 3:19; 26:20), and (b) salvation is entirely a gift of God, not procured via water baptism (Acts 10:43 [cf. v. 47]; 13:38-39, 48; 15:11; 16:30-31; 20:21; 26:18); '(2)The baptism referred to here is spiritual only. Although such a view fits well with the theology of Acts, it does not fit well with the obvious meaning of “baptism” in Acts—especially in this text (cf. 2:41); '(3)The text should be repunctuated in light of the shift from second person plural to third person singular back to second person plural again. The idea then would be, “Repent for/with reference to your sins, and let each one of you be baptized…” Such a view is an acceptable way of handling eij", but its subtlety and awkwardness are against it; '(4)Finally, it is possible that to a first-century Jewish audience (as well as to Peter), the idea of baptism might incorporate both the spiritual reality and the physical symbol. That Peter connects both closely in his thinking is clear from other passages such as Acts 10:47 and 11:15-16. If this interpretation is correct, then Acts 2:38 is saying very little about the specific theological relationship between the symbol and the reality, only that historically they were viewed together. 'One must look in other places for a theological analysis. For further discussion see R. N. Longenecker, “Acts,” EBC 9:283-85; B. Witherington, Acts, 154-55; F. F. Bruce, The Acts of the Apostles: The Greek Text with Introduction and Commentary, 129-30; BAGD 229 s.v. eij" 4.f.' (http://www.bible.org/cgi-bin/netbible.pl#note_5) |
||||||
1274 | Can a toddler go to heaven? | Rom 3:23 | Radioman2 | 76671 | ||
Sniper: What follows is my best attempt to answer your questions. Nothing in this post is intended to be argumentative or offensive. :-) Your question: 'You allude to a freewill. You call it a "willful rejection" or "sensing personal need". But, then you turn around and say the following. '"Scripture is clear that children and the unborn have original sin-including both the propensity to sin as well as the inherent guilt of original sin." 'How is there a willful rejection if the sin is inherent and original? Where is scripture clear about this? Please support.' An answer: I didn't say or mean that babies made a conscious, willful rejection of Jesus Christ. Nor did I say or mean that babies were condemned or lost. Therefore, as to your question "How is there a willful rejection if the sin is inherent and original?": there may be some contradiction in what I posted, but I honestly don't see any. As far as scriptural support for my position, I have no other scriptures to cite other than those I've already cited. You also write: "You allude to a freewill." Perhaps I did, but let me emphasize: "freewill" is one word I never use lightly or carelessly. Thank you for your question and interest. Radioman2 |
||||||
1275 | Can a toddler go to heaven? | Rom 3:23 | Radioman2 | 76619 | ||
Sniper: Please accept my sincere apology for the tone and content of my earlier post. There is no excuse for my behavior. I am truly sorry. God bless you! Radioman2 |
||||||
1276 | Help | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 76532 | ||
1 Peter 3:19 (ESV) in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, Please note that in v. 19 the word "back" simply does not appear. Nor am I aware of any Bible verse that says Jesus went *back* to the people of Noah's day and preached. 1 Peter 3:18-20 (ESV) For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, [19] in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, [20] because they formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water. |
||||||
1277 | Can a toddler go to heaven? | Rom 3:23 | Radioman2 | 76524 | ||
"snipe — v.i. (...) "3. to attack a person or a person's work with petulant or snide criticism, esp. anonymously or from a safe distance." (http://www.infoplease.com/ipd/A0659446.html) |
||||||
1278 | Can a toddler go to heaven? | Rom 3:23 | Radioman2 | 76439 | ||
Do babies and others incapable of professing faith in Christ automatically go to heaven? * * * * * * * * * * * * * "...it is a credible assumption that a child who dies at an age too young to have made a conscious, willful rejection of Jesus Christ will be taken to be with the Lord. " * * * * * * * * * * * * * 'People often wonder about the eternal destiny of the unborn, babies, and those unable to intellectually understand the gospel. That question is a difficult one. Unfortunately, the Bible offers us no explicit answer. However, based on several passages, as well as an understanding of God's character and His dealings with men, we can develop a good idea of how He works in such situations. 'Second Samuel 12:23 is one of the passages often quoted to imply that babies go to heaven. Though the verse doesn't explicitly say that, David clearly does expect to one day be reunited with his departed child. Since we know David is a believer whose destiny was heaven, we can infer that his hope of reunion means he expected his child to be in heaven. Thus, 2 Samuel 12:23 suggests strong evidence for a heavenly destiny of the unborn and children who die young. 'If this were all we had to support our position, it would be admittedly less than stalwart. However, there are other evidences that point us to the same conclusion. First, the Bible clearly teaches that God cares deeply for children. Passages like Matthew 18:1-6 and 19:13-15 affirm the Lord's love for them. Jesus not only used children as an example of the qualities of kingdom citizens, but also taught that they each have guardian angels (Matt. 18:10). Those verses don't state that children go to heaven, but they do show God's heart toward children. He created and cares for children, and beyond that, He always accomplishes His perfect will in every circumstance. 'The psalmist reminds us that God is "full of compassion and gracious, longsuffering and abundant in mercy and truth" (Ps. 86:15). He is the God who became flesh that He might carry our sins away by His death on the cross (2 Cor. 5:21). He is the God who will comfort Christians in heaven, for "He will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death; nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain" (Rev. 21:4). We can be assured that God will do what is right and loving because He is the standard of rightness and love. These considerations alone seem to be evidence enough of God's particular, electing love shown to the unborn and those who die young. 'However, another point may be helpful in answering this question. While infants and children have neither sensed their personal sin and need for salvation nor placed their faith in Christ, Scripture teaches that condemnation is based on the clear rejection of God's revelation-whether general or specific-not simple ignorance of it (Luke 10:16; John 12:48; 1 Thess. 4:8). Can we definitely say that the unborn and young children have comprehended the truth displayed by God's general revelation that renders them "without excuse" (Rom. 1:18-20)? They will be judged according to the light they received. Scripture is clear that children and the unborn have original sin-including both the propensity to sin as well as the inherent guilt of original sin. But could it be that somehow Christ's atonement did pay for the guilt for these helpless ones throughout all time? Yes, and therefore it is a credible assumption that a child who dies at an age too young to have made a conscious, willful rejection of Jesus Christ will be taken to be with the Lord.' (http://www.gty.org/IssuesandAnswers/archive/heaven7.htm) |
||||||
1279 | Are "fleeces" necesary for today? | Judg 6:37 | Radioman2 | 76386 | ||
"Gideon was not here seeking to learn God's will, because that had already been clearly revealed to him (vv. 14,16). He put out the fleece for two reasons: (1) to strengthen the weakness of his own faith; and (2) to give him evidence that would convince the people that he was really God's instrument. This is not to be taken as the usual method for discovering God's will. See Prov. 3:5-6; Jas. 1:5-8" (Note at Judges 6:37, New Scofield Reference Bible, Oxford, 1967). NASB Judges 6:37 behold, I will put a fleece of wool on the threshing floor. If there is dew on the fleece only, and it is dry on all the ground, then I will know that You will deliver Israel through me, as You have spoken." |
||||||
1280 | Baptism in the Holy Spirit? | 1 Cor 12:13 | Radioman2 | 76362 | ||
"For by one Spirit we were all baptized" NASB 1 Corinthians 12:13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit. AMPLIFIED 1 Corinthians 12:13 For by [means of the personal agency of] one [Holy] Spirit we were all, whether Jews or Greeks, slaves or free, baptized [and by baptism united together] into one body, and all made to drink of one [Holy] Spirit. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 ] Next > Last [66] >> |