Results 141 - 160 of 221
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Jesusman Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
141 | Did Jonah die in the belly of the fish? | Matt 12:40 | Jesusman | 192335 | ||
Ok .. in what way was I unclear in that I was trying to add a little extra-biblical support to what was taking place in the Bible? Did I ever say I was trying to replace the Gospel? No! Is it some huge crime or sin against the Ten Commandments to say "hey .. this not only happened here, but something very similar happened in recent history." Or to say "Hey .. this really did happen cause proof was found that it did happen"? Is the concept of apologetics totally foreign here?? |
||||||
142 | Why was the man speechless? | Matt 22:11 | Jesusman | 29495 | ||
There could be any number of reasons. Maybe he was awestruck by the amount of food there was? The text really doesn't clarify. Jesusman |
||||||
143 | "ONCE SAVED ALWAYS SAVED"!!! | Matt 22:37 | Jesusman | 30131 | ||
So, if a Christian can lose his salvation, then that means that God isn't as powerful as he claims, that it is up to us to save ourselves, and that we have bragging rights if we make it to heaven. Therefore, we are just as good on our own as we are with God. After all, God isn't powerful enough. Correct? Jesusman |
||||||
144 | "ONCE SAVED ALWAYS SAVED"!!! | Matt 22:37 | Jesusman | 30428 | ||
Johnny, You missed my point. If we are to remain in Salvation, as you seem to be saying, then we must work for it. However, Scripture clearly teaches that Salvation is a gift from God and that we do not work for it. Jesusman |
||||||
145 | "ONCE SAVED ALWAYS SAVED"!!! | Matt 22:37 | Jesusman | 30455 | ||
For by Grace are you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of Works, that no one should boast. Ephesians 2:8-9 YOU DON'T WORK FOR YOUR SALVATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Jesusman |
||||||
146 | "ONCE SAVED ALWAYS SAVED"!!! | Matt 22:37 | Jesusman | 30466 | ||
Let me get this straight. You're saying that our good works keep us in Salvation. Correct? However, Our Good Works are not to keep us saved, but to prove to others that we are saved. "By their fruits you shall know them, ..." Matthew 7:20. "For it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure." Philippeans 2:13 Paul says in the following verse that you referenced that it is God who is working within you. Also, our works not only prove our salvation, but it is the logical cource of action for those dead to Sins, look at Romans 6:1-23. It clearly teaches that we are dead to sin, and that as new creatures in Christ, we are to act as Christ did. In fact, Romans 6 proves fully that works don't save you, that grace through faith saves you, and that works are the natural course of Action for the saved. Jesusman |
||||||
147 | Unleavened Bread Prior to Passover? | Matt 26:17 | Jesusman | 32099 | ||
I have a correction to make about the timeline I gave. Instead of resting on the 21st and the 22nd, he would've only rested on the 21st due to it being the last day of the Passover and due to it being Sabbath, then rested on part of the 22nd, and raising on the morning of the 22nd. I got my days mixed up. Sorry. Jesusman |
||||||
148 | Does Matt 28: 18 infer to do what Europe | Matt 28:18 | Jesusman | 192186 | ||
In the greek, there are two separate words for authority and power. In these passages, Jesus uses both for himself, but when in reference to his followers, only the word for Power is used. To use your example of a soldier, you were granted by your government the power needed to accomplish the mission. Be that power in the form of credentials, or equipment, or personnell to aid you. However, were you ever to exceed your scope of power in order to abuse it, or attempt to, your government would have repremanded you appropriately, yes? So .. you did not have "authority" only "power". When it comes to the christian duties, we are to go .. teach .. baptize .. and also make disciples. The power granted to christians by Jesus does not include bringing down a form of religious martial law .. or declaring holy wars .. or even eradicating what is believed to be pagans. We're supposed to be teachers .. not warriors. Jesusman |
||||||
149 | Trinity? | Matt 28:19 | Jesusman | 189451 | ||
Greetings, This is more of a follow up on what Hank has listed here. Some added thoughts as it were. The term "trinity" is not found in the Bible, however, the doctrine is clearly found. Above was mentioned the baptism of Jesus. In this event, you clearly see the all three .. persons (for lack of a better term) of the Godhead. Those who don't believe in the Tri-une Godhead will say that God conveniently chose to appear as three different forms during this event, and that he could have appeared as any number of persons. However, one thing that must be asked is why would God appear as three separate persons, especially at this event, if he is only one God? Why didn't God simply appear before Jesus in a white light or the like? Something else to ask, if there is no tri-une Godhead, then how can Jesus be God while here on earth and pray to God at the same time, calling God "Father"? If you remove the Doctrine of the Tri-une Godhead from the equasion, what you have is a classic case of either multiple personalities or schizophrenia(sp). Then you have the declaration in Genesis 1 where God says "Let us create man in our own image .." "Us"? "Our?" If God isn't Tri-une then who is he talking to? Angels? Why would he make man in the image of angels when being in the Image of God is superior? Also, the context of the passage doesn't mention the mere slightest hint of angels. In fact, the first angel mensioned in the book is with Abraham. So .. that leave's God talking to himself. Again, with out the doctrine of the Tri-une Godhead, God is either talking to himself or needs to see a psychiatrist. There are too many events in the Bible and too many questions that can be raised if you remove the doctrine of the Tri-une Godhead. The only way these passages make any sense is with the Doctrine of the Tri-une Godhead. Jesus Loves you! Jesusman |
||||||
150 | Trinity? | Matt 28:19 | Jesusman | 189536 | ||
Thanks, Hank. Good to be back. | ||||||
151 | If God gave us brains, why wouldn't he w | Mark 16:16 | Jesusman | 40028 | ||
Hello, I'd say, go ahead. After all, why post here if others cannot benefit from our experience and research. Jesusman |
||||||
152 | One example of loosing salvation NT | Luke 8:13 | Jesusman | 88842 | ||
1 Peter 1:3-5 Our inheritance is reserved in heaven. It will remain there under the protection of God and it will not be taken away, fade away, nor will it be defiled, nor perish. Roman 8: 12-17 We are called "Children of God". We are adopted by HIM. Are you aware of the First Century view on adoption? In the first century, an adopted Child could never be "un-adopted". Adoption was perminant. Not even the courts or an order by the Emperor could disolve an adoption. People, such as Government officials, the wealthy, and the like would adopt their own Children. Why? To ensure that they would get their inheritance. An Adopted Child could never be denied his/her inheritance. With these two passages, and others that I just plainly don't have time to look up, how can you you come to any other conlusion than that Christians cannot lose their salvation? ON top of that, why would you want to believe anything else? Are you seriously content with the idea that your salvation can be wisked away at a moments notice? I'm not. How powerful can God be if he cannot secure the salvation he provided for me? This God you speak of must be one gigantic weakling, especially if he depends upon my help to stay under his graces. Why should I fear a God who cannot keep a hold of his own subjects? Jesusman |
||||||
153 | One example of loosing salvation NT | Luke 8:13 | Jesusman | 88887 | ||
Stop thinking like your living in the twentieth century, and start thinking like the writers of the Bible. What the writers of the Bible thought about certain topics is different than today. They didn't go around "claiming" to be Christians while still doubting one of the fundamental truths of Christianity. Even in death, that Child was stil the child of the person who adopted him/her. There was absolutely ZERO method, NONE, No way, Nada to become "Un-adopted". It was perminant. The Child could not deny his/her adoption. The courts could not break the adoption contract. The adopted parent could not break, deny, or nullify the adoption either. The adoption was perminant. On top of that, The adopted child in NO way could be denied their inheritance. You may stand firm in your belief, but it isn't fimrly planted upon the Bible or it's teachings. You are fimrly standing upon your own stubbornness, and refusal to admit that your belief is wrong. 1 Peter 1:3-5, a passage I talked about in my previous post, talks about the inheritance. Did you read it? While we're on the subject of reading the Bible, how many of the Bible passages have you looked up? Anyways, 1 Peter describes the inheritance in this manner. It is imperishable, Undefiled, and will not fade away. It is reserved in heaven. Then, Peter turns around and tell us that we can ... do what? REJOICE!!! Why should we rejoice if you believe that we can lose our inheritance? According to Peter, who I am certain knows more about the teachings of Christ than you do, we can't lose our inheritance. John 6:35-40 talks about Jesus being the Bread of life, and speaks that all that the Father has given Jesus, Jesus keeps, and cannot lose. I have supplied three passages just off the top of my head that prove this teaching. So apparently it isn't from "men of denominations". Do you comprehend the implications of saying that our security lies in ourself? Do you? You are saying, "God! You are not powerful enough for me. Therefore, thanks for the salvation, but I'll take care of the rest on my own." Believe it or not, That IS what you are saying. You are saying that God can't do it. That Jesus doesn't have the power to hold you firmly to him. That you need to get to heaven on your own, and that all God did was show you which road to take. What is it that Jesus said about this thinking? "I am the way, the truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father, except through me." Do you know what Paul taught about the belief that You can reach heaven on your own? Such people are worthy of death. The only way to get to heaven is for God to carry you, guide you, and be with you the whole way. You cannot do it on your own. You are not that strong. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
154 | Luke 23:43 where is the thief? | Luke 23:43 | Jesusman | 192993 | ||
I'm not one to hypthosize whether a passage is being spoken literally or figuratively. So, I assume passages are speaking literally until something is provided in the passage to assume otherwise. There are many passages that have both types of meanings. In the case of the thief on the cross, I believe that Jesus is speaking in a literal sense. There is little, if any, markers in the context to assume different. This is a historical recording of an event that has been proven to be Historically accurate. Jesus tells the thief that he will be with christ that day in paradise. There is nothing provided to assume that this passage should be read in anything other than literally true. Jesusman |
||||||
155 | Luke 23:43 where is the thief? | Luke 23:43 | Jesusman | 192997 | ||
How about we apply some simple grammer instead? One use of a comma is to identify a change in sentance focus, or to even to add emphasis on what is immediately following. It is not a gigantic leap in logic to believe that such is the case here. The phrase following the comma needed emphasis. Besides, put this phrase before an English Grammer expert and see what they would say. I'm sure they would give a similar answer. Again .. I see no indications to state that I should see this statement in any other way other than literal. Jesusman |
||||||
156 | Luke 23:43 where is the thief? | Luke 23:43 | Jesusman | 193003 | ||
Actually the koine greek does provide punctuation, as does any language for that matter. Not always as we might expect, but punctuation none the less. Someone trained in translating the greek into English will be familiar with that. Jesusman |
||||||
157 | Luke 23:43 where is the thief? | Luke 23:43 | Jesusman | 193004 | ||
Exactly my point, Doc. As one of my college professors was noted for saying, "Context is King". Both Jesus and the Thief were dying in this moment of time. I dought seriously that Jesus was taking time out to give a parable or a philosophical discussion with multiple figurative meanings. Anyone who is at the moment of death will make sure that anything said will clear and straight to the point. Jesusman |
||||||
158 | Luke 23:43 where is the thief? | Luke 23:43 | Jesusman | 193036 | ||
Reguardless of when the punctuation is put into the text, the statement remains the same. Jesus is telling this thief that he will be in paradise. Be that Abraham's bosom, or heaven, or whatever, the fact is that the thief wasn't going to hell. Jesus begins by saying "truly I say to you ...". In other words, "I'm not lying here ...". Jesusman |
||||||
159 | Why have J W's changed John 1:1 | John | Jesusman | 30431 | ||
I agree, Hank. They are just trying to deny the deity of Christ. However, in my experience the more technical and thorough explaination usually is what is sought after, which is why I gave the answer I gave. Also, the very core of the issue concerning the J. W. doctrine and our doctrine is whether or not Jesus is God. By merely saying that they are attempting to deny the deity of Christ doesn't solve the problem. However, by going into the matters concerning the Greek text, you solve many of the inherant problems and narrow down the field. J. W.'s are known for using the Greek to support many of their weird doctrines. I'm trying to show how they are incorrectly using the greek. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
160 | Is the wedding feast symbloic or literal | John | Jesusman | 40174 | ||
Hello, As I said before, it is an interesting analysis. However, I find it often dangerous to dive into the symbolic nature of many passages and events in the Bible. It is too easy to come up with something that can't be supported with scripture. Also, what the "symbols" may represent to you, may not coinside with another's interpretation of symbols. Then all you have is an argument brewing. So, as I said, it is interesting, but a dangerous area. I am mostly passing a word of caution to you. Among other scholars and Bible Teachers, such conversations could prove useful. However to the unchurched or newborn christian, such teachings may do more harm than good. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ] Next > Last [12] >> |