Results 141 - 160 of 292
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: bowler Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
141 | Question on topic of Masturbation | 1 Cor 3:16 | bowler | 206845 | ||
tachminite Type that word in the top right "search" feature. You will find plenty. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
142 | Speculation? | 2 Tim 2:23 | bowler | 206842 | ||
Beja Thank you for a gracefull reply. I would not be interested in a debate as if we disagree either. You owe me nothing, but I sincerely thank you. I do see what you mean by your taking the text back a pace, I do see how it fits what you meant, I really do. I appreciate the time you took to get back to me. Thank you again. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
143 | How Far Are We To Suffer For Christ? | 1 Pet 4:16 | bowler | 206841 | ||
Azure Thank you for your post. Now perhaps you mihgt see that this is exactly why I did not choose to outline exactly what the circumstances were? It leads more to friction here with the saints over whether or not I am judging anyone by simply asking a question about how one would apply the scripture about suffering for Christ, rather than pointing to the real thrust of my question. I was not in the first post, or any other querying about my friends sinful lives. I was querying about what it means to "suffer for Christ", how far should one go? At what cost? No one can tell who realy is a Christian, we don't know who sincerely asked for forgivness of Jesus based on whether or not they sin, or how long they stay in it. As I tried to say, one's life can be "ruined" for a period of time if they walk away from "parts of family", house, job. Suffering for Christ is something we all face. I was merely quoting my friends, not making a Biblical point as if a Christians life is "ruined by Christ". I also mentioned that Christ will restore after a while, I qualified this statment before. By asking the question I seem to be seen as thinking that I have all the answers, nothing could be further from the truth, as I stated three times now, in the love of Christ and with as much grace as I can - I do not think I know better than others and have better or the only answer. In and for the love of Christ Jesus and in the interested of Christian grace and having our conversation edifying and with "salt" I will be happy to hear from everyone on the matter, but choose not to continue from my side on this matter. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
144 | what is a response to the interpretation | Matt 5:17 | bowler | 206838 | ||
tachminite 1) Communal living based on Acts 4:32-36 - Acts 4:34, 35 - the owners of land and house came to the apostles and laid down the money gotten from selling these things at the feet of the apostles for those that had need and it was distributed to those who had need. These sales do not necessarily mean they gave up their own houses, these people may have had extra houses and extra land. 2 John 1:10 - a lady had her own house and was told to refuse false teachers to stay in her home. She lived there with her children and entertained traveling Christians strangers. Acts 2:44-46 - they shared all their the sales of their property and possessions and were together going from house to house eating and worshipping. I found another alternate transliteration of the Greek - 44, 45 Everyone believed having faith beside together present had needs the occasion of destitution requiring that all commonly share the distribution from employment as the occasion arose. Every man whose possession was sold goods was required to part with them to every man through occaision of destitution. This renders it not that they shared all things in common, but that they all shared in the distribution as the occassion arose. 2) Adherence to OT rules versus NT freedom from the law - Romans 4:1-8, 13-16 - God has always justified by faith and not by the law. Romans 3) Ignoring NT commandments based on Galatians 5:1 - 1 Crointhians 6:9-11, Ephesians 2:1-4, 5:1-18, 1 John 1:5-2:2, James 2:18-23. 4) Pagans mistakenly think Christ instituted Cannibalism based on John 6:53 - This is as close as I could come to cannabalism and Rome - Direct quote - http: double front slash ajwrb.org single front slash history front single front slash index.shtml Early Christians abstained from eating any sort of blood. In this regard Tertullian (c. 155-a. 220 C.E.) pointed out in his work Apology (IX, 13, 14): "Let your error blush before the Christians, for we do not include even animals’ blood in our natural diet. We abstain on that account from things strangled or that die of themselves, that we may not in any way be polluted by blood, even if it is buried in the meat. Finally, when you are testing Christians, you offer them sausages full of blood; you are thoroughly well aware, of course, that among them it is forbidden; but you want to make them transgress." Minucius Felix, a Roman lawyer who lived until about 250 C.E., made the same point, writing: "For us it is not permissible either to see or to hear of human slaughter; we have such a shrinking from human blood that at our meals we avoid the blood of animals used for food."Octavius, XXX, 6." (Insight on the Scriptures, 1988, vol. 1, p. 346) Argument that Christians might have given Roman pagans? John 6:35-40 - the Bread of Life - this is the key that Jesus describes Himself as the way to salvation using figurative language - just like when Jesus says "I am the door", when Jesus says, "I am the Bread, eat My flesh, drink My blood" this is figurative language. Jesus is not a door, or bread, or drink - He is saying He is salvation and eating His flesh represents His body dying on the cross for our sins, and drinking His blood represents Jesus shedding His blood for our sins. Jesus is saying take My body, take My blood - believe in My and take salvation. That would be the argument for any age it seems to me. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
145 | Fruitless Scripture Discussion? | 1 Tim 1:6 | bowler | 206829 | ||
Steve Thank you for clarifying everything again. I think I said "some only appeared", as in "some" and not all! To be without grace! My good fellow you were not at all not "measuring up", far from it. I am not looking for what my answer should be. I was not trying to imply you had not ansered the question or did not provide scripture! Although I do try hard to stick to the text and not give opinion, I am sure I am guilty of this too. Sorry for the misunderstandings. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
146 | How Far Are We To Suffer For Christ? | 1 Pet 4:16 | bowler | 206826 | ||
Val I must respectuly say that I am confused about your post to me. I don't think I have all the answers and am the only one who is on track. If you would realy like to know the circumstances that occassion that comment please just ask, these are people I know personally and as far as they are concerned their lives would be ruined by "turning around and sinning no more" as they put it. What I have tried to do in my post is not volunteer information that is so specific as to make the question have to be about a specific narrow paritcular subject as I know three people with different life situations this would apply to. In the name of blessed Jesus, why would you say to me that I have a Pharisee atitude? I will qualify my statment in the first paragraph for you - No, I am not saying Christ does not provide a nice life. I am saying once you have built your entire life, your house, your family, your job, on things that are the direct result of sin - if you then turn around and walk away from the sin that is the direct source of keeping these things, in obedience to Christ, you may have to be required give up the house, parts of the family, the job - and that could ruin your life. That is what my friends are saying to me, not me, but them. Christ may very well give them "a nice life" sometime afterwards, Christ is good, Christ is great. That does not mean these people will not at first have ruined lives and suffer for a long time before Christ rebuilds their lives. Hence the "suffering for Christ", hence the "ruined life". You seem to leave out the part where I say there are different ways to look at suffering and that the law could also be being obedient to Christ and that others may see things differently. Your post to me seems to be implying by your scriptures that I am standing in judgment of others and am a hypocrite, which I most respectfully and most certainly am not. Ephesians 4:3 being diligent to perserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. blessings abound, bowler blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
147 | old versus new testament | Rom 3:1 | bowler | 206822 | ||
Next Post, bowler From Luther's Small Catechism What is Baptism? Baptism is not water only, but it is water used together with God's Word and by his command. What is this Word? In Matthew 28 our Lord Jesus Christ says: Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. What benefits does God give in baptism? In Baptism God forgives sin, delivers from death and the devil, and gives everlasting salvation to all who believe what he has promised. What is God's promise? In Mark 16 our Lord Jesus Christ says: He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not will be condemned. How can water do such great things? It is not water that does these things, but God's Word with the water and our trust in this Word. Water by itself is only water, but with the Word of God it is a life giving water which by grace gives the new birth through the Holy Spirit. St. Paul writes in Titus 3 He saved us in virtue of his own mercy by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit which he poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior so that we might be justified by his grace and become heirs in hope of eternal life. This saying is sure. What does Baptism mean for daily living? It means that our sinful self with all its evil deeds and desires should be drowned through daily repentance and that day after day a new self should arise to live with God in righteousness and purity forever. St. Paul writes in Romans 6 We were buried therefore with him by Baptism into death so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father we too might walk in newness of life. Direct quote - http: double front slash www.rapidnet.com single front slash squiggle sign jbeard single front slash bdm single front slash exposes single front slash luther single front slash martin.htm Luther in His Own Words from The Large Catechism All from The Large Catechism of Martin Luther translated by Robert Fischer It remains for us to speak of our two sacraments, instituted by Christ. Every Christian ought to have at least some brief elementary instruction in them because without these no one can be a Christian. First we shall take up Baptism through which we are first received into the Christian community. Moreover, it is solemnly and strictly commanded that we must be baptized or we shall not be saved pp. 80 to 81. Hence it is well described as a divine, blessed, fruitful and gracious water for through the Word Baptism receives the power to become the washing of regeneration as St. Paul calls it in Titus 3:5. Thus faith clings to the water and believes it to be Baptism in which there is sheer salvation and life p 84. He who believes and is baptized will be saved that is faith alone makes the person worthy to receive the salutary divine water profitably. But it becomes beneficial to you if you accept it as Gods command and ordinance so that baptized in the name of God you may receive in the water the promised salvation pp 84 to 85 Yes it takes a tremendous amount of sweat to study church history, so thank you sincerely for making me study the first time around! You are stretching my brain and I thank you very much Doc - you are truly a gifted teacher of the word of God, and I truly mean that. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
148 | old versus new testament | Rom 3:1 | bowler | 206821 | ||
Doc In the name and for the sake of Jesus, now I am going to have to qualify my statements to you. I pray to do so with grace. I am going to say this with the greatest respect for you and for the great divines okay? I got my information from John Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion and from Martin Luther's Commentary on Romans and not from uniformed credo-baptists at all. I was very careful to make sure that what I was saying was fact and not from secondary sources of the original authors. Quote, Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion 4, part 21 http: double front slash www.iclnet.org single front slash pub single front slash resources single front slash text single front slash ipb front slash e single front slash epl front slash 09 single front slash cvin4 front slash 21.txt Excerpts from John Calvin's Institutes - What heavier charge can be brought against their doctrine than the decree of the Council of Melita? Let him who says that baptism is given for the remission of sins only, and not in aid of future grace, be anathema. What was truly given in baptism, is falsely said to be given in the confirmation of it, that he may stealthily lead away the unwary from baptism. John Calvin was giving an answer to some saying that there are promises which are not obtained by baptism, but that after baptism greasy oil were applied to confer that grace of the Holy Spirit as the attainment of that grace. John Calvin argues that these same heretics are saying that baptism does not confer the grace which enables the believer to grow in Christ because they wrongly believe that one can be baptized and then receive a second grace with oil and a prayer without having first obtained faith. He differentiates elsewhere between faith, and grace and states that grace is obtained through baptism and says scripture upholds this principle. He clearly states that what is to be given at baptism is an aid of future grace. He also clearly believed that baptism was for remission of sins, and he did not refute that those whom he was speaking of did also as he says, Let him who says that baptism is given for the remission of sins only. Go to this link for John Calvin's Institutes on his defense for Paedobaptism - http: double front slash www.apuritansmind.com single front slash Baptism single front slash CalvinInfantBaptism.htm number sign 1. Direct qoute - http: double front slash www.tbaptist.com single front slash aab single front slash lutherbaptism.htm Luther and Baptismal Regeneration from Luther's Commentary on Romans In his commentary on Romans, Luther wrote concerning Romans 6:3, as follows We are not found in a state of perfection as soon as we have been baptized into Jesus Christ and His death. Having been baptized into His death, we merely strive to obtain the blessings of this death and to reach our goal of glory. Just so, when we are baptized into everlasting life and the kingdom of heaven, we do not at once fully possess its full wealth of blessings. We have merely taken the first steps to seek after eternal life. Baptism has been instituted that it should lead us to the blessings of this death and through such death to eternal life. Therefore it is necessary that we should be baptized into Jesus Christ and His death. Commentary On The Epistle To The Romans, By Martin Luther, translated by J. Theodore Mueller, page 85. According to Martin Luther baptism has the power to confer blessings Luther's Small Catechism Direct quote - http: double front slash www.sundayschoollessons.com single front slash baptism.htm See Next Post, bowler |
||||||
149 | Isaiah Sawn In Two? | Heb 11:37 | bowler | 206818 | ||
Searcher Thank you, can you name the source? I am having a lot of trouble finding the source. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
150 | Boast in the Lord About? | 2 Cor 10:17 | bowler | 206817 | ||
Searcher Oh most excellent indeed, indeed! I never saw that. I completely did not look for the referrence in the column and this went right by me. I am really impressed with this because of the direct reference before this verse in Jeremiah becuase Paul also uses that! Jeremiah 9:23 Thus says the Lord, "Let not a wise man boast of his wisdom, and let not the mighty boast of his might, let not the rich boast of his riches. Paul as you said is using these verses of Jeremiah in his thinking, absolutely - in 1 Corinthians he uses both Jeremiahs 9:23, and 24 for a whole two chapters talking about the folly of wisdom and of boasting in the Lord. I asked someone out here what they thought about this and they came up with something I never noticed - Paul is answering accusations made about his ability to preach as if he is not very good at it and as if he is not wise, as if he is a fool speaking to the wise. So he gives an answer to the Corinthians who have been hearing this arrogant claim made against him. Thank you. blesssings abound, bowler |
||||||
151 | Fruitless Scripture Discussion? | 1 Tim 1:6 | bowler | 206816 | ||
Immanuelsown Amen brother, amen! You are making me think harder about this now - my mind was more leading towards not talking about endless genealogies and myths as being the only things we shouldn't be talking about. But in context of not causing the "weak", although who knows, I may be the "weak", to stumble I agree that is correct. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
152 | Consists Not in Words But in Power? | 1 Cor 4:20 | bowler | 206815 | ||
Immanuel I really do agree with you except that Paul specifically says that the kingdom of God "does not consist in words, but in power". You mean that Jesus is the "power"? Thanks. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
153 | God Not Give More Than We Can Bear? | 1 Cor 10:13 | bowler | 206814 | ||
Steve Thank you. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
154 | What Parts Makes Covenant Work? | Heb 9:16 | bowler | 206813 | ||
Steve Thank you. I would wonder if a Biblical source might contain Biblical explanation of Biblical concepts. Webster's? I am not out to disparage your efforts to find a source, I myself before and asking the question found absolutely, not one source for what constitutes the parts of what makes up a covenant. I had two posts looking at this concept of what elements, or rules comprise a covenant, this general one and the specific one about marriage. Those are some interesting elements you found though, food for thought - Mutual consent A written agreement as a contract God's commands, prohibitions, promises, obedience As you have outlined it would be that mutual consent is required as a written agreement of contract to obtain the promises of God or between church parties with the vairous prohibitions and obedience to the covenant. Thank you. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
155 | Marriage as a Covenant Relationship? | Eph 5:32 | bowler | 206812 | ||
beja The new covenant has no qualifications on our side? How about faith as a requirement on our side. This verse you are using applies to Jesus new covenant. I would be pleased to hear how this relates to the covenant of marriage? Each covenant has different rules, promises, and obligations. Are all these things, rules, promises, and obligations, interchangeable between one covenant and another? Has the covenant of marriage changed and are there truly no obligations to keep? Or are you realy saying that marriage obligations will be kept because "God will write it on their hearts"? I am interested in your response. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
156 | Repentance is Sorry or Walk From Sin? | Matt 3:8 | bowler | 206811 | ||
Steve Thank you for the reccomendation of that book there I will endeavor to purshase it. I am realy wondering how people who have made life style choices, however legal they may be, can continue in them and actualy believe they have "repented and redicated" their lives to God, when in fact the choices they made are legal, but not lining up with the word of God? blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
157 | Repentance is Sorry or Walk From Sin? | Matt 3:8 | bowler | 206810 | ||
Jayell I agree with you one hundred percent on this issue. What I have been running across is the practice of turning around from sins that are easy to walk away from by some, but these same some won't walk away from a sin that requires a drastic and devasting life style change becuase they would lose way too much in the process. Acts 26:20c to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, preforming deeds apporpriate to repentance. Yes repentance requires picking up and walking away from sin to "turn around" and have a "change of mind" - you can't repent and then stay in the same sinful situation and be said to have truly repented until you "change your mind and walk away from sin". I wonder how else thinks something? I am open to different understandings than my own. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
158 | Marriage as a Covenant Relationship? | Eph 5:32 | bowler | 206809 | ||
Steve Proverbs 2:7, Malachi 2:14 - Marriage is a covenant. Paraphrase for the Hebrew- Covenant: In the sense of cutting, a compact because of being passed between two peices of flesh, confederacy, convenant, league. Covenants are "cut" as a compact by the particants of a confederacy, with particants being passed between two pieces of flesh, which forms the covenant. Paraphrase for the Greek - Disposition, a contract, especially a devisory will, a covenant, a testament. Covenants are a legal contract, as in a will, as a testament being made, which makes up the will as a testament by the author of the testament who is the testator with the participants. Interesting Link - http://ipraytoday.wordpress.com/2006/11/04/the-covenant-of-marriage/ All Biblical covenants have the following seven elements - 1) God is the testator of the testament as the primary witness and is the author of the covenant. - Genesis 15:18-21 - Testator 2) Humans are the participants and recipients of the testament as secondary witness making the covenant public. - Genesis 1:28 - Public 3) God makes specific promises to the pariticipants. - Genesis 8:21 - Promises of the testator 4) God gives specific obligations to the participants to follow. - Exodus 34:10-27 - Obligations of the pariticipants 5) God forms an exclusive relationship between Himself and the pariticipants. - Genesis 17:7, Exodus 20:1, Deuteronomy 5:1-5 - Covenant excludes those outside it 6) God requires obedience to the covenant by the participants. - Exodus 20:1-26 - Obedience to the covenant is required 7) God is making a forensic legal agreement between himself and the pariticipants as a covenant with the pariticipants. - Hebrews 9:16, 17 - Covenant is binding with God Marriage is a covenant, this is an outline of marriage God's style only and not of traditions and societal norms- 1) Adam and Eve - Genesis 1:28, 2:24 - God testified as a witness that Adam and Eve were to multiply and it was "cut" by the passing together of flesh. 2) Adam and Eve - Genesis 1:28 - God told them to multiply and made it public. 3) God - Genesis 2:18, 2:24, Proverbs 18:22, 1 Corinthians 7:2-4, Hebrews 13:4 - God makes promises to the participants of His will 4) God - Ephesians 5:21-33 - God gives obligations to the participants 5) God - God excludes those outside the covenant - Ephesians 5:32, Hebrews 13:4, 1 Corinthians 7:2, 6 6) God - God demands obedience to the covenant - Romans 7:1-3, 1 Corinthians 7:39, Mathew 19:6 7) God - God makes a forensic binding covenant by "cutting" the covenant with blood and the passing of flesh - Genesis 2:24, Ephesians 5:30, 1 Corinthians 7:31 Those are the rules to the covenant of marriage as I understand them to be based on scripture. I am not so very sure how modern marriage vows would fit into these rules. I think that the traditional vows are in keeping with overall scriptural concept of a marriage covenant. I am more interested in what others think, whether it be as a covenant or as something else and how it works as a covenant or something else? blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
159 | Speculation? | 2 Tim 2:23 | bowler | 206784 | ||
beja Thank you for your response. Am I to understand that where Paul was speaking of of not passing judgment on him in terms of regarding Apollos above Paul and then Paul says, "I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, so that in us you may learn not to exceed what is written, so that no one will become arrogant in behalf of one against another", that you are taking an alternate application? Not a misinterpretation, I don't mean that at all, but from the original interpretation, a secondary application? Exceed what was written then as what was written about everything in scripture, and not as what was written about not judging Paul or Apollos? I can see you mean the former and not the latter. I like brain twisters but not everyone finds profit in that because they can't find an application in real life for the answers. There is no such thing as a scripture that does not have a current application that can be derived at from a literal interpretation. Which is why I like the brain teasers, to try to find out what that is going to be, all scripture is profitable, you just have to understand how for each one. Scripture has a lot of parts to what it takes to undertand it. Some things in scripture have that they are specific things God has done that have parts as to how it works according to what God has outlined. And some scriptures have different things that God has incorporated into what He has done that each break down into the rules He laid out for each part of each of the major things that went into His one decision. The actual scripture proscribing some particular thing to do about something God has insitituted does not always contain every single aspect of every single thing that God has outlined in scriptures as the parts of how the thing He is doing works, but the elements are in scripture in various other places directly outlined as having exactly to do with the single thing and how God operates its parts. I agree with you whole heartedly that going beyond what scripture actually says about something is going beyond "what is written". But, I think it is important to see what the whole canon of scriptures is saying about how all the parts of the major "thing" that are outlined in scripture work together to form how the "thing" actually works according to scripture. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
160 | Fruitless Scripture Discussion? | 1 Tim 1:6 | bowler | 206782 | ||
Steve Thank you very much for everything you said. Somethig stood out that was very important to me in terms of how it is viewed the word "opinion". I have found that often when one gives the Bible verses and then takes the meaning that the author had for his audience, there is only usually one, that others think one is oferrig their "opinion". This is distrubing. There is indeed only one interpretation of scripture, but various applications. When one sticks to the application that the author had in mind according to his intent, that is sticking to the most literal interpretation that there could possibly be, but that does not mean that there are not other applications for the scripture that are valid, there are. For instance 1 Peter 4:16 "if anyone suffers as a Christian, he is not to be ashamed" - this can apply to suffering for preaching, and it can apply to obeying Christ in your personal life in all circumstances. That is two very different applications, one interpertation, two applications. When someone asks a question that is personal in nature, but there is definetely scripture that attends the problem with a literal interpretation, then this should not be seen as offering and "opinion" or pushing ones' view. Literal interpretation is literal interpretation, it is not an opinion, or advice, or pushing a view. I hear you that people who need counseling should go to counseling, but giving them scripture with a literal interpretation without proscribing what exactly is the course of action they should take is not counseling them, or giving advice, or pushing a view, or giving them your opnion. What they do with it is up to them. That is a shame, if it is true, that Calvinism and Arminianism cannot be discussed here. I actually went through some of the branches on that to see what you were talking about. What I found was that some only appeared to have grace on the surface and once the line of sovereignty was crossed in the discussion it digressed into the judgmental, or bordering on being crass in response. I myself am now trying to tread carefully on a number of subjects in here becuase there are people who strongly beleive what they beleive, but I am afraid that presenting evidence to the contrary will only result in either an arugument, or in my post being pulled. I am not here to offend by stating what I believe, I am not here tp push my views. 1 Corinthians 6:12 All things are lawful for me, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be mastered by anything. By the way what I was asking for was how to interpret a specific scripture in how to apply it - the whole paragraph there before and after in the scripture is definitely about what topics are acceptable to be discussing - to try to understand which ones would be off limits is not asking for an opinion, it is asking for clarification. Thanks for everything you said. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ] Next > Last [15] >> |