Results 161 - 180 of 277
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: charis Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
161 | What does 1 Tim 3:2 mean? | 1 Tim 3:2 | charis | 7002 | ||
Dear PSP, and fellow posters to this question, I see that this issue has divided into two poles, both of which seem off-Center to me. One side is the 'Absolute Literal Interpretation' side, and the other is the 'Broad and Kind-of-Vague Interpretation' side. I like the word 'off-Center' (Ray, take note of the capitalization :-) because it describes this, and several other recent issues on this Forum. Walking close to (with) Jesus is our goal, and the Holy Spirit is our Guide. Scripture teaches in so many places that God is sovereign, and that strict and absolute adherance to 'rules' is not the point of His commandments. The grace of God has made allowance for man's deviation from perfection many times in the Bible. The problem is that man has a tendency to either disallow that grace, or depend upon it, both negating God's sovereignty. Returning to this particular thread: Yes, I think it is safe to say that God wants shepherds to be men, husbands and fathers, and not divorced or a widow(er). Does this mean that women can never be ministers? No. Does it mean that they must be married? No. Does it mean that they must have children? No. Does it mean that they can never be divorced? No. Does it mean that their spouse can never die? No. It means that God has given us a pattern, a 'holy preference' for His will, but that He will call whomever He calls. Our job on this earth is to obey His patterns first, but always be sensitive to the Holy Spirit to discern the workings of grace and specific Divine Purpose. We cannot, therefore, say, "Women can be shepherds, as well as singles and divorcees." That would overstep grace, and fall into abuse, or the manipulation of grace. (Frankly, the widow(er) issue sounds crass. Though it might be said that it takes two to divorce, God decides the hour of death, not the spouse) My answer: If the question is specifically about ministry for those re-married after divorce, then it is outside of God's general pattern, but possible in the grace of our Lord. Many denominations forbid this, so said person would have to leave the church (if it is God's calling, worth it) or fight the church (which cannot be God's will). Other variations are answered above. In Christ Jesus, charis |
||||||
162 | Priority in the home. | 1 Thess 4:11 | charis | 6909 | ||
Dear Louder, I am very happy to hear that my words were a confirmation to you. I am a person pursuing simplicity, so please do not think you are troubling me. I am honored to help, and strengthened in my own walk by attempting to make this concept understandable. 1)Serve God- this is a no-brainer. "Now, therefore, fear the Lord and serve Him in sincerity and truth; and put away the gods which your fathers served beyond the River and in Egypt, and serve the Lord." Joshua 24:14 NASB. There are many verses that speak of serving God first and only. It is an attitude of he heart, a matter of trust and faith and submission. 2)Serve family- The act of serving God begins with serving your own family. This is not serving 'in the flesh' by bringing home a paycheck. This is caring and responsibility. Jesus said that we are to leave our homes and make our own (Matthew 19:5). Ephesians 5:22-6:4 tells us of the love that a family must share to glorify Jesus. Though nowhere says clearly "home-before-church," the qualifications of an elder-deacon in 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus clearly state that a servant of the church must first be a servant of his-her family. 3)Serve your local church- The next way to manifest our service to God is to serve His people, the body of Christ. "And sitting down, He called the twelve and said to them, "If anyone wants to be first, he shall be last of all, and servant of all." Mark 9:35 NASB. "So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God's household," Ephesians 2:19ff NASB. When we become part of the Lord's church, we become part of His world-wide body of believers. However, the main manner in which we manifest this 'membership' is in the fellowship of the saints of a local expression of His body. The Bible speaks about commitment and service as a real thing, not a 'nebulous' feeling of togetherness. This is why 'para-church' is just that, a subsidiary function. These can never replace the holy responsibility toward a committed body of believers. X)Serve your boss- We are clearly told to serve our earthly masters. "Slaves, in all things obey those who are your masters on earth, not with external service, as those who merely please men, but with sincerity of heart, fearing the Lord." Colossians 3:22 NASB. (Remember, this is to be done 'as unto the Lord,' not as unto men, or as unto yourself.) I find it hard to place a clear priority 'number' on this one. I can find no exhortation to 'pursue a career' in the Bible. One may say that they didn't have careers back then, but this is not true. Even back then, they had the convoluted intrigues of public service, trade guilds, and religion. So the 'career-minded' Pharisees are a case-in-point against self-seeking job focus. Also, the Scriptures and comments by Steve Butler are very good. I pray that these (few) verses and comments will be of (para-church) service to you :-) In Christ Jesus, charis |
||||||
163 | Will there be degrees of judgment? | Matt 11:22 | charis | 6868 | ||
Dear Hank, I have read this thread with great interest. I have one comment: What does it matter to God's people whether there are degrees of punishment? Frankly, I can see no good reason to dwell on the 'degree' of judgment. Friend, was this an intentional pun? If it was, it was great!! Will 'X' be roasting at 240F, and 'Y' at 275F? Poor 'Z' is right on the coals at 500C!! I suspect that maybe the Lord has a way to cause 'greater discomfort' in Hell, but I can see no purpose in *our* measuring it :-) It would appear that the rich man (looking upon Lazarus) had some remorse. He seemed to accept his plight, but hoped that maybe there was some way to warn others of their danger, if they continued in their evil ways. Would this 'remorse in Hell' grant him a lower temperature? To what end? After all, he is in Hell. A great question, but some of the answers were a bit 'academic,' IMHO. In Jesus' name, charis |
||||||
164 | House wife or career wife? | 1 Thess 4:11 | charis | 6827 | ||
Dear Louder, Before I specify the role of the Christian wife-mother, I think it is proper to clarify the role of the Christian husband-father. I firmly believe that the order of priority in the home is, serve God, serve immediate family, serve your local church family, then do a good job in whatever you do in order to pursue the above three priorities. Sure, men (and women) can have a career, if their priorities are straight. Men have the responsibility to be the pillar of their household, and this can only be accomplished if they are around and available. A modern 'career-minded' person has a hard time fulfilling his-her true responsibilities in Jesus. A 'two-career' family has little or no chance of serving the Lord in the way that He wants. Some may disagree with me, but I am sure that reality is on my side. Christian wife, can she work? Yes. There are many kinds of work that allow you to make money while serving Christ-family-church. Staying at home and raising children is not a prison sentence, unless you make it one! The Bible portrays this as honorable and fufilling. Can she work if necessary? Yes, but often greed overcomes honesty. Get out of financial debt, by all means! But don't use it as an excuse to get away. Also, don't stay in debt. I have seen that paying taxes, day-care or baby-sitters and giving your kids guilt-offering bribes for not being around can cost more than not working. If you have 'too-much house,' move! No true Christian will judge you for repenting of pride and greed. Re-evaluate your life with Christ in mind, and careers, houses, cars, bank accounts, 'personal freedom' and worldy 'self-esteem' disappear. Jesus replaces all these things with holy satisfaction in Him. In Jesus' name, charis |
||||||
165 | Study Bible Forum -- or Circus? | Gen 1:17 | charis | 6764 | ||
Dear Hank, I join you in appealing for a return to focus for this forum. I am an eternal optimist, but I see that we are not following a path of edifying the body of Christ. Adamant statements, flaring tempers, and random musings are sure signs that we are not on track to becoming what our sponsors at the Lockman Foundation had hoped for. For their sake and ours, let's return (repent) to studying the Bible with love, faith, fellowship, temperance and tolerance. We can be adamant, angry and rambling at home. This is not a 'venting' place :-) Peace upon you, brother, and upon the saints of this forum. In Jesus' name, charis |
||||||
166 | What did women do in the early church? | Rom 16:2 | charis | 6705 | ||
Dear Hank, A lot! Seriously, it seems to me, IMHO, that women were very active in the early church. Even today, I think it is safe to say that women are the majority in most Christian activities. I think it is also safe to say that a majority of independent local churches started as a result of the prayers and participation of women, and often in women's homes. I must say that my own limited experience has shown that women are 'prayer warriors,' and 'personal evangelists,' as well as givers of care, shelter and love. I have no reason to doubt that this was so in the early church. We now have large 'organized and established' churches that put men in the limelight, but I believe that women are the more effective servants overall. Though I believe that God has placed a mantle of responsibility upon men as shepherds and pillars of their households, we (men) should be shamed by the selfless zeal and faith that women have shown these two millennia. I applaud the women of the early church, and their living legacy in the church today! Amen! (No, my wife didn't make me write this :-) In Christ Jesus, charis |
||||||
167 | What was the problem in the church? | Acts 15:1 | charis | 6703 | ||
Dear Hank, The first verse speaks of the 'Judaizers' (from Judea) that came to (Syrian) Antioch saying that circumcision was required for salvation. (Which would effectively cut women away from Christ, pun intended:-) Thought the focus was on circumcision, these men were also attempting to require the whole Law of Christians, which would make our faith into a sect of Judaism. Paul and Barnabas had 'no small dispute' with them, and were sent to Jerusalem to ask for wisdom. Peter stood up to say that Christians should not be made to bear what Jews could not, the Law. After Paul and Barnabas gave testimony of their mission journey, the apostles and elders agreed to send emmissaries to Antioch with a letter discrediting the requirements of the 'Judaizers,' and encouraging the saints to abstain from pagan offerings and practicing immorality. In other words, we are not bound by the fetters of the Law, rather by Christ's work in the heart, which sets us free! In Jesus' name, charis |
||||||
168 | Must Christians agree? | Rom 15:5 | charis | 6655 | ||
Dear Hank, No. One can wear plain red socks, another herringbone yellow. I part my (remaining) hair on the left, and others may part between their ears. We can still be of the same mind in Christ Jesus. To be found in Him does not necessarily mean to be of one post-Bible creed, faction, or denomination. "If you love Me, you will keep My commandments." John 14:15 NASB. I am absolutely confident that the commandments of our Lord are uniting, not divisive. To this end I pray and act. In Jesus' name, charis |
||||||
169 | Who's on first? | Josh 10:12 | charis | 6649 | ||
Yes. | ||||||
170 | Birthday of the church? | Acts 2:41 | charis | 6646 | ||
Dear Hank, Yes! The day is correct, but I think the time was a bit before, when the Holy Spirit came upon those gathered. Note the word 'added' in verse 41. "And when the day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one place. And suddenly there came from heaven a noise like a violent, rushing wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. And there appeared to them tongues as of fire distributing themselves, and they rested on each one of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them utterance." Acts 2:1-4 NASB Though God has had a chosen people from the beginning, this is the first time His 'called-out saints' were filled with the Spirit as one Body. In Christ Jesus, charis |
||||||
171 | Ten Commandments obsolete? | Rom 10:4 | charis | 6645 | ||
Dear Hank, No, the Ten Commandments are in effect, in fact, they are now fulfilled in their original intention. "Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, that we may be justified by faith." Galatians 3:24 NASB. Though Jesus said, "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the Law, until all is accomplished." Matthew 5:18 NASB, He was speaking of God's intentions toward man, not the strict legalistic adherance to man's interpretations of the Law. This is shown through Paul, "But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter." Romans 7:6 NASB. The Ten Commandments are alive and well in Christ the Lord! In Jesus' name, charis |
||||||
172 | Gender distinction in the Kindom of God? | Gal 3:28 | charis | 6643 | ||
Dear Louder, Happy First Birthday sometime soon, and welcome to the forum! Great question! JVH0212 was correct that in God's sight gender is not an issue. In our relation to Him, the issue is moot. However, in the government of His kingdom, the practical application of authority in home and church, there does seem to be a division of responsibility. Though it would be hard to claim an *absolute* segregation of ministry in home and church, a *general* segregation is clearly suggested. Shepherds (pastor and elders, though some say deacons as well. I believe in the ministry of deaconess) seem to be men, while most other ministries seem to be open to women. The basic qualifications should remain the same (except 'husband of one wife :-) In special situations, this may be altered, but the pattern is clear in Scripture. In the home, there is a clear distinction of responsibility, but not a 'higher-lower' or 'superior-inferior' type of difference. It only makes sense that one is given final reponsibility, because a committee will not work. A woman's submission to her husband will only truly work when he is submitted to God and the requirement to love his wife. For precisely this reason, a shepherd should be married with children. (Again, an ideal, not an absolute) By his understanding the responsibility of a home, he will have a better understanding of the responsibility of shepherding God's flock. More specific answers are available in the above 'thread' entitled "Can God use woman in the ministry?" and also "Unmarried men pastors?" I pray that this is helpful. Blessings upon you in Christ Jesus, charis |
||||||
173 | giving your tithe | 1 Cor 9:16 | charis | 6268 | ||
Dear fliha, I am a believer in the tithe simply because it makes more sense than a church having to ask for money all the time. Fund-raising becomes a primary occupation. People that give much are often put on pedastals (or their name is put on plaques) Tithing is indeed, pre-Law and not 'required' in the New Testament, but it certainly simplifies the matter of deciding 'how much?' Friend, that you are struggling with this particular tithe is my concern. It sounds as if you do not trust your church to use this bonus-tithe properly. Does your church have outreach ministries? Do they allow you to say (suggest) where you feel God wants this money to be used? I think that you must review in your heart your feelings toward your local church, and either give in faith or ask your leadership for clarification of their financial doctrine and policy. Peace to you in Christ Jesus, charis |
||||||
174 | Why was Jesus named “Jesus”? | Is 7:14 | charis | 6108 | ||
Dear ekip, Welcome back from a long hiatus! The 'name' Immanuel is mentioned only two times, both in Isaiah (7:14 and 8:8). The first clearly speaks of the Messiah, and the second seems to speak to the 'land of Messaiah.' There are no other references to this name suggesting that it is not a common name for an Israelite, as is Jesus, Joshua or Yehoshua, meaning 'God is Salvation' or 'Savior.' I guess what I am trying to say is that Mary naming her son 'Immanuel' might be considered presumptuous or irreverent, but apparently 'Jesus' was not. Possibly calling the Lord 'Immanuel' would be inconsistent with His humble nature? Ekip, this is not a dumb question, but quite thought-provoking. I am sure that there is a much more esoteric theory :-) This is my contribution. Blessings in Christ Jesus, charis |
||||||
175 | What is the point of the flags? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 6047 | ||
Dear EdB, I guess the point is that Lockman has made available a means of expressing our feelings toward a thread of postings or an individual's opinions. After all, only one vote (per posting) was cast, and look at how easy it was to change the color with another vote :-) Some people are impervious to confrontation, some dread it. You and orthodoxy are still free to continue your thread, nobody is stopping you. We have been given the choice of replying or not, reading or not, and voting or not, none of which take away the privilege of others. Peace and blessings in Jesus' name, charis |
||||||
176 | Would you explain your action? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 6006 | ||
Dear EdB, I did not vote on this thread, but the idea behind voting was to have a way to point out a *remarkably* biased or controversial opinion. The leadership at Lockman can use this as a way to 'feel the pulse' of the participants. I think that many times it is not the content so much as the attitude that would bring one to *remark* on a posting. In Christ Jesus, charis |
||||||
177 | Darkness: an Effect or Substance? | Gen 1:4 | charis | 5994 | ||
Dear Lionstrong, Darkness has no substance. It is the absence of light. Cold is the absence of heat. Death is the absence of life. Lies are the absence of truth. This absence can affect the substance by dissipating it. I believe that this is a physical answer with valid spiritual implications. Instead...trust the substance of God, and flee the dissipating power of the enemy. In Christ Jesus, charis |
||||||
178 | Babies in heaven when they die? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 5932 | ||
Dear Nolan, I can find no direct reference to babies and children going to heaven. Often, babies are referred to as 'cherubic.' As to the salvation of children, it becomes a bit sticky. First, children of the unsaved: Regarding children, unborn or born of the unsaved, there is little Scriptural indication that they are considered 'innocent.' In fact, the Word says we are "by nature children of wrath." There is the place where Jesus says, "Permit the children to come to Me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these." in Luke 18:16, but this Scripture is often quoted as speaking of believers, not literal children. Suggesting a dual-meaning could be dangerous. Verse 15 might mean the literal children of believers, while verse 17 leads us to a figurative meaning of believers in Christ, but neither seems to mean 'all' children. In the book-movie "Left Behind," all children, born and unborn, of saved and unsaved were 'raptured.' I find this hard to support Biblically. Please, I am not being unfeeling, judgmental, or proclaiming that children of the unsaved will go to Hell. I am just saying that the *assumption* that all children are innocent and all deserve to go to heaven is hard to back up. God will save whom He will save. Next, children of the saved: The main scripture that might give hope to parents is 1 Corinthians 7:14 "...but now they are holy." MacArthur writes: 'They would be unclean if both parents were unsaved, but the presence of one believing parent exposes the children to blessing and brings them protection. The presence of even one Christian parent will protect children from undue spiritual harm, and they will receive many blessings, and often that includes salvation.' My personal hope is that it guarantees salvation. If we try to say that children are saved through infant baptism, then the unborn or unbaptized would not be saved. (Note: not an argument against infant baptism, only against baptism required for salvation) It is my belief that if our children are saved, they will be in heaven. Finally, when are they no longer children? I do not believe there is a set age. My experience with kids suggest that they can really know Jesus (as compared to know about Jesus) between 12 and 15. (Please, people with 11 and younger children, don't jump on me! Every Christian parent wants their children to be personally saved earlier than that :-) But truly, children are children until they begin to shoulder the burdens and responsibilities of adult life. This would include marital, financial, parental, social, church fellowship, and spiritual burdens. Those who are 'in between' phases, are just that, and God is much more aware of their situation than anyone else. They are His. Trust God to do the right thing. "Let God be true...!" In Christ Jesus, charis |
||||||
179 | Urgent and swift help needed!! | Eph 6:12 | charis | 5882 | ||
Dear TheresaEP, You have received some very good advice from the saints of the Forum, Of course, prayer is absolutely necessary, but you have obviously passed the point of passive prayer. I agree wholeheartedly with Hank. His insight about money was spot on! Battling for the sake of your financial 'investment' in this church is not pleasing to God, but battling for your heart 'investment' of fellowship is worthy. As orthodoxy (and others, as well as your question verse) pointed out, Biblical discipline requires confrontation of the offender. Your pastor must spearhead this action, or he is not a shepherd. The sheep will be slowly scattered if nothing is done, and this kind of church destruction always sends many away from the church bitter and filled with doubt. Gird up your loins, do your homework about the legal situation, and go forth! The problem is afterward. Do something! Regroup the flock into a church, even if it is only in a living room. Don't dwell on past things, just start afresh, and put away bitterness. My home church went through a similar situation, and many are still hurting themselves by opening up old wounds, 3 years old. Theresa, I will be praying for wisdom, courage, and the leading of the Spirit. |
||||||
180 | Is infant baptism Biblical? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 5654 | ||
Dear Nolan Keck, You should seek to be baptized. There is no 're-baptism' if there is only one (water) baptism, as clearly stated in Ephesians 4:5. As you well, know, I am not a Conservative Mennonite, but their Anabaptist roots come from a restoration of truth to the church. Infant baptism was simply a method of insuring membership in a denomination of the church, a convenience. They believed that the church was salvation, not personal faith in Christ. Your faith is your faith, not your parent's faith any longer. Infant baptism is a 'christening' or naming ceremony, a prayer offered in hope that the child will grow up into Christ Jesus. Nothing more, and nothing less. I do not 'condemn' this practice, but do put it into Biblical perspective. I pray that you will make a holy decision based on the Spirit that indwells you, and the Bible that tells you, not on the traditions of your church. In Jesus' name, charis |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ] Next > Last [14] >> |