Results 181 - 200 of 1806
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: stjohn Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
181 | 1 Timothy 6:3 | 1 Cor 9:19 | stjohn | 218250 | ||
Dear Mike, Please check out this link. http://www.gotquestions.org/lectio-divina.html I will be keeping you in prayer, Mike, and I know others who have been reading along will too. John |
||||||
182 | Who should baptize? | Acts 2:41 | stjohn | 218223 | ||
Thanks, Andrew, that helps a lot. You know, sir, to my shame I've been sorely remiss in my study of this subject and, this thread has really convicted me to delve deeper, especially, into the Word, also to read more of what the early Church fathers, and also what the reformers taught on the subject of Baptism. "And therefore, if you ask, “Why do you immerse in Baptism?” I say because Baptism must, in the very nature of things, be a representation setting forth figuratively the burial and resurrection of Christ and because to immerse and to immerse only, is the meaning of this word baptize."- Rev. Hugh Stowell Brown (1823-1886) John |
||||||
183 | Who should baptize? | Acts 2:41 | stjohn | 218213 | ||
Amen. | ||||||
184 | Who should baptize? | Acts 2:41 | stjohn | 218211 | ||
Dear Searcher, So what is your issue? I'm not clear about what you are saying. Should there be a delay to see if they are saved, or not? And who, pray tell is it that, determines whether someone is saved? The eunuch was baptized right away, so were the 3000. John |
||||||
185 | Who should baptize? | Acts 2:41 | stjohn | 218208 | ||
Hi Searcher, Yes, I would tend to agree with you, and have really always seen it pretty much in that way, though I've never quibbled with the believers I've been attached to. It doesn't do any good to argue about it when we are with those who feel very strongly about something that doesn't adversely effect our salvation or sanctification. I wasn't around any believers for quite some time and obviously not a member of a Church when I first believed and was saved. I did read the Bible several times though, and felt no strong compulsion to be baptized. But, as soon as I joined a Church I wanted to be baptized right away. That says something I think, about it (i.e. water baptism) being an outward sign. I was baptized (dunked!) in the river by the way, it was very cold! :-) John |
||||||
186 | Who should baptize? | Acts 2:41 | stjohn | 218193 | ||
Hello, Andrew, A warm welcome to the forum! My dad wanted to name me Andrew, my mom, didn't. Guess who won. :-) You say that the Bible clearly teaches immersion only and, many, I know believe this. My Church practices this, and I find it to be the tradition pretty much wherever I go in this corner of the world -we have lots and lots of water here- besides I haven't ever been one to quibble over which is the proper way to baptize. (Just wondering.... What would an Eskimo do in winter? Or a desert nomad?) I've always thought -from reading Scripture)- it was an outward symbol of an inward change, i.e. when we believe, we are immersed in the Spirit -baptized in and of the Holy Spirit, that, being true baptism. Can you please show me the scriptures that 'clearly teach' immersion only. John |
||||||
187 | Why was it ok for Rehab to lie? | Josh 6:25 | stjohn | 218187 | ||
Well said, BradK. Very well said. John |
||||||
188 | Is Noah''s flood a Baptism of the Earth? | NT general | stjohn | 218182 | ||
:-) | ||||||
189 | Is Noah''s flood a Baptism of the Earth? | NT general | stjohn | 218180 | ||
Dear Searcher, Kneel-?! :-( May it never be! We are all equal in His eyes! :-) John |
||||||
190 | Is Noah''s flood a Baptism of the Earth? | NT general | stjohn | 218178 | ||
Thanks but that wasn't my question. You wrote that you believed it was a 'mistranslation'. Is that correct? Shouldn't you have said it was a 'misinterpretation'? They are two very different things. :-) |
||||||
191 | why kill everyone if you a God of love? | Bible general Archive 4 | stjohn | 218171 | ||
Very well said, CDBJ, I have wondered what the world would look like today, if they had simply obeyed God. Of course if man had it in him to obey, we wouldn't have needed Jesus, the only one who ever did truly obey. Thanks brother! John |
||||||
192 | Is Noah''s flood a Baptism of the Earth? | NT general | stjohn | 218170 | ||
Dear Searcher, Did you mean misinterpretation? :-) John |
||||||
193 | Oneness theology wrong again | 2 Cor 13:14 | stjohn | 218132 | ||
It's so good to see you posting my brother! It truly fills my heart with joy! :-) very cordially as always John |
||||||
194 | Oneness theology wrong again | 2 Cor 13:14 | stjohn | 218131 | ||
--"Question: "Will we have physical bodies in Heaven?" Answer: Although the Bible tells us little about what it will be like in heaven, it seems that we will most likely have a physical body, although not in the same sense of “physical” that we have now. First Corinthians 15:52 says that "the dead will be raised incorruptible" and that those who are alive at the time of Christ's return for His saints "shall be changed." Jesus Christ is "the first fruits" of those who have died (1 Corinthians 15:20, 23). This means that He set the example and leads the way. First Corinthians 15:42 says that our "body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption." In a precursor to the believers’ resurrection, some were raised at the time of Christ's resurrection in Matthew 27:52 where it says that their "bodies...were raised." Thomas, in John 20:27, physically touched the body of Christ following His resurrection, so He obviously had a body that was solid. We can expect that all believers’ resurrection will be like that of Christ's. What a wonderful truth! The Bible is not specific, but it seems that we will be able to eat. John, in Revelation 22:2, writes of his vision of the eternal state where he saw that "in the middle of its street, and on either side of the river, was the tree of life, which bore twelve fruits, each tree yielding its fruit every month." This seems to be a reversal of the Genesis 3 punishment where Adam and Eve, and hence all of mankind, were banned from eating from this tree. As for hunger, it appears that there won't be any. Isaiah 49:10 says that there will be no hunger or thirst in the millennial kingdom. This is speaking of mortal men during that period, not of translated saints, but by extension it can be said that if mortals on earth during Christ's Kingdom do not hunger, then surely there will be no hunger in heaven (see also Revelation 7:14-16). Finally, Job wrote that he knew for sure that even after he dies and his skin is long gone, that "in my FLESH I shall SEE God" (Job 19:25 - all caps added for emphasis). So that means our bodies will consist of some kind of glorified flesh. Whatever form we have, we know that it will be perfect, sinless and flawless."-- http://www.gotquestions.org/physical-bodies-heaven.html |
||||||
195 | Is this law still binding? If so, how? | Bible general Archive 4 | stjohn | 218120 | ||
Dear 5282, Welcome to the forum! Very well said! Especially the part about consideration for womankind, and how a loving husband should respect his wife as a weaker vessel and to show her respect and kindness during her time. It truly makes me sad that such a question is asked in the first place. Perhaps I'm going to be viewed as prudish, but in my opinion, it shows just how far humans are form godly grace toward one another. John |
||||||
196 | online multiple translations-more than 2 | Bible general Archive 4 | stjohn | 218118 | ||
Hi 5282, This one has the option you are looking for. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage John |
||||||
197 | Why did Paul do it? For conscience sake? | Acts 21:23 | stjohn | 218088 | ||
note: So that there is no misunderstanding to all involved in this thread. When I said no need to apologize, I've meant from where I sit alone, and not at all speaking for others. I was not offended, seeing the levity intended, though not well thought through and sorely misplaced. But if there is some twinge of conscience, which is, indeed apparent, then I'd hope that the one offended would be the one confessed and apologized to, i.e. God. Psalm 51:4 Shalom John |
||||||
198 | Why did Paul do it? For conscience sake? | Acts 21:23 | stjohn | 218085 | ||
:-) No problem... friend. :-) No need to apologize in the first place, MJH, that's why I didn't acknowledge it, sorry for that. You say you do the best you can? But the word of God says that isn't good enough when it comes to the law. Gal 3:10-13 John p.s. If it weren't for spell check, I wouldn't have known. :-) |
||||||
199 | Why did Paul do it? For conscience sake? | Acts 21:23 | stjohn | 218080 | ||
"Christ's sacrifice puts an end to the need for sin sacrifice in the world to come as Hebrews teaches." (sic) So are we to be sacrificing lambs? Since the "world to come" is obviously in future. Thence, if we are to be obeying the law -and not a jot or title is to be left out- how are the lambs doing in your neighborhood? :-) Sorry, MJH, I couldn't resist, you don't have to answer, and we really don't need to revisit this same old tired debate. Shalom John |
||||||
200 | That we may grow thereby | Matt 18:15 | stjohn | 218076 | ||
Dear Yen, If I haven't done so yet welcome to the forum! I appreciate your comments and the spirit in which they were given, but you assume that this brother has not been contacted in privet. There is quite a bit of history here concerning not only this member in regard to sound doctrine -on and off the forum- that not everyone is aware of. John |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ] Next > Last [91] >> |