Results 181 - 200 of 292
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: bowler Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
181 | 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 |
||||||
182 | Missions question | 1 Cor 9:1 | bowler | 206972 | ||
tachminite Please listen to Searcher he is realy trying to help you out here. Perhaps where you are from the there is an expression "three selves". I have never heard this before. It makes me wonder if you mean the trinity? Think about the three omni's and how they "literaly manifested" themselves in the Christian community, you will arrive at the answer. As to how the term "three selves" emerged into the Christian community, that is something that a pariticular Christian community arrived at as a term and as a concept that they "emerged" into the Christian community. That is not a universal understanding derived from theology proper that I have ever heard of before. I am not an expert, I do not think I know all the answers, there is plenty I do not know, and plenty I will be happy and eager to learn from others here. I am a worthless son. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
183 | am i a truly converted ? | 1 Cor 9:27 | bowler | 206548 | ||
docanlinda2 This verse is about runnig the race of faith as if to win the race. Here is a brain teaser for you about what Paul is saying here about not wanting to be disqualied that my pastor once told us in an illustration of what this verse really means - Can you run a race, be on a team with others in that race and lose the race, but still be part of the team? Why yes you can! And this is what Paul is talking about here, being on the team, but winning or losing the fight, the race, not getting the prize! Look at the preceding verse - 1 Corinthians 9:24-26 Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but only one receive the prize? Run in such a way that you man win. Everyone who competes in the games exerts self-control in all things. They then do it to recieve a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable. This is talking about running the race of faith to get the rewards of that faith, not losing salvation! Paul is using the anology of being an athelete who competes for a prize, a wreath, the winners crown. We have been promised rewards for our work, for our walk, for our "running the race as if to win". Here - 1 Corinthians 3:12 Now if any man builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, each man's work will become evident; for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each man's work. If any man's work remains, he will recieve a reward. If any man's work is burnt up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet as through fire. Do you see what is says there - if your work as a Christians is burnt up you will still be saved? This is what Paul means by "but I discipline my body and make it my slave, so that after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified". Paul is talking about being a holy person by doing Romans 12:1 - to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual sercive of worship - so that his preaching, his good works, will not be "disqualified" by bad deeds done in his body. So this verse does not have anything to do with losing or keeping salvation, it has what to do with "running the race in such a way as to reap eternal rewards and not be disqualified from receiving them". blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
184 | God Not Give More Than We Can Bear? | 1 Cor 10:13 | bowler | 206748 | ||
I have heard it said many a time that God will not give you more than you are able to bear in regards to trials and tribulations as, "God will not give you more than you are able". Are there any scriptures to support this? Jesus died, Peter and Paul both say we are called to suffer, even if it means death. Who can bear death? Is it true God will not give you more than you cn bear? blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
185 | God Not Give More Than We Can Bear? | 1 Cor 10:13 | bowler | 206814 | ||
Steve Thank you. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
186 | Why are some gifts of God not wanted? | 1 Cor 12:4 | bowler | 208027 | ||
hopalong Could you please explain how it is that some Christians treat a gift of God is an inconvenient imposition? Not saying you have a wrong concept, just wondering exactly what you mean. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
187 | Why are some gifts of God not wanted? | 1 Cor 12:4 | bowler | 208061 | ||
hopalong Yes that can be regrettable. My wife and I have one child for the same reasons and now we also regret it. I am well past my child rearing years and I hope one day my only child who is what, wife and I jokingly call grown, will raise a family. To answer your question, I think we often do not want the gifts, whatever they are, of God, because as you so wisely point out, we think it will cost us more than we could afford to bear. Sometimes finacially and sometimes spiritually or emotionally. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
188 | Why is death God's enemy? | 1 Cor 15:25 | bowler | 207385 | ||
Flinty Joe I saw your other post on this and saw the answers there. I think you are clarifying better what you mean here in this post. I would tend to agree with you because death is evil, is an enemy, came about by sin, will be destroyed, will be thrown into the Lake of Fire. - Revelation 20:13. I think the "differene" comes in when saints view death as a means of going home to the Lord - as Paul says twice, once in Philippians and once in 2 Corinthians that he would rather prefer to die and go home to the Lord, that is he was looking forward, not to the event of death, but what lay beyond. Christians tend not to fear death, thinking in terms, not of the event itself but what lays beyond. But death is an enemy, no one, not even a Christian looks forward to the actual event, not even Christ was happy to go there. He agonized over having to go through it the way He knew He would have to endure it and asked if perhaps this cup might pass from Me. It is a very non Christian and scientific idea that death is part of life and that death is "a natural process" we all have to go through. I often ask those who say death is natural and a part of life, "then why do most people have a tendency to fear death if it is so natural? Death is not natural, when you are in the middle of a car accident thinking you are about to die and screaming or crying out to God for help, is death something you are thinking is natural?" I dont' think when we are faced with death so squarely and immediately that many of us wouldn't hope to escape that fate and keep on living. Of course there are those who have a complete calm come over them when face with death because they know where they are going. But that is the point, they know where they are going, it is not the even itself they look forward to. Ephesians 4:3 Being diligent to preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
189 | Death God's friend or enemy? | 1 Cor 15:25 | bowler | 207510 | ||
Doc I read a lot of what you had to say to one Pastor Glenn I may freely assume that you view the use of the words "spirit" and "soul" in 1 Thessalonians 5:23 and Hebrews 4:12 to be interchangeable. I am trying hard to see this. I see from your posts on this that you view the concpet of Trichotism to be an invention of the Greek philosophers. I am wondering since two NT writers bothered to separate the words soul, spirit with the use of the word "and", and seeing as how they chose to use two different Greek words there is no such thing as a trichotimist view as being "Biblical", rather than as "Greek". How are we to say that the writers of the NT meant to use them interchangeably while in the same sentence used as two different aspects of the human spiritual essence? I saw your explanation that the "division of the soul and the spirit" means both were divided, as in searched out (bad paraphrase), rather than divided from one another. However, the writers of the NT did not say that both were divided in themselves but from one another, as if there were two things being put assunder from one another. Granted this is only found in two NT sources and that the case for dichotism if far stronger throughout the OT. Perhaps you could point me to some other posts than the long one I read all of with Pastor Glenn in it, if you don't feel like getting into this again. I happen to agree with your assessment, not as if you needed me to, but I do, that tolerance of people should be separated from tolerance of ideas. 1 Corinthians 1:20 Where is the wise man? Where is the Scribe? Where is the debator of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
190 | Death God's friend or enemy? | 1 Cor 15:25 | bowler | 207511 | ||
Doc There was once the concept of "the gentlemen's debate" for many centuries in which divers individuals would sit and discuss at length matters of the day and matters of depth. And in these debates there were certain rules of conduct and deportment fitting of gentlemen; The debates were polite, all veiws were to be discussed without reservation. Support for a position was to be provided using reason and logic as a means of dissembling information. The word argument referred strictly to the art of building and presenting a case of evidence for a position and had nothing whatsoever to do with being "argumentative with a disposition towards the use of words to inflict injury or insult". Men presented their arguments point by point or in sections and their opponents either agreed or refuted these arguments point by point. It was assumed that freedom of thought was to be expressed, but, no one was called upon or expected to agree, or to give creednce to, or to tolerate, the thoughts of those they disagreed with. This would have abrogated a man's right to believe as he pleased and to fully express his belief. The thoughts of others were never censured but were roundly debated. The debates often became heated over important matters but no one took it personaly per se but rather respected the right of others to express their thoughts with a certain fervor. Gentlemen would part to continue debates or arguments another day, ammicably and often resolved issues by agreeing to disagree. Hands were shook in the spirit of commararderie amongst gentlemen regarding the art of debate. Debate was not viewed as a dirty word, and was considered to be an accademic pursuit. The spirit of debate was an effort to arrive at a conclusion to a question posed, or a theory, or an hypothesis posited, in a reasonable and acceptable fashion as described here. This practice was applied to all things academic, and religion and philosophy were considered to be matters of highest accademia. The entire concept of the gentlemen's debate has been lost in a quest for "tolerance of the belief's of others" in modern society, which grew out of the secular movement, the liberation theology movement, feminism, "gay pride", and other movements both political and philosphic in nature. This is a deplorable situation in society today. And as D.A. Carson says, "Exclusiveness is the one religious idea that cannot be tolerated. Correspondingly, proselytism is a dirty word.". Well I seem to have gotton off on a bit of a tangent here, but I was very interested in everything you had to say. I think all Christians should stand by what they believe, whatever it is, and be ready to defend it. That should not be viewed as "debating" in the sense that modern society now views that word. The way that is viewed today is completely skewed and is slanted towards the use of insult and injury to persons. But if anyone were to look the meaning of the word up, that is before they change the dictionaries again, they might find that one meaning is a lengthy exchange of opinion on a subject. We, however are Christians and our wisdom is Christ Jesus. I like what Paul says about part of the realm of ideas - 2 Corinthians 10:5 We are destroying speculations and every lofty thing raised up against the knowledge of God, and we are taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
191 | Why is death God's enemy? | 1 Cor 15:25 | bowler | 207512 | ||
Immanuelsown I do believe the concept of God having foreknowledge of all things happening may qualify as Him "allowing all things to happen", which thing is different than what He wills to happen. God foreknew that we would sin and death would come, but He did not authorize Satan to go an introduce the concept of sin to Adam and Eve - that would be evil on the part of God. God does not will evil to happen. As death will be thrown into the Lake of Fire, we can assume death is evil. Therefore death could not possibly be part of God's "plan". God allows plenty of things to happen that are not "His plan and purpose for mankind". Jesus says this "Therefore when you see the Abomination of Desolation which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place, etc.". Jesus foreknew as God what would happen, not just because Daniel said it, but because He as God was saying it. Jesus knew that this event would happen, the event must happen, is allowed to happen, but it is an evil thing. It is not Jesus' will for it to happen, it is Satan's will for it to happen. Satan cannot decide if what he wills can happen, he can only attempt things. God can and does decide what to allow to happen, but evil happening is not "the will of God", it is the allowance of God that whoever should rebel against Him should be free to do so and pay the consequences. Death is a consequence of Adam and Eve's choice to sin, God allowed them to sin, but not as His will, only as His allowing something to be able to happen. Revelation 20:14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
192 | Death God's friend or enemy? | 1 Cor 15:25 | bowler | 207519 | ||
Doc I never meant to imply that those rules should be applied to this forum. Also a lot of those debates between individuals were quite public. As well, I never meant to imply that the rules of the forum should be changed (you did not say that). The one thing that those "debates" had in common with our present responsibilities is that we should indeed defend what we believe as they most certainly did, without worrying that our beliefs will offend someone, which they most certainly never worried about. That is the main reason I posted what I did, because I agree with you about your point here regarding being dogs who bark when our master is attacked. 1 Corinthians 1:22, 23 For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom; but we preach Christ cricified, to Jews a stumbling block, adn to Gentiles foolishness. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
193 | Why is death God's enemy? | 1 Cor 15:25 | bowler | 207520 | ||
Doc I actually have reviewed what I said and agree with your statement here that to say what God had foreknowledge of and allowed to happen "was not in God's plan" is problematic. I also strongly agree that there was never a plan "B". But somewhere here there needs to be a disticntion between what God allows to happen, as in God allows evil and death, but is not the author of them (is God the author of death?) - and that God foreknows "what" will happen. I agree God is sovereign, not one thing happens to a sparrow without His consent - which point I did make, that nothing happens without His allowing it to happen. I think this blunders into the area of God fore-ordaining things to happen, if I am correct, which is a "problematic" area altogether anyway. If you would care to comment on that aspect some illumination might be had here? 1 Corinthians 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness before God. For it is written, He is the one who catches the wise in their craftiness. - in regards to worldly knowledge in the face of the mind and purpose of God. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
194 | Death God's friend or enemy? | 1 Cor 15:25 | bowler | 207521 | ||
Doc By uiversalism do you mean the concept that "everyone, absolutely everyone" will be saved whether they repented to Jesus or not and took Him as savior? I am trying to see how Flintyjoe could be into "unversalism" after posting sometime up above that "those who never repent and get bad hearts don't go to heaven"? I have heard of universalism, I think before, but am not quite sure what you mean exactly by the term. 1 Corinthians 3:18 Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you thinks that he is wise in this age, he must become wise in this age, he must become foolish. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
195 | Death God's friend or enemy? | 1 Cor 15:25 | bowler | 207524 | ||
Flintyjoe Revelation 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. Acts 2:23 this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death. Jesus was definitely a "Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" - as in God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit, "foreknew" from the foundation of the world that He would be slain. That is the concept that Mathew Henry is talking about, it is not a twisting or mis-representation of Revelation 13:8, it is correct because there is not one thing that can happen that is not foreknown by God "from the foundation of the world" as definitely going to happen. As someone pointed out to you before, you have no way of knowing if Adam made it to heaven or not because the Bible does not say that he did or did not make it, like say in the case of Enoch, or Elijah, or Abraham. We cannot assume things the Bible does not say, and just because it does not say Adam made into heaven, that does not mean he didn't. The only one who knows, even of the so called saints, who makes it into heaven is God Himself. The logic of your first statement is a little wanting. The first time you spank a child does he know just because you tell him you will do it if he is bad what a spanking means? I have to wonder how Adam could know what death meant since there was none to observe as a way to understand what that was? I am not saying he did not know, but the Bible does not tell us how he knew what it meant. What bothers me about trying to figure that part out is that wouldn't knowing what death is be part of "the knowledge of good and evil", as death is part of evil? I realize my reasoning here creates a big problem because God is indeed just and he told Adam he would die to warn him not to get in the position to have to die. But, the Bible does not give us a clue how Adam could know what that mean in any capacity as he could not know the difference between good and evil - as that the knowledge of good and evil would be necessary to understand what it means? Just a thought there to complicate the whole she-bang for you.:-) Genesis 2:16 The Lord God commanded the man, saying, "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat of it, for in the day that you eat from it you shall surely die." blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
196 | Why is death God's enemy? | 1 Cor 15:25 | bowler | 207765 | ||
Doc Well thank you very much for that! I agree with everything I read in the this essay exept I had one itsy bitsy problem with the concept of resolving the whole she-bang with Supralapsarianism. The reason is only one, the last part of that view, not in the article, but in the view itself, states that the decree to provide salvation was only for the elect. Yet, the Bible gives us scriptures stating that Christ's death was for the whole world and so on. I do agree with the concepts of irresistible grace and with God's sovereign election of men to be saved. I personally have just never been able to reconcile those scriptures which state that to many is given the offer of salvation but few are called, with that, Jesus died for the whole world. I believe both are true, but that we can't understand the theology of how God does that, as they are not contradictory, but both are true. Thanks again for a wonderful link. 1 John 2:2 and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world. Mathew 22:14 "For many are called, but few are chosen." blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
197 | Why is death God's enemy? | 1 Cor 15:25 | bowler | 207789 | ||
Doc, Very interesting post there Doc. I learned it this way - Supralapsarianism - the fourth one is scripturally wrong. 1 The decree to save some and condemn others. 2 The decree to create both. 3 The decree to premit the fall of both. 4 The decree to provide salvation only for the elect. Infralapsarianism - the fourth one is scripturally wrong. 1 The decree to create human beings. 2 The decree to permit the fall. 3 The decree to save some and condemn others. 4 The decree to provide salvation only for the elect. Subplapsarianism - the third one is scripturally wrong. 1 The decree to create human beings. 2 The decree to permit the fall. 3 The decree to provide salvation sufficient for all. 4 The decree to elect some. Arminianism - the second and the third one are scripturally wrong. 1 God desires all to be saved. 2 All have the ability to believe and to meet the conditions of salvation. 3 God predesitines and elects based on who He knows will choose Him. My Pastor Teacher's Take On It. 1 Man is totally depraved and without God's initiation and intervention no one would believe - the decree to permit the fall. 2 God's foreknowledge means He knew beforehand who would choose but He ordained who would choose - the decree to save some and condemn others. 3 God's election and foreknowledge are not dependant on man's choosing but do not violate man's choosing of his own volition - the foreordination and foreknowledge of God do not absolve man of the responsibility to choose. 4 God's choosing and calling are not by coercion or force but by persuasion - God draws men wooeing them to Him by perusasion. 5 Christ's death was to provide salvation for all men but not all men are called to salvation - the decree to provide the opportunity for salvation to absolutely everybody does not mean God will save all. 6 All are welcome to come but only those who respond according to God's foreordination by irresistible grace come - the decree that all have been offered salvation but only some are foreordained and drawn by irresistible grace. 7 Where scripture stops so must we some things about the eternal purposes of God have not been revealed to us - whatever we do not understand about 1-6 has not been revealed to us in scripture and should not presuppose that we can speculate as to how to reconcile seeming contradictions which are not contradictory but are facets of God's will and plan. Job 42:2 I know that you can do all things, and that no purpose of Yours can be thwarted. Romans 11:33 Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways! blessings abound, bowler blessinsg abound, bowler |
||||||
198 | What is the treasure? | 2 Cor 4:7 | bowler | 206224 | ||
What is the treasure in earthen vessels, is it the gospel? Is the treasure in earthen vessels the power of God? Is the treausure the life of Jesus in our body? Is is the treasure the knowledge of the glory of God? I am stuck here trying to figure this verse out because there are so many possibilities in the surrounding verse. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
199 | Hermeneutical question | 2 Cor 8:9 | bowler | 206967 | ||
tachminite I pray this will help you. Always pray asking for the Holy Spirit to illuminate the text. First get the interpretation of the passage according to what the author's intent was to his audience. Ask questions of the text based on the text. Answer the questions working to resolve any problem areas and to get more information about the interpretation of the text. Exegetics has some steps that answers a series of questions. I won't outline what the step are, but there are three basic questions that have to be answered. What does this mean? - the interpretation comes only from what the author meant to his audience or it is not a literal interpretation. Is this true and do I believe it? - how is this valid - depending on how you did the first question will determine if what you came up with is valid - does it line up with what the rest of the Bible teaches and would someone else understand what you mean, if it doesn't line up, and if they wouldn't understand it, then don't necessarily believe you have the right interpretation. What difference does this make? - how do I apply this - based on a valid interpretation of what the author meant to his audience what should be the application, and are there more than one. Hermeneutics basically answers the question - Why does this matter? 2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. For every single passage in the Bible there is a valid application based on the interpretation. The Bible is always speaks to the church today. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
200 | question on overview | 2 Cor 8:13 | bowler | 206988 | ||
tachminite I seemed to have missed this one. Read the whole two passages about three times, it will stand out like the big blue sky because he talks about the one thing for the two whole passages without deviance. :-) Once you see what he was talking about you have to go chapter by chapter from one end of the book to the other, looking for the verses that dove tail with what he talks about in the two chapters you are studying. The verses are here and there, you just have to read the book with a pad and paper in hand and write down every verse that pertains. Then you have to read the whole book again with an eye of what the whole theme of the whole book is, there is a verse or two in there that are the theme, there always is. :-) :-) :-) No one yet that I know of has found just one theme for either Corinthians book, there are more than a few, and verses for each theme and sub theme. Try to chart the book on a piece of paper or three - one thing is spoken about, then Paul moves to a next theme, and a next and a next. Break them up and label them with the verse that is the theme for each section. It will help you understand if those two passages even do relate to the "whole book" or not. Happy studying, God bless you. blessings abound, bowler |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ] Next > Last [15] >> |