Results 201 - 220 of 232
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Grace and Truth Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
201 | Can God save us the way HE WANTS TOO? | Acts 2:38 | Grace and Truth | 50431 | ||
Baptism isn’t always mentioned A gracious gentleman acknowledges that we have cited a number of passages which appear to connect baptism with salvation (e.g., Mt. 28:19-20; Mk. 16:16; Acts 2:38; 22:16; Rom. 6:3-4; 1 Cor. 12:13; Gal. 3:27; Eph. 5:26; Tit. 3:5; 1 Pet. 3:21). But he says: “I’m also familiar with Ephesians 2:8, ‘by grace are ye saved ’ and Romans 3:22-27. Nowhere in these passages is baptism mentioned as a requisite to salvation.” 1. While it is true that the passages referenced (Eph. 2:8; Rom. 3:22-27) do not explicitly mention baptism, neither do they contain any allusion to repentance. Are we to assume that repentance is not required for redemption? Surely not. 2. It is rarely the case that a single context will totally exhaust the biblical material on a particular theme. It is the “sum” of the truth that counts (Psa. 119:160), not an isolated text, that may focus upon a limited point of emphasis. Acts 2:38 contends for repentance and baptism as “requisites” for “forgiveness,” with no specific mention of faith. However, by means of that interpretive rule known as “analogy of faith,” belief in the Lord must be implied as well. In his famous work, Biblical Hermeneutics, M.S. Terry defined the concept of “analogy of faith.” This principle “assumes that the Bible is a self-interpreting book, and what is obscure in one passage may be illuminated by another. No single statement or obscure passage of one book can be allowed to set aside a doctrine which is clearly established by many passages” (449). |
||||||
202 | Can God save us the way HE WANTS TOO? | Acts 2:38 | Grace and Truth | 50428 | ||
I'm going to share some information with you, so bear with me. A Dispute About the Purpose of Baptism by Wayne Jackson Article Description Several questions and comments have been recently received relative to some of our material dealing with the purpose of (water baptism, ) as that theme is set forth in the New Testament. Accordingly, in this Feature article, we wish to address a readers obviously sincere concerns. We receive a great number of questions dealing with a variety of biblical issues. It simply is not possible to deal with all of them. Some are impertinent, trivial, seemingly bereft of any semblance of sincerity and, therefore, in our judgment, warrant no response. We give very little, if any, attention to unsigned correspondence. Some questions, however, though reflecting erroneous ideas, are characterized by an apparent earnestness, and are of such significance, that they may justify a response that is more extensive than our normal Questions and Answers column might accommodate. Such was the nature of several questions and comments recently received relative to some of our material dealing with the purpose of (water baptism,) as that theme is set forth in the New Testament. Accordingly, in this Feature article, we wish to address a reader’s obviously sincere concerns. We will state our friend’s objections, and then follow with our response. |
||||||
203 | Can God save us the way HE WANTS TOO? | Acts 2:38 | Grace and Truth | 50403 | ||
I see that you still want to seperate Peter's answer to those who asked "what shall we do" My question was did Peter lie or did he tell them what the Lord said to those who believed? Where is it in the bible does it say were saved by FAITH ALONE! The book of James wouldn't agree with this statement, no where in the bible will you find such a statement. Again in Mark 16:15-16 DID JESUS TELL THE APOSTLES WHAT TO PREACH? OR did he not know what he was talking about? You equate baptism with the Law of Moses, or with something man thinks of himself, but what I'm talking about is WHAT JESUS SAID we must DO! Which is a direct ORDER FROM GOD John 12:48-50. Baptism is a mandate FROM GOD, man did not inclue it GOD did! It is the only way (into Christ) (into his DEATH) through FAITH! I notice you pick out verses in Romans and Galatians and you don't read to the end of those chapters, because if you did you would learn what the text is teaching, God spoke to Abraham Romans 4:20-25 He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving goly to God:(unbelief in what God said! what Jesus said IN Mark 16:16, what Peter told the people to do in Acts 2:38, vs. 21 And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform. Jesus promised salvation to those who believed and were baptized in Mark 16:16. If God promised salvation through faith, repentance,confession,baptism and living faithful; we shouldn't stagger at what he promised! In Galatians 3:6-29 teaches that they or we are not to depend on the Law of Moses, because it was just a school master vs.24 to bring us to Christ, vs 27 teaches us how we get (into Christ) by baptism through faith, we put him on! |
||||||
204 | Can God save us the way HE WANTS TOO? | Acts 2:38 | Grace and Truth | 50402 | ||
I see that you still want to seperate Peter's answer to those who asked "what shall we do" My question was did Peter lie or did he tell them what the Lord said to those who believed? Where is it in the bible does it say were saved by FAITH ALONE! The book of James wouldn't agree with this statement, no where in the bible will you find such a statement. Again in Mark 16:15-16 DID JESUS TELL THE APOSTLES WHAT TO PREACH? OR did he not know what he was talking about? You equate baptism with the Law of Moses, or with something man thinks of himself, but what I'm talking about is WHAT JESUS SAID we must DO! Which is a direct ORDER FROM GOD John 12:48-50. Baptism is a mandate FROM GOD, man did not inclue it GOD did! It is the only way (into Christ) (into his DEATH) through FAITH! I notice you pick out verses in Romans and Galatians and you don't read to the end of those chapters, because if you did you would learn what the text is teaching, God spoke to Abraham Romans 4:20-25 He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving goly to God:(unbelief in what God said! what Jesus said IN Mark 16:16, what Peter told the people to do in Acts 2:38, vs. 21 And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform. Jesus promised salvation to through who believed and were baptized in Mark 16:16. If God promised salvation through faith, repentance,confession,baptism and living faithful; we shouldn't stagger at what he promised! In Galatians 3:6-29 teaches that they or we are not to depend on the Law of Moses, because it was just a school master vs.24 to bring us to Christ, vs 27 teaches us how we get (into Christ) by baptism through faith, we put him on! |
||||||
205 | God knows everything Why except the date | John 10:30 | Grace and Truth | 50393 | ||
If you need more bible answers go to christiancourier.com! | ||||||
206 | God knows everything Why except the date | John 10:30 | Grace and Truth | 50369 | ||
Yes, I am a member of the Lord's church! | ||||||
207 | Should women be allowed to preach? | Galatians | Grace and Truth | 50301 | ||
The BIBLE IS RIGHT! The passage could be said in this way " that a woman should not try and be a bossy nag over her husband. " (Your View) now this is a truth that all would agree with, it was a problem for women then and it is also still today. This problem has it's roots in fear. The woman who is afraid of adversity will find that she will try to take control by trying to control her husband and her family. This is ban against usurping the authority of the husband, not a ban on teaching the Gospel to all that have hears to hear. All saints are called to teach the Word as the Spirit leads. (This above statement is wrong as two left shoes, and is taking God's word out of context, we need to let God be true and every man a liar! If God or Jesus wanted to use women as preaches He would have made it clear in his word)! The Bible is very clear about the woman role in the church and no one can change that, and those who seek to justify women being (PASTORS,DEACONS,ELDERS OR ANYTHING OVER THE MAN IS WRONG! DEAD WRONG!). 1Tim 2:12 means exactly what it saids. How many women Apostles did Jesus choose? How many were chosen in Acts 1? The women were there from the begining, but God did not choose them to preach then or now! |
||||||
208 | Any scriptures on slain in spirit? | Bible general Archive 1 | Grace and Truth | 50282 | ||
John you are one who I can see that have his eyes wide open to what's going on out there in the name of Jesus Christ! The information you gave to (enriched) is right on the money! Would to God more eyes are as opened as yours! | ||||||
209 | catholic and protestant salvation view | Eph 4:3 | Grace and Truth | 50128 | ||
1. The writer of Hebrews affirmed that Moses, in constructing the tabernacle, was warned by God that he must “make all things according to the pattern,” which was shown to him at Horeb (Heb. 8:5). Do we, as recipients of the “better covenant” (Heb. 7:22; 8:6), sustain a lesser responsibility as we minister to God in his church – of which the tabernacle was but an inferior type (cf. Heb. 9:1-10)? It is unbelievable that anyone would dare to argue such. 2. John unequivocally states that those who go beyond the “teaching of Christ” have no fellowship with God (2 John 9). Conclusion All of these passages, and numerous others, forcefully reveal that there is a divine standard to which men are accountable. The grass withers and the flowers fade, but the word of God, with its inscribed obligations, abides (cf. 1 Pet. 1:24-25). In physics there is a law known as the Second Law of Thermodynamics. It suggests that things proceed toward a state of degeneration. It might also be argued that there is sort of a Second Law in the spiritual realm as well. Men tend to drift; the pure frequently becomes contaminated. Such was never more clearly indicated than in the current status of the church of God. This is not the time to relax the call for a restoration to the ancient order of Christianity. We are truly at the crossroads! |
||||||
210 | catholic and protestant salvation view | Eph 4:3 | Grace and Truth | 50127 | ||
1. The early church is clearly a model for us in that it “continued steadfastly in the apostles’ teaching” (Acts 2:42). Why was that an important point for Luke to make if the pattern of the “apostles’ teaching” is irrelevant? Moreover, the multitude of believers “were of one heart and soul” (Acts 4:32), suggesting a unity of practice in their Christian decorum. 2. Paul reminded the saints in Rome that they had been made free from sin due to the fact that they had been obedient to a certain “form” [pattern] of teaching (Rom. 6:17,18). Can such a passage yield any sense if there is no pattern? 3. The Christians in Rome were admonished to “mark” (be on the look-out for) and turn away from those who were causing divisions “contrary to the teaching” which they had learned (Rom. 16:17). If there is no pattern of New Testament doctrine, how could one ever be required to “turn away” from those who do not conform to it? 4. The inspired Paul instructed the brethren in Corinth not to go “beyond the things which are written” (1 Cor. 4:6 ASV). This clearly demonstrates that spiritual activity is regulated by the Scriptures. 5. The primitive Christians were warned repeatedly about “falling away” from “the faith” (cf. 2 Thes. 2:3; 1 Tim. 4:1ff; 2 Tim. 4:1ff). The expression “the faith” has to do with a body of doctrinal truth. If there is no doctrinal “pattern,” how could one ever “fall away” from the faith? Note also that identifying marks of apostasy went beyond so-called “core” matters, such as the deity of Christ. They concerned things like the forbidding marriage and prohibiting certain foods (1 Tim. 4:1ff). 6. Paul spoke of the “pattern of sound words” (2 Tim. 1:13) which the early Christians were being taught and in which they were to “abide” (2 Tim. 3:14). These truths were to be passed on to others (2 Tim. 2:2), and men were to be charged not to teach a “different doctrine” (1 Tim. 1:13). How in the name of common sense can men read these passages and not know that there is a body of sacred truth with which we must not tamper? |
||||||
211 | catholic and protestant salvation view | Eph 4:3 | Grace and Truth | 50126 | ||
Rubel Shelly, of Nashville, Tennessee, has been one of the most vociferous critics of the restoration movement in recent years. His speeches at the Christ Church Pentecostal denomination in Nashville (April 13, 1994), at the 1995 Tulsa Workshop, and at the Florence (Alabama) Spiritual Renewal Conference (April 19, 1996) are but a sampling of this misguided brother’s hostile mood. (Note: For further discussion see the author’s article, “Contemporary Attacks on the Restoration Principle,” The Spiritual Sword, Vol. 23, No. 1, October, 1991, pp. 40-44.) The biblical platform The fact is, the Bible teaches that when the Creator establishes a system of religion, its obligations are to remain intact until God Himself provides evidence that it no longer is operative. No one is to presume to modify the divine arrangement. The Old Testament emphasizes this principle repeatedly. Surely no clearer example of this concept can be found than that of the sad case of Jeroboam I, the premier king of northern Israel. His apostasy from the Mosaic pattern is carefully documented in 1 Kings 13. Note the following: 1. He changed the object of worship from the invisible God to golden calves, which were to represent the Lord. 2. The monarch switched the sacred center of devotion from Jerusalem to Bethel and Dan. 3. Priests could be selected from tribes other than Levi. 4. A new feast was inaugurated to rival the feast of the tabernacles. Modern “Jeroboams” doubtless would endorse these alterations as quite refreshing; after all, we can’t be stifled by “traditionism.” Jehovah’s attitude, however, was radically different. In approximately twenty-one passages the Old Testament refers to Jeroboam, the son of Nebat, who “made Israel to sin” (cf. 1 Kgs. 14:16). Innovation is transgression! “Restoration” defined When one speaks of a “restoration” plea, several things are implied. First, there is the suggestion that there is a divine “pattern” for human conduct. Second, God expects conformity to that pattern. Third, in the nature of things, rebellious and frail men will digress from that heavenly way. Fourth, it is the responsibility of those who revere the Lord’s will to restore, the primitive order, and call their fellows back to the “old paths” (cf. Jer. 6:16). There are numerous New Testament passages which stress these truths. Let us consider a few. |
||||||
212 | catholic and protestant salvation view | Eph 4:3 | Grace and Truth | 50125 | ||
Why is it different? Who made it so? Certainly not God. Rather, arrogant men have assumed they have the right, and the wisdom, to renovate the divine scheme of redemption. The very attitude is an atrocity. Not only has mainstream denominationalism contended that it is permissible to change the original forms and ceremonies of New Testament doctrine, it has even radically altered its concept of morality. Several decades ago there could not be found a solitary religious body, remotely professing Christian principles, that would endorse homosexuality. Now, the defenders of sodomy are disgustingly numerous. If Christianity may be re-designed with reference to its religious dogma, why not re-write its moral code as well? The very idea is absurd. Problems within churches of Christ The brotherhood of churches of Christ has become sorely afflicted with the “change” mentality over the past several decades. More than a third of a century ago, Carl Ketcherside and Leroy Garrett were creating a stir in many Christian congregations with radical notions of ecumenism, as advocated in their journals, Mission Messenger and Restoration Review. At that time, however, these gentlemen were considered to be a fringe-element aberration. Eventually, though, along came Integrity, Image (now defunct), and finally, Wineskins. These journals, in concert with several “Christian Scholars Conferences” on campuses like Abilene Christian University and Pepperdine University, flung the doors wide open to radical changes within the fellowship of God’s people. The drift has been gradual. At first, the concept of the “restoration plea” was merely questioned – under the guise of honest investigation. Then it was overtly challenged. Finally, in the waning days of this century, it is shamelessly ridiculed by those who have thrown off all attempts to disguise their ambitions. Some of our digressive brothers take unusual delight in mocking the church, while their sectarian audiences roar with laughter and applaude the barbs that wound the body of Christ. |
||||||
213 | catholic and protestant salvation view | Eph 4:3 | Grace and Truth | 50124 | ||
Anyone with more than a smattering knowledge of Scripture should know that the first view is the correct one. And yet, amazingly, the second proposition is being advocated by an increasing number of people – even a growing number within the church of the Lord. It is not at all surprising that society finds the “new Christianity” appealing. We have been brainwashed to believe that anything “new” is also “improved.” The marketplace is flooded with “new and improved” products. And so, many reason, why doesn’t the same principle apply in religion? The world of sectarianism has long operated on the premise that Christianity may “change” as circumstances demand. Catholicism employed this rationale as the basis upon which it adopted many pagan practices (e.g., the use of the Rosary, the worship of the Virgin Mary, etc.) in order to attract heathen converts (Mosheim, p. 105). Allegedly, this made the pagan feel more comfortable in his new “Christian” environment. The Roman Church makes no apology for the fact that she can modify her doctrine as the times or culture changes. Many can remember when it was considered sinful for Catholics to eat meat on Friday. Today, it is not even a matter of conversational interest among many. The Protestant sects, in actual practice, subscribe to a similar “evolutionary” approach to Christianity. For example, a popular creed book states: “It is most likely that in the Apostolic age when there was but ‘one Lord, one faith, and one baptism,’ and no differing denominations existed, the baptism of a convert by that very act constituted him a member of the church, and at once endowed him with all the rights and privileges of full membership. In that sense, ‘baptism was the door into the church.’ Now, it is different...”(Hiscox, p. 22; emp. WJ). |
||||||
214 | catholic and protestant salvation view | Eph 4:3 | Grace and Truth | 50123 | ||
Happily, however, by-and-by men would arise – both in Europe and in America – who would grasp the concept of restoring Christianity to its primitive status, free from the stifling encumbrances of sectarianism. The ideal was to start afresh. Honest souls, in humble fashion, would embrace nothing but the pure gospel of Christ, unveneered by human tradition, and follow the New Testament as their only rule of faith and practice. What a breath-taking concept it was – indeed still is, at this very hour! The “restoration” ideal There are two basic attitudes regarding the Christian religion. 1. One disposition affirms that Jehovah, across several millennia of history, meticulously prepared for the initial advent of Christ, and the spiritual system – Christianity – that He would inaugurate. This ideology argues that the divine format of the Christian system – as such existed in the first century under the guidance of inspired teachers – was exactly what God intended it to be. Moreover, this view asserts that this sacred plan, as designed by the eternal and omniscient Creator, would be perpetually relevant, thus age-lasting (cf. Dan. 2:44). Those who advocate this concept maintain that if the world is ever to be saved, it must conform to the mold of primitive Christianity – and that the reverse should never prevail (cf. Rom. 12:2). 2. On the other hand, there is the adverse theory which alleges that the Christian religion was not designed to be static. Proponents of this credo argue that aside from a few “core” components (e.g., the fact that Jesus is the Son of God, and that He died for the sins of humanity, etc.), the advocates of “Christianity” are free to alter its forms and rites, fashioning them anew as cultural peculiarities fluctuate. Supposedly, the Christian movement is free to experience an “evolutionary” development. It is thus suggested that the “Christianity” of today may be vastly different from that of the first century – yet still enjoy Heaven’s approval. Which of these concepts is valid? |
||||||
215 | catholic and protestant salvation view | Eph 4:3 | Grace and Truth | 50122 | ||
The Restoration of First-Century Christianity by Wayne Jackson Article Description Should we try to restore the New Testament pattern of Christianity? When Martin Luther visited Rome in the fall of 1510, he was appalled by the spiritual laxity he observed – even in the priesthood. His dissatisfaction with the Catholic Church would eventually lead to his challenge of that system, which was culminated when he nailed his Ninety-five Theses to the door of the cathedral in Wittenberg, Germany on October 31, 1517. But Luther simply wanted to reform the church of his day; he had no vision of leaving it. Professor Harold O.J. Brown has written: “[I]t was not Luther’s intention to found a new church, but simply to purify the old one...from the time of the Reformation there were new churches – first the Lutheran, then the Reformed, and finally the Anglican. From its beginning, the Reformation created new churches as no other movement had suceeded in doing” (Heresies, Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1998, p. 311). The church of the Middle Ages, however, was far too corrupt to yield to any “band-aid” reformatory process. Though men like Luther, Calvin, Wesley and others were, perhaps moved by noble motives, they erred by thinking they bettered religious conditions by establishing new religious movements. These movements carried much of Rome’s theological baggage. |
||||||
216 | catholic and protestant salvation view | Eph 4:3 | Grace and Truth | 50113 | ||
John 5:39 said we best search the scriptures. 2Peter1:10 to make our calling and election sure: Matt 15:9 the doctrine cannot be of men. |
||||||
217 | catholic and protestant salvation view | Eph 4:3 | Grace and Truth | 50106 | ||
Why don't you try searching the scriptures for the answer to your questions on this matter! This is something all should be asking. Does Jesus care what we are religiously? When the books are open will we be found in it. Salvation is (in) Christ Jesus 2Tim.2:10 is what the bible teaches, can we be a Catholic or Baptist or Lutheran, Presbyterian, or what ever we want to be and go to heaven? The bible makes christians only and the only christians! I can't find a Catholic or Baptist or any other in the bible, So my question is where are they in the bible? Matt 7:21-27 The doctrine that you follow does make a differance. | ||||||
218 | Healing powers of the false prophets? | Matt 7:22 | Grace and Truth | 50104 | ||
Good answer Guy. | ||||||
219 | MANY RELIGIONS, WHAT'S RIGHT | John 3:16 | Grace and Truth | 50103 | ||
Take a look at this site christiancourier.com You will find many answers to your questions about religions, and the true religion of the bible. P.S. pass this on to a friend. |
||||||
220 | TKO, does God operate differently today? | Acts | Grace and Truth | 49954 | ||
Steve! I'm not saying that God has left us without, I believe the Holy Spirit of God works through his Word Eph 3:1-4 also in chapter 1:13 it says we are sealed with the Holy Spirit, His operation is through God's Word, In the first centry they didn't have the complete reverlation of God, that's why God used signs to confirm the words of the apostles, and once the word was completly revealed through John, it was sealed. You mention Mark being suspect, remember we serve a perfect God, who is all powerful and no matter what men may say, we let God be true and every man a lair! The men who are douting the parts in Marks book have no right or authority to do so! This is where faith come in John 17:20. God's word is all we have today, and if we let men place dout in our minds about it we are of all men most miserable 1Cor15:19 because we have nothing else to let us know about God. | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ] Next > Last [12] >> |