Results 21 - 40 of 332
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: retxar Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
21 | Are christians sinners or not? | Rom 3:23 | retxar | 69448 | ||
I stole that line from a guy named Ron David Moore who came out with a song called B.A.D. a few years ago. It was a christian song that had kind of a country sound to it. It talked about these guys who ran around together getting in trouble. They thought they were "bad", but when the meet Jesus they were realy B.A.D. (Born Again and Delivered!) retxar (one B.A.D. dude!) |
||||||
22 | Are christians sinners or not? | Rom 3:23 | retxar | 69447 | ||
You said: "My primary motivation is to caution those who answer that "christians are not sinners", to be sure to qualify their claim, lest they cause the unlearned to stumble. I would also exhort all of us to make our boast in the Lord. For without Him we can do nothing!" Thanks John, your points are well founded and well taken. retxar |
||||||
23 | Are christians sinners or not? | Rom 3:23 | retxar | 69444 | ||
I understand what you are saying (that admitting one is a "sinner" is a matter of humility), and the example from scripture you gave is a good one. (One of the FEW other examples in scripture I knew would come up) However, more times than not the plea of "Christians are sinners" is just used as a smoke screen to justify a Christian who wants to live like the world. That old "Christians aren't perfect, only forgiven" excuse that does not bring glory to the grace that forgives, but only glorifies the weakness of the flesh. retxar |
||||||
24 | Are christians sinners or not? | Rom 3:23 | retxar | 69409 | ||
Again, my position is not that Christians do not sin, only that the word "sinner" in scripture is a description of someone's lifestyle, not a description of a Christian that commits a sin, so thus, is the wrong word to use to describe a Christian, because sin should not be our lifestyle. retxar |
||||||
25 | Are christians sinners or not? | Rom 3:23 | retxar | 69408 | ||
This is from your previous post: “1 Tim 1:15 It is a trustworthy statement, deserving full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, among whom I am foremost of all.” “Notice he said this in the present tense.” Taken in context, we have to know that Paul is talking of his former self. He was speaking in humbleness and thankfulness that God had delivered him from the life he lived before and was now using him to minister the Gospel (1Ti 1:11-14). Otherwise, Paul would be saying that his current spiritual condition was even worse than the “sinners” he told us about in verse 9, because he said he was the chief. If he was the chief among those sinners he put himself in the same class with in verse 9, it had to before he meet Jesus, not after. In verse 16 it becomes apparent Paul is speaking of his former self when he says that God has already saved the chief of sinners, so there is absolutely no limit to Gods mercy. He also said it was God’s grace that had now made him a worthy example for others to follow. Paul was saying “Hey, if God can do this with the chief of sinners like me, you have to know that He has no limits!” Thanks for sharing your thoughts on 1John3! I like to use illustrations myself (notice my 1st post in this thread). One thing I would add would be that 1John3 also depicts the distinct difference between a Christian and a non-Christian. Please know, I have never took the position that Christians do not sin, only that the word “sinner”, in scripture, depicts someone in which sin describes their lifestyle, not someone who simple commits a sin. Do a word search on the words “sinner” and “sinners” and you will see what I mean! Gal 2:17, I admit, offers some argument against this. This is Paul’s amazing confrontation against Peter, Barnabas, and the other Jewish leaders who were trying to separate themselves from the Gentiles and trying to put some extra requirements of the Law on them. In Gal 2:17-18 Paul said, "But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is Christ therefore a minister of sin? Certainly not! For if I build again those things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor.” Paul spoke this in anticipation that the “certain men of James” (vs12) would present argument to try to say that the everyday sins committed by Christians needed to be justified before God by more than just faith in Jesus. He presented the response ahead of time (kind of like I’m doing now!) in the way he thought the attack would be coming at him, so this does not carry the same connotation scripture usually gives to the word “sinner”, and not really the connotation that we give it today. Good talking with ya! retxar |
||||||
26 | Are christians sinners or not? | Rom 3:23 | retxar | 69375 | ||
I knew all along you were BAD! (Born Again and Delivered!) :-) I will discuss this post with you later, bro, as I am out the door right now. In the mean time, think about what 1John 3 means to you. thanks, retxar |
||||||
27 | Are christians sinners or not? | Rom 3:23 | retxar | 69374 | ||
Greetings One, This is one of a the few verses I thought I would be discussing when I asked for scripture that referred to Christians as "sinners". I will discuss this with you later, as I am out the door right now. In the mean time, think about what 1John 3 means to you. thanks, retxar |
||||||
28 | Are christians sinners or not? | Rom 3:23 | retxar | 69352 | ||
John, You said “I am not always kind and loving”. Surely you jest! :-) I can't think of anything that we have disagreed on during this exchange except for our difference of opinion on what the word "sinner" means. I guess we should not argue over the meaning of a word, least it create strife (2Ti 2:14). You say we are "sinners" because we still sin, and believe if we say we are not sinners, we imply that we live a sinless life. This may very well be the WORLD’S interpretation, but I can see the WORD saying something totally different, so I guess I will just stick with that. If you know of any verse in the bible that refers to a born again saint as a “sinner”, let me know, as this would add some teeth to your argument. Born again and delivered! retxar |
||||||
29 | Are christians sinners or not? | Rom 3:23 | retxar | 69351 | ||
John, You said “I am not always kind and loving”. Surely you jest! :-) I can't think of anything that we have disagreed on during this exchange except for our difference of opinion on what the word "sinner" means. I guess we should not argue over the meaning of a word, least it create strife (2Ti 2:14). You say we are "sinners" because we still sin, and believe if we say we are not sinners, we imply that we live a sinless life. This may very well be the WORLD’S interpretation, but I can see the WORD saying something totally different, so I guess I will just stick with that. If you know of any verse in the bible that refers to a born again saint as a “sinner”, let me know, as this would add some teeth to your argument. Born again and delivered! retxar |
||||||
30 | Are christians sinners or not? | Rom 3:23 | retxar | 69297 | ||
Yes, I can certainly agree with what you are saying. However, I also know that these same people are also going to have a pretty hard time understanding what John meant in 1st John chapter 3. He made some pretty remarkable claims himself! I think the biblical explanation as you suggested is exactly what is called for. I have never had very much success talking to ANYONE about Jesus who was comfortable in their sin. Getting people saved is easy. Getting them “lost” is the hard part! Those who know the chains that satan has them bound with are the ones who are hungry for Jesus. They already know the “bad news”, because they are living it! They are ready for the good news! They not only want to be delivered from sin’s condemnation, they also want to be delivered from sins domination. I would much rather give these true seekers a biblical explanation of this than giving the sceptics the “Christians aren’t perfect, just forgiven” story, just to justify myself or others. Jesus said that if He did not do the works of His Father to not believe Him (John 10:37), so I better not expect anything but the same treatment! If I don’t do the works of Jesus, don’t believe me! If the ones we share the gospel with do not see the works of Jesus in us, they are never going to believe what we have to say anyway, so I'm not going to spend a lot of time trying to explain to them why I still sin, cause they ain’t gonna listen! retxar |
||||||
31 | IS MICHAEL AND JESUS THE SAME PERSON? | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 69287 | ||
I posted this on my break at work today, so that's the reason for the typo! (good excuse anyway!) I now see another one! "I Jesus an Angel" should say "Is Jesus an Angel". Thanks for keeping me straight bro! retxar |
||||||
32 | IS MICHAEL AND JESUS THE SAME PERSON? | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 69262 | ||
that should say "corrupt nwt" not "nlt", sorry folks retxar |
||||||
33 | IS MICHAEL AND JESUS THE SAME PERSON? | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 69261 | ||
Is Jesus the Angel of the Lord - yes Exo 3:14 John 8:24,28,58 I Jesus Michael the Archanel - NO Read Hebrews chapter 1 in any translation you want (even the corrupt NLT!), and you will know that Jesus is no angel! Heb 1:4 having become so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. Heb 1:5 For to which of the angels did He ever say: "You are My Son, Today I have begotten You"? And again: "I will be to Him a Father, And He shall be to Me a Son"? Heb 1:6 But when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says: "Let all the angels of God worship Him." Heb 1:7 And of the angels He says: "Who makes His angels spirits And His ministers a flame of fire." Heb 1:8 But to the Son He says: "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your Kingdom. Heb 1:9 You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You With the oil of gladness more than Your companions." Heb 1:10 And: "You, LORD, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth, And the heavens are the work of Your hands. Heb 1:11 They will perish, but You remain; And they will all grow old like a garment; Heb 1:12 Like a cloak You will fold them up, And they will be changed. But You are the same, And Your years will not fail." Heb 1:13 But to which of the angels has He ever said: "Sit at My right hand, Till I make Your enemies Your footstool"? Heb 1:14 Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to minister for those who will inherit salvation? Jesus is Lord! retxar |
||||||
34 | Are christians sinners or not? | Rom 3:23 | retxar | 69259 | ||
John, When I read Romans 6 I read that I have been radically changed by God’s grace. I see that I am no longer a slave to sin but a slave to God. I see that God has set me free from the chains that Satan had on me. I see that before, my fruit was shame that lead to death. I see now that my fruit is holiness that leads to everlasting life. I see now that I am dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus. I see now, I MEAN RIGHT NOW, that sin does not have to reign in my mortal body, and I do not have to obey its lusts. I repeat: This is RIGHT NOW! This power over the sinful lust of the flesh is only possible because Jesus lives in me. This is a power that is above and beyond my own will power. This is a power over sin that the unsaved do not have. So what happens when I sin? It’s not that “I can’t help it”, it is because I choose to allow the flesh to overrule the Spirit. When I read 1John 3 (especially 1Jo 3:9), I see a distinct difference between the children of God and the children of the devil. It tells me how to know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are. This distinction is only possible because of what the presence of Jesus in our heart does, not of any goodness we have on our own. I have heard the statement many, many times that “Christians aren’t perfect, just forgiven”. This is a good word. However, the focus should be that on the fact that “we are forgiven”, not the excuse of, “oh well, we are not perfect”, as is many times the case. I don’t really like the word “just” used as description of how I was forgiven! A better word would be, “We are forgiven, just not perfect.” I like what Paul said even better. He said, “imitate me as I imitate Christ” (1 Cor 11:1). Too many times we have to say, “Don’t look at me (or other Christians or the church), just look at Jesus”. Well, Jesus said to let people see us for who we are and that should reflect Him (Mat 5:16). Our life should not be a life just like the sinner we were before with the only difference now being that we are forgiven. Paul said God’s WORD should be the manifestation that others see in our lives (2Co 3:2-3), not the manifestation of sin. I haven’t written anything here as any kind of rebuttal to what you said, because I pretty much agree with it all. I just wanted to explain my thoughts a little better. I think my definition of a sinner (a person complacent in sin) is probably a little different than yours (a person who sins), but hopefully you can pretty much agree with the other things I said. God bless you bro, retxar |
||||||
35 | Churches | Phil 3:3 | retxar | 69237 | ||
You said: “In my experience, the slate has always been elected unanimously. I guess that reflects either apathy or general agreement on the committee's work. I hope it's the latter.” Act 6:5-6 And the saying pleased the whole multitude. And they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit, and Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas, a proselyte from Antioch, whom they set before the apostles; and when they had prayed, they laid hands on them. In this example from scripture, all who were chosen were approved and confirmed unanimously as God’s choice. This shows me that people can make perfect choices and be in perfect agreement of those who God wishes to choose, approve and confirm if they allow God to work thru them. Man can never commission God’s appointment for anyone. Man can only recognize and confirm what God has already commissioned. If you are elected as an elder in your church, I believe it reflects an appointment from God that man has only recognized and confirmed. God bless! retxar |
||||||
36 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | retxar | 69115 | ||
Don First off, let me say I did not say or imply you were a “snot-nosed punk with no decent sensibilities toward others”. I spoke of what you did (deceptively mis-quoted JFB), not your character. I presented the reason for my accusation, not generalities or name calling. If you can refute that what you did was not dishonest with the intent to deceive and mislead, and that what you left out was not intentional because it was detrimental to the agenda you are attempting to push, we would all like to hear about it. If you chose to ignore what you did and consider deception OK, fine, but don’t expect anyone around here to really take what you have to say seriously, regardless of how many big name professors you have shut down with your vast array of knowledge. Forgive me if I have a major problem with this, but I’m not used to fellow Christians trying to deceive me and then have them brush it off as if nothing happened. Please deal with this in a responsible manner. You’re kidding no one but yourself. You said ‘The commentary I quoted from CLEARLY said "THE ANCIENT INTERPRETATION THAT THE PROHIBITION HERE IS AGAINST POLYGAMY IN A CANDIDATE BISHOP IS NOT CORRECT." And why did the commentary say that the “one wife” thing Paul was talking about was not talking about polygamy?? Because of the part you left out!! It is the statement just before the one you like to quote here. Let’s read it again: “and as polygamy was never allowed among even laymen in the Church”. The commentary said that Polygamy was not what Paul was talking about here because POLYGAMY WAS PROHIBITED FOR ALL, NOT JUST BISHOPS! If you won’t listen to anyone else, just listen to yourself, and take a serious look at how weak and dishonest your attempts are at trying to prove you point. What is your motivation for this? retxar |
||||||
37 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | retxar | 69030 | ||
You said: “Perhaps you have a corrupt copy of that commentary, or you did not read what those men had to say that I DID include in the quote.” No, I do not have a corrupt copy, I DID read ALL they had to say, without leaving parts out! I checked the post you referred me to concerning your address of the commentary mis-quotation I questioned. One thing you said was: “There are MANY more portions of that commentary that I could have quoted, but we are all limited to only 5000 characters in this forum.” I am re-posting exactly what you posted the 1st time, PLUS I added the part you conveniently left out. For the sake of putting to rest the debate over Titus and 2 Timothy's "husband of one wife" argument, I offer a commentary from three well respected scholars of the Hebrew and Greek languages. The threads of this question have begun to run far too deep to keep up with it all, so I will begin by addressing the "husband of one wife" issue in Titus. (The "all caps" is my emphasis rather than that of the authors.) This quote comes from a well respected commentary, Jamieson, Faussett, Brown Commentary: "husband of one wife -- confuting the celibacy of Rome's priesthood. Though the Jews practiced polygamy, yet as he is writing as to a Gentile Church, and as polygamy was never allowed among even laymen in the Church, (this is the part you conveniently left out) THE ANCIENT INTERPRETATION THAT THE PROHIBITION HERE IS AGAINST POLYGAMY IN A CANDIDATE BISHOP IS NOT CORRECT. It must, therefore, mean that, though LAYMEN MIGHT LAWFULLY MARRY AGAIN, candidates for the episcopate or presbytery were better to have been married only once. As in 1Ti 5:9, "wife of one man," IMPLIES A WOMAN MARRIED BUT ONCE; so "husband of one wife" here MUST MEAN THE SAME. The feeling which prevailed among the Gentiles, as well as the Jews (compare as to Anna, Lu 2:36,37), against a second marriage would, on the ground of expediency and conciliation in matters indifferent and not involving compromise of principle, account for Paul's prohibition here in the case of one in so prominent a sphere as a bishop or a deacon. Hence the STRESS THAT IS LAID IN THE CONTEXT on the repute in which the candidate for orders is held among those over whom he is to preside (Tit 1:16). The Council of Laodicea and the apostolic canons discountenanced second marriages, especially in the case of candidates for ordination. Of course second marriage being lawful, the undesirableness of it holds good only under special circumstances. It is implied here also, that he who has a wife and virtuous family, is to be PREFERRED TO A BACHELOR; for he who is himself bound to discharge the domestic duties mentioned here, is likely to be MORE ATTRACTIVE to those who have similar ties, for he teaches them not only by precept, but also BY EXAMPLE (1Ti 3:4,5). The Jews teach, a priest should be neither unmarried nor childless, lest he be unmerciful [BENGEL]. So in the synagogue, "no one shall offer up prayer in public, unless he be married" [in Colbo, ch. 65; VITRINGA, Synagogue and Temple]." [Emphasis mine] Guess what? Even with adding the part you left out and all I have said here, we are STILL under the 5000 word limit! Imagine that! retxar |
||||||
38 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | retxar | 68998 | ||
When my wife turned 40 I told her she was so grand that I thought I could probably trade her in on 2 twenty year olds! But she told me I wasn't wired for 2-20, so I scrapped the idea! :-) retxar |
||||||
39 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | retxar | 68971 | ||
Speaking of words being twisted and taken out of context, are you going to deal with the Jamieson, Faussett, Brown Commentary "quote" you posted the other day? Was this an honest mistake on your part, or did you get a little too zealous trying give your agenda some credibility? Did you really think we would buy that without checking out your source? Forgive me, but you seem to avoid all the hard questions, and keep repeating the same answers over and ever. Also, do you also take the stand that a women can have more than one husband. If not, why not? retxar |
||||||
40 | making wine.Did Jesus make a mistake. | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 68736 | ||
Thanks bro. That's the way I see it too; we are kings and priest and that position will be fully realized when we are with Jesus. Thanks for your exchange with me on this issue and for considering the point I was trying to make; our conduct is important because Jesus has put us in a position of influence and obligation as kings and priest. I am glad you see what I have presented as wise guidelines to follow and that they do apply to us. Like I have already said, I will not be dogmatic about this, and I will not impose what I accept as a command for myself, on others who see it as only a guideline. God bless my friend, retxar |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [17] >> |