Results 21 - 40 of 150
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: atdcross Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
21 | Repent or believe, which is first? | Bible general Archive 3 | atdcross | 167135 | ||
You may suggest an "order" but I do not see one in the Bible with reference to our discussion. | ||||||
22 | Essentials, where is the proof? | Bible general Archive 3 | atdcross | 167134 | ||
Good day Tim, Not being familiar with the Greek of the NT, I am forced to rely on scholars. In the first place, looking at the Strong's, I notice that in John 3:36, I notice: 1. The Greek word for the first instance of "believeth" (KJV) is a different Greek word from its use in the second instance for "believeth" (KJV). 2. The Greek word used in 3:12,18 is the same as that used in the first instance in v.36, which, again, is different from the second instance, "believeth" (KJV). 3. Some of the popular and more accurate translations have "disobey" (RSV, NASV, TEV, cf. less popular known, Moffatt, Revised English Bible). In the second place, Vincent states, "More correctly as Rev., 'obeyeth not'. disbelief is regarded in its active manifestation, disobedience" (Word Studies; cf. Linguistic/Exegetical Key to the Greek NT; Robertson Word Pictures). Mayfield agrees that "he who does not obey" is the "better translation" and comments, "The opposite of faith is actually 'refusal to obey'" (Beacon Bible Commentary; cf. "The Gospel an Epistles of John", F.F. Bruce). Notice that Michaels writes, "The last verse of the chapter brings the reader back to the point reached in verses 18-21" (NIBC), which is what I suggested (cf. EBC). What Leon Morris asserts in his NICNT commentary on John is very instructive - as is also his footnote with reference to the BAGD - and answers directly to your asertion that the word translated as "disobey" can also be translated as "not believe." In conclusion, I do not go along with your suggestion because: 1. (a) Words are different. To be more accurate in translation, I will go along with the TEV. (b) Context does not demand what you assert but rather suggests, especially with vs. 16-21, that "disobeys" is the better translation of the Greek word. 2. The commentaries agree that the word translated "disobey" (TEV) emphasizes the activity of faith (something that I attempted to point out but they said it better). To me, it seems this emphasis is lost if translated merely as "disbelieves". 3. The contrast made in vs.12,18 is that of believing and disobedience when seen in its context, especially in light of vs.19-21. Their condemnation is "because their deeds were evil." In conclusion, if disobedience is the activity of unbelief, it seems to me that repentance - a truning to obedience - is, as I have suggested, the activity of faith. If your translation be insisted on, it should be with the understanding that an activity is emphasized, that is, the activity of diobedience. |
||||||
23 | Essentials, where is the proof? | Bible general Archive 3 | atdcross | 167100 | ||
As I stated in another note, repentance is assumed in John 3:16, cf. vs.20-21. Note also v.36. It first says, "Whoever believes...has eternal life"; however, the converse is not, "Whoever disbelieves" but "Whoever disobeys" (TEV). It is interesting to note that the contrast is made not between "believing" and "not believing" (as one might assume in veiw of v.16) but between "believing" and "disobedience", which, as I understand it, assumes the necessary activity of repentance for faith in the former and being unrepentant through "disobedience" in the latter, resulting in the divine displeasure (to put it mildly). |
||||||
24 | Are these essentials for Salvation? | Bible general Archive 3 | atdcross | 167097 | ||
No. I said, "To 'believe with your heart' is to repent." I do not mean that repentance and belief (faith) are synonomous but that true faith requires repentance. Without faith in God there is no repentance that leads to salvation. However, repentance is of no value to the saving of one's soul without faith. Many people repent of that evil they may have done but their repentance, instead of directing it with faith in God, merely reform their lifestyle. Change in lifestyle alone offers nothing if not mixed with faith (Rom 10:3). I offer some Bible verses in post ID# 167082. |
||||||
25 | Repent or believe, which is first? | Bible general Archive 3 | atdcross | 167096 | ||
Repentance is an aspect of faith and, as such, there is no "order" as you suggest. In John 3:16 repentance is assumed, cf. v20-21. | ||||||
26 | Are these essentials for Salvation? | Bible general Archive 3 | atdcross | 167082 | ||
Matt 3:2 - the first call of the Gospel; 3:8; Mark 1:5 - "repent and believe"; Luke 3:3; 13:3; 5:32; Acts 3:19; 26:20; 2 Cor 7:9-10; 2 Pet 3:9; Rev 9:20-21; 16:9. | ||||||
27 | Are these essentials for Salvation? | Bible general Archive 3 | atdcross | 167069 | ||
Repentance involves not only the acknowledgement that we are sinners, but a complete reversal of lifestyle from disobedience to God to obedience. To "believe with your heart" is to repent; obedience to God is the "bringing of fruit worthy of repentance." Confessing with one's mouth without this repentance has no saving value (as also repentance without the public confession has none either). |
||||||
28 | Understanding by cross referencing. | 2 Cor 6:14 | atdcross | 167046 | ||
Allow me to point out: 1. Regardless of which would cause the "greater hurt" the "hypcritical lifestyle", assuming one is to interpret "cold" as an unbeliever or a believer that has turned away from God, they have both driven the nail and slashed Jesus equally as deep. 2. However, who does the "greater damage" is irrelevant. It is not even speaking of what some term as "lukewarm Christian"; as far as the verse is concerned, there is no such thing. One is either "cold" or "hot", both terms used with reference medicinal waters. To be neither, that is, "lukewarm," is to cease being a believer and forfeit salvation since God will spit him out. God forgives sins; he neither tolerates or countenances sin in any form or degree. God not only desires that all "be righteous through His Son", He desires that all act righteous in the Son "even as he is righteous." Righteousness is not only a position before God, it is the conduct to be lived out and experienced by every believer. |
||||||
29 | How did the sin of Satan happen? | Matt 12:31 | atdcross | 167044 | ||
Hi again Kay, Just wanted to make a few "uneduated" comments here. As I stated earlier specifically "how" sin could have happened in a "pure heaven" is not touched upon in the Bible (as far as I can tell) as the fact that it did happened. Could this occur after the end days when all is restored? I think not for two reasons: (1) all tha angels that did not rebel against God have proven their loyalty to God by not joining in Lucifers rebellion. Such loyalty is, may I say, "eternally engraved" in their will and heart. (2) Believers have already proven their loyalty by holding on to their faith until death. They have shown that no matter what, their choice will always be made for God. As the song goes, "If I can make it here [on earth], I can make it anywhere." As such, their faithfulness is also "eternally engraved". I think the Bible makes certain hints that the above is the case but I don't have my Bible at hand at the moment. If you want some verses, let me know and, as soon as it is convenient for me, I will post them for you (although, I do think as you read this, some Bible verses may pop up to your mind). |
||||||
30 | How was the sin nature really created? | Matt 12:31 | atdcross | 167043 | ||
Hi Kay. To continue... 2. Where did the sin nature come from? The sin nature, as far as Satan is concerned, resulted as the consequence of his own choice to rebel against God. The purity of heaven does not guarantee the moral purity of created beings with free will. Again, we are not told in the Bible specifically how Lucifer was able to turn against God, only the fact that he did; the metaphysical aspects are not hinted at. I thought I saw three questions, but actually where did the sin nature come from and how it could happen in heaven is apparently one question answered in point #2 above. The answers are brief. If you have any further questions that may not be clear or find my answers unsatisfactory, don't hesitate to letme know (although, again, my answers are "uneducated"). |
||||||
31 | How was the sin nature really created? | Matt 12:31 | atdcross | 167040 | ||
Some scholars believe that Isa 14 and Eze 28 are representations of God's creation of the angel Lucifer and his fall. Primarily from these two chapters do I make brief answers to what I see are three questions (if you do not mind an uneducated answer). 1. Where was sin formed? Sin was not "formed" but found in Lucifer. As created, he was perfectly made for divine purposes and he walked blamelessly in relationship with God until the day he sought to usurp God's dominion and make himself God. As far as I know, the Bible does not say why Lucifer turned against God or what were the influences, if any, that motivated him to take such action. All we read is that he became proud to the point of desiring equality or supremecy over God. God did not "create" Satan. Lucifer turned into a satan when he rebelled against God; his character and conduct are thus described in the name given to Lucifer, which is Satan, which means (if I am not mistaken), "adversary", specifically God's adversary. I will continue later... |
||||||
32 | Understanding by cross referencing. | 2 Cor 6:14 | atdcross | 167019 | ||
Hi Fervent, I do not believe that God desires we be either "wholly righteous or wholly unrighteous"; his desire is for us to be "wholly unrighteous". What you suggest I am aware is the standard understanding of the texts but it is seems to me to be wrong because everywhere in the Bible God commands and desires us to be holy. Nowhere, except and only here as it has been erroneously interpreted, does the Bible suggest that God wants us one way or the other. God wants us to be one way: holy. You might want to check out the Expositor's Bible Commentary on that verse. |
||||||
33 | Why does Satan believe he can win? | Bible general Archive 3 | atdcross | 167000 | ||
"As you wish", from Princess Bride and it really translates to "I love you." Well, thank you, Doc, I love you too in Christ. |
||||||
34 | Why does Satan believe he can win? | Bible general Archive 3 | atdcross | 166980 | ||
-----------------------------------------------------Doc, I have found that me first response was filled with grammatical mistakes and not as clear on certain points as I would like it to be so, since I am unable to edit it, I am reposting it. -------------------------------------------------- Yes, Doc, the Bible says God is sovereign and I agree with it (but I do wonder if you are getting me mixed up with someone else because I cannot find where I specifically discussed God’s sovereignty with you on this thread). I do not agree with your notion of the kind of sovereign He is since it is contrary to Biblical revelation (notice, I did not qualify my statement with, "In my opinion"). I do not need to read the LBCF since (1) as you stated, we are dealing with the Bible, and (2) since truth is found in the Bible, the LBCF is unnecessary as well as patently false leading to heretical conclusions about God and salvation (notice, again, I purposely refrained from stating "It seems" or "In my opinion"). What is important is that I do agree with the Bible (note, again for the third time, I do not qualify it with "It seems" or "In my opinion"). Agreeing with you is inconsequential (as far as my conscience is concerned) and I give no importance or value (in comparison to Biblical revelation) whatsoever to the LBCF. It has also been an unpleasant experience to read your responses and respond to them. Do not misconstrue that it is because your arguments are so impressive and weighty as to devastate any objections I may conjure up. With all due respect, discussions with you are not about the Bible since (1) you do not use the Bible but fancies of a certain theological position; (2) you argue your point by attacking the person; and (3) you use sarcasm as a "technique that caricatures an opponents argument in order to make it easier to attack". As it is not my purpose to prove my position is correct, please be advised, I am ignoring your comments from now on. -------------------------------------------------- Doc, amy further cummunication between us is ended. -------------------------------------------------- |
||||||
35 | Why does Satan believe he can win? | Bible general Archive 3 | atdcross | 166979 | ||
Yes, Doc, the Bible says God is sovereign and I agree with it. I do not agree that with your fanciful notion of the kind of sovereign He is since it is contrary to Biblical revelation (notice, I did not qualify my statement with, "In my opinion"). I do not need to read the LBCF since (1) as you stated, we are dealing with the Bible, and (2) since truth is found in the Bible, the LBCF is unnecessary as well as patently false leading to heretical conclusions about God and salvation notice, again, I purposely refrained from stating either "It seems" or "In my opinion"). What is important is that I do agree with the Bible (note the courage with which I make my assertion for, again, the third time, I do not qualify it with "It seems" or "In my opinion"). Agreeing with you is inconsequential and I give no importance or value whatsoever to the LBCF. It has also been an unpleasant experience reading your responses and responding. Do not miscontrue that it is because your arguments are so impressive and weighty as to devastate any objections I may conjure up. With all due respect, discussions with you are not about the Bible since (1) you do not use the Bible but fancies of a certain theological position; (2) you argue your point by attacking the person, and (3) you use sarcasm as a "technique that caricatures an opponents argument in order to make it easier to attack". I am ignoring your comments from now on. |
||||||
36 | Why does Satan believe he can win? | Bible general Archive 3 | atdcross | 166975 | ||
If “we are here to study the Bible”, why bring up 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith? Besides, I don’t agree with it; it is not Biblical. Furthermore, since it is not what we are here to study, I’ll have to ignore if (that is, if I am to follow your advice; same goes for Gill). You stated, “That's pretty frightening to think that there is something out there that can force God's hand!” What technique you used here “in order to make it easier to attack” does that fall under? My remark was only to express what I think is a frightening thought. It was not intended to make attacking your point easier. I’m not that deft in the art of logic. Regarding your comment that I ignored your explanation, unfortunately, it seems to me that you missed my brief remark regarding the other passages mentioned. Would you rather I assert, “The Bible says so-and-so, therefore, you must be wrong”? |
||||||
37 | Why does Satan believe he can win? | Bible general Archive 3 | atdcross | 166932 | ||
I agree. Evil is not created; it is a state of being. However, I am not sure that Satan is unable to, in some sense, create (a God-given ability he may possess as created). |
||||||
38 | Why does Satan believe he can win? | Bible general Archive 3 | atdcross | 166899 | ||
Good day, Doc. Amos 3:6. The evil in Amos is with reference to God executing judgment on those who have committed moral evil; it does not mean God created moral evil. “Evil” would, it seems, be better translated as “disaster” or “calamity”. I am of the impression that the story of Job is not solely or predominately to teach us that God is sovereign; that God is sovereign is never questioned in Job. In any case, the book of Job reveals to the reader that it was not God who gave Job the boils and sickness; neither did God execute the calamities against Job that caused the loss of all that he had. Eph 1:11. Are you saying my position “would be in keeping with the rest of Scripture”? Also, I’m not sure I understand what point you are trying to make with quoting Gill. Are you saying that God created/authored moral evil or sin? Matt 10:29. It’s pretty frightening to picture the hand of God just smashing a helpless, innocent bird to the ground for no reason. God does have the power to do it and if that is what he feels like doing, so be it. However, I don’t think the Bible, at least for me, give that kind of picture of God. My comment does not suggest in any way God’s hand being forced. In brief, God set in motion certain laws in nature and, it seems to me, those laws, unless God through nature intervenes to overrule the normal course nature normally takes, determine the occurrence of certain events. Ps 104:21-30 does not seem to contradict this notion. 1 Kings 17:4-6 is a good example of God overruling the natural order. Prov 16:33. Are you suggesting God doesn’t work in the lives of men submitted to His rule over them? I am merely suggesting that it is not necessary to assume by the verse cited that God’s “control over the affairs of men are as exhaustive and minute”. As for God working in the lives of those who are submitted to him, I do not think it can be denied He works on their behalf. |
||||||
39 | Why does Satan believe he can win? | Bible general Archive 3 | atdcross | 166843 | ||
Although I am not sure I understand what your point is, I do want to respond to some verses in particular. Amos 3:6. The calamity is with reference to judgment and not moral evil. Job 1:21; 2:10. As seen "behind the scenes" of Job's story, it is Satan and not God who has "taken away" and "covered [him] with boils." Eph 1:11. Note, it does not say God "causes all things" especially moral evil and every tragedy and sickness that occurs. Matt 10:29. It does not say God caused the sparrow to fall. Prov 16:33. As I see it, God may intervene in the roll of dice, however, there is no indication that his control over the affairs of men are as exhaustive and minute. As the TEV suggests, the men throwing the dice are doing so "to learn God's will" (that is, they are in a posture of submission to God) and, therefore, "God himself determines the answer." |
||||||
40 | Why does Satan believe he can win? | Bible general Archive 3 | atdcross | 166840 | ||
It seems we agree, especially your when you state, "God can be the creator of a being, without being the 'creator' of evil." If the scholars are correct and Lucifer is Satan, then God created Lucifer but not Satan, as I suggested that the name denotes his character and conduct. As such, my objection would be against using the phrase, "God created Satan." I think it is misleading and can be misunderstood as God having created evil or an evil being. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ] Next > Last [8] >> |