Results 241 - 260 of 464
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Sir Pent Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
241 | Why did God wait to send the Holy Spirit | Joel 2:28 | Sir Pent | 114094 | ||
Disagreement............................................ Hi Jcsav, I want to thank you again for pointing me to the Galations 4 passage. It has been helpful for my thinking and also assisted coming to consensus with EdB on this issue. However, I think that I disagree with your interpretation of the passage. You seem to be saying that the passage is comparing Jews and Gentiles. I think that instead he is comparing God's people in the Old and New Testament. In the Old Testament, God's people were the Jews and they were under bondage to the law (Gal 4:1-3). Then the critical change happened when Jesus came (Gal 4:4) and God's people were all those who believed, whether Jew or Gentile. Furthermore, the relationship of God to His people changed from a master/servant relationship to a father/son relationship (Gal 4:5-7). What do you think? |
||||||
242 | Why did God wait to send the Holy Spirit | Joel 2:28 | Sir Pent | 114122 | ||
Here's the verses you asked for................................. Hello again Ray, I am aware of your personal study on capitaliztion, although I must admit that I most of your posts on the subject are beyond me. Your dedication to your study is quite impressive though. As for the current topic, you mentioned a need for verses where the Holy Spirit dwells "in us". I would point you towards some that Makarios pointed me to. Gen 41:38, Num 27:18, Dan 4:8, 5:11-14, Ex 31:3, and Ex 35:31 all talk about the Holy Spirit being "in" people of the Old Testament. Rom 8:9-11, 1 Cor 3:16, Eph 2:22, Eph 3:16-17, 2 Tim 1:14, and James 4:5 all refer to the Holy Spirit dwelling "in" believers after Christ. |
||||||
243 | Why did God wait to send the Holy Spirit | Joel 2:28 | Sir Pent | 114123 | ||
I need clarification............................................. Hi Ray, You said that you believe the Holy Spirit came the same way to people in the Old Testament as He does to us. I think that Makarios brought up a similar view, that the only difference was just the increased number of people who the Holy Spirit comes to now. If that is the case, then how do you explain the Galations chapter 4 passage that jcsav brought up. It seems to say that the Holy Spirit now comes "into our heart" becuase we are "sons" of God after Christ and no longer "servants" of God like in the Old Testament. That passage seems to indicate a new kind of relationship with God leading to a new kind of filling with the Holy Spirit. There aren't any passages in the Old Testament that say the Holy Spirit comes into someone's heart. What do you think? |
||||||
244 | Why did God wait to send the Holy Spirit | Joel 2:28 | Sir Pent | 114129 | ||
Agreement................................................... Hi again Jcsav, I agree that in God there is neither Jew or Gentile. I also agree that as humans there is still a definition of "Jew" and "Gentile". I also agree that the Church today has some people who would be classified as "Jews" and others who would be classified as "Gentiles". For instance, my wife has some Jewish ancestry, and I do not think that I have any myself. And we are both believers and a part of the Church today :) |
||||||
245 | Why did God wait to send the Holy Spirit | Joel 2:28 | Sir Pent | 114133 | ||
Vehement Disagreement.................................... Hi Hank, I'm disappointed by your last post. I made two posts in response to Ray within 1 minute of each other. They were right on top of each other on the webpage, and I have to assume you read them both. In the first one I pointed out no less than 6 passages in the Old Testament that spoke of the Holy Spirit being "in" people there. In fact, I have stated throughout this entire thread that I believe the Holy Spirit was active in the Old Testament. Then you ignore all of that and instead focus on one phrase from my second response to Ray that the Holy Spirit does not come "into the heart" of anyone in the Old Testament. You take that one phrase out of it's context and then make it sound like I don't believe the Holy Spirit came on people in the Old Testament. You characterize me falsely, and in an irresponsible manner. As a forum leader, I expect more of you. |
||||||
246 | Why did God wait to send the Holy Spirit | Joel 2:28 | Sir Pent | 114159 | ||
Continued Disagreement............................... Hello again Hank, I am disappointed again by your last post. It seems to be wrong on 3 different levels. 1. You said that I made a statement "contrary to biblical fact". That is not true. I said that the Old Testament does not contain any verses that say the Holy Spirit comes "into our heart" (although it is in the New Testament in Gal 4:6). Can you find any Old Testament verse that contains that exact phrase? 2. You said that I personally attacked you, and implied that I held grudges, and called you names. That is not true. My response to your post intended to critique your post not your person. I meant that your post ignored the context of the entire thread of the discussion. I meant that your post characterized me falsely. I have no grudges against you (notice I didn't refer to anything in my response to you except in regards to the most recent post). And the only "name" I called you was a "forum leader", which I meant as a term of respect (which is why I had high expectations). 3. It is also curious to me why you would respond to my post directed towards Ray on the grounds that it was unbiblical (which it wasn't). There have been many posts recently that have truly been unbiblical (denying the orthodox belief in the Trinity, debating the neccessity of baptism, etc.). Yet you have not responded to almost any of them. Why pick on me? |
||||||
247 | Why did God wait to send the Holy Spirit | Joel 2:28 | Sir Pent | 114165 | ||
Tieing up loose ends......................................... Hi Makarios and Ray, I think the only loose end left in this thread is to figure out whether the Holy Spirit's methods changed from the Old Testament to now. It seems that most people think that there is a differnce, which is supported by the Galations 4:1-7 passage. However, you both seem to think that the Holy Spirit's methods are the same and that the only change is one of quantity, in that He fills ALL true believers (Christians) now. Do I understand you correctly, and if so, could you back up that belief? |
||||||
248 | Can anyone else answer this question? | Joel 2:28 | Sir Pent | 114707 | ||
I need clarification............................................. Hello Mommapbs, Thanks for your answer. I have been away as well. In your last post you said that in the Old Testament (OT) the Holy Spirit rested "upon" people, but in the New Testament (NT) it dwells "in" people. However, Gen 41:38, Num 27:18, Dan 4:8, 5:11-14, Ex 31:3, and Ex 35:31 all talk about the Holy Spirit being "in" people of the OT. Similarly, Rom 8:9-11, 1 Cor 3:16, Eph 2:22, Eph 3:16-17, 2 Tim 1:14, and James 4:5 all refer to the Holy Spirit dwelling "in" believers after Christ. And we know that the Holy Spirit came "on" the prophets of the OT, and also "on" the NT believers at Pentecost among other places. However, there is only one place in scripture that the Holy Spirit's method is referred to as "into our hearts". That place is Galations 4:6. So is the difference between the OT and NT method of the Holy Spirit acting in people lives really "on" and "in"? Or instead is it a difference of being "in" AND "on" in both the OT AND the NT, and being "into our hearts" only in the NT? What do you think? |
||||||
249 | Why did God wait to send the Holy Spirit | Joel 2:28 | Sir Pent | 114952 | ||
My answer................................................... Hi again Ray, I have read your post that you asked me to respond to, but I regret that I continue to be somewhat lost by the whole capitalization thing. I understand that it is very important to you however. The one thought that did occur to me is whether there is any difference between God's "spirit" and the Holy "Spirit"? It seems to me that you can't have one without the other, and I can't even really think of anything that distinguishes them. |
||||||
250 | Why did God wait to send the Holy Spirit | Joel 2:28 | Sir Pent | 114986 | ||
Personal Note................................................. Hi Steve, You are another person who I am glad is still around here at the forum. Thanks for your note, but I really think that Hank was in the wrong on this one. My post that he responded to was making the point that the specific phrase "into our hearts" is not found in any verse of the Old Testament in reference to the Holy Spirit. I can't quote a verse to support the idea that there aren't any verses :) I also understand that it does take more effort to read an entire thread as opposed to any single post. However, this forum is designed to be organized by threads. There are size limits on posts, and it is impossible to contain all the thoughts on some subjects in a single post. Therefore, it is necessary to split them up into different parts. In addition to that, simply repeating the same verses in every post of a thread is extremely redundant (although I now find myself having to do this more in order to appease my brothers). ....................... Jesus wept. John 11:35 |
||||||
251 | why difference in family tree of jesus | Matt 1:16 | Sir Pent | 20055 | ||
Please do a Search ............................ Dear Sujit, This question has been asked before. Please do a search for "Joseph Mary Father", and you will find another thread on the subject. In my post there, I explain why I think that Matthew has Mary's geneology and Luke has Joseph's geneology. |
||||||
252 | What does "send her away" refer to? | Matt 1:19 | Sir Pent | 63456 | ||
A Different View ............................. Dear John, In your post, you mentioned that you believe that “even the best translations are not infallible for infallibility is ascribed to the original manuscripts alone.” I would just like to point out that I disagree with that statement. I believe that since God went to the trouble of leaving a permanent record of His message to mankind (the Bible), that He would also protect that message across time, copies, and translations. Otherwise the only people who would be able to really trust God’s message would be the very small number of Greek and Hebrew scholars in the world. .......................................................... I believe that the major translations of the Bible are completely accurate, truthful, and trustworthy today in whatever language a person reads them in. This issue has been discussed before on the forum, and I would recommend reading that thread which started with post number 15402. |
||||||
253 | What does "send her away" refer to? | Matt 1:19 | Sir Pent | 63563 | ||
Personal Note ................................................. Dear Hank, Greeting to you as well, my friend. Thanks for your agreement, and I am glad that you have found such success with the NLT. I am not personally acquainted with it, but it sounds helpful :) |
||||||
254 | What does "send her away" refer to? | Matt 1:19 | Sir Pent | 63564 | ||
Personal Note ..................................... Dear John and EdB, I did not originally intend to post again to this thread since my comments on the subject are already pretty well developed in another thread. However, since you both have mentioned me, I felt it would be rude to not at least say hello to my distinguished colleagues. ..................................... Thanks to both of you for your compliment that my case is "strong". I am glad that we all agree that we can trust the Bibles that we have today as the True Word of God. |
||||||
255 | Are we do pray to Jesus? | Matt 6:9 | Sir Pent | 14296 | ||
Nolan, I am going to say somthing here, and I ask that you please consider it. My purpose is not to offend you, but hopefully to help you to be a more effective witness for Christ, in this forum, and in your life. The first instinct will probably be to get defensive, and come back and attack me. But I know you, and am confident that if you take some time to think about these things, you will understand my perspective and will be able to rise above that. One of the fruits of the Spirit is self-control, and there are times where certain posts of yours do not exibit this characteristic. I have seen several examples, which I could quote for you if it will help, but this is a good example here, and I would prefer not to pile them up on you. Just looking at this example, Steve asks a question about whom we should address our prayers to according to scripture. This is a question that I have heard other Christians ask me before. It was not that they questioned the Deity of Christ, but rather that it seemed to them that prayers should be specifically addressed to the Father. There is some biblical basis for this in that the Lord's Prayer (Jesus recommended example) is addressed to the Father. Also most churches teach that Jesus' purpose was to bring us to the Father, therefore, Jesus interceeds for us, making it possible for us to pray to the Father. That is why many people start prayers with "Gracious heavenly Father" (acknowledging who they are addressing), and end them with "in Jesus name, Amen" (giving credit to Jesus for making it possible). There are of course other scriptures, which do seem to indicate that it is appropriate to pray to Jesus also like Acts 7:59, where Steven prays to Jesus as he is being stoned. However, it is possible that Steve was not aware of these verses. In fact that is the whole purpose of this forum. To allow people to ask questions in a place where others may be able to help them find the answers in scripture. I therefore appreciate rextar?s response on this topic. Now contrast that with your own response. Instead of trying to see Steve's point of view, it appears that you make a very big assumption that he is questioning Christ's deity. Then instead of asking him to clarify his intentions, you immediately jump to the drastic recommendation of barring him from the forum. This shows an apperant lack of self-control, and is not treating him with dignity or respect. I realize that I'm new here, and possibly Steve has in the past made statements, which have strongly affected your perspective of him. However, even if that is the case, today is a new day, and this is a new post which seems to be genuine and potentially of interest to the community at large. In conclusion, Nolan, you are a strong defender of the faith, and have much wisdom to share with others (which I have seen in many of your posts). Please consider taking a little more time to wrap this in a package, which others will be willing to sign for. |
||||||
256 | Are we do pray to Jesus? | Matt 6:9 | Sir Pent | 14944 | ||
Welcome back Nolan, It takes a great person to be able to humble himself and admit when he has made mistakes. I appreciate your willingness to examine yourself and find ways to be a better example of Christ by "using good judgement" and "being a servant". May we all learn from this example. |
||||||
257 | Is it wrong to preach against sin? | Matt 7:2 | Sir Pent | 60655 | ||
A different view ......................................... Dear Norrie, In your post you mentioned that the Bible was translated using incorrect words (like kill instead of murder, and judge instead of condemn). I know that you mean well here, but, I think that your idea is incorrect and very dangerous to some whose faith is not strong. It could lead them to question everyting in the Bible, and cease to believe that it was authoritative in their lives. ......................................... I believe that the Bible was translated correctly, and that God has protected its accuracy and truth throughout the centuries (I would recommend reading the thread #15780). I believe that the problem is not with the words at all, but rather with how some people choose to interpret what they mean. The Bible is always right, but the same can not be said of us :) |
||||||
258 | Reincarnation, Who will be saved ? | Matt 10:16 | Sir Pent | 61265 | ||
Support (mostly) ............................................. Dear MYR, I would agree with almost everything that Steve said. The only thing that I would clarify would be than I am not convinced that every aboriginies, primitive tribes, etc. will die in their sins. Steve is correct that those who reject God will, but I believe that it is possible to learn about God even through the nature that is around us. Rom 1:19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. Rom 1:20 Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse; |
||||||
259 | Was Peter denied before the Father? | Matt 10:33 | Sir Pent | 15786 | ||
I would agree that Peter's denial of Jesus was not one of belief, but instead one of aquaintance. Peter did not deny that Jesus was the Christ. Instead he denied that Peter was who Peter really was. Peter didn't lie about Jesus, he lied about himself by saying he didn't know Jesus. It was still a lie, and was still sin, and still required repentance and forgiveness. However, I think that this is different from the idea, which Jesus was trying to communicate when He said that those who deny Christ would be denied before the Father in Heaven. Whether or not a Christian could do that or not is another interesting question and is covered in the "Can a Christian disown Christ?" thread. |
||||||
260 | So ALL who believe in Christ are saved? | Matt 10:33 | Sir Pent | 15789 | ||
You combine many questions here, which probably each deserve their own thread. I will attempt to answer them briefly, but would recommend seperate threads if more detail is required. As for Peter's denial of Christ, that is already covered in a current thread. As for Satan and the fallen angels, yes they believe in Jesus' existence, but this is not enough. Imagine a cancer patient who visits their doctor. The doctor diagnoses the problem and prescribes some medicine to take, which will cure their disease. The patient may be completely convinced that this medicine is at the pharmacy and would be effective at curing their disease. However, if they don't choose to go pick up the medicine and take it, they will still die. Believing that Jesus exists is not sufficient for salvation. As for Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, and Muslims, the problem there is that the "Jesus" that they believe in is not at all the Jesus which is in the Bible. For instance, Muslims and Mormons do not believe that Jesus was actually God. Therefore, they do not really believe in the real Jesus at all. I understand and appreciate that you are bringing up questions, which young Christians and non-believers would naturally ask. But I hope that they will be able to see that these appearant contradictions that you bring up are actually not contradictions at all. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ] Next > Last [24] >> |