Results 241 - 260 of 4232
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: kalos Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
241 | Did the Apostles have a choice? | Luke 5:8 | kalos | 179254 | ||
Doc, Thanks for an excellent post. You've summed it up well. I ought to print a copy and keep it with me when (not if) someone asks a question similar to the one KumKum asked. Grace to you, John |
||||||
242 | Could Jesus have sinned? | Heb 4:15 | kalos | 179006 | ||
Well said, Doc. Grace to you, John |
||||||
243 | Could Jesus have sinned? | Heb 4:15 | kalos | 178987 | ||
Could Jesus have sinned? (Source: www.gotquestions.org/could-Jesus-have-sinned.html) 'If He was not capable of sinning, how could He truly be able to "sympathize with our weaknesses (Heb 4:15)? If He could not sin, what was the point of the temptation?" 'No, Jesus could not have sinned. If He could have sinned He would still be able to sin today because He retains the same essence He did while living on earth. He is the God-Man -- and will forever remain so, having full deity and full humanity so included in one person as to be indivisible. To believe that Jesus could sin is to believe that God could sin. Colossians 1:19 For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell. Colossians 2:9 For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. 'Although Jesus is fully human He was not born with the same sinful nature that we are born with. He certainly was tempted in the same way we are, in that temptations were put before Him by Satan, yet He remained sinless because God is incapable of sinning. It is against His very nature (Matthew 4:1; Hebrews 2:18, 4:15; James 1:13). Sin is by definition a trespass of the Law. God created the Law and the Law is by nature what God would or would not do. Therefore, sin is anything that God would not do by his very nature. 'To be tempted is not in and of itself sinful. A person could tempt you with something you have no desire to do, such as to smoke crack or participate in a homosexual act. You probably have no desire whatsoever to take part in these actions, but you were still tempted because someone placed the possibility before you. There are at least two definitions for tempted: '1) Tempted - To have a sinful proposition suggested to you by someone or something outside yourself or by your own sin nature. '2) Tempted - To consider actually participating in a sinful act and the possible pleasures and consequences of such act to such a degree that the act is already taking place in your mind. 'The first definition does not describe a sinful act/thought, the second does. When you dwell upon a sinful act and consider how you might be able to bring it to pass you have crossed the line of sin. Jesus was tempted in the fashion of definition 1, except that He was never tempted by a sin nature because it did not exist within Him. Satan proposed certain sinful acts to Jesus but He had no inner desire to participate in the sin. Hence He was tempted like we are but remained sinless. 'Jesus knows what it is like to be tempted but He does not know what it is like to sin. This does not prevent Him from assisting us. We are tempted with sins that are common to man (1 Corinthians 10:13). These sins generally can be boiled down to three different types: the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh and the pride of life (1 John 2:16). Examine the temptation and sin of Eve as well as the temptation of Jesus and you will find that the temptations for each came from these three categories. Jesus was tempted in every way and in every area that we are, but remained perfectly holy. Although our corrupt natures will have the inner desire to participate in some sins we have the ability to "just say no" to sin because we are no longer slaves to sin but rather slaves of God (Romans 6 especially verses 2 and 16-22).' ____________________ www.gotquestions.org/could-Jesus-have-sinned.html [Note: If anyone reading this has neither the ability to understand nor the faith to believe that Jesus could not have sinned, then I feel sorry for you and will pray for you. "To believe that Jesus could sin is to believe that God could sin." --Kalos] |
||||||
244 | Apologetics Help Please! | Is 7:14 | kalos | 178897 | ||
Steve: I wrote my reply to Tim before I read your reply. Turns out we both used the same phrase to express our agreement with Tim -- the words "Amen and Amen!" :-) Grace to you, John |
||||||
245 | Apologetics Help Please! | Is 7:14 | kalos | 178896 | ||
Good point! Tim: You write: "The doctrine of the Virgin Birth does not stand or fall upon how one translates the term in Is. 7:14." To that I say Amen and Amen! You make a good point -- one that is often overlooked by many. Grace to you, John |
||||||
246 | Did God create evil? | Is 45:7 | kalos | 178821 | ||
Did God create evil? (Source: www.gotquestions.org/did-God-create-evil.html) ‘At first it might seem that if God created all things then evil must have been created by God. However, there is an assumption here that needs to be cleared up. Evil is not a "thing" - like a rock or electricity. You can't have a jar of evil! Rather, evil is something that occurs, like running. Evil has no existence of its own - it is really a lack in a good thing. For example, holes are real but they only exist in something else. We call the absence of dirt a hole - but it cannot be separated from the dirt. So when God created, it is true that all that existed was good. One of the good things that God made was creatures who had the freedom to choose good. In order to have a real choice, God had to allow there to be something besides good to choose. So God allowed these free angels and humans to choose good or non-good (evil). When a bad relationship exists between two good things we call that evil, but it does not become a "thing" that required God to create it. ‘Perhaps a further illustration will help. If I were to ask the average person "does cold exist?" - his/her answer would likely be yes. However, this is incorrect. Cold does not exist. Cold is the absence of heat. Similarly, darkness does not exist. Darkness is the absence of light. Similarly, evil is the absence of good, or better, evil is the absence of God. God did not have to create evil, but rather only allow for the absence of good. ‘Look at the example of Job in Job chapters 1-2. Satan wanted to destroy Job, and God allowed Satan to do everything but kill Job. God allowed this to happen to prove to Satan that Job was righteous because he loved God, not because God had blessed him so richly. God is sovereign and ultimately in control of everything that happens. Satan cannot do anything unless he has God's "permission." God did not create evil, but He allows evil. If God had not allowed for the possibility of evil, both mankind and angels would be serving God out of obligation, not choice. He did not want “robots” that simply did what He wanted them to do because of their "programming." God allowed for the possibility of evil so that we could genuinely have a free will and choose whether we wanted to serve Him or not. ‘Ultimately, there is not an answer to these questions that we can fully comprehend. We, as finite human beings, can never fully understand an infinite God (Romans 11:33-34). Sometimes we think we understand why God is doing something, only to find out later that it was for a different purpose than we originally thought. God looks at things from an eternal perspective. We look at things from an earthly perspective. Why did God put man on earth knowing that Adam and Eve would sin and therefore bring evil, death, and suffering on all mankind? Why didn’t He just create us all and leave us in Heaven where we would be perfect and without suffering? The best answer I can come up with is this: God didn’t want a race of robots who did not have a free will. God had to allow the possibility of evil for us to have a true choice of whether to worship God or not. If we never had to suffer and experience evil, would we truly know how wonderful heaven is? God did not create evil, but He allowed it. If He hadn’t allowed evil, we would be worshipping Him out of obligation, not by a choice of our own free will.’ Recommended Resource: The Problem of Evil by Charles Colson Related Topics: Why does God allow bad things to happen to good people? What is theodicy? Why was God so evident in the Bible, and seems so hidden today? Does God change His mind? Why does God allow natural disasters, i.e. earthquakes, hurricanes, and tsunamis? ____________________ Source: www.gotquestions.org/did-God-create-evil.html |
||||||
247 | explain God father son is one | NT general Archive 1 | kalos | 178814 | ||
One God in 3 persons-not 1 God in 1 person 'Modalism 'Modalism is probably the most common theological error concerning the nature of God. It is a denial of the Trinity which states that God is a single person who, throughout biblical history, has revealed Himself in three modes, or forms. Thus, God is a single person who first manifested himself in the mode of the Father in Old Testament times. At the incarnation, the mode was the Son. After Jesus' ascension, the mode is the Holy Spirit. These modes are consecutive and never simultaneous. In other words, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit never all exist at the same time, only one after another. Modalism denies the distinctiveness of the three persons in the Trinity even though it retains the divinity of Christ. 'Present day groups that hold to forms of this error are the United Pentecostal and United Apostolic Churches. They deny the Trinity, teach that the name of God is Jesus, and require baptism for salvation. These modalist churches often accuse Trinitarians of teaching three gods. This is not what the Trinity is. The correct teaching of the Trinity is one God in three eternal coexistent persons: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.' ____________________ Source: www.carm.org/heresy/modalism.htm |
||||||
248 | “Keep reminding them of these things” | 2 Tim 2:14 | kalos | 178775 | ||
“Keep reminding them of these things” 14 Keep reminding them of these things. Warn them before God against quarreling about words; it is of no value, and only ruins those who listen. 15 Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth. 16 Avoid godless chatter, because those who indulge in it will become more and more ungodly… 23 Don't have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you know they produce quarrels. 2 Timothy 2:14-16, 23 NIV |
||||||
249 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | kalos | 178635 | ||
You're the one who implied that Jesus used a word that did not really mean what He had in mind. And whether Jesus spoke in Aramaic, Hebrew, Latin, or Greek, the NT was written in Greek. So tell me, what happened? Did the writer of the Gospel get it wrong when he used the Greek word for lust? Saying that it doesn't matter what the word means, it only matters what Jesus had in mind doesn't even make any sense. John |
||||||
250 | Sin Not Leading To Death | 1 John 5:16 | kalos | 178616 | ||
Losing the respect of the one with whom you are debating 'Pride is a harmful thing. It caused the fall. It ruins marriages. It leads to anger and self-righteousness. It has no place in the Christian's life. Never admitting you are wrong is being prideful. If anyone proves you wrong in something, be kind and courteous. Admit you made a mistake and go on. Everyone makes mistakes. There is nothing wrong with admitting an error. It no more proves you are wrong about Christianity than being wrong about the color of a boat means boats don't exist. But, if you never admit when you are wrong, you will not be able to convince anyone in a discussion of your position. You will simply lose the respect of the one with whom you are debating.' Source: www.carm.org/atheism/christianmistakes.htm |
||||||
251 | Women Preachers? Yes or No? | 1 Cor 1:1 | kalos | 178591 | ||
'Less than a year before her own death, Kathryn Kuhlman brought one of her healing services to St. Louis. One driver from a fleet of chartered buses that brought people to the meeting from a near 200-mile radius of the city, noted: '“‘She doesn’t always succeed,’ said a driver from Chester. ‘My bus was pretty quiet on the way home last year [after her service]. But for some of those people a little inspiration does wonders, if only for a little while. I had a guy last year who was dying of cancer. He got up on the stage and said he was healed. He died a week later’” (St. Louis Post Dispatch, 5/4/75, “Praying, Hoping, Waiting...” pg. G11). 'To the thousands packed in the auditorium, this man with terminal cancer was just one of many who supposedly walked from the service healed of his infirmity. In reality he was not, despite Kuhlman’s declaration: “God ... has more than enough healing power for everyone in this great auditorium” (ibid.). This same scenario can be applied to untold thousands, perhaps millions' (www.pfo.org/hurtheal.htm). |
||||||
252 | Sin Not Leading To Death | 1 John 5:16 | kalos | 178590 | ||
The "sin unto death" and the unpardonable sin are not one and the same thing. They are two very different things. The sin unto death has to do with believers. The unpardonable sin has to do with people who are not, were not, and never will be believers. | ||||||
253 | What is the sin unto death (1 John 5:16) | 1 John 5:16 | kalos | 178589 | ||
Everything you wrote in your post (ID# 178572) is correct except for the following: "Mark 3:29 is the scripture you are looking for." Had you read my post before you replied to it you would know that Mark 3:29 is not the Scripture I am looking for. Mark 3:29 has nothing whatever to do with either the question or the answer. And where in my post does it say I am looking for a verse? |
||||||
254 | Free will and predestination co-exist? | Rom 8:29 | kalos | 178588 | ||
Searcher, Tell your niece that if God cannot know the future because man has choices, then there are some things God does not know. Which, of course, is not true. Grace to you, John |
||||||
255 | Free will and predestination co-exist? | Rom 8:29 | kalos | 178587 | ||
“Belief” in the NT—what does it mean? Lionheart, I agree with you. Following are two excellent quotes explaining the meaning of the Greek word pisteuo. ____________________ "Whosoever believeth in him" is equivalent to "whosoever trusts in or commits himself to him [Christ]." ____________________ From THE AMPLIFIED BIBLE: Background and History: Overview ‘adhere to, cleave to; trust; rely on 'Through amplification, the reader gains a better understanding of what the Hebrew and Greek listener instinctively understood (as a matter of course). Take, for example, the Greek word pisteuo, which the vast majority of versions render as "believe." That simple translation, however, hardly does justice to the many meanings contained in the Greek pisteuo: "to adhere to, to cleave to, to trust, to have faith in, to rely on, to depend on." Notice the subtle shades of meaning which are unlocked in John 11:25: '"Jesus said to her, I am [Myself] the Resurrection and the Life. Whoever believes in (adheres to, trusts in, and relies on) Me, although he may die, yet he shall live."' (www.gospelcom.net/lockman/amplified/) From the New Scofield Reference Bible, Oxford, 1967 'Belief in the N.T. denotes more than intellectual assent to a fact. The word (Gk. pistis, noun; pisteuo, verb) means *adherence to, committal to, faith in, reliance upon, trust in* a person or an object, and this involves not only the consent of the mind, but an act of the heart and will of the subject. "Whosoever believeth in him" is equivalent to "whosoever trusts in or commits himself to him [Christ]." Belief, then is synonymous with faith, which in the N.T. consists of believing and receiving what God has revealed.' Grace to you, John |
||||||
256 | Faith apart from works! | James | kalos | 178585 | ||
Question: In what version and in what verse in John 15 does it SAY, "God is the true vine"? Answer: I will now answer my own question. The Bible either SAYS it or it doesn't. The fact is the Bible does not SAY, "God is the true vine". |
||||||
257 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | kalos | 178583 | ||
Mark, I agree with you. Also, if a man could commit adultery in his heart by lusting after his own wife, then in his heart he would would be commiting adultery WITH his own wife. Utter nonsense! Such an interpretation would be not from common sense, but from a lack of it. Grace to you, John |
||||||
258 | Faith apart from works! | James | kalos | 178575 | ||
Thank you for the clarification. Grace to you, John |
||||||
259 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | kalos | 178562 | ||
P.S. If we do not know what Jesus meant by the words he used, then how do we know what he meant? Of course, the answer is that if we can't know what he meant by what he said, then we just can't know. The Word of God is the expression of the thoughts of God. The words of Christ are the expression of the thoughts of Christ. |
||||||
260 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | kalos | 178561 | ||
We know what the Bible means by what it says -- not by reading minds or by ignoring the Greek definition of the words being used. If it's true that what the Greek word lust means and what Jesus means are not the same thing, then either Jesus, the Gospel writer, or the translator picked the wrong word, didn't they? How is it that Jesus used a word that did not really mean what he had in mind when he used it? |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ] Next > Last [212] >> |