Results 241 - 260 of 332
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: retxar Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
241 | How can anyone be saved? | 1 Cor 2:14 | retxar | 61067 | ||
Jesus gave a genuine offer of salvation to the rich young ruler (Mark 10:21), but him actually receiving it depended on the condition of his positive response to the gospel. Jesus provided forgiveness, and God really actually forgave those who crucified Him (Luke 23:34), but them actually receiving the gift of forgiveness, along with the gift of salvation, depended on the condition of their positive response to the gospel. Jesus made it clear to Nicodemus (John 3) that the plan of salvation He had laid out to him was dependent on the condition of his positive response to the gospel. Steven made it clear to the Sanhedrin that their rejection of the gospel was because they resisted the Holy Spirit (Act 7:51), not that He would not give them the faith to believe. “Whosoever believes in Him should not perish” Or was that “Whosoever should not perish believes in Him?” retxar |
||||||
242 | How can anyone be saved? | 1 Cor 2:14 | retxar | 61108 | ||
John, I agree totally with your conclusion of why this nice young man, who Jesus felt a special affection for, decided to, in the end, reject Jesus. It was, as you said, "He loved his wealth more than he loved Jesus". It was not that Jesus did not give him what he needed to believe. I also see, and you do too, that Jesus desired very much that this young man answer the call to salvation He had given him, and that Jesus was very sad when he decided, instead, to walk away. This young man was in the same boat as the ones Stephan spoke to before the Sanhedrin (Act 7:51). It was not that Jesus did not give him a genuine call to salvation. It was that he willfuly resisted and rejected God's call to salvation. retxar |
||||||
243 | How can anyone be saved? | 1 Cor 2:14 | retxar | 61147 | ||
Yes we agree, but how do you deal with the fact that the young mans decision went against what Jesus wanted him to do? (receive salvation and follow Him) | ||||||
244 | How can anyone be saved? | 1 Cor 2:14 | retxar | 61208 | ||
Well that does not really answer my question (why people God want's saved do not always get saved), but that's OK, this is a tired debate. retxar |
||||||
245 | Baptism of the Holy Spirit after reborn? | 1 Cor 12:13 | retxar | 3632 | ||
You are correct in the fact that the disciples already had the Holy Spirit living in them before Pentecost (John 20:22), but they were not baptized with the Holy Spirit. This first occurred at Pentecost, just as Jesus promised (Acts 1:5). This could not have been a one time occurrence with the disciples as the only recipients, as you suggest. Did the disciples go “to the end of the Earth?” (Acts 1:8) The account of tongues at Pentecost is the only time I recall where tongues were actually understood by someone other than God, so this could have been a miracle of hearing, as well as evidence of the Baptism of Holy Spirit as promised. Note: vs6 "everyone HEARD them speak in his own language" Note: vs8 "we HEAR, each in our own language" Note: vs11 "we HEAR them speaking in our own tongues.” The utterances of praise that were given at Pentecost were real languages? Maybe, maybe not. A mistake to equate this with any specific gift? I don’t think it’s a mistake. Neither does the Word. (Acts11:17) No mention whatsoever (here or elsewhere) of anyone speaking in some kind of "heavenly" language being connected with the Holy Spirit? Huh, I don’t know about that. (1Cor14:2) 1Cor13:1 “tongues of men and of angels” an exaggeration used for emphasis? I guess you might could read that into this scripture. I have read JM commentary also. Baptism of Holy Spirit to be “spontaneous event initiated by the Spirit” yes -- “not led, encouraged or brought on by any action of man?” Certainly not forbidden. (Acts 8:14-15) I will end on this note: This is not meant as an attack on my part, just as you have said it was not an attack on your part. I accept that, PLEASE do the same. You admit that a separate experience of being filled with the Spirit is possible, so I assume you cannot deny with any Biblical bases, only personal experience or observation. There is not much talk on this forum of personal experiences or even personal relationships with Jesus. I assure you, I have both. (Not to imply AT ALL that others do not have). Most of the talk is on theological issues, which will only take someone so far. Acts 15:8 says "So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us. Notice the Holy Spirit was not given because of knowledge, but the HEART. I will make this deal with you. I won’t try to prove the Bible with any of my experiences or lack of them, or anybody else’s. My experiences or lack of them do not prove or disprove the Bible. The Bible stands on it’s own. If it does not line up with the Word, throw it out. |
||||||
246 | Baptism of the Holy Spirit after reborn? | 1 Cor 12:13 | retxar | 3970 | ||
Sorry I came across as I was seeking to debate. I was not. Sorry. I was only expressing my beliefs, as you, which I base on scripture, not experience. A few more points to ponder, and I will shut up. If Acts 2 does not mention the baptism of the Holy Spirit, where is Jesus’s promise fulfilled in Act 1:5? 1Cor 14:2 says “For he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God, for NO ONE understands him; however, in the spirit he speaks mysteries”. I can’t understand how anyone could say tongues could be a known world languages, based on 1Cor 14? I have heard testimonies as such, but I can’t see how anyone could use 1Cor 14 to back it up. As far as the tongues in Acts 2, I said “this COULD have been a miracle of hearing”. Please don’t think I do not believe the disciples could not have spoken in real foreign languages. I was just giving another possibility that would be consistent with other accounts of tongues in scripture. In Jesus Love |
||||||
247 | Baptism of the Holy Spirit after reborn? | 1 Cor 12:13 | retxar | 4012 | ||
Thanks melchizedekau for your words of concern. Please take note of what I have said earlier in this forum: “I believe in the Baptism of the Holy Spirit as Jesus promised in Acts1. That promise bore witness as being true thru out Acts (2,8,10,11,19). I believe it is still true today and is verified by the initial evidence of speaking in tongues as the Holy Spirit gives utterance.” I think that states my position pretty well. I think we might be in the same book, but certainly not on the same page. I think it might help if we could read the previous posts, before we respond with any sort of judgmental comments. Notice I said read the post, not READ INTO the post. When I say “I think” I am stating “my opinion” which does not mean very much. Please don’t think I think you need to believe my opinion, unless the scripture references and the Holy Spirit tell you otherwise. Acts2 : Please re-read my previous post. Sorry if I seemed to be saying something I did not mean. Please believe me, I was only giving another POSSIBLE interpretation, that’s all, not my theology. I can’t even spell theologian, but now look at me, I are one! Just kidding Bro! Anyway, here is my last explanation (I hope) of what I said. Many people claim the tongues in Acts 2 were different from the other examples in scripture, because they were actually understood. ALL I am saying is what I have already said, there is also the POSSIBILITY there could have been a miracle of understanding going on also, because all DID NOT understand (vs13). In Jesus’s Love |
||||||
248 | Baptism of the Holy Spirit after reborn? | 1 Cor 12:13 | retxar | 4039 | ||
Right on Bro! At salvation the HS is the baptizer, at Baptism of/with HS, Jesus is the baptizer, just as you stated. Thanks for the book reference. Another reliable source of info on the subject is http://angelic.org Thanks Jesus Lives! |
||||||
249 | Holy Ghost Baptism subsequent to salvati | 1 Cor 12:13 | retxar | 4739 | ||
Hi JVH0212, just a quick note. I know your post here is a few days old, so sorry if I'm bringing up something someone has already brought to your attention. You are correct, Acts 2:4 does not use the word "baptized." However, was this not the baptism with the Holy Spirit as Jesus promised in Acts 1:5? Didn't Jesus also gave a description of the baptism with the Holy Spirit in Acts 1:8? Was Jesus talking about receiving the Holy Spirit and being baptized into the body of Christ at salvation as in 1 Cor 12:13? I think not, as the disciples had already received the Holy Spirit in John 20:22 as promised in John 14:17, but they had not been baptized/filled with the Holy Spirit. Thanks Jesus is Lord |
||||||
250 | Holy Ghost Baptism subsequent to salvati | 1 Cor 12:13 | retxar | 4764 | ||
Thanks JVH0212, I am printing out all the posting you referenced. I am pretty busy, so it may take me a day or two to get back to you. I will look at each one before I respond. You are very thorough, thank you. Jesus Lives! |
||||||
251 | Holy Ghost Baptism subsequent to salvati | 1 Cor 12:13 | retxar | 4826 | ||
Hi JVH0212. I’m finally getting a chance to get back to you. Thank you for your references. They help me know where you are coming from. I really enjoyed you’re personal sharing, as it helped me realize we believe a lot closer than I originally thought. Please consider, if you will, a couple of differing views, on John 20:22, and Acts 2:4. Please consider my thoughts on Acts 2:4 “And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.” I guess this is a repeat of what I have already said, but I will expound. You quote the MacArthur Study Bible here which says Acts 2:4 is NOT the “baptism with the Holy Spirit”, rather it is the “filling with the Holy Spirit”. I agree, all were filled with the Holy Spirit. This cannot be disputed, as this is what Acts 2:4 says. However, how can one possibly say this is not the baptism with the Holy Spirit, as this is exactly what Jesus called it? Acts 1:5 "for John truly baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now." Was Jesus talking about receiving the Holy Spirit upon baptism into the body of Christ at salvation as in 1 Cor 12:13? No! Jesus explained what He meant by “baptized with the Holy Spirit” in Act 1:8 "But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth." I can say “filled with the Holy Spirit” instead of “baptized with the Holy Spirit” till Jesus comes back, if I need to. I would rather have someone understand exactly what I am talking about, rather than having to guess. However, if someone says “baptized with the Holy Spirit”, instead of “baptized into the body of Christ”, I am going to think of “baptized with the Holy Spirit” as Jesus identified in Acts 1:5 and described in Acts 1:8. Please consider my thoughts on John 20:22. “And when He had said this, He breathed on them, and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit.” You quote the MacArthur Study Bible again here. It says the disciples did not actually receive the Holy Spirit until Pentecost. If we interpret scripture with scripture here, I see no way the disciples COULD NOT have received the Holy Spirit when Jesus spoke the words "Receive the Holy Spirit.” Romans 10:9 says that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. This is the very first time the disciples were able to believe in their heart “that God has raised Him from the dead”. If we look down at verse 28 we see Thomas saying to Jesus, "My Lord and my God!" Thomas certainly “believed in his heart” and also “confessed with his mouth” that Jesus is Lord. Jesus confirms Thomas’s belief in verse 29; "Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed.” I feel the disciples HAD to “Receive the Holy Spirit”, just as Jesus said to them, in order to be true believers, which Jesus said they were. One more thought on John 20:22. Notice the words “He breathed on them”. If we determine that the disciples did not receive the Holy Spirit here, that statement whould have to be brushed off as in-significant. I think this is very significant and cannot be looked over. Every place in scripture I know of (Gen2:7, Job33:4, Ps33:6, Eze37:9 for example), that speaks of the breath of God, signifies life. I think, just as God breathed the breath of life in Adam as the first man, Jesus breathed the breath of eternal life into these first believers under grace, by giving them the seal of the Holy Spirit. What do you think? Thanks Bro, and God Bless! |
||||||
252 | Only 900 "baptism" posts | 1 Cor 12:13 | retxar | 26735 | ||
You forgot one. Did Adam and Eve have belly buttons? retxar |
||||||
253 | Do holy people have to speak in tongues? | 1 Cor 12:30 | retxar | 29425 | ||
Greetings algumwood! Welcome to studybible forumsville! I think I could agree with all you are saying here, except for your take on Acts 19:2. I also believe these 12 disciples here were true believers. They would not have been called “disciples” unless they were in fact true believers. However, there is no way they could be true believers unless they had also received the Holy Spirit (Joh 7:39, Rom 8:9, Rom 8:16, 2Co 1:22, Eph 1:13, 1Jo 5:10). These disciples probably came to believe under the teaching of Apollos, which would have definitely been after the cross. So according to John 7:39, they HAD to have received the Holy Spirit also. Their answer in Act 19:2 was one of ignorance, and not necessarily one of truth. This lines up with Acts 18:24-28 that gives some background on some of Apollos’s earlier teaching, in which these disciples were probably under. Apollos was not aware that Jesus’s death and resurrection was something that had already happened, rather than just a promise, until he was told different by Aquila and Priscilla (Acts 18:26). This would explain these disciples answer here when they said they had not even heard of the Holy Spirit. They had not heard of the Holy Spirit because Apollos’s was not aware that the Holy Spirit had been given. What they received here was not the indwelling of the Holy Spirit as Jesus’s disciples received in John 20:22, and they no doubt received when they believed. What they received was the filling of the Holy Spirit as Jesus’s disciples received in Acts 2:4 and the Samaritans received in Acts 8:14-17. retxar |
||||||
254 | Do holy people have to speak in tongues? | 1 Cor 12:30 | retxar | 29428 | ||
1Co 12:1 Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I do not want you to be ignorant Why would anyone turn their nose up at ANY gift from God? |
||||||
255 | Do holy people have to speak in tongues? | 1 Cor 12:30 | retxar | 29460 | ||
Good day my friend! 1Co 14:2 For he who speaks in another language speaks not to men, but to God; for no one understands; but in the Spirit he speaks mysteries. (WEB) I have read the WEB (World English Bible) and I like it! It translates tongues exactly as you have suggested. However, it still says that at least in some instances, if not in every single instance, that the language spoken is a mystery, only understood by God, and no one else. retxar |
||||||
256 | Do holy people have to speak in tongues? | 1 Cor 12:30 | retxar | 29464 | ||
Right on, bro! We need to use the gifts He gives us and let others use the gifts He gives them and realize that all the gifts He gives are good gifts (Mat 7:11). retxar |
||||||
257 | IS TONGUES FOR TODAY? | 1 Cor 14:5 | retxar | 55022 | ||
good site, good info | ||||||
258 | IS TONGUES FOR TODAY? | 1 Cor 14:5 | retxar | 55244 | ||
You need to understand what kind of "sign" Paul was talking about here. He was addressing un-interpreted tongues in a public church service. He is saying that if un-interpreted tongues are allowed to go on, the uninformed or the unbeliever could bring judgement on themselves. They might treat the manifestation of the Holy Spirit with scoff and ridicule (1Co 14:23) and the Holy Spirit would be mocked (Act_2:13). This is the only interpretation that makes since because words of understanding would be the only ones those who are uninformed or unbelieving would recognize as a positive sign from the Lord (1Co 14:24-25). Un-interpreted, the sign to the uninformed or the unbelievers would NOT be a sign of edification, as would occur with interpretation (1Co_14:5). Rather, the manifestation of the Holy Spirit would become a sign of judgement to them because of there possible ridicule. The Isaiah quote in 1Co_14:21 bears this out. retxar |
||||||
259 | IS TONGUES FOR TODAY? | 1 Cor 14:5 | retxar | 55245 | ||
You need to understand what kind of "sign" Paul was talking about here. He was addressing un-interpreted tongues in a public church service. He is saying that if un-interpreted tongues are allowed to go on, the uninformed or the unbeliever could bring judgement on themselves. They might treat the manifestation of the Holy Spirit with scoff and ridicule (1Co 14:23) and the Holy Spirit would be mocked (Act_2:13). This is the only interpretation that makes since because words of understanding would be the only ones those who are uninformed or unbelieving would recognize as a positive sign from the Lord (1Co 14:24-25). Un-interpreted, the sign to the uninformed or the unbelievers would NOT be a sign of edification, as would occur with interpretation (1Co_14:5). Rather, the manifestation of the Holy Spirit would become a sign of judgement to them because of there possible ridicule. The Isaiah quote in 1Co_14:21 bears this out. retxar |
||||||
260 | IS TONGUES FOR TODAY? | 1 Cor 14:5 | retxar | 55699 | ||
Maybe not "evidence" as a Biblical requirement, but certainly as a Biblical “result of”. The Apostles were assured that the Gentiles were indeed filled with the Holy Spirit in Acts 10:45-47 by the result of/evidence of/sign of (pick the phrase that sounds best to you) the manifestation of the Spiritual gift of tongues. retxar |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ] Next > Last [17] >> |