Results 241 - 260 of 305
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Radioman Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
241 | The Lord pronounced judgement on the for | Amos | Radioman | 6124 | ||
. | ||||||
242 | The Lord pronounced judgement on the for | Amos | Radioman | 6123 | ||
. | ||||||
243 | Is this a discussion group? | 2 Tim 2:23 | Radioman | 5903 | ||
No, this is not a discussion group. Since the question has been clearly and authoritatively answered, I suppose we are now in for a month-long debate over the question. That would be typical here at the Forum. | ||||||
244 | Binding and Loosing power over darkness? | Matt 18:18 | Radioman | 5902 | ||
What covenant? I do not see any mention of the word covenant in John 1:14; 3:16; 5:24; 20:31; Romans 10:9,10,13, etc. | ||||||
245 | Babies in heaven when they die? | Bible general Archive 1 | Radioman | 5900 | ||
1) "...so also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word." NASB Romans 10:13-14 for "WHOEVER WILL CALL ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED." How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher? 2) The implication that non-elect babies go to hell to suffer eternal torment and torture is both cruel and absurd. 3) "Also, faithful members of the covenant have the right, based upon the promises of God, to expect that God will work in their children. Thus, Christians who lose a child may be comforted thus, but unbelievers may not." Surprise! Bulletin! Hello? God does not have any grandchildren, contrary to your doctrine. 4) "...it doesn't work unless you have Reformed soteriology." I don't believe I've ever had that. Is it something you can get by drinking from a public water fountain? |
||||||
246 | Biblical support for animals in heaven? | Bible general Archive 1 | Radioman | 5898 | ||
No, it is not Biblically based. We cannot draw any such conclusion based upon Biblical evidence. Nor can one give a Bible reference to support the fact that it isn't in the Bible. | ||||||
247 | Human responsibility, divine sovereignty | Rom 9:19 | Radioman | 5897 | ||
Human responsibility-divine sovereignty. Rom. 9:19-20 "If God's choice of the elect is unconditional, does this rule out human responsibility? Paul asks and answers that very question in Romans 9:19-20. He says God's choice of the elect is an act of mercy. Left to themselves, even the elect would persist in sin and be lost, because they are taken from the same fallen lump of clay as the rest of humanity. God alone is responsible for their salvation, but that does not eradicate the responsibility of those who persist in sin and are lost--because they do it willfully, and not under compulsion. They are responsible for their sin, not God. "The Bible affirms human responsibility right alongside the doctrine of divine sovereignty. Moreover, the offer of mercy in the gospel is extended to all alike. Isaiah 55:1 and Revelation 22:17 call "whosoever will" to be saved. Isaiah 45:22 and Acts 17:30 command all men to turn to God, repent and be saved. First Timothy 2:4 and 2 Peter 3:9 tell us that God is not willing that any should perish, but desires that all should be saved. Finally, the Lord Jesus said that, "the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out" (John 6:37). "In summary, we can say: The ultimate question of why God chose some for salvation and left others in their sinful state is one that we, with our finite knowledge, cannot answer. We do know that God's attributes always are in perfect harmony with each other, so that God's sovereignty will always operate in perfect harmony with His goodness, love, wisdom, and justice" (article by John MacArthur at www.gty.org - listed in Issues and Answers archives). |
||||||
248 | Christ dying only for elect? | Rom 5:6 | Radioman | 5809 | ||
Re: The Bible Doctrine of Election. Some are trying to disprove a Bible doctrine -- election -- of which they have no knowledge or understanding. What attorney, professor or debater ever successfully disproved something of which he had absolutely no knowledge? An effective opponent of an idea would need to know all the main points and details of that idea before he could persuade others that the idea was false. It is obvious to me that most, if not all, the shrill anti-election people are clueless as to what election is and when, where and how the Bible speaks of the elect or election. If one is not even familliar with the terminology of that which he is debating, he will never convince anyone of anything. Election and people spoken of as the elect exist, according to the Bible, whether you and I believe or don't believe in the Bible doctrine of Election and regardless of how you define election. (Use a concordance and look up the words "elect" and "election." To set the record straight: 1) the word "freewill" is used 22 times in the NIV Bible. In every single reference the adjective freewill is used to modify the noun "offering(s)." So how does the Bible's use of the word freewill support the idea that the doctrine of election is false? 2) The dictionary defines the adjective "elect" as "chosen" or "carefully selected". So elect and chosen clearly mean the same thing. Some say "only a small portion of the Bible can be used to justify "election". For your information, while "freewill" occurs in the Bible (NIV) only 22 times and only in connection with the word "offering(s)", the word "elect" appears 11 times; "election" 3 times; "choose" (which means the same thing as "elect") appears 66 times; "chose" 45 times; and "chosen" 125 times. This gives us a total of 250 occurences of the words "elect", "election" (although not, in every instance, in connection with the Bible doctrine of Election ) or their equivalents choose, chose and chosen, but only 22 occurences of the word freewill, and then only in connection with offerings. There isn't one verse in the Bible which -- when properly translated and understood in the context and in relation to all other verses dealing with the same subject -- not one word that contradicts the Bible's teaching on the subject of election. The majority of nonbelievers in election are people who can neither define nor explain what it is that they are opposed to. It is apparent from the comments written by opponents of election that these people have not read the answers supporting election. They've neither read the answers, looked up the Scriptures cited, nor given the other side a fair hearing. |
||||||
249 | Church Age? | Acts 2:17 | Radioman | 5553 | ||
You say: "These things will take place only after the rapture of the Church." If this is so, then why does Peter say in Acts 2:16, "But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel"? Verse 17 goes on to say: "And it shall come to pass in the last days." We are in the last days. We have been in the last days since Jesus opened his eyes in a manger in Bethlehem. Answer (short): In Acts 2:17 the phrase " 'last days' refers to the present era of redemptive history from the first coming of Christ (Heb 1:2; 1 Pet 1:20; 1 John 2:18) to his return." (p. 1636, MacArthur Study Bible, Word Publishing, 1997). Answer (full): "LAST DAYS. In the passage quoted from Joel the Hebrew has 'after this' and the Septuagint 'after these things.' Peter interprets the passage as referring specifically to the latter days of the new covenant in contrast to the former days of the old covenant." At the time of Acts chapter 2, "the age of Messianic fulfillment" had "arrived." (p. 1575, Zondervan NASB Study Bible, edited by Kenneth Barker, Zondervan, 1999) "Last Day(s), Latter Days, Last Times. There are problems with the terminology of 'the latter days' in that, for example, the King James Version quite often refers to 'the latter days,' an expression not found in modern translations. Further, it is not always clear whether 'the latter days' means a somewhat later period than that of the writer or the latest times of all, the end of the world. There are also expressions that locate the day being discussed in the time of the speaker. Care is needed as we approach the passages that use these terms." (pp. 464-465, Baker Theological Dictionary of the Bible, Walter A. Elwell, editor, Baker Books, 1996) |
||||||
250 | Where's the line? | 2 Tim 2:23 | Radioman | 5552 | ||
I agree entirely with your well-stated answer. Unfortunately, the people who need it most won't get it. The fact that it applies to them will roll right off their back, or their mane as the case may be. "Do you have any Scriptural support for the idea of human free will?" Apparently the person you asked has no Scriptural support. If they did, I'm sure they would be eager to tell you what it is. |
||||||
251 | Where can I find the Beatitudes? | Matt 5:3 | Radioman | 5551 | ||
You will find the Beatitudes in Matthew 5:3-12. A parallel passage is also to be found in the gospel of Luke. | ||||||
252 | Is God responsible for evil? | Bible general Archive 1 | Radioman | 5549 | ||
Forrest, you need not apologize. I'm the one who needs to apologize. Charis is right, "Fear not, Radioman's bark is worse than his bite :-)" Actually, I don't bite. I owe you an apology. I was wrong. Please accept my belated apology. I was reading too fast and honestly did not notice that what you were doing was making corrections to your copy and then reposting it, which is perfectly legitimate. According to the respondents to this Forum, there are at least half a dozen unforgivable sins. But neither a misspelling nor a typographical error constitutes unpardonable sin. If anything, you are to be commended for taking care to proofread and edit your submissions. Keep up the good work. Let no one say of you that you are "monitoring the questions in an inferior way." Again it was wrong of me to come down on you the way I did. -Radioman |
||||||
253 | What is the goal of Bible study? | Col 1:28 | Radioman | 5546 | ||
One purpose of Studying the Bible is so that the foolish may become wise. After reading many of the postings to this website, I conclude that apparently this purpose is not being fulfilled by some persons who study the Bible, assuming they have studied it. | ||||||
254 | Christ dying only for elect? | Rom 5:6 | Radioman | 5544 | ||
This question, election, has already been much debated on this Forum, much to everyone's delight. If you use the Search function and after "contain these words" put "election", then you will have access to the Forum's accumulated wisdom concerning the subject. | ||||||
255 | Where's the line? | 2 Tim 2:23 | Radioman | 5543 | ||
"Paul does not tell Timothy to refuse speculations." Yes, he does. NASB 2 Timothy 2:23 "But refuse foolish and ignorant speculations, knowing that they produce quarrels." |
||||||
256 | Where's the line? | 2 Tim 2:23 | Radioman | 5542 | ||
In case you missed it: "Have you built your ark yet? "From this verse, Genesis 6:14, and this verse alone, isn't it perfectly clear that God expects each one of us to build an ark?Some doctrines have been based on little more than a random verse, so why shouldn't we stock up on gopher wood and start building?" (original question by Hank) Your friend, Radioman. |
||||||
257 | Does God have free will? | Bible general Archive 1 | Radioman | 5541 | ||
"Actually the question is not absurd at all." Yes, it is. Moreover, it is FOOLISH, balmy, crazy, harebrained, insane, loony, preposterous, silly, and wacky. |
||||||
258 | Does God have free will? | Bible general Archive 1 | Radioman | 5540 | ||
Do you have a Scripture reference for your question? A lot of these questions under the category "The Entire Bible" are getting increasingly weirder, especially questions beginning with "Why" or "What if"? One could ask questions based on false syllogisms all day. But who would be edified? This is not a rap session; it is a StudyBibleForum. Where's the Bible verse you are asking about? | ||||||
259 | Questions on Luke 8:16-25 | Luke 8:18 | Radioman | 5539 | ||
Could you tell us, who is the author of this daily devotional? If the author is you, would you say so? If it is not you, would you mind telling us who did write it? Normally, IF quoting another publication, one would give the author, title, page number, name of publisher, date of publishing. ************************************ Main Entry: pla·gia·rize Function: verb Inflected Form(s): -rized; -riz·ing Etymology: plagiary Date: 1716 transitive senses : to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own : use (another's production) without crediting the source intransitive senses : to commit literary theft : present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source |
||||||
260 | How did evil arise? | Bible general Archive 1 | Radioman | 5398 | ||
You want to know the truth and need to know, but banging you with doctrine won't help? Pray tell, what will help? If the answer to your question is not to be found in Bible doctrine, then where is it to be found? What would you like folks to be banging you with? Reader's Digest, Popular Mechanics, Southern Living, TV Guide, philosophy, New Age crystals, opinions off the top of people's heads with no supporting Scriptural reference? If you truly do not want Bible doctrine and a clear explanation from Scriptue, I can recommend about a dozen posters on this Forum who will be glad to oblige you. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ] Next > Last [16] >> |