Results 261 - 280 of 2452
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Reformer Joe Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
261 | Is baptism a sign of the New Covenant? | Luke 22:20 | Reformer Joe | 80394 | ||
"The way I understand the term from the Old Testament, one had to be circumcized in order to be a receipient of the benefits of the covenant." One became a member of the visible covenant people through circumcision, but were the spiritual benefits of the covenant limited only to the circumcised? "For indeed circumcision is of value if you practice the Law; but if you are a transgressor of the Law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision. So if the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? And he who is physically uncircumcised, if he keeps the Law, will he not judge you who though having the letter of the Law and circumcision are a transgressor of the Law? For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God." --Romans 2:25-29 This is why a distinction is made between the visible church and the invisible church. Just because the circumcision by God of the heart made one a "true Jew" did not mean that the outward circumcision didn't take place. The latter visibly marked a child as a member of God's people and truly set him apart as a covenant member. Whether he would show himself to be a covenant breaker or a covenant keeper would remain to be seen. Whatever the true spiritual condition of the circumcised male, he and the rest of the outwardly circumsized were "in it together." --Joe! |
||||||
262 | What or who did the rock signify/ | Luke 22:20 | Reformer Joe | 80392 | ||
Christ. "For I do not want you to be unaware, brethren, that our fathers were all under the cloud and all passed through the sea; and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea; and all ate the same spiritual food; and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them; and the rock was Christ." --1 Corinthians 10:1-4 I see both Protestant sacraments alluded to in these verses. --Joe! |
||||||
263 | Christ's "real presence" not efficaous? | Luke 22:20 | Reformer Joe | 80391 | ||
'Can Christ's "real presence" not be efficatious?' Oh, I think it is definitely efficacious. We just disagree on the effects. I have a hard time reading Paul's commentary on the Lord's Supper in 1 Corinthians 10-11 without concluding that it actually "does something." "Is not the cup of blessing which we bless a sharing in the blood of Christ? Is not the bread which we break a sharing in the body of Christ?" --1 Corinthians 10:16 In my understanding, it is much more than the bare memorial that the Reformer Ulrich Zwingli concluded it to be. If it is just a ceremony, why were people dying for partaking of it unworthily? Here is the Westminster Larger Catechism's summary of the efficacy and meaning of the Supper: Q. 168. What is the Lord’s supper? A. The Lord’s supper is a sacrament of the New Testament, wherein, by giving and receiving bread and wine according to the appointment of Jesus Christ, his death is showed forth; and they that worthily communicate feed upon his body and blood, to their spiritual nourishment and growth in grace; have their union and communion with him confirmed; testify and renew their thankfulness, and engagement to God, and their mutual love and fellowship each with the other, as members of the same mystical body. So the Lord's Supper: --is a proclamation of Christ's death --nourishes the believer spiritually --causes the faithful to grow in grace (not to maintain or renew our salvation, but rather to further sanctify us) --serves as an outward confirmation of our belonging to Jesus Christ (the covenant aspect) --unites us to the body and blood of Christ through the mediation of the Holy Spirit --reminds us of our belonging to each other and to the universal church of all times and places Of course, this is a minority view among 21st-century Protestants, but it is the view to which I hold. --Joe! |
||||||
264 | Is baptism a sign of the New Covenant? | Luke 22:20 | Reformer Joe | 80390 | ||
'"Real Presence" is a term I learned at my mother's very Catholic knee and I think it encompasses Catholic doctine.' Here is what I mean: Heidelberg Catechism: Question 79. Why then doth Christ call the bread "his body", and the cup "his blood", or "the new covenant in his blood"; and Paul the "communion of body and blood of Christ"? Answer: Christ speaks thus, not without great reason, namely, not only thereby to teach us, that as bread and wine support this temporal life, so his crucified body and shed blood are the true meat and drink, whereby our souls are fed to eternal life; but more especially by these visible signs and pledges to assure us, that we are as really partakers of his true body and blood by the operation of the Holy Ghost as we receive by the mouths of our bodies these holy signs in remembrance of him; and that all his sufferings and obedience are as certainly ours, as if we had in our own persons suffered and made satisfaction for our sins to God. Westminster Larger Catechism: Q. 170. How do they that worthily communicate in the Lord’s supper feed upon the body and blood of Christ therein? A. As the body and blood of Christ are not corporally or carnally present in, with, or under the bread and wine in the Lord’s supper, and yet are spiritually present to the faith of the receiver, no less truly and really than the elements themselves are to their outward senses; so they that worthily communicate in the sacrament of the Lord’s supper, do therein feed upon the body and blood of Christ, not after a corporal and carnal, but in a spiritual manner; yet truly and really, while by faith they receive and apply unto themselves Christ crucified, and all the benefits of his death. So I believe in the real presence as well. --Joe! |
||||||
265 | Is baptism a sign of the New Covenant? | Luke 22:20 | Reformer Joe | 80376 | ||
The term "real presence" may be kind of broad to describe Roman Catholic beliefs about the Eucharist. Both Luther and Calvin rejected transubstantiation but held to the real presence of Christ in the Supper. --Joe! |
||||||
266 | Is baptism a sign of the New Covenant? | Luke 22:20 | Reformer Joe | 80373 | ||
One difference between the signs of the Old Covenant and the New is that the OT signs for the most part were bloody rituals (circumcision and animal sacrifice), while the Eucharist and baptism are not. Secondly, the signs were changed by Jesus at the Last Supper. The lamb is the focus of the Passover meal (and clearly points to the Lamb of God); yet Jesus picked up the bread and the cup as the elements of the meal pointing to Himself from that point forward. I find this fascinating and would love to delve into the significance of that at some point. Of course, cirumcision was for males only. What differences did you have in mind? --Joe! |
||||||
267 | Is baptism a sign of the New Covenant? | Luke 22:20 | Reformer Joe | 80357 | ||
"And to think I was just asking about baptism as a sign!" Oh, come on, Emmaus. You have been around long enough to know that simple "yes" or "no" answers are as rare as hen's teeth around here! :) But I will break with tradition: "Yes." --Joe! |
||||||
268 | Is baptism a sign of the New Covenant? | Luke 22:20 | Reformer Joe | 80354 | ||
I know the Bible doesn't SAY sign, but does what Jesus SAY MEAN that it is a sign or not? :) --Joe! |
||||||
269 | Is baptism a sign of the New Covenant? | Luke 22:20 | Reformer Joe | 80352 | ||
Hey, Tim. You wrote: "So, I would say no, since Scripture does not call baptism a sign of the new covenant!" The Bible may not directly CALL it a sign of the New Covenant, but can it be legitimately inferred from the teachings regarding baptism? Baptism is tied to the Great Commission, as a sign of discipleship. Therefore, those who are participants in the New Covenant are to be baptized (Matthew 28:19-20), making it a covenant sign and seal, IMO. In addition, we have seen Acts 2:38 quoted all-too-frequently here, but rarely do we see it tied into the following verse: 'Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call to Himself."' --Acts 2:38-39 Peter uses some very covenantal terms here when he ties in the promises of God to the hearers AND their children AND those whom God will call from far off. And, again, baptism is prominent in this covenantal language. He also refers to us who were one not a people becoming the people of God (1 Peter 2:9-10), and our baptism is the visible mark of this covenantal sanctification. Obviously, I am coming from a covenant theology point-of-view, but it is clear to me from Scripture that our baptism is a commonality among the covenant people of God: "There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all." --Ephesians 4:4-6 --Joe! |
||||||
270 | Robots? | Gen 4:7 | Reformer Joe | 80330 | ||
"You call that a defense? It is sad that all men sin and are doomed without the blood of Jesus." It says more than "all men sin." 'as it is written, "THERE IS NONE RIGHTEOUS, NOT EVEN ONE; THERE IS NONE WHO UNDERSTANDS, THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD; ALL HAVE TURNED ASIDE, TOGETHER THEY HAVE BECOME USELESS; THERE IS NONE WHO DOES GOOD, THERE IS NOT EVEN ONE. THEIR THROAT IS AN OPEN GRAVE, WITH THEIR TONGUES THEY KEEP DECEIVING, THE POISON OF ASPS IS UNDER THEIR LIPS; WHOSE MOUTH IS FULL OF CURSING AND BITTERNESS; THEIR FEET ARE SWIFT TO SHED BLOOD, DESTRUCTION AND MISERY ARE IN THEIR PATHS, AND THE PATH OF PEACE THEY HAVE NOT KNOWN. THERE IS NO FEAR OF GOD BEFORE THEIR EYES." --Romans 3:10-18 How do you get the "basic goodness of humanity" out of that? You wrote: "That all men are sinful does not mean that everything they do is sinful. That is an unwarranted conclusion you make." The Bible teaches: "For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, and those who are in the flesh cannot please God." --Romans 8:6-8 How can one reconcile hostility toward God with "human goodness"? These verses clearly say that the unregenerate are UNABLE to please God. And sin by definition includes everything that is not pleasing to God. "And you were dead in your trespasses and sins,in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest." --Ephesians 2:1-3 Non-Christians are basically good children of wrath? "The heart is more deceitful than all else And is desperately sick; Who can understand it?" --Jeremiah 17:9 "The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth what is good; and the evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth what is evil; for his mouth speaks from that which fills his heart." --Luke 6:45 "For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not." --Romans 7:18 If humans are basically good, as you have said, it should be fairly easy to produce Scriptures which testify to that fact. --Joe! |
||||||
271 | does God know all things? Genesis 22:12 | James 2:21 | Reformer Joe | 80328 | ||
"Oh you deny Jesus knew what men didn't know?" Since the Incarnation, Jesus has two natures, one human and one divine. On earth, Jesus in his human nature was not omniscient (Matthew 24:36). I would also assume that He was not born able to speak or walk, for example. Jesus the man learned things, so it is not inconsistent to say that Jesus saw the faith of men in ways similar to the way you and I do. "Your point is not a point. Jesus saw faith. Don't deny this." Where did I state my denial of this? "Faith is seen by Jesus and God." Agreed. "God saw Abraham's faith." Did that happen before or after he outwardly obeyed, however? "God knows all, but He wants man to do and show his faith." No argument there. --Joe! |
||||||
272 | does God know all things? Genesis 22:12 | James 2:21 | Reformer Joe | 80284 | ||
'I sorry you have problem here because "Jesus seeing their faith" healed and told man to walk.' Yes, that was Jesus the God-man seeing the faith of His fellow humans and physically healing them. What does this have to do with the omniscient Father declaring humans righteous on the basis of faith apart from works (Romans 4:5-6). "Faith needs to be seen and repenting needs to be more than talk." True faith will be seen, but that does not mean that God doesn't know it is there before it is seen in our works. Repentance isn't even talk. Good works are the fruit of repentance and not repentance itself (Luke 3:8; Galatians 5:22-23). Repentance and faith is a disposition of the heart that results in works. --Joe! |
||||||
273 | Robots? | Gen 4:7 | Reformer Joe | 80247 | ||
"You work on the assumption that ALL motives are evil? That is a terribly sad view of man." Is it any more sad than Romans 3:9-18? Or Romans 8:6-8? What do those verses tell us about human nature? --Joe! |
||||||
274 | does God know all things? Genesis 22:12 | James 2:21 | Reformer Joe | 80208 | ||
Greetings. You wrote: "When God sees faith then he says of sinner 'now I know' and justifies." Do you believe that God does not know the mind of the believer before any outward actions take place (baptism or any other form of outward obedience)? I have a real problem with tossing God's omniscience out the window by saying that He has to "see" our faith (as man sees) before He justifies. 'But the LORD said to Samuel, "Do not look at his appearance or at the height of his stature, because I have rejected him; for God sees not as man sees, for man looks at the outward appearance, but the LORD looks at the heart."' --1 Samuel 16:7 --Joe! |
||||||
275 | Belief alone saves? | John 3:16 | Reformer Joe | 80204 | ||
" I'm not embarrassed as I accurately depict Calvin, but you seem to compromise him." Then, please, by all means, enlighten me. Take the quote I gave you, and explain him to me. Start here: "Great is our proficiency, when, almost forgetting ourselves, certainly postponing our own reason, we faithfully make it our study to OBEY God and his commandments." Awaiting your instruction... --Joe! |
||||||
276 | Belief alone saves? | John 3:16 | Reformer Joe | 80203 | ||
"When are you saved? With or without obedience?" Please print this so I do not have to answer it again: I am saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. "But if you say it is by faith alone/only, and then start talking about all you have to do to stay saved, then you are inconsistent." Please point out the post where I said works were necessary to "stay saved." And then explain to me why Christian obedience is foreign to Calvinism when Calvin wrote at length about it. --Joe! |
||||||
277 | Ruth | Ruth | Reformer Joe | 80164 | ||
Ruth 1-4 | ||||||
278 | Belief alone saves? | John 3:16 | Reformer Joe | 80155 | ||
'"Satan is a deadly enemy of both." No Calvinist can believe this.' My apologies for the false attribution. It was actually Martin Luther who wrote the passage you quoted. Calvin wrote the other lengthy passage I gave and you ignored. --Joe! |
||||||
279 | Belief alone saves? | John 3:16 | Reformer Joe | 80154 | ||
"Do you believe I can lose my salvation? The Bible says no." And so do I. '"Satan is a deadly enemy of both." No Calvinist can believe this.' Are you really this obtuse? It was Calvin who WROTE it! "God elects and Satan can do NOTHING to alter it. Right? Whoever writes this cannot believe Calvin's tenets and the inevitibility of the Sovereign's will. My opinion is that you are not consistent. Last word." Simply amazing. I quote Calvin at length to refute your un-Biblical (and un-Calvinist) position on works, and you still persist on calling ME inconsistent. How embarassing... --Joe! |
||||||
280 | Belief alone saves? | John 3:16 | Reformer Joe | 80146 | ||
"He was saved by faith alone/only. Just as Luther and Calvin taught." Luther, who believed and taught faith alone as the instrument of justification, on the importance of good works in the life of the Christian: " The Apostle exhorts all Christians to practice good works after they have embraced the pure doctrine of faith, because even though they have been justified they still have the old flesh to refrain them from doing good. Therefore it becomes necessary that sincere preachers cultivate the doctrine of good works as diligently as the doctrine of faith, for Satan is a deadly enemy of both. Nevertheless faith must come first because without faith it is impossible to know what a God-pleasing deed is." --Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians, notes on verse 5:14 --Joe! |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ] Next > Last [123] >> |