Results 281 - 300 of 422
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: jlhetrick Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
281 | how would i explain mathew 12:36?? | Matt 12:36 | jlhetrick | 184148 | ||
Hello rolltide, Welcome to the forum. If you plan to stick around many of us would appreciate learning a little about you. Update your user profile with a little personal info if you don't mind. I sincerely believe that the verse has already been explained within the context of the passage. I truly would explain it like this: "Matt 12:33-37 "Either make the tree good and its fruit good, or make the tree bad and its fruit bad, for the tree is known by its fruit. 34 You brood of vipers! How can you speak good, when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. 35 The good person out of his good treasure brings forth good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure brings forth evil. 36 I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, 37 for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned." ESV We know that we are not saved by what we say as verse 37 might seem to indicate. But verse 34b explains verse 37. It is the condition of our hearts that is represented by our words. So like Paul, we are to "preach Christ crucified" (1Cor 1:23). 2 Cor 4:5-6 5 For what we proclaim is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, with ourselves as your servants for Jesus' sake. 6 For God, who said, "Let light shine out of darkness," has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. ESV Praise God, Jeff PS, I'm from the land of the tide, I hope we roll better next season. |
||||||
282 | Who r said to be | Matt 12:49 | jlhetrick | 200883 | ||
Welcome! Start with Matthew 12:49 Jeff |
||||||
283 | AUTHORITY, ORGINISATION | Matt 16:15 | jlhetrick | 155047 | ||
Obi, humbledbygrace has sufficiently revealed your ploys and tactics so I don't feel the need to further expose you. I would like, however, to take one comment you made in your post that humbled didn't touch on and try and reveal the most important truth of all regarding your position and condition. You wrote: "I believe in JESUS CHRIST and I AM NOT SAVED" You say you believe, great; and then you boldly confess that you are not saved. Let us let the scriptures, the Truth, reveal who you are then and what you stand for. James 2:19 You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that — and shudder. (NIV) Now I am not saying that you are a demon, not at all. But your eternal condition is the same, yet you do not shudder. This is arrogance. So before you can know the truth you must discard the arrogance and humble yourself. As you mature, you will find just how beneficial humility can be, especially as you leave the world of the class room and enter into adult life and all of the responsibilities that will follow. So I want to give you some truth, not from me but, from the scriptures; from God Himself. Rom 10:9-10 "...if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. (NIV) You see, one can believe "in" Jesus as you claim, but only when you make Him your Lord will you be saved. Don't take my word for it. Read the verses from the bible, meditate on it, and receive it from God. After all, it is only God himself who can reveal this truth to you. He himself has said so very plainly. If you don't believe me refer to Matt. 16:15-20 This portion of scripture talks plainly about this truth. "on this rock" our Lord says. On believing in who I am, Jesus said, which can only be revealed to you in truth by my Father in Heaven He teaches so wonderfully and eloquently. Obi, read this, understand it, believe it, and confess it and you too will be given the keys of the kingdom of Heaven which are in Jesus Christ the man, Jesus Christ our Lord, and never ever, the denomination of the Church of Jesus Christ. God Bless you Obi, and may you find the truth though you stray far from it. Sincerely, Jeff |
||||||
284 | REVELATION ! | Matt 16:15 | jlhetrick | 155155 | ||
Obi, How interesting that you persist with hyperverbal manic babble and can't find time to resond to those who have redirected you, and given you the truth. When someone is confused, as you are, and longing for the answer to a question, as you are, eternally hopeless to find it on their own, as you are, the next best thing is to listen to those who are far more experienced and knowledgeable in the area of that which you seek. knowing this. As long as you continue to poor sand into your gas tank, your boat motor will never start and thus, you will continue to drift farther and farther away. Soon there will be no one near to listen to your desperate cries for answers and therefore able to give them to you. It has been said that the definition of insanity is repeating the same disfuntional behavior over and over again and expecting different results. It has been said of a babbler Prov 10:10 a chattering fool comes to ruin. NIV One is not totally lost until he dies not knowing and having accepted Jesus Christ as Lord. But Obi, Jesus said: John 10:27 My sheep hear my voice , and I know them, and they follow me: KJV Please, listen for His voice and if you are able to here it, follow Him. Praying for you, Jeff |
||||||
285 | Preterism refuted using Scripture alone? | Matt 16:28 | jlhetrick | 183942 | ||
Hello coper44, I haven't participated in this particular thread but I have followed along and read each post with interest. I would like to quote from your original post and then offer some observation and suggestion. You wrote: "I'm aware that this line of thinking is called Preterism. I've been introduced to it rather recently and I can't disprove it. It has become an obsession with me and I would appreciate it if someone could shed some light on this subject and redirect me back to a more proper understanding of Scripture." In your own words you presented yourself (intentionally or unintentionally) as only having recently been exposed to the preterist view and apparently having little to go on. However, you unleash a string of posts (some quite long) that accurately represent the preterist view. So I, and I suspect others, are left wondering if you in fact posted your original with an agenda other than the one you stated; which was to "have light shed on this subject and redirect me back to a more proper understanding of Scripture." Are you simply regurgitating literature or do you actually have a much better learning of what you have only recently been introduced to than you suggested? In either case, you have not been truly open to the "shed light" others have offered as your stated intent suggested you would be. You also wrote: "I'm brand new to this forum so please let me know if I'm out of line with this question or if it's been asked and answered or if it's not allowed on this site." Your original question was not in and of itself "not allowed" on the forum, however, initiating a thread with a now apparent intent to push one's own view on a topic that is widely debatable and divisive is in violation of the terms of use of the Forum. Therefore, I might encourage you to put an end to your "obsession", at least on the forum. There is a sufficient amount of literature on the Market that will allow you to peck out the differences in the debate without having to push your debatable views on the bible study forum. One place to get a good look at all four of the major views of this issue is "Revelation: Four Views: A Parallel Commentary by Steve Gregg. I don't endorse the book necessarily as I own it but have not actually read it in it's entirety. I suggest it because of it's lay-out (Parallel) which makes it easy to consider the different views up close. Your cooperation will be much appreciated. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
286 | biblical ex. of how to rebuke a brother | Matt 18:15 | jlhetrick | 156490 | ||
Hi now, Matt 18:15-17 "If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. 16 But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that 'every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses .' 17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector. NIV Hope this helps, Jeff |
||||||
287 | NEED HELP PLEASE! | Matt 18:19 | jlhetrick | 153276 | ||
God bless you IN2JESUS, I will pray for you and your family in accordance with God's will. Mat 18:19(NASB) "Again I say to you, that if two of you agree on earth about anything that they may ask, it shall be done for them by My Father who is in heaven. Best wishes, Jeff |
||||||
288 | have you really forgave that person? | Matt 18:21 | jlhetrick | 171373 | ||
Hello Sherita, Welcome to the forum! Start with Matthew 18:21-35. Read the parable by Jesus which illustrates man's responsibility to be mercyful and to forgive others. Notice that one's failure to offer forgiveness results in his/her own conflict with God (not that of the one to which forgiveness was not extended). But keep in mind that the one you speak of is not God. He/she will struggle in his imperfections. We are incapable of "forgetting" in the way God promises to do when He forgives. So patients may be in order on your part. Be careful not to put undue expectations on the one you have wronged by requiring their dealing with the issue to conform to your expectations. If you are saved you are already forgiven by God, to incude the wrong against this person you speak of (Heb. 10:12). Hope this helps, Jeff |
||||||
289 | Lord's Table | Matt 18:21 | jlhetrick | 176582 | ||
Hello Kuravackal, Read 1 Corinthians 7 for some insight regarding this topic. Based on your explanation, it sounds like verse 15 may apply here. 1 Corinthians 7:12-16 (NASB95) 7:12 But to the rest I say, not the Lord, that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he must not divorce her. 13 And a woman who has an unbelieving husband, and he consents to live with her, she must not send her husband away. 14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through her believing husband; for otherwise your children are unclean, but now they are holy. 15 Yet if the unbelieving one leaves, let him leave; the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us to peace. 16 For how do you know, O wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, O husband, whether you will save your wife? Jeff |
||||||
290 | state vs God | Matt 19:5 | jlhetrick | 181988 | ||
Hello rodent tamer, I believe it's important to begin my response by reminding you that the Scriptures teach us to be subject to the rules and laws of society where they do not conflict with the higher moral authority of God revealed in scripture. Romans 13:1 (NKJV) 13:1 Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. So if a man and woman are married officially, through the legal system of their society; they are married indeed and bound to one another and the obligations and responsibilities that go with the oath they have made. With proper consideration for what the bible teaches, the blurred lines of confusion should be brought into clear focus. Submitting to the vows and commitment of marriage publicly and legally while not honoring that in our heart and intent is not consistent with what the bible teaches; nor is it a valid excuse relieving us of the obligations and responsibilities of our condition. The bible clearly teaches that if we make an oath, even a foolish one, we are held accountable by God. Biblical support for this can be provided if you are not familiar. Regarding your concern/question about homosexuals taking that same oath, the same principle applies as above. It may be recognized legally, but it is not consistent with God's moral laws. It is recognized by God as sin. Genesis 2:21-25 (NASB95) 2:21 So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place. 22 The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man. 23 The man said, "This is now bone of my bones, And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man." 24 For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh. 25 And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed. Marriage is ordained by God between a man and a woman. If if that is rebelled against through public law, it has no validity before God. I have no idea how many times I have said it but I will say it again here. One of the biggest mistakes we can make is to attempt to philosophize a position in an attempt to find loop-holes in the truth. There are no loop-holes, there is only acceptance or rejection. Hope this helps, Jeff |
||||||
291 | if God knew how can it be valid? | Matt 19:5 | jlhetrick | 182070 | ||
Hello again rodent tamer, I see that there are other responses to you and honestly, I am very busy with my studies and can not spend time reading so I will just respond briefly to your post here. It's important to understand that I am not taking this up as an opportunity to oppose you and/or simply argue. The truth is, your entire argument falls ridiculously short of making sense. No offense intended. But what I did notice in this post was a little more information. The two were divorced. HUMM. Interesting, but at least now we have the motive and can understand the need to invalidate the original vow in the first place. Friend, you simply make too many assumptions and go off on too many tangents for me to truly address it all in the forum setting. In all honestly, I don't believe it would be appropriate in any case. I believe the biblical perspective has been presented and beyond that, well, the forum is not intended to go beyond that. finally, I will simply suggest that you re-evaluate your understanding of the marriage covenant. Try to focus on the biblical perspective of marriage while considering the typical "vows" verbalized in most secular ceremonies. You might find that there is some significant differences in emphasis. And yes, when you sign a contract, regardless of your intentions, you become legally committed to that contract. Might I pose a question using "your logic"? If you borrow money to buy a house and sign the contract "knowing you don't intend to pay the loan off" what happens? Your logic suggests that you simply are not held accountable because, well, you really didn't mean it. Please refer back to my other post and consider it honestly. "My logic" was not "my logic". My argument was biblically based and supported by scripture. Please consider your true motives for your line of questioning. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
292 | Mat 21:12 Arrogance or what? on J' part | Matt 21:13 | jlhetrick | 186697 | ||
Hello jbrob, humbledbyhisgrace (Steve) gave an excellent response in my opinion. I would like to add a thought or two if I may. While agreeing with Steve that we can not specifically speak to this particular situation (not knowing the truth of the matter) we can make some observations that might help give food for thought for your "next discussion". Some may disagree, but it is my experience that the Pastors of today have been degraded by the very flocks they were called to shephard in many ways. We hear about it and see it all the time. I personally know of more than one situation where the Pastor has been literally ousted for telling the truth. Of course, the truth is often hard to swallow and may hurt more than a little; therefore, we can only tolerate a small portion of it. We can't have our pastors out there telling it like it is too often; too many may tuck tail and run; where? Well down the road of course, to the church on the corner which makes them feel warm and fuzzy and really normal in spite of their unconfessed and unrepented sin. I believe a careful study of our Lord will reveal a man and a God who is somewhat different from the soft-spoken, gentle little passive persona that Hollywood has portrayed. While many in the church today would not tolerate the turning over of the money-changer's tables, neither would they tolerate the brood being labeled as vipers I suspect. While we are considering these things lets not forget to offer thanksgiving and prayer for those our Father has called to shephard us. With that said, I offer a public greeting and heartfealt thanks to all readers who are pastors and who suffer the whims and whinings of us your flock. It's no wonder so many have fled the pulpit. Thank you who have stayed true to the calling. Food for thought, Jeff |
||||||
293 | Will there be marriages in heaven? | Matt 22:30 | jlhetrick | 180161 | ||
Hello dd, It's an honest question that I believe most of us have asked. To be sure we know the answer is no, we will not marry, we will not be given in marriage, and if we die married we will no longer be married in glory. Along with what Humbledbyhisgrace has pointed out in the Matthew passage, we see that the institution of marriage, created by God, is dissolved at the moment one of the married couple dies. Rom 7:2 2 Thus a married woman is bound by law to her husband while he lives, but if her husband dies she is released from the law of marriage. ESV So there should be no confusion about whether a married living person will be married in Heaven. We won't be. " But, in the resurrection, there is no occasion for marriage; whether in glorified bodies there will be any distinction of sexes some too curiously dispute (the ancients are divided in their opinions about it); but, whether there will be a distinction or not, it is certain that there will be no conjunction; where God will be all in all, there needs no other meet-help; the body will be spiritual, and there will be in it no carnal desires to be gratified: when the mystical body is completed, there will be no further occasion to seek a godly seed, which was one end of the institution of marriage, Mal 2:15. In heaven there will be no decay of the individuals, and therefore no eating and drinking; no decay of the species, and therefore no marrying; where there shall be no more deaths (Rev 21:4), there need be no more births. The married state is a composition of joys and cares; those that enter upon it are taught to look upon it as subject to changes, richer and poorer, sickness and health; and therefore it is fit for this mixed, changing world; but as in hell, where there is no joy, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride shall be heard no more at all, so in heaven, where there is all joy, and no care or pain or trouble, there will be no marrying. The joys of that state are pure and spiritual, and arise from the marriage of all of them to the Lamb, not of any of them to one another." (from Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Modern Edition, Electronic Database. Copyright © 1991 by Hendrickson Publishers, Inc.) Hope this helps, Jeff |
||||||
294 | Does Matt 28: 18 infer to do what Europe | Matt 28:18 | jlhetrick | 192147 | ||
John- humbled... asked a good question and BradK gave sufficient response to Matt 28:18. I agree with BradK that dealing with political issues as well as legal ones would be beyond the scope (and intent) of the forum. Your post leaves a lot (too much) to speculate on regarding your intent and/or your need in questioning the forum. If by "conservative denomination" you are referring to a Christian denomination then I would expect that you are thankful that the European settlers spread the gospel to this contenent. If that's your point then I would respond that it's not a matter of what Jesus would have done, but rather, what Jesus commanded to be done. The church is still about the business praise the Lord. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
295 | Please explain "Corban" in Mark 7 | Mark | jlhetrick | 240058 | ||
Hi and welcome to the Forum! 14th century : a sacrifice or offering to God among the ancient Hebrews (Merriam-Webster, I. (2003). |
||||||
296 | how would you exegete mark 1:1-15 | Mark 1:1 | jlhetrick | 188812 | ||
Hello harper, Welcome to the forum! Will you please be a little more specific? Do you have a particular question regarding the passage? God bless, Jeff |
||||||
297 | how is .... | Mark 1:1 | jlhetrick | 188816 | ||
Hello again Harper, First things first; please accept this as my attempt to be helpful and not punitive or argumentative. First, once the original question is asked and received a response a “Thread” has begun. Please tag all additional posts as a “Note”. That way the dialogue continues in the single “Thread”. Otherwise, if you tag your next response as a “Question” it shows up at the top of the Home Page and stands alone – it is no longer a part of the ongoing thread. In other words, your response can actually be a question but hit the radio button for “Note” so it stays with the ongoing conversation. Finally, please limit a single post to manageable parts. Your question I am responding too is actually five questions, each of which might be expanded on in some detail. Again friend, please take this as helpful. We each had to become adjusted to the format when we first began to participate. God bless, and answers will be forthcoming, Jeff |
||||||
298 | how is .... | Mark 1:1 | jlhetrick | 188817 | ||
Hello again Harper! To get started with your questions I’ll offer some brief input. Others will no doubt give additional response. To start- the “Son of God” title denotes the divinity of Christ. Christ is the “third person” of the triune God. I don’t want to make any assumptions about what you do and do not understand regarding God’s word. I’ll keep this one short with a copy and paste. If this is too basic please let me know. “Trinity — a word not found in Scripture, but used to express the doctrine of the unity of God as subsisting in three distinct Persons. This word is derived from the Gr. trias, first used by Theophilus (A.D. 168-183), or from the Lat. trinitas, first used by Tertullian (A.D. 220), to express this doctrine. The propositions involved in the doctrine are these: 1. That God is one, and that there is but one God (Deut. 6:4; 1 Kings 8:60; Isa. 44:6; Mark 12:29, 32; John 10:30). 2. That the Father is a distinct divine Person (hypostasis, subsistentia, persona, suppositum intellectuale), distinct from the Son and the Holy Spirit. 3. That Jesus Christ was truly God, and yet was a Person distinct from the Father and the Holy Spirit. 4. That the Holy Spirit is also a distinct divine Person.” (Easton's Bible dictionary) This definition by Easton's Bible dictionary with the included Scripture references should be a bit to chew on if you are not already very familiar with this. God bless, Jeff |
||||||
299 | how is .... | Mark 1:1 | jlhetrick | 188818 | ||
Harper- Scripture tells us that John’s baptism was a baptism of “repentance”. Mt 3:1-2 NASB95 Now in those days John the Baptist came, preaching in the wilderness of Judea, saying, “REPENT, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” (emphasis added) Lk 3:2-3 NASB95 in the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John, the son of Zacharias, in the wilderness. And he came into all the district around the Jordan, preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins; God bless, Jeff |
||||||
300 | how is .... | Mark 1:1 | jlhetrick | 188825 | ||
Harper, Please see humbledbyhisgrace's post 188823 and my response to him. He corrected me on a very important point. Forgive my misstatement on this important issue. I stated that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is the third person of the Trinity. Scripture presents Him clearly as the Second person of the Trinity, not the third. thanks again Steve for clarifying that. Jeff |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ] Next > Last [22] >> |