Results 381 - 400 of 420
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Radioman2 Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
381 | One save always saved? | Rev 3:5 | Radioman2 | 78797 | ||
Rev. 3:4-5 Does God Have an Eraser? How can I be certain God won't erase my name from the book of life? (All of the following text consists of direct quotations from the work cited at the end.) We will begin . . . by looking first at what the New Testament has to say concerning the book of life. (...) First Printing The apostle John refers to the "book of life" five other times in Revelation. From two of these passages it becomes evident that he certainly did not believe names could be erased: And all who dwell on the earth will worship him, everyone whose name has not been WRITTEN FROM THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD in the book of life of the Lamb who has been slain. Revelation 13:8, emphasis added. And those who dwell on the earth will wonder, whose name has not been written in the book of life from the FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD. Revelation 17:8, emphasis added. In these passages John informs us about the time when the book of life was filled out. This information comes as a surprise. Without it, our assumption would be that when men or women put their trust in Christ, their names were added at that moment. But that is not the case at all. The book of life has been complete since the foundation of the world. By "world," John does not mean "earth." In both passages "earth" and "world" appear. These are from two different Greek words. The one translated "earth" means just that--this ball of dirt upon which we live. The Greek word translated "world" is kosmos from which we get our English word cosmos. John is using "world" here to refer to the entire universe (see John 1:3; Acts 17:24). In light of the scientific limitations of John's day, it could very well be a reference to all created things. Either way, his point is the same: THE BOOK OF LIFE WAS FILLED OUT BEFORE THE FIRST ENTRY WAS EVER BORN. If that is the case, God's foreknowledge had a great deal to do with who was written in and who was not. In anticipation of Christ's death on man's behalf, God wrote the names of those He knew from eternity past would accept His gracious offer. The apostle Paul had this same idea in mind when he wrote, Just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before Him. (Ephesians 1:4) God wrote before we did anything. He filled out the book of life in anticipation of what He knew we would do. Therefore, He did not write in response to what we ACTUALLY did; rather, He wrote in response to what He KNEW we would actually do. This distinction is very important. For if God put names in the book as history unfolded--as we actually believed ---it could be argued that He erases them as history unfolds as well. But if God entered names according to His foreknowledge, it follows that He would erase them according to His foreknowledge, which makes no sense at all. If God wrote and erased according to foreknowledge, both His writing and His erasing would be complete before the world began. In that case, no one needs to live with the fear that his or her name will be erased from the book of life sometime in the future. But if that is the case, Revelation 3:5 is no longer a problem. Missing Persons There is a second reason these passages eliminate the possibility of names being erased. Both passages indicate that the lost people in these verses had never had their names written in the book of life. John does not say these names were simply not in the book at that time. He says, "Everyone whose name has not been written from the foundation of the world." Who is he talking about here? "All who dwell on the earth." In other words, no lost persons alive at that time had ever had their names in the book of life. Of course, they had never had their names erased from the book, either. The only way around this problem for those who hold to the ERASABLE NAME VIEW is to maintain that all the unsaved people who had their names erased were already dead by this time in history. That is certainly possible, but it is highly unlikely. It is especially unlikely in light of the intense persecution those who name the name of Christ will be facing during this time (see Revelation 13:7). ---------- This material has been adapted from: Eternal Security: Can You Be Sure? by Dr. Charles Stanley (http://www.intouch.org/myintouch/exploring/bible_says/eternal_security/erase_149096.html) |
||||||
382 | One save always saved? | Rev 3:5 | Radioman2 | 78783 | ||
Rev. 3:4-5 (ESV) [4] Yet you have still a few names in Sardis, people who have not soiled their garments, and they will walk with me in white, for they are worthy. [5] The one who conquers will be clothed thus in white garments, and I will never blot his name out of the book of life. I will confess his name before my Father and before his angels. "It is unfortunate that this passage in Revelation has become a focal point of controversy. The result has been a fixation on what the verse does not say rather than what it does say. This verse was never intended as a warning. Within its context there is nothing negative or foreboding about these words. In fact, it makes a strong statement in favor of eternal security. It is a passage of encouragement and praise. "The comments are directed to a group of faithful believers from the church in Sardis (Rev. 3:4 Yet you have still a few names in Sardis, people who have not soiled their garments, and they will walk with me in white, for they are worthy). Unlike the majority of the folks in their congregation, this handful of members had remained unsoiled by the world around them. The verse in question contains Christ's commendation to this group for their consistent walk. "To assume from what is said here that God will possibly erase names from the book of life is to read into the text a concept clearly not present. At best, it is an argument from silence, for the verse simply reads, "And I will not erase his name from the book of life." If this statement raises doubts for some about eternal security, they would do well to search the Scriptures for an answer. But to base one's answer to this important question on this verse is to adopt a method of study with the potential of leading to all kinds of problematic conclusions." (...) "The good news is, God's pencil has no eraser. Before you breathed your first word, God knew how you would respond to His offer of grace. According to His foreknowledge, He wrote your name in the book of life. And there it shall remain forever. Jesus said it this way: "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow me; and I give eternal life to them, and they shall never perish; and no one shall snatch them out of My hand. John 10.27-28 "And as if that were not clear enough: "My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand. John 10.29 " (To read the entire article, which I suggest you do before you post questions, go to: http://www.intouch.org/myintouch/exploring/bible_says/eternal_security/erase_149096.html) |
||||||
383 | Why did Jesus say "never again?" | Matt 24:21 | Radioman2 | 78685 | ||
You write: "If time is to end at the end of the tribulation..." If time is to end? The King James Version says: "that there should be time no longer:" Re 10:6 (KJV) And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer: The NASB says: "that there will be DELAY no longer, " NASB Revelation 10:6 and swore by Him who lives forever and ever, WHO CREATED HEAVEN AND THE THINGS IN IT, AND THE EARTH AND THE THINGS IN IT, AND THE SEA AND THE THINGS IN IT, that there will be delay no longer, The Amplified Bible says: "that NO MORE TIME SHOULD INTERVENE and there should be NO MORE WAITING OR DELAY." AMPLIFIED Revelation 10:6 And swore in the name of (by) Him Who lives forever and ever, Who created the heavens (sky) and all they contain, and the earth and all that it contains, and the sea and all that it contains. [He swore] that no more time should intervene and there should be no more waiting or delay, If time is to end? NASB Revelation 22:2 in the middle of its street. On either side of the river was the tree of life, bearing twelve kinds of fruit, yielding its fruit every month; and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. Note: "yielding its fruit every MONTH." |
||||||
384 | What did God first call Himself? | Gen 17:1 | Radioman2 | 78629 | ||
So what are you saying? That YHWH, the name used almost 7,000 times in the Bible, is NOT really God's name? That it's just a man-made nickname? I'm sorry, but this doesn't even make any sense. In Genesis chapters 4 and 12 it does not say that people CALLED him YHWH. It says they began to CALL UPON THE NAME of YHWH. Where do you think they got the name -- that they just made it up? Do your research. Man called God YHWH because that is his name. Do you understand that? |
||||||
385 | is baptism necessary for salvation? | Bible general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 78586 | ||
Is baptism needed for salvation? Part Two "In Acts 2:38, Peter appears to link forgiveness of sins to baptism. But there are at least two plausible interpretations of this verse that do not connect forgiveness of sin with baptism. It is possible to translate the Greek preposition eis "because of," or "on the basis of," instead of "for." It is used in that sense in Matthew 3:11; 12:41; and Luke 11:32. It is also possible to take the clause "and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ" as parenthetical. Support for that interpretation comes from that fact that "repent" and "your" are plural, while "be baptized" is singular, thus setting it off from the rest of the sentence. If that interpretation is correct, the verse would read "Repent (and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ) for the forgiveness of your sins." Forgiveness is thus connected with repentance, not baptism, in keeping with the consistent teaching of the New Testament (cf. Luke 24:47; John 3:18; Acts 5:31; 10:43; 13:38; 26:18; Ephesians 5:26). "Mark 16:16, a verse often quoted to prove baptism is necessary for salvation, is actually a proof of the opposite. Notice that the basis for condemnation in that verse is not the failure to be baptized, but only the failure to believe. Baptism is mentioned in the first part of the verse because it was the outward symbol that always accompanied the inward belief. I might also mention that many textual scholars think it unlikely that vv. 9-20 are an authentic part of Mark's gospel. We can't discuss here all the textual evidence that has caused many New Testament scholars to reject the passage. But you can find a thorough discussion in Bruce Metzger, et al., A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, pp. 122-128, and William Hendriksen, The Gospel of Mark, pp. 682-687. "Water baptism does not seem to be what Peter has in view in 1 Peter 3:21. The English word "baptism" is simply a transliteration of the Greek word baptizo, which means "to immerse." Baptizo does not always refer to water baptism in the New Testament (cf. Matthew 3:11; Mark 1:8; 7:4; 10:38-39; Luke 3:16; 11:38; 12:50; John 1:33; Acts 1:5; 11:16; 1 Corinthians 10:2; 12:13). Peter is not talking about immersion in water, as the phrase "not the removal of dirt from the flesh" indicates. He is referring to immersion in Christ's death and resurrection through "an appeal to God for a good conscience," or repentance. "I also do not believe water baptism is in view in Romans 6 or Galatians 3. I see in those passages a reference to the baptism in the Holy Spirit (cf. 1 Corinthians 12:13). For a detailed exposition of those passages, I refer you to my commentaries on Galatians and Romans, or the tapes of my sermons on Galatians 3 and Romans 6. "In Acts 22:16, Paul recounts the words of Ananias to him following his experience on the Damascus road: "Arise, and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on His name." It is best to connect the phrase "wash away your sins" with "calling on His name." If we connect it with "be baptized," the Greek participle epikalesamenos ("calling") would have no antecedent. Paul's sins were washed away not by baptism, but by calling on His name. "Baptism is certainly important, and required of every believer. However, the New Testament does not teach that baptism is necessary for salvation." (http://www.gty.org/IssuesandAnswers/archive/baptism.htm) |
||||||
386 | is baptism necessary for salvation? | Bible general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 78585 | ||
Is baptism needed for salvation? Part One Is baptism necessary for salvation? "No. Let's examine what the Scriptures teach on this issue: "First, it is quite clear from such passages as Acts 15 and Romans 4 that no external act is necessary for salvation. Salvation is by divine grace through faith alone (Romans 3:22, 24, 25, 26, 28, 30; 4:5; Galatians 2:16; Ephesians 2:8-9; Philippians 3:9, etc.). "If baptism were necessary for salvation, we would expect to find it stressed whenever the gospel is presented in Scripture. That is not the case, however. Peter mentioned baptism in his sermon on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:38). However, in his sermon from Solomon's portico in the Temple (Acts 3:12-26), Peter makes no reference to baptism, but links forgiveness of sin to repentance (3:19). If baptism is necessary for the forgiveness of sin, why didn't Peter say so in Acts 3? "Paul never made baptism any part of his gospel presentations. In 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, Paul gives a concise summary of the gospel message he preached. There is no mention of baptism. In 1 Corinthians 1:17, Paul states that "Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel," thus clearly differentiating the gospel from baptism. That is difficult to understand if baptism is necessary for salvation. If baptism were part of the gospel itself, necessary for salvation, what good would it have done Paul to preach the gospel, but not baptize? No one would have been saved. Paul clearly understood baptism to be separate from the gospel, and hence in no way efficacious for salvation. "Perhaps the most convincing refutation of the view that baptism is necessary for salvation are those who were saved apart from baptism. We have no record of the apostles' being baptized, yet Jesus pronounced them clean of their sins (John 15:3--note that the Word of God, not baptism, is what cleansed them). The penitent woman (Luke 7:37-50), the paralytic man (Matthew 9:2), and the publican (Luke 18:13-14) also experienced forgiveness of sins apart from baptism. "The Bible also gives us an example of people who were saved before being baptized. In Acts 10:44-48, Cornelius and those with him were converted through Peter's message. That they were saved before being baptized is evident from their reception of the Holy Spirit (v. 44) and the gifts of the Spirit (v. 46) before their baptism. Indeed, it is the fact that they had received the Holy Spirit (and hence were saved) that led Peter to baptize them (cf. v. 47). "One of the basic principles of biblical interpretation is the analogia scriptura, the analogy of Scripture. In other words, we must compare Scripture with Scripture in order to understand its full and proper sense. And since the Bible doesn't contradict itself, any interpretation of a specific passage that contradicts the general teaching of the Bible is to be rejected. Since the general teaching of the Bible is, as we have seen, that baptism and other forms of ritual are not necessary for salvation, no individual passage could teach otherwise. Thus we must look for interpretations of those passages that will be in harmony with the general teaching of Scripture. With that in mind, let's look briefly at some passages that appear to teach that baptism is required for salvation." (to be continued) (http://www.gty.org/IssuesandAnswers/archive/baptism.htm) |
||||||
387 | Taking ones own life | 1 Cor 3:17 | Radioman2 | 78552 | ||
"...Your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit" "...And God will destroy anyone who destroys his temple." 1 Corinthians 6:19 Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; (NIV) 1 Corinthians 3:16-17 All of you surely know that you are God's temple and that his Spirit lives in you. Together you are God's holy temple, and God will destroy anyone who destroys his temple. (NIV) 1 Corinthians 3:16-17 Do you not discern and understand that you [the whole church at Corinth] are God's temple (His sanctuary), and that God's Spirit has His permanent dwelling in you [to be at home in you, collectively as a church and also individually]? If anyone does hurt to God's temple or corrupts it [with false doctrines] or destroys it, God will do hurt to him and bring him to the corruption of death and destroy him. For the temple of God is holy (sacred to Him) and that [temple] you [the believing church and its individual believers] are. (Ampflified Bible) |
||||||
388 | TO JUDGE | 1 Cor 2:15 | Radioman2 | 78516 | ||
When taken as a whole and diligently compared one to another, the Scriptures do NOT prohibit all types of judging. Do not judge??? Anyone? Anything? Ever? A careful reading of the NT and a study of the passages in which the English word "judge" appears may surprise you. You will find that Christians are to judge between dogs and swine. Also, according to the Scriptures (see below), Christians are to judge: all things, those who are inside the church, the world, angels, what is said or taught, and ourselves. So believers are to judge at least seven different things or groups of people. Do not judge and criticize and condemn others, so that you may not be judged and criticized and condemned yourselves. Matthew 7:1 Amplified New Testament "7:1 Judge not. As the context reveals, this does not prohibit all types of judging (v. 16). There is a righteous kind of judgment we are supposed to exercise with careful discernment (John 7:24). Censorious, hypocritical, self-righteous, or other kinds of unfair judgments are forbidden; but in order to fulfill the commandments that follow, it is necessary to discern dogs and swine (v. 6) from one's own brethren (vv. 3-5)" (1997, Word Publishing). Other Scriptural examples of Christians judging are presented below. (The following Scripture quotations are from the NKJV unless otherwise noted. Words in parentheses ( ) or brackets [ ] are from the text of the Amplified New Testament.) 1 Co 2:15 (ANT)But the spiritual man tries all things [he examines, investigates, inquires into questions, and discerns all things], yet is himself to be put on trial and judged by no one . . . 1 Co 5: 12 For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge (pass disciplinary judgment [passing censuring sentence on them as the facts require]) those who are inside [the church]? 1 Co 6:2 Do you not know that the saints will judge (and govern) the world? And if the world will be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge (try) the smallest matters? 1 Co 6:3 Do you not know that we shall judge angels (and pronounce opinion between right and wrong [for them])? How much more, things that pertain to this life? 1 Co 6:5 I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you, not even one, who will be able to judge ( to decide [the private grievances, disputes, and quarrels]) between his brethren? 1 Co 10: 15 I speak as to wise men; judge (think over and make up your minds) for yourselves [about] what I say. 1 Co 11:31 For if we would judge (searchingly examine) ourselves [detecting our shortcomings and recognizing our own condition], we would not be judged. 1 Co 14:29 Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others judge (pay attention and weigh and discern what is said). 2 Co 13:5 (ANT) Examine and test and evaluate your own selves to see whether you are holding to your faith and showing the proper fruits of it. Test and prove yourselves . . . |
||||||
389 | Why did Jesus not want to be known? | Mark 3:12 | Radioman2 | 78317 | ||
'Jesus did not permit the demons to make him known because the time for such disclosure was not yet at hand, and such a revelation would have certainly been misunderstood by the people. In all likelihood, if the people had understood him early on to be the Son of God, or Messiah, they would have reduced his mission to one of political deliverance from Roman oppression (cf. John 6:15). Jesus wanted to avoid, as much as possible, any premature misunderstanding about who he was and what he was doing. However, at the end of his ministry, he did not deny such a title when the high priest asked him (14:61-62).' Study note at Mark 3:12. New English Translation (http://www.netbible.com) (http://www.bible.org/cgi-bin/netbible.pl#note_7) |
||||||
390 | Ideas Urgent | Rom 1:20 | Radioman2 | 78315 | ||
Hebrews 11:6 (ESV) And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him. |
||||||
391 | Ideas Urgent | Rom 1:20 | Radioman2 | 78313 | ||
"Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." A god who will not show himself? John 20:26-29 (ESV) Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you." [27] Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe." [28] Thomas answered him, "My Lord and my God!" [29] Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." 1 Timothy 3:16 :: Amplified Bible (AMP) (16) And great and important and weighty, we confess, is the hidden truth (the mystic secret) of godliness. He [[1] God] was made visible in human flesh, justified and vindicated in the [Holy] Spirit, was seen by angels, preached among the nations, believed on in the world, [and] taken up in glory. ------- Footnote 1. Some manuscripts read "God." 1 Timothy 3:16 :: New Living Translation (NLT) (16) Without question, this is the great mystery of our faith: Christ[1] appeared in the flesh and was shown to be righteous by the Spirit. He was seen by angels and was announced to the nations. He was believed on in the world and was taken up into heaven. ------- Footnote 1. 3:16a Greek Who; some manuscripts read God. Hebrews 1:1-3a :: Amplified Bible (AMP) (1) IN MANY separate revelations [each of which set forth a portion of the Truth] and in different ways God spoke of old to [our] forefathers in and by the prophets, (2) [But] in the last of these days He has spoken to us in [the person of a] Son, Whom He appointed Heir and lawful Owner of all things, also by and through Whom He created the worlds and the reaches of space and the ages of time [He made, produced, built, operated, and arranged them in order]. (3) He is the sole expression of the glory of God [the Light-being, the out-raying or radiance of the divine], and He is the perfect imprint and very image of [God's] nature, upholding and maintaining and guiding and propelling the universe by His mighty word of power. Hebrews 1:1-3a :: New Living Translation (NLT) (1) Long ago God spoke many times and in many ways to our ancestors through the prophets. (2) But now in these final days, he has spoken to us through his Son. God promised everything to the Son as an inheritance, and through the Son he made the universe and everything in it. (3) The Son reflects God's own glory, and everything about him represents God exactly. He sustains the universe by the mighty power of his command. |
||||||
392 | ARE ALL ANGELS MEN ? | NT general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 78257 | ||
Revelation 1:20 The mystery of the seven stars which thou sawest in my right hand, and the seven golden candlesticks. The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches: and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches. 'angels 'The natural explanation of the "messengers" is that they were men sent by the seven churches to ascertain the state of the aged apostle, now an exile in Patmos (compare Philippians 4:18), but they figure any who bear God's messages to a church.' Scofield, C.I. "Scofield Reference Notes on Revelation 1". "Scofield Reference Notes (1917 Edition)". (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commenta ries/ScofieldReferenceNotes/). 1917. |
||||||
393 | ARE ALL ANGELS MEN ? | NT general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 78253 | ||
No angels are men. Angels are angels and men are men. However, the Greek word "aggelos" is the usual word for angel, but is often translated "messenger." (NSRB, note at Rev. 1:20) |
||||||
394 | Is there conflict between Paul and Matt? | 2 Tim 3:16 | Radioman2 | 78099 | ||
Do you believe in the inspiration of the Bible (2 Tim. 3:16)? Every word of the Bible is literally "God-breathed." Not merely the thoughts, but the very words of scripture -- all of them -- are divinely inspired. The notion that parts of the Bible are inspired and other parts are not is foreign to the doctrine of the divine inspiration of the Bible. If you do believe in the inspiration of the Bible, then it would be absurd to assert or imply that one writer of scripture disagrees with or contradicts another. Granted, there are *apparent* contradictions in the Bible, which, when properly understood, are not contradictions at all. But the divine author, God, never contradicts himself. Moreover, the words of Paul, written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, are NOT Paul's "theological opinions." They are no man's opinions. Rather, they are the very words of God Himself. |
||||||
395 | Must we justify incest among Adam's kids | Gen 1:1 | Radioman2 | 78053 | ||
Where did Cain get his wife? [Numbers in brackets (e.g. [1], [2], [3]) are footnote references. To read the footnotes and the entire article, go to (http://christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c004.html)] ------------- 'Cain's Brothers and Sisters 'Cain was the first child of Adam and Eve recorded in Scripture (Genesis 4:1). His brothers, Abel (Genesis 4:2) and Seth (Genesis 4:25), were part of the first generation of children ever born on this earth. 'Even though only these three males are mentioned by name, Adam and Eve had other children. In Genesis 5:4 a statement sums up the life of Adam and Eve -- "And the days of Adam after he had fathered Seth were eight hundred years. And he fathered sons and daughters." This does not say when they were born. Many could have been born in the 130 years (Genesis 5:3) before Seth was born. 'During their lives, Adam and Eve had a number of male and female children. The Jewish historian Josephus wrote that, "The number of Adam's children, as says the old tradition, was thirty-three sons and twenty-three daughters."[11] 'The Bible does not tell us how many children were born to Adam and Eve. However, considering their long life spans (Adam lived for 930 years -- Genesis 5:5), it would seem reasonable to suggest there were many! Remember, They were commanded to "Be fruitful, and multiply" (Genesis 1:28). 'The Wife 'If we now work totally from Scripture, without any personal prejudices or other extra-biblical ideas, then back at the beginning, when there was only the first generation, brothers would have had to have married sisters or there would be no more generations! 'We are not told when Cain married or any of the details of other marriages and children, but we can say for certain that some brothers had to marry their sisters at the beginning of human history. 'But what about God's Laws? 'Many people immediately reject the conclusion that Adam and Eve's sons and daughters married each other by appealing to the law against brother-sister intermarriage. Some say that you cannot marry your relation. Actually, if you don't marry your relation, you don't marry a human! A wife is related to her husband even before they marry because all people are descendants of Adam and Eve -- all are of "one blood." The law forbidding marriage between close relatives was not given until the time of Moses (Leviticus 18-20). Provided marriage was one man to one woman for life (based on Genesis 1 and 2), there was no disobedience to God's law originally when close relatives (even brothers and sisters) married each other. 'Remember that Abraham married his half-sister (Genesis 20:12). God blessed this union to produce the Hebrew people through Isaac and Jacob. It was not until some 400 years later that God gave Moses laws that forbade such marriages. ------------- (...) 'Conclusion 'Many Christians cannot answer the question about Cain's wife because they focus on today's world (and the problems associated with close relations marrying), and do not understand the clear historical record God has given to us. 'They try to interpret Genesis from our present situation, rather than understand the true biblical history of the world and the changes that have occurred because of sin. Because they are not building their world view on Scripture, but taking a secular way of thinking to the Bible, they are blinded to the simple answers. 'Genesis is the record of the God who was there as history happened. It is the word of One who knows everything, and who is a reliable witness from the past. Thus, when we use Genesis as a basis for understanding history, we can make sense of questions that would otherwise be a mystery' (http://christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c004.html) ------------- Read more about Cain at (http://christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c004.html) |
||||||
396 | Holy Spirit | Rom 8:9 | Radioman2 | 77838 | ||
Question:What are the Conditions for the Holy Spirit to Dwell, to start working in ones heart? - - - - - - - - - - Answer (short): 'C. CONDITIONS FOR BEING *FILLED*. '1) *A dedicated life*. '2) *An undefeated life*. '3) *A dependent life* Answer (full): The Holy Spirit -- baptized by, indwelt by, filled with 1) Upon salvation we are *baptized* (placed) into the body of Christ by the Holy Spirit. NASB 1 Corinthians 12:13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit. AMPLIFIED 1 Corinthians 12:13 For by [means of the personal agency of] one [Holy] Spirit we were all, whether Jews or Greeks, slaves or free, baptized [and by baptism united together] into one body, and all made to drink of one [Holy] Spirit. 2) Also, at the time of our salvation, we are *indwelt* by the Holy Spirit. NASB Romans 8:9 However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him. AMPLIFIED Romans 8:9 But you are not living the life of the flesh, you are living the life of the Spirit, if the [Holy] Spirit of God [really] dwells within you [directs and controls you]. But if anyone does not possess the [Holy] Spirit of Christ, he is none of His [he does not belong to Christ, is not truly a child of God]. [Rom. 8:14.] NASB Ephesians 1 13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation--having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God's own possession, to the praise of His glory. AMPLIFIED Ephesians 1 13In Him you also who have heard the Word of Truth, the glad tidings (Gospel) of your salvation, and have believed in and adhered to and relied on Him, were stamped with the seal of the long-promised Holy Spirit. 14That [Spirit] is the guarantee of our inheritance [the firstfruits, the pledge and foretaste, the down payment on our heritage], in anticipation of its full redemption and our acquiring [complete] possession of it--to the praise of His glory. 3) We are also commanded to be *filled* with the Spirit. Eph. 5:18 NASB Ephesians 5:18 And do not get drunk with wine, for that is dissipation, but be filled with the Spirit, AMPLIFIED Ephesians 5:18 And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery; but ever be filled and stimulated with the [Holy] Spirit. [Prov. 23:20.] While all believers are indwelt by the Holy Spirit (Rom. 8:9), it is obvious that not all believers at all times are *filled* (controlled and empowered) by the Spirit (Eph. 5:18). ' X. THE FILLING OF THE SPIRIT. (...) 'B. CHARACTERISTICS. 1) Filling is commanded (Eph 5:18, the verb is imperative). 2) Filling is repeated (Acts 2:4; 4:31). 3) Filling produces Christlikeness (Gal 5:22-23). 'C. CONDITIONS FOR BEING FILLED. '1) *A dedicated life*. Yielding to the Spirit's control, though commanded, is voluntary and necessitates an act of dedication. This includes two aspects: initial dedication (Rom 12:1-2) and continual dedication of one's life (Rom 8:14). 2) *An undefeated life*. Victory over sin in daily experience is necessary in being controlled by the Spirit (Eph 4:30). This means responding to the light of the Word as it is continually revealed (1 John 1:7). 3) *A dependent life* (Gal 5:16). 'D. CONSEQUENCES. Being filled or controlled by the Spirit means: 1) A Christlike character (Gal 5:22-23). 2) Worship and praise (Eph 5:18-20). 3) Submissiveness (Eph 5:21). 4) Service (John 7:37-39).' (Page 2064, the Ryrie Study Bible: Expanded Edition, Moody, 1986, 1995.) Eph. 5:18 "be filled with the Spirit. Paul has taught in this epistle that all believers are sealed with the Spirit when they believe (Eph. 1:13-14; 4:30), but not all are filled, since that depends on yieldedness to God's will (5:17). 'Filling' describes an experience that can be repeated (Acts 2:4; 4:31), and here, as in Acts, it is connected with joy, courage, spirituality and Christian character. Though contrasted with drunkenness, the filling of the Spirit compares the idea of control, either of wine over a person or the Spirit over the believer" (Ryrie Study Bible: Expanded Edition, note at Eph. 5:18). |
||||||
397 | When did God change "mode" of baptism? | Bible general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 77571 | ||
The mode of baptism - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - "Scripture and common sense indicate that the water is not all-important and that, therefore, other modes [i.e., modes other than immersion] may be used as substitutes in exceptional circumstances." - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - "There are three modes (or methods) of water baptism used in Christian churches today: immersion (in which the person is completely submerged), affusion (that is, pouring), and aspersion (sprinkling). Evangelical Christians are divided on the question of which mode or modes are proper forms of baptism. Some Christians (typically those who believe that only believers should be baptized) think that immersion is the only valid mode, while other Christians (usually those who recognize the validity of infant baptism) consider all three modes to be acceptable. (...) "Those who believe that all three modes are valid would point out that only in the most ritualistic view of baptism can the amount of water be considered important. The immersion-only view, they say, appears absurd: What if one hair fails to be immersed? What if a finger or a hand? Where does one draw the line? But the opposing argument can be made to appear absurd also: If a small amount of water is permissible, is one drop enough? How about no water at all (not a view to be laughed away, since the "Quakers" take this exact view)? Where does one draw the line at this end? Therefore, the better approach is to realize that it is the general form of the act and the intention of those involved that matter, not the precise amount of water used. The issue is: Shall we obey the command of Christ as He intended or shall we obey the command in a way that pleases us? (...) "What shall we conclude from these observations? "It seems clear to us that immersion is the biblical norm, but that it is not an inflexible norm. That is, Scripture and common sense indicate that the water is not all-important and that, therefore, other modes may be used as substitutes in exceptional circumstances. God accepts the believer on the basis of his faith in Christ and his desire to obey Him, not on the basis of how much water covered his body when he was baptized. The doctrine that immersion is the only valid mode of baptism and that only those so baptized should be admitted into the fellowship of the Church body would, therefore, appear to be a bit extreme and not based on Scripture. The Church should welcome into its fellowship all those whom Christ has accepted (Romans 15:7, I John 1:3)" (http://www.equip.org/search/). |
||||||
398 | Did Paul actually "see" Jesus? | Rom 10:15 | Radioman2 | 77545 | ||
Actually Paul did see Jesus. 1 Cor. 15:8 (NKJV) Then last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time. NKJV 1 Corinthians 15 3For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, 5and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. 6After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. 7After that He was seen by James, then by all the apostles. 8Then last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time. |
||||||
399 | is baptism necessary for salvation? | Bible general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 77455 | ||
The mode of baptism - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - "Scripture and common sense indicate that the water is not all-important and that, therefore, other modes [i.e., modes other than immersion] may be used as substitutes in exceptional circumstances." - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - "There are three modes (or methods) of water baptism used in Christian churches today: immersion (in which the person is completely submerged), affusion (that is, pouring), and aspersion (sprinkling). Evangelical Christians are divided on the question of which mode or modes are proper forms of baptism. Some Christians (typically those who believe that only believers should be baptized) think that immersion is the only valid mode, while other Christians (usually those who recognize the validity of infant baptism) consider all three modes to be acceptable. (...) "Those who believe that all three modes are valid would point out that only in the most ritualistic view of baptism can the amount of water be considered important. The immersion-only view, they say, appears absurd: What if one hair fails to be immersed? What if a finger or a hand? Where does one draw the line? But the opposing argument can be made to appear absurd also: If a small amount of water is permissible, is one drop enough? How about no water at all (not a view to be laughed away, since the "Quakers" take this exact view)? Where does one draw the line at this end? Therefore, the better approach is to realize that it is the general form of the act and the intention of those involved that matter, not the precise amount of water used. The issue is: Shall we obey the command of Christ as He intended or shall we obey the command in a way that pleases us? (...) "What shall we conclude from these observations? "It seems clear to us that immersion is the biblical norm, but that it is not an inflexible norm. That is, Scripture and common sense indicate that the water is not all-important and that, therefore, other modes may be used as substitutes in exceptional circumstances. God accepts the believer on the basis of his faith in Christ and his desire to obey Him, not on the basis of how much water covered his body when he was baptized. The doctrine that immersion is the only valid mode of baptism and that only those so baptized should be admitted into the fellowship of the Church body would, therefore, appear to be a bit extreme and not based on Scripture. The Church should welcome into its fellowship all those whom Christ has accepted (Romans 15:7, I John 1:3)" (http://www.equip.org/search/). |
||||||
400 | I'm still unclear about "fallen away", | Heb 6:6 | Radioman2 | 77250 | ||
"Fall away." (Hebrews 6:6) "This Gr. term occurs only here in the NT. In the LXX, it was used to translate terms for severe unfaithfulness and apostasy. It is equivalent to the apostasy in [Heb] 3:12. The seriousness of this unfaithfulness is seen in the severe description of rejection within this verse: they re-crucify Christ and treat Him contemptuously (see also the strong descriptions in 10:29). "The 'impossible' of v. 4 goes with 'to renew them again to repentance.' Those who sinned against Christ in such a way had no hope of restoration or forgiveness. The reason is that they had rejected Him with full knowledge and conscious experience (as described in the features of vv. 5,6). With full revelation they rejected the truth, concluding the opposite of the truth about Christ, and thus had no hope of being saved. They can never have more knowledge than they had when they rejected it. They have concluded that Jesus should have been crucified, and they stand with his enemies. "There is no possibility of these verses referring to losing salvation. Many Scripture passages make unmistakably clear that salvation is eternal (compare John 10:27-29; Rom. 8:35,38,39; Phil. 1:6; 1 Pet. 1:4,5). Those who want to make this verse mean that believers can lose salvation will have to admit that it would then also say that one could never get it back again." (Note at Hebrews 6:6, MacArthur Study Bible, Word Publishing, 1997. For all Scripture references, see the MacArthur Study Bible.) |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ] Next > Last [21] >> |