Results 401 - 420 of 494
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: stjones Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
401 | Judas went to hell? | NT general Archive 1 | stjones | 27947 | ||
Hi, Nolan; With all due respect (and that's a fair amount!), I disagree. These passages make it clear that Judas committed a grievous sin. So have we all. Probably the most damaging passage is John 6:70, where Jesus calls Judas "a devil". The phrase "a devil" doesn't show up anywhere else in the NT, so it needs to be approached with some thought. The Greek word translated as "devil" is defined in Strong's as "prone to slander, ... false accuser, slanderer, ... applied to a man who, by opposing the cause of God, may be said to act the part of the devil or to side with him." Most of the time (34, to be exact), the word is preceded by the definite article "the" which makes it clear that it refers specifically to Satan. In four places, it is used indefinitely - this passage in John and 1 Tim 3:11, 2 Tim 3:3, and Titus 2:3 where it is translated as "false accuser" or "slanderer". Elsewhere in John's gospel (13:2), "the" devil (the one and only) is said to have "prompted" Judas (NIV) or "put it into his heart" (NAS) to betray Jesus. So the motive for betraying Jesus came from Satan, not from Judas himself. Judas, like all of us from time to time, was guilty of succumbing to Satan. And he was certainly a false accuser, so it possible that Jesus used the word in that sense. I don't think John 17:12 reveals Judas' fate; I think it describes his condition. The word "perished" (as in this passage) is also translated nearly as frequently in the NT as "lost". Given the context, Judas had clearly not yet "perished", so he must have been "lost". I think the other passages convey a similar message. But Jesus came to seek and save the lost and no one - not even Judas - is beyond his reach. The fact remains that Judas repented. Martyr said that if he had accepted Jesus, he wouldn't have hanged himself. But at that time, nobody knew what it meant to "accept Jesus". The thief on the cross didn't utter the "sinner's prayer"; Peter hadn't given his Pentecost sermon yet; there were no letters from Paul. Judas might well have called upon the name of the Lord and beed saved. (Rom 10:13) My point is not to prove that Judas is in Heaven; I don't know where he wound up. But if he truly repented - and returning the money and killing himself is pretty strong evidence - he might be in Heaven. Jesus' unconditional love and atoning sacrifice could cover even Judas, a truth for which I am eternally grateful. Peace and grace and a blessed and merry Christmas to you and yours Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
402 | When will I speak/pray in tongues? | Acts 2:6 | stjones | 27807 | ||
Hi, a2b; Thanks for your reply. If I have a sweet spirit, it's that Holy one, not my carnal one.... At the risk of generalizing from my own experience ;-) I will just say that I have been baptized by the Holy Spirit and do not (yet, anyway) speak in tongues. Yet others have told me that they see evidence of the Spirit's indwelling. The passage you cite is troublesome because of its absense from early manuscripts. I hope you don't go 'round drinking Drano and playing with rattlesnakes. ;-) Peace and grace and a blessed and merry Christmas Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
403 | Do we "use" the Spirit as we shoul? | Eph 1:13 | stjones | 27800 | ||
Hi, Search; I think that is the key to visible manifestation. I received the Holy Spirit when I was saved. That was the easy part. The hard part is to learn to yield to his leading. I still tend to think I have a better plan which, of course, interferes with the outward manifestation that God intends. Was I "filled"? I don't know; I've still got a few sizeable leaks. But God still uses cracked vessels. Peace and grace and a blessed and merry Christmas, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
404 | When will I speak/pray in tongues? | Acts 2:6 | stjones | 27720 | ||
Hello, a2b; Just out of curiosity, can you show where the Bible says we get to choose our gifts? Or that there is any gift that all believers are given? I think the references already given support the notion that gifts are distributed as God wills, not as we will, and that there is no one gift common to all. I certainly don't mean to challenge your gift or even your discovery of it. But I would caution you against generalizing from your own experience. It's easy to imagine Peter, James, and John getting the idea that the only "true" disciples were those who were present at the Transfiguration. But they had Jesus to show them that their experience was uniquely theirs and not a standard by which to measure others. We have the Bible which serves the same purpose. Peace and grace and a blessed and merry Christmas, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
405 | Give the difference of evil and wickness | OT general | stjones | 26189 | ||
Thanks, Steve; I admire your discernment. ;-) ;-) I also appreciate yours, including those few I may disagree with. One of the things to like about this forum is the (usually) thoughtful and sincere posts. Ok, enough of the group hug. Peace and grace Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
406 | what about the K J V | Rev 3:10 | stjones | 24960 | ||
Hi, Waldo; As I'm sure you know, that's not a practical solution for most people. For scholarly purposes (and by scholarship, I refer primarily to publication), yes, that is the preferred way. But the kinds of technical questions that entertain scholars these days don't have much bearing on the lives of believers. I don't think God expects most of us to do that either. The Holy Spirit guides our understanding. It certainly may be true that the more material we give him to work with (translations, paraphrases, original languages, trustworthy commentaries, other believers, even this forum), the more mature or discerning we may become. I think people who use lexicons as a substitute for learning the ancient languages can be led astray. Nearly every word in a lexicon has multiple meanings or shades of meaning. How does one pick the appropriate meaning for a word without knowing the original context in which it was used? This is not a condemnation of lexicons (which I use myself on occation) or of those who refer to them in this forum, just an observation. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
407 | all scripture for doctrine? | 2 Tim 3:16 | stjones | 24819 | ||
Great answer, Hank. Peace and grace Steve aka Indiana Jones from the Amen corner |
||||||
408 | What scripture talks about alcohol | Hab 2:5 | stjones | 24168 | ||
Thanks, Casiv; You are absolutely right. I had forgotten about references to "strong drink". Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
409 | Franklin Graham's view of Moslem faith | 1 Cor 2:10 | stjones | 23987 | ||
Hi, Bob; Just a historical note - Muhammad was born in 570 and had his first visit from an "angel" at age 40. Pope Urban called for the First Crusade in 1095. But there's no question that the Crusades helped to grow Islam and perhaps planted the seeds of hatred of the West that we see today. The key point is, as you said, that Allah is certainly not God and Muhammad was certainly not God's messenger. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
410 | God is Light! | 1 John 1:5 | stjones | 23964 | ||
I appreciate the kind words, Nolan, but I must confess.... I think I mentioned in another thread that I was invited to preach on 1 John 1:5-2:6 a couple of months ago and had a long time to prepare. Those comments came from that sermon and all credit goes to the Holy Spirit who guided my preparation. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
411 | God is Light! | 1 John 1:5 | stjones | 23946 | ||
Hi, Nolan; A couple of observations about light and dark - In English "light" is both the radiant energy and its source - e.g. a lamp or lantern. God is both the source and the energy itself. Darkness is without power - in fact it's without its own definition; darkness is just the absence of light. Because darkness has no power of its own, it succumbs to the light every time. No matter how deep or dark the abyss may be, a single candle wins - "Better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness". Likewise God's light defeats spiritual darkness every time. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
412 | If He came today would He turn away fro | OT general | stjones | 23936 | ||
Hi, Bob; Glad you found the informtation useful. I should add that when they are 14, kids in our church are given the opportunity to join after a pretty vigorous Communicants' Class. At that time, they make a public profession of faith. If they were not baptized previously (i.e. as infants), they are baptized at the same time. I would not be offended if either of my daughters chose to be baptized again. If they came to believe that the Presbyterian understanding of baptism was incorrect and their infant baptism "didn't count", I would hope they would do as you did. After all, God knows our hearts; I don't suppose he is offended at a sincere desire to discern and do his will. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
413 | Where's the line? | 2 Tim 2:23 | stjones | 23905 | ||
Hi, Lion; I would consider an argument over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin to be foolish or ignorant speculation. Perhaps I would apply a two-part test: (1) If the answer is generally known, it is ignorant. (2) Ask yourself - if you knew the answer, would it matter? If the answer is no, it wouldn't matter, the speculation is foolish. If it's neither ignorant nor foolish, it might be worthwhile. Just my opinion. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
414 | If He came today would He turn away fro | OT general | stjones | 23895 | ||
Explanation of infant baptism [LONG] Hi, Bob. You said "The closest thing that can be compared to baptism in my understanding is the circumsision of the Old Testament. It is an outward sign of an inward covenant. Salvation is by faith in Jesus Christ plus nothing". This is the view of the Presbyterian church - baptism does not save, faith does. Baptism is the sign of a covenetal relationship between God and his chosen people. The Sacrament of Baptism is practiced according to the theology that guides the Presbyterian church. Therefore, Presbyterians only baptize members' children and only during a worship service. When presenting an infant or child for baptism, the parents make a public profession of faith in Christ. As part of the sacrament, the congregation affirms its intention to welcome the child and help grow the child in the faith. As good Calvinists, Presbyterians focus on God's sovereign act of choosing. 'Just as Jesus had said to his disciples, "You did not choose me but I chose you . . . .", one can see in the Sacrament of Baptism God's act of choosing. Whatever the age of the person being baptized, it's God's choosing that is the crucial action. Adults, as well as infants, will have to decide many times after their baptism whether or not to choose God back!'* 'When the parents make a profession of faith, they do so not on behalf of their child, but as a statement of their identity as members of the covenanted community, and their intention to form the child's faith as best they can within that community. Under those circumstances, there is at least a reasonable prospect that a baptized person will grow into her baptism in due time, making a profession of faith and choosing back the God who first chose her.' 'Infant baptism [is] about the status of the children of believers - members of the covenant community - and not about children in general! Baptism [is] meant neither to save the child from some peril in this world or the next, nor as a sentimental blessing upon newborns, nor as a way for the parents to profess the child's supposed "implicit" faith by proxy. It [is] an act which incorporate[s] into the body of Christ the children of persons who [are] already a part of that body.' This is consistent with 1 Corinthians 7. There is no assumption that the act of baptizing with prevent the child from later deciding to leave the covenant community by choosing not to accept Christ for herself. *All quotes are from an article in the Office of Theology and Worship section of the Presbyterian Church (USA) web site. I don't intend to start a dispute over baptism, infant or otherwise; I'm posting this purely as information. Peace and grace, Steve "Indy" Jones |
||||||
415 | What does Matthew 24: 28 mean? | Matt 24:28 | stjones | 23794 | ||
Hi, Ross; Even the original disciples acted on their own sometimes, arguing about their places in Heaven and such. It should come as no surprise that we more recent ones don't always get along as Jesus wants us to. All that proves is that Christians are not perfect - something that most of us already know. Your comparison with Babel is off the mark - the languages of the workers were confused by God's design. In fact different churches and different denominations work together often. If they fail to do so when they should, that's simply a human failing, not God's design. As for the passage at the top of the page, I have no idea what it means; it's not a passage I've studied. But that's not the point. You claimed to have knowledge about a prophecy that "no Christian on Earth" has an adequate understanding of. That's gnosticism. If gnosticism masquerades as Christianity, it's a heresy that was exposed in the first century. If it does not masquerade as Christianity but comes from another religion altogether, it is of no theological significance to a Christian. Muhammad misreprented both Moses and Jesus. You could hardly expect a Christian to learn anything about either of them from the Qur'an. Or from any other religion that departs from orthodox Christianity. From what I've seen, Bahais misrepresent Jesus in a similar way. You and I can respect each other and learn from each other as fellow humnas on this earth. But I can learn nothing about Jesus from any source but the Bible, the Holy Spirit confirmed by the Bible, or brothers and sisters in Christ confirmed by the Bible. Peace and grace, Steve "Indy" Jones |
||||||
416 | Purpose of the Bible | 2 Tim 3:16 | stjones | 23777 | ||
Hi, Kalos; I just happened to think that I ought to go back to just plain (if confusing) "Steve". Indiana Jones managed to insult: (1) the Jews with the idea that the Ark of the Covenant could be used as a weapon ("Raiders of the Lost Ark"), (2) the Hindus by associating their goddess Kali with child abuse and torture ("The Temple of Doom"), and (3) Christians with the idea that drinking out of the chalice used by Jesus at the last supper could confer immortality ("The Last Crusade"). Peace and grace, Steve, formerly "Indiana Jones", formerly "Steve" |
||||||
417 | end times | NT general Archive 1 | stjones | 23776 | ||
Thanks, Kalos. You too. Peace and grace, Indiana Jones, formerly "Steve" (too many Steves around here) |
||||||
418 | What does Matthew 24: 28 mean? | Matt 24:28 | stjones | 23775 | ||
Thanks, Tim; In my years of searching, I explored Bahai. At first it looked like Unitarianism with ritual. I eventually realized that its attempt to legitimize just about any and all religions by combining them produced contradictions, not answers. The temple up north of Chicago is impressive though. Peace and grace, Indiana Jones |
||||||
419 | How do we respond to war as Christians? | Deut 7:2 | stjones | 23764 | ||
Support for Tim (and Radioman); Tim made an important distinction - Jesus taught people how to live and act toward one another. I can't recall anything he said about how states should behave toward one another. Jesus taught us that we ought not hate bin Laden and Al Qaeda or seek to kill them out of hatred or revenge. It could certainly be a matter of individual conscience, however, whether one ought to serve in the military and perhaps kill them as an act of war: "For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience." (Romans 13:3-5) The terrorists are evil-doers. It doesn't look to me as though the one who uses the sword in the ruler's name to punish them is committing a sin. Peace and grace, Indiana Jones, formerly "Steve" (too many Steves around here) |
||||||
420 | What does Matthew 24: 28 mean? | Matt 24:28 | stjones | 23763 | ||
Hi, Ross; You said "I also ask church members to explain for me their understanding of Isaiah 22:22-25 and Isaiah 19:18-25, which are also Holy Prophecies concerning which no Christian on Earth is able to provide the accurate explanation of their fulfillment, in the same manner that no Christian could provide the accurate explanation of the fulfillment of Mat.24:27,28." With all respect, Peter and Paul both dealt with similar claims of secret knowledge. It's called gnosticism. I'm sure your understanding of these passages is interesting - perhaps you'll share it some time. But understanding of this passage is not a litmus test for faith in Christ or for maturity in the Christian faith. If you are indeed certain that there is no Christian who understands or agrees with your interpretation of this or any other passage, the explanation is simple. Your interpretation - whatever it may be - is incorrect. Peace and grace, Steve |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ] Next > Last [25] >> |