Results 41 - 53 of 53
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: reformedreader Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
41 | What is reformation? | Heb 9:10 | reformedreader | 6021 | ||
charis, Verse 11 is the time of reformation. The previous verses spoke of the "insufficiency" of sacrifices and ordinances that shadowed the "sufficiency" of Christ Himself. The book of Hebrews is mainly concerned with the sufficiency of Christ in that many new believes (and some not) were still making trips to the temple for atonement. They were not trusting in the sufficiency of Christ's atonement to put away the condemnation of sin forever. Christ is the reformation (change) of a law only in respect to the levitical law (priesthood), sacrifices and ordinances related to sins. This is not to be confused with the "whole" law, only that "part" of the law specifically related to the end of the levitical priesthood and all associated ordinances and sacrifices. |
||||||
42 | how does John 9.3 and 4 answer reincarna | Heb 9:27 | reformedreader | 2885 | ||
They don't answer the question of reincarnation because there is no such thing as reincarnation. God is quite clear when He says that we die but once and then our judgement comes. A believer has already died to sins and has already been judged guilty. Our sins were paid for by Christ and the guilty/death penalty was envoked on Him. Our judgement is now to live for Christ and with Christ for eternity. The unbeliever, on the otherhand, has not died to sins and upon their physical death, if they have not been called out of darkness, they will be submitted to their judgement of eternal separation from God and cast into eternal torment. Sam Hughey |
||||||
43 | Blood sacrifices during the Millenium? | Heb 10:12 | reformedreader | 3745 | ||
Nrojac, I truly do not mean for this note to be disrespectful to you or anyone else in anyway whatsoever, however, I do intend it to be firm and serious. The dispensational idea of blood sacrifices at "ANY" time since Christ's once and for all blood sacrifice is blashpemy and the epistle to the Hebrews clearly warns those who do not accept the finished work of Christ as the only propitiatory redemptive act that they cannot redeem themselves again through vainful human effort of repetitive acts of blood sacrifices. What you are talking about is nothing more than imaginative eschatology. There is no such thing as a future "literal" millennium, rebuilt temple and especially blood sacrifice. This is nowhere found in scripture. It sounds like this DD is a hyper-dispensationalist who really doesn't understand the scriptures. The typical place dispensationalists use to teach a future temple and sacrifices is in Ezekiel 40 and further. The supposed future earthly millennium is Revelation 20:4. You are correct in not believing in a future blood sacrifice for the remission of sin or as a remembrance of "anything". Sam Hughey |
||||||
44 | Why evangelize if already chosen? | 1 Pet 2:9 | reformedreader | 4133 | ||
Lionstrong, Thank you for such a sound and biblical apology for both God's election and our responsibilty to obey God. I pray that those who are anti-Calvinistic will at least attempt to honestly see what Biblical Calvinism truly teaches instead of the old worn out stories that never prove to be true. (Isaiah 55:11) So will My word be which goes forth from My mouth; It will not return to Me empty, Without accomplishing what I desire, And without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it. Man's will cannot thwart, deny, deprive, correct or change the pre-determined will (word) of God that goes out to accomplish "SUCCESSFULLY" whatever it was sent out to do. Sam Hughey |
||||||
45 | Is 1 John 1:9 applicable to Christians? | 1 John 1:9 | reformedreader | 2877 | ||
Lifer, Your question has plagued Christians for a long time. It will undoubtedly receive much attention. (I hope) Let's start with the conclusion. As Christians, we are either forgiven for all sins or for only some sins. If "all" sins, then would our asking for forgiveness imply we do not believe we are forgiven and if only "some" sins, then are we still under the condemnation of God for "unforgiven" sin? And, if we die before we confess and ask if God will forgive us for at least one sin that might have been either overlooked or ignored or forgotten, would we still spend eternity as one who has been washed clean by the blood of the Lamb? What do you think? Sam Hughey |
||||||
46 | Does His blood wash away ALL our sins? | 1 John 1:9 | reformedreader | 2900 | ||
Lifer, Romans 8:1 clearly states there is no condemnation to those who are in Christ (saved). If I believe this to be true, then no matter what sin I have ever committed or ever will commit, there is no condemnation to me because I am in Christ. This is not a liscence to sin and when we sin, we must judge our hearts as to why we sin, acknowledge that we have sinned and confess the sin to God. Our confession does not let God know something He doesn't already know and the sin is already forgiven. Unlike the temporary atonement prior to Calvary, Christ's atonement is a once and for all (sins and time) cleansing of sin. It does not prevent us from sinning but it does prevent us from being condemned for sinning. His atonement is a perpetual atonement always being made for His elect. Hebrews 10:11 explains how the Old Testament Priests stood daily ministering offerings time after time the same sacrifice that could not take away sins. However, our Lord is "seated" at the right hand of His Father, having taken away complete and utter condemnation for sins (past, present and future). No present or future work of atonement is necessary since Christ's atonement was complete. When, not if, a Christian dies and has unconfessed sin, that Christian is still a Christian and still under no condemnation of sin. Romans 8:1 settles that argument. There are some, however, who would have us believe that we must continually seek forgiveness in order to be what we already are. This is a works oriented salvation and usually goes hand in hand with free-will theism, though not always. This places the actions of man at the center of his salvation rather than Christ Himself. Hope this helps. Sam Hughey |
||||||
47 | The inevitable BUT... | 1 John 1:9 | reformedreader | 2902 | ||
Lifer, Our salvation is conditional upon nothing we do or not do for we are saved by grace which is God's unmerited favor (love) for those who can do nothing for themselves. The forgiveness of sin is as much a part of our salvation as our salvation itself. In fact, you cannot have one without the other. I do not see John making statements that would lead us to believe if we fail to confess but one sin, we will not be saved. And, lest we forget, salvation without forgiveness is impossible. I believe John is addressing an audience much like our congregations today. There is a mixture of known and unknown lost and saved. Many who profess to be saved are not and the message would naturally be applied to them. I thank God my sins are forgiven and the praise of thanksgiving not only solidifies my belief and faith but glorifies God in that He alone can and has forgiven sin. The reasoning is really very simple when we conclude the most logical antithesis of John's words. If we do not confess our sins, He is not faithful and not just and will not forgive. But we do know God to be faithful and just to forgive and it is never based on a human condition but His grace alone. However, not a single Christian has ever or will ever say truthfully they confessed to God every sin they ever committed in order to be forgiven in order to be saved. We are saved in spite of not confessing our sins. Our salvation should be a settled matter. On the otherhand, if we acquire the desire to sin and not confess, seeing no importance in confessing usually requires seeing no wrong in sinning, then we fall into the 8th verse of 1st John. We have deceived ourselves and most often because we never responded to the true gospel. Hope that helps, Sam Hughey |
||||||
48 | True...but what about 1 John 1:9? | 1 John 1:9 | reformedreader | 2904 | ||
Lifer, Yes, our salvation is complete because of the complete work of Christ. He has given us complete and utter redemption, justification, sanctification and reconciliation (forgiveness). If it is complete, then what further acts of Christ do we need to be or have what we already are and have? Hebrews address this same problem. Many 1st century Jews were still going to the Tabernacle to offer sacrifices for the forgiveness of sins. The writer clearly explains how Christ's atonement was complete and brought an end to any future sacrifice (offering) for the forgiveness of sin. That is why Romans 8:1 can say what it says. I think the problem you are having might be that you are forcing the two verses to fit into perhaps a preconceived idea. I don't believe the two contradict each other because they are part of the same gospel message John is preaching. John is addressing an audience of people who are both unredeemed and redeemed. Perhaps as in our own congregations today there are those who are under the impression they are saved because they walked an aisle, repeated certain words and were baptized. Our Baptist churches are filled with unregenerate church members. John is merely doing the same any preacher would do. When presenting the gospel, there should always be a warning to repent of sin and the consequences for not doing so. There should also be the message of security for knowing that, as Christians, our sins (all) are forgiven (2:12). 1 John 1:9 and 2:12 merely compliment the complete gospel message and warns those who falsely believe they can be saved and have no problems with sin versus those who have problems when they sin and therefore, confess to God to restore the fellowship (not membership) of their relationship. Sam Hughey |
||||||
49 | Fellowship? Am I in or out? | 1 John 1:9 | reformedreader | 2916 | ||
Lifer, Please don't be troubled with asking anything. Afterall, that is why we are here. The consequences for Christians who are suffering from an unhappy fellowship with God is unhappiness, weak faith, easily tempted into surrendering to sin, doubting their salvation and even leads to not believing God. If this persists, it can lead to disastrous results in both your Christian life and others who are both directly and indirectly influenced by you. Look at the "prodigal son" for example. He did not have the proper fellowship with his father which caused him to be envious and greedy (wanting his inheritence before its time). He wallowed in the mud with pigs (lowest form of life for Jews), yet his relationship with his father never changed. Your standing with God, if you are a believer, is certain. Your relationship has not been dissolved and never will be. Christ has stated in John 6:39 that the will of the Father is that of all whom the Father has given Him (Christ), He (Christ) will lose "NONE". Both the Father and the Son were and are fully aware of the sins we will commit in our future but our salvation is certain and not even the gates of hell can prevail against that truth. I think the terms "in" and "out" of fellowhsip are inaccurate and abused by many. It is another term "Bible-Believing" Christians like to use that is not even used in the Bible. I think the Bible refers to the "joy" of our fellowship being there or not as with David when he finally acknowledged his sins concerning Bathsheba and her husband. David suffered much, such as the loss of his child with Bathsheba and his reign as King would always be filled with violence. I cannot say what God will or will not do in any given situation. But I do know that God will allow us to wallow in the mud with pigs until we come to our senses. It can be very painful and we might lose much in the process, but our relationship will never, never be lost. Sam Hughey |
||||||
50 | Jesus took all the world's sins on Him? | 1 John 2:2 | reformedreader | 2949 | ||
petra, Would you explain "kessu" for the sake of those who do not know so responding might be made easier? Sam Hughey |
||||||
51 | Did Christ die for the world? | 1 John 2:2 | reformedreader | 6569 | ||
Morant61, First of all, I really appreciate anyone truly desiring to discuss this issue with an honest and open attitude. However, if you wish to entertain this discussion with only a limited use of scripture, I would say this can prove to be a fruitless effort when you want to limit it to the verses only "you" want us to use. That's like stacking the deck in your favor. Secondly, did Christ die for the sins of all humans or for all humans who sin? There is a big difference. 1 John 2:2 does not say Christ died for all humans, it says He died for the sins of the whole world. 1 John 4:10 also does not say Christ died for all humans, it says He died for "our" sins. If you force the term "whole world" to refer to "all humans", then that reasoning and 1 John 2:2 demands a strict and literal agreement with John 10:11 where John said Christ died for His "sheep". That would imply that all humans are Christ's sheep. The same writer would not contradict himself at 1 John 2:2 with what he said at John 10:11. John again states that Christ laid down His life for His sheep in verse 15. It is not a matter of what "seems" to be clear, it is a very distinct fact that for whomever Christ died, they are referred to as His sheep. John also makes it crystal clear that those who do not believe are so because they are not Christ's sheep. Now, since Christ laid down His life for His sheep, what does that say about those who are "not" His sheep? Romans 3:25 does not say anything whatsoever about for whom Christ died but, rather, for what He died and that would be sins. If we are going to be restricted to what verses we can observe, then the verses we observe must be viewed correctly in light of what they actually say. Sam Hughey |
||||||
52 | Believer's authority and the devil. | Jude 1:9 | reformedreader | 7447 | ||
JVH0212, When considering that Michael did not dare to bring a railing judgement against Satan, then it should move us to at least consider if we should. Actually, one may even consider it to be of no purpose if we did. After all, what could we possibly say to or against Satan that would change anything? Do we need to tell him that he is eternally damned when he already knows that? Do we need to say he is a liar when our Lord has already made that perfectly clear? What would we say that Satan doesn't already know or that would make any difference? I believe it to be highly unwise to attempt to combat Satan without the power of God (as well as a command from God) and I have never seen anywhere in scripture where we should be inclined to do so. We should resist him and even flee from him at appropriate times but we are nowhere commanded to fight this enemy without first calculating the risks involved. Sam Hughey |
||||||
53 | Does Rev. 1:6 refer to the Millenial age | Rev 1:6 | reformedreader | 7451 | ||
Hiram Abiff, This is mainly a matter of perspective. A dispensationalist might view this from a different perspective than those who are a-mil or post-mil. Actually, 1 Peter 2:9 says; "But you are A CHOSEN RACE, A royal PRIESTHOOD, A HOLY NATION, A PEOPLE FOR God's OWN POSSESSION, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light." So, with respect to this verse, we are already a kingdom of priests and have been since God called His elect to salvation. Rev. 1:6 in no way whatsoever makes reference to the dispensational view of the millennial kingdom. The fact that we are and have been made to be a kingdom of priests to God is the essence of Rev. 1:6, not the millennial kingdom. Sam Hughey |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 ] |