Results 41 - 60 of 332
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: retxar Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
41 | what is baptism | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 26719 | ||
kin, No one has answered your question? You have got to be kidding! Your question has been answered repeatedly. Here’s something else. Romans chapter 4. Please look back and find solid scripture based answers to all the questions raised in opposition to your “water saves” doctrine (questions you have consistently avoided) before asking us to continue repeating ourselves. Jesus saves by grace! retxar |
||||||
42 | what is baptism | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 26861 | ||
OK. Maybe I could see your point if I could ignore Rom4. Maybe I could see your point in Mar 16:16 if I could ignore Mar 16:16b-18. Maybe I could see your point in 1Pe3:21 if I could ignore the fact that Peter was VERY VERY careful to make the distinction that it isn't the actual washing of the water that saves us, but the reality behind it, which is a good conscience toward God made good thru the resurrection of Jesus, not water baptism. Maybe I could see your point in Acts 2:38 if I could, somehow, glue repentance and water baptism together, and not have them come un-glued (waterproof glue maybe!) when I interpreted it with ALL other scripture that clearly teach repentance and salvation by grace thru faith alone, apart from water baptism. If I can get around all those barriers, maybe we can talk about this again. In the mean time: "Please look back and find solid scripture based answers to all the questions raised in opposition to your “water saves” doctrine (questions you have consistently avoided) before asking us to continue repeating ourselves." Sorry, I guess I DID repeat myself! What else do you got on your mind, bro? How about let’s talk about that? Ask me anything (else). Jesus saves by grace! retxar |
||||||
43 | is no one going to answer me? | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 27854 | ||
Mommapbs, I think you may have taken Ed's answer here wrong. Ed was only reffering Grace to his answer under the original question Grace asked, not this tree here that resulted from Grace asking the same question again. Peace on earth to men of goodwill, retxar |
||||||
44 | is no one going to answer me? | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 27856 | ||
Sorry for butting in guys! Ya'll type to fast! Merry Christmas! retxar |
||||||
45 | Why not eat blood/why accept transfusion | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 27929 | ||
JWs ORIGINAL INTERPRETATION OF ACTS 15:20,29 Christian commentaries show that abstaining from these "necessary things" was necessary to maintain peace between Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians. If Gentile Christians were to eat blood with their food it would offend Jewish Christians. In 1892 the first president of the JWs, C T Russell, agreed with this Christian interpretation. (Zion’s Watch Tower 1892 November 15) In 1909 Russell showed that the 4 prohibitions were part of the Law of Moses, didn’t really apply to Gentiles, but were necessary for peace. He wrote: "These prohibitions had never come to the Gentiles, because they had never been under the Law Covenant; but so deeply rooted were the Jewish ideas on this subject that it was necessary to the peace of the church that the Gentiles should observe this matter also." (The Watch Tower 1909 April 15 pp. 116-117) A DIFFERENT AND CHANGED VIEW: In 1939 the 2nd president of the JWs, J.F. Rutherford, wrote: "…… the life is in the blood and that blood must not be eaten. That would be true of a clean animal or an unclean one just the same. ……and if an animal is killed and the blood is not poured out, but eaten, then the man who does it is guilty of death, for the reason that no man shall drink blood without dying." (The Watchtower 1939 February 15 p.62) ANOTHER, CHANGED, AND I ASSUME CURRENT VIEW: The Watchtower 1944 December 1 stated: "Not only as a descendant of Noah, but now also as one bound by God’’s law to Israel which incorporated the everlasting covenant regarding the sanctity of life sustaining blood, the stranger was forbidden to eat or drink blood, whether by transfusion or by mouth." (complete article at www.adam.com.au/bstett/JwBloodDoctrineOrigin10.htm) My question to a JW on this would be, what happened to all the JW followers before 1944 who were led astray by the false prophet called The Watchtower, who lead them to believe a blood transfusion was OK, and now it says no man shall take blood without dying? I would not even discuss the blood issue with them. Even if they agree with you, it will accomplishment nothing if they refuse to recognize Jesus for who He is. Their mis-interpretation of Acts 15 won’t send them to hell, so let them believe what thy want. However, their mis-interpretation (and mis-translation) of John 1:1 will. Remember, when they step on our porch, they are on our territory, and it is our responsibility to give them the Gospel. Use the blood issue, as the Holy Spirit leads, to show them the lies they have been fed, so maybe they will accept the truth of the Gospel. Jesus was with God and He was God! Merry Christmas, retxar |
||||||
46 | Where does Jesus say He is God? | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 46358 | ||
Thanks Nolan! It was an easy question to answer by just using Jesus’s own words when He at various times un-mistakenly proclaimed Himself to be the self-existing, ever-existing, great I AM! However, I hesitated to answer anyway, since Jesus did not always give an answer to those who already had their mind made up. We are not obligated to answer those who are just out to shut us down and promote themselves, as seems to be the case here. Jesus showed us that by example in Mark 11:27-33. Jesus always answered true seekers tho, as He demonstrated in John 20:24-29 with Thomas. Hopefully I.U. will become a true seeker like Thomas, and Jesus can show them the truth and proof they are looking for and they can be set free! I hope and pray so! Jesus is Lord! retxar P.S. I like you new screen name! |
||||||
47 | Is speaking in tongues for today? | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 47056 | ||
1Co_14:22 says tongues are a sign to unbelievers, but to understand what that means, one must also look at verses before and after. Tongues spoken to the congregation must be interpreted for the benefit and protection of the uninformed and the unbelievers (1Co_14:23). Uninterpreted, the sign to the uninformed or the unbelievers would NOT be a sign of edification, as would occur with interpretation (1Co_14:5). The manifestation of the Holy Spirit would become a sign of judgement to them because they would scoff and the Holy Spirit would be mocked (Act_2:13). The Isaiah quote in 1Co_14:21 bears this out. retxar |
||||||
48 | Is speaking in tongues for today? | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 47128 | ||
I guess I need to better clarify what I was saying. With no interpretation, the uninformed or the unbeliever could bring judgement on themselves because they might treat the manifestation of the Holy Spirit with scoff and ridicule (1Co 14:23) and the Holy Spirit would be mocked (Act_2:13). This is the only interpretation that makes since because, as you pointed out, words of understanding would be the only ones those who are uninformed or unbelieving would recognize as from the Lord (1Co 14:24-25). retxar |
||||||
49 | Is speaking in tongues for today? | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 47136 | ||
I am glad the truth of God's Word is not established by my experience, my lack of experience, my observations, or the way I try to live it. If it was, we would all be in trouble! retxar |
||||||
50 | Is speaking in tongues for today? | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 47171 | ||
I'm not really interested in a flame throwing exchange with you here, bro. That is defiantly not my intent and I don't think that is the intent of this forum either. I think I’m a little confused tho. You keep referring to me asking the question of whether the spiritual gift of tongues is a valid spiritual gift for today. I can not remember or find that I ever asked that question anywhere on this forum. If I have overlooked something, please let me know. The relevance of the spiritual gift of tongues, along with all spiritual gifts, to remain until Jesus’s return was clearly and undoubtable answered for me thru the Word alone. This question was answered for me with no hint of any other conclusion. I read and believed what the Word revealed to me many years before I had anything I could feel, see, hear, smell, or taste to base it on. The Word always confirms or disqualifies our experiences and observations, not the other way around. retxar |
||||||
51 | did the wine from the water make you dr | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 47177 | ||
Hi Tim, I did not do a search as you advised Biynah to do, so forgive me if you have answered this question before. My question is, would there be ANY possibility that the wine Jesus created in John 2 was alcoholic at all. Since it was new wine that Jesus created, and wine only becomes alcoholic from fermentation and decay, how could new wine ever be alcoholic? thanks, retxar |
||||||
52 | Is speaking in tongues for today? | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 47948 | ||
Greetings Biynah I’m still at a loss of when and where I responded to any of your post other than those I answered as a direct response to what seemed to be an attempt to stir things up a bit. I know how easy it is to get confused to who you might be talking to here, so maybe you thought I was someone else, as your original response to me had no hint of addressing anything I had said in the post you were responding to. If you check the tree, I’m sure you will see that I am correct. If not, please show me where I have erred. Anyway, if you are a true seeker, I would be happy to show you what the Word revealed to me concerning the relevance of tongues being a valid spiritual gift today. Actually, since the Word does not say that any of the spiritual gifts given the church were temporary, the burden of proof would be on you to scripturally prove otherwise. The 1Co 13:8 reference you gave is a good reference that, when taken in context, is strong scriptural evidence that tongues WILL exist until Jesus’s kingdom is complete (1Co 13:10), and will not cease before that. If one insists that 1Co 13:8 is saying that tongues have already ceased, we must also say that knowledge has ceased. Are we living in the last days? The Word says that in the last days that knowledge would increase, not cease (Dan 12:4). The Word says the same thing about prophesies (Acts 2:17). If you wish to defend a “tongues have ceased position” by saying that “when that which is perfect has come”, found in 1Co 13:10, is referring to the completion of the NT, show me anywhere in the Word that the term “face to face”, as found in 1Co 13:12, ever means written words and someone’s face. Also, do you know everything completely, just as God knows you now? (1Co 13:12 ) I sure don’t! In 1Co 1:7 Paul said to the church at Corinth “Now you have every spiritual gift you need as you eagerly wait for the return of our Lord Jesus Christ.” This scripture is clear that they NEEDED all the spiritual gifts they had until Jesus returned. We know for a fact that one of the gifts that Paul said they had and needed was tongues, so it does not make since that Jesus’s church today would not also need that gift, along with the others, until His return. Regardless of whether we ever agree of not, please remember what 1Co 13 is all about. Let’s not get so caught up in ourselves that we forget how we are to act toward one another. Love never fails! retxar |
||||||
53 | Thankful To Be Alive! | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 57340 | ||
Thank you Father for Hank and the witness he has been for You here and to all he knows and meets. We praise You and thank You for the early diagnosis and treatment. We thank you for the wisdom and knowledge you have given Hank's doctors to prescribe the perfect treatment for Hank's condition. We thank you that you have touched and healed Hank's heart Spiritually, and we also thank You for touching and healing Hank's heart physically. We thank You and praise You that no permanent damage has occurred and for complete recovery. We pray, Holy Spirit, to lead and guide Hank in the things he needs to do in diet and exercise. We thank You for Hank's loving family, and thank You for being with them. In Jesus name, amen Jesus is our healer! retxar |
||||||
54 | KJVstudy guide for New christians | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 59610 | ||
Great recommendation Hank! I have just recently purchased a Nelson King James Study Bible in genuine leather from www.bibleexplosion.com for only 25 bucks! They still have it on sale for that price thru August. I think it is a great study Bible and I'm not even Baptist! (Tho I have told people I was Bapticostal before!) retxar |
||||||
55 | God is in control of every single atom? | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 61986 | ||
How do the unsaved become partakers of the Holy Ghost? retxar |
||||||
56 | God is in control of every single atom? | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 62042 | ||
OK, maybe partaking of the Holy Spirit does not have to mean the same as the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, as you say. I believe God can, and does, use the peace and joy unbelievers enjoy when they fellowship with Christians to draw them to Himself. However, this principle is a major stretch to apply to what Heb6 is talking about. Heb6 is speaking of true believers (whether hypothetical or actual). Otherwise how could a non-believer be renewed AGAIN unto repentance if no repentance has ever occurred? retxar |
||||||
57 | Bible books deleted Jehovah is now God | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 62742 | ||
God actually did reject the Aprocypha as being uninspired. The Jews had already rejected the Aprocypha as uninspired before the birth of Jesus. Jesus never spoke of the Jews as being in error concerning its rejection. retxar |
||||||
58 | Bible books deleted Jehovah is now God | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 62831 | ||
Jesus’ And The Extent Of The Old Testament A statement by Jesus seemingly gives His belief in the extent of the Old Testament. Therefore I send you prophets, sages, and scribes, some of whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town, so that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar. Truly I tell you, all this will come upon this generation (Matthew 23:34-36). He mentions Abel and Zechariah as the first and last murder messengers of God that were murdered. Abel’s murder is mentioned in Genesis while Zechariah’s was in 2 Chronicles – the last Old Testament book in the Hebrew canonical order. The fact that these two are specifically mentioned is particularly significant. There other murders of God’s messengers recorded in the Apocrypha. Jesus does not mention them. This strongly suggests He did not consider the books of the Apocrypha as part of Old Testament Scripture as with the books from Genesis to 2 Chronicles. There Was More Testimony From Jesus Jesus gave further testimony of the extent of the Old Testament canon in the day of His resurrection. He said. How foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! . . . And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself (Luke 24:25,27). Note Jesus’ emphasis on “all that the prophets had spoken.” Later He explained the extent of “all that the prophets had said.” He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms” (Luke 24:44). This is a reference to the threefold division of the Hebrew Scripture. They constitute “all that the prophets said.” There is no reference to the Apocrypha. It would not have been part of the threefold division of the Old Testament. Complete article at http://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/nbi/395.html retxar |
||||||
59 | Pre update NASB | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 67050 | ||
Ed, I guess what I said had nothing to do with the differences between the NASB and NASB-u. Sorry for the confusion. All I was trying to say, and show, was how thee's and thou's were originally used in Renaissance English. Thee's and thou's were not used as a reverent way to address the Lord, as in the '77 NASB. “Thee” and “thou” are singular forms of the pronouns “you” and “your”. In present day English “you” and “your” can be either singular or plural. In Renaissance English “you” and “your” were always plural and “thee and “thou” were always singular. I only gave the passage of Luke 22:31-32 as an example of how this can be a determining factor in knowing what a particular passage is saying. If we only have “you” and “your”, which can be either singular or plural, we have to guess where Jesus means Peter and where Jesus means all the disciples. If we have “thee” and “thou” as well as “you” and “your”, we can know when Jesus means Peter and when Jesus means disciples. I hope this clears things up a bit, and explains what I was trying to say! retxar |
||||||
60 | Pre update NASB | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 67106 | ||
Edb, Luke 22:31-32 "Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has demanded permission to sift you (does "you" here mean Peter or the disciples?) like wheat; [32] but I have prayed for you (Peter or the disciples?), that your faith (Peter's faith or the disciple's faith?) may not fail; and you, when once you have turned again, strengthen your brothers." NASB-U Luke 22:31-32 And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you (you is plural so Jesus means the disciples), that he may sift you (the disciples) as wheat: [32] But I have prayed for thee (thee is singular so Jesus means Peter), that thy faith (thy is singular so Jesus means Peter's faith) fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren. KJV I hope you now see what I am saying. But unless we are aware that there is a difference between you/your and thee/thou it does not make this passage or any other more clear. retxar |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [17] >> |