Results 41 - 60 of 558
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: retxar Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
41 | Are christians sinners or not? | Rom 3:23 | retxar | 69297 | ||
Yes, I can certainly agree with what you are saying. However, I also know that these same people are also going to have a pretty hard time understanding what John meant in 1st John chapter 3. He made some pretty remarkable claims himself! I think the biblical explanation as you suggested is exactly what is called for. I have never had very much success talking to ANYONE about Jesus who was comfortable in their sin. Getting people saved is easy. Getting them “lost” is the hard part! Those who know the chains that satan has them bound with are the ones who are hungry for Jesus. They already know the “bad news”, because they are living it! They are ready for the good news! They not only want to be delivered from sin’s condemnation, they also want to be delivered from sins domination. I would much rather give these true seekers a biblical explanation of this than giving the sceptics the “Christians aren’t perfect, just forgiven” story, just to justify myself or others. Jesus said that if He did not do the works of His Father to not believe Him (John 10:37), so I better not expect anything but the same treatment! If I don’t do the works of Jesus, don’t believe me! If the ones we share the gospel with do not see the works of Jesus in us, they are never going to believe what we have to say anyway, so I'm not going to spend a lot of time trying to explain to them why I still sin, cause they ain’t gonna listen! retxar |
||||||
42 | IS MICHAEL AND JESUS THE SAME PERSON? | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 69287 | ||
I posted this on my break at work today, so that's the reason for the typo! (good excuse anyway!) I now see another one! "I Jesus an Angel" should say "Is Jesus an Angel". Thanks for keeping me straight bro! retxar |
||||||
43 | IS MICHAEL AND JESUS THE SAME PERSON? | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 69262 | ||
that should say "corrupt nwt" not "nlt", sorry folks retxar |
||||||
44 | IS MICHAEL AND JESUS THE SAME PERSON? | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 69261 | ||
Is Jesus the Angel of the Lord - yes Exo 3:14 John 8:24,28,58 I Jesus Michael the Archanel - NO Read Hebrews chapter 1 in any translation you want (even the corrupt NLT!), and you will know that Jesus is no angel! Heb 1:4 having become so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. Heb 1:5 For to which of the angels did He ever say: "You are My Son, Today I have begotten You"? And again: "I will be to Him a Father, And He shall be to Me a Son"? Heb 1:6 But when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says: "Let all the angels of God worship Him." Heb 1:7 And of the angels He says: "Who makes His angels spirits And His ministers a flame of fire." Heb 1:8 But to the Son He says: "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your Kingdom. Heb 1:9 You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You With the oil of gladness more than Your companions." Heb 1:10 And: "You, LORD, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth, And the heavens are the work of Your hands. Heb 1:11 They will perish, but You remain; And they will all grow old like a garment; Heb 1:12 Like a cloak You will fold them up, And they will be changed. But You are the same, And Your years will not fail." Heb 1:13 But to which of the angels has He ever said: "Sit at My right hand, Till I make Your enemies Your footstool"? Heb 1:14 Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to minister for those who will inherit salvation? Jesus is Lord! retxar |
||||||
45 | Are christians sinners or not? | Rom 3:23 | retxar | 69259 | ||
John, When I read Romans 6 I read that I have been radically changed by God’s grace. I see that I am no longer a slave to sin but a slave to God. I see that God has set me free from the chains that Satan had on me. I see that before, my fruit was shame that lead to death. I see now that my fruit is holiness that leads to everlasting life. I see now that I am dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus. I see now, I MEAN RIGHT NOW, that sin does not have to reign in my mortal body, and I do not have to obey its lusts. I repeat: This is RIGHT NOW! This power over the sinful lust of the flesh is only possible because Jesus lives in me. This is a power that is above and beyond my own will power. This is a power over sin that the unsaved do not have. So what happens when I sin? It’s not that “I can’t help it”, it is because I choose to allow the flesh to overrule the Spirit. When I read 1John 3 (especially 1Jo 3:9), I see a distinct difference between the children of God and the children of the devil. It tells me how to know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are. This distinction is only possible because of what the presence of Jesus in our heart does, not of any goodness we have on our own. I have heard the statement many, many times that “Christians aren’t perfect, just forgiven”. This is a good word. However, the focus should be that on the fact that “we are forgiven”, not the excuse of, “oh well, we are not perfect”, as is many times the case. I don’t really like the word “just” used as description of how I was forgiven! A better word would be, “We are forgiven, just not perfect.” I like what Paul said even better. He said, “imitate me as I imitate Christ” (1 Cor 11:1). Too many times we have to say, “Don’t look at me (or other Christians or the church), just look at Jesus”. Well, Jesus said to let people see us for who we are and that should reflect Him (Mat 5:16). Our life should not be a life just like the sinner we were before with the only difference now being that we are forgiven. Paul said God’s WORD should be the manifestation that others see in our lives (2Co 3:2-3), not the manifestation of sin. I haven’t written anything here as any kind of rebuttal to what you said, because I pretty much agree with it all. I just wanted to explain my thoughts a little better. I think my definition of a sinner (a person complacent in sin) is probably a little different than yours (a person who sins), but hopefully you can pretty much agree with the other things I said. God bless you bro, retxar |
||||||
46 | Churches | Phil 3:3 | retxar | 69237 | ||
You said: “In my experience, the slate has always been elected unanimously. I guess that reflects either apathy or general agreement on the committee's work. I hope it's the latter.” Act 6:5-6 And the saying pleased the whole multitude. And they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit, and Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas, a proselyte from Antioch, whom they set before the apostles; and when they had prayed, they laid hands on them. In this example from scripture, all who were chosen were approved and confirmed unanimously as God’s choice. This shows me that people can make perfect choices and be in perfect agreement of those who God wishes to choose, approve and confirm if they allow God to work thru them. Man can never commission God’s appointment for anyone. Man can only recognize and confirm what God has already commissioned. If you are elected as an elder in your church, I believe it reflects an appointment from God that man has only recognized and confirmed. God bless! retxar |
||||||
47 | Are christians sinners or not? | Rom 3:23 | retxar | 69160 | ||
Eph 2:19 says Christians are no longer sinners but saints, so I have to disagree with you and say that Christians are NOT sinners. It is true, as you say, that we still commit sin after we become Christians, but we do not practice sin. Sin will always hurts us, grieve the Holy Spirit living within us, and cause our heart to ache under His conviction until we repent. If we do practice sin and have no remorse, we do not meet the biblical definition of a Christian (1Jo 3:2, 1Jo 3:9, 1Jo 2:4, 1Jo 4:8, 1Jo 5:18). However, that does not mean that we do not have struggles (Romans 7), but it does mean we don’t have to live there (Romans 8). There is a big difference between committing a sin out of weakness of the flesh, verses being one who practices sin, and thus IS a sinner. Let me offer this illustration that may help: When I was at Wal-Mart last night a guy came in the sporting goods department looking at the fishing poles. He asked the guy behind the counter if he was a fisherman, because he wanted to go fishing, and needed some advice from someone who knew the sport. He happily left with his new gear with plans to go fishing. When this same guy hits the water and comes back into Wal-Mart in a few days for some more supplies, he will still not be a fishermen, just a guy who has been fishing. If he continues practicing fishing, he will eventually become known as a fisherman, but if he does not continue practicing the sport of fishing on a regular basis, he is just a guy who goes fishing now and then, not a fisherman. We sin, but we do not practice sin, so thus, we are not sinners. We are Christians doing battle with the flesh and losing out periodically because we try to do the fighting ourselves, and do not utilize the Holy Spirit living within us. This was not a perfect illustration, but I hope you see the point I am trying to make. For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war according to the flesh! (2Co 10:3) retxar |
||||||
48 | Churches | Phil 3:3 | retxar | 69158 | ||
One difference is church government. Baptist are more of a congregational run fellowship where major decisions are voted on by the congregation and they also determine church policy. The Presbyterians are more of a Elder run fellowship where the board of Elders make the major decisions and determine church policy. retxar |
||||||
49 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | retxar | 69115 | ||
Don First off, let me say I did not say or imply you were a “snot-nosed punk with no decent sensibilities toward others”. I spoke of what you did (deceptively mis-quoted JFB), not your character. I presented the reason for my accusation, not generalities or name calling. If you can refute that what you did was not dishonest with the intent to deceive and mislead, and that what you left out was not intentional because it was detrimental to the agenda you are attempting to push, we would all like to hear about it. If you chose to ignore what you did and consider deception OK, fine, but don’t expect anyone around here to really take what you have to say seriously, regardless of how many big name professors you have shut down with your vast array of knowledge. Forgive me if I have a major problem with this, but I’m not used to fellow Christians trying to deceive me and then have them brush it off as if nothing happened. Please deal with this in a responsible manner. You’re kidding no one but yourself. You said ‘The commentary I quoted from CLEARLY said "THE ANCIENT INTERPRETATION THAT THE PROHIBITION HERE IS AGAINST POLYGAMY IN A CANDIDATE BISHOP IS NOT CORRECT." And why did the commentary say that the “one wife” thing Paul was talking about was not talking about polygamy?? Because of the part you left out!! It is the statement just before the one you like to quote here. Let’s read it again: “and as polygamy was never allowed among even laymen in the Church”. The commentary said that Polygamy was not what Paul was talking about here because POLYGAMY WAS PROHIBITED FOR ALL, NOT JUST BISHOPS! If you won’t listen to anyone else, just listen to yourself, and take a serious look at how weak and dishonest your attempts are at trying to prove you point. What is your motivation for this? retxar |
||||||
50 | John8:24 and John8:57-58 | John 8:24 | retxar | 69052 | ||
Jesus was NOT BORN before Abraham, He has existed from eternity! The statement Jesus made when He said He was the great I AM (John 8:24,28,58), means He is the eternal, self existent One, He has no beginning, He has forever existed as God from eternity past and will exist as God forever and ever! I have always thought that the “he” the translators added to John 8:24,28 should not be there and takes a little bit of the “teeth” out of what Jesus was really declaring to the Pharisees. They knew exactly what He was saying, as they wanted to stone Him to death for it! Jesus declaration that He was the great I AM was the same thing Moses heard from God at the burning bush (Exo 3:14). Some believe, as I, that Moses encounter with God at the burning bush was a OT visit from Jesus; God with us and in the flesh (John 1:18). “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” (John 1:1) retxar |
||||||
51 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | retxar | 69030 | ||
You said: “Perhaps you have a corrupt copy of that commentary, or you did not read what those men had to say that I DID include in the quote.” No, I do not have a corrupt copy, I DID read ALL they had to say, without leaving parts out! I checked the post you referred me to concerning your address of the commentary mis-quotation I questioned. One thing you said was: “There are MANY more portions of that commentary that I could have quoted, but we are all limited to only 5000 characters in this forum.” I am re-posting exactly what you posted the 1st time, PLUS I added the part you conveniently left out. For the sake of putting to rest the debate over Titus and 2 Timothy's "husband of one wife" argument, I offer a commentary from three well respected scholars of the Hebrew and Greek languages. The threads of this question have begun to run far too deep to keep up with it all, so I will begin by addressing the "husband of one wife" issue in Titus. (The "all caps" is my emphasis rather than that of the authors.) This quote comes from a well respected commentary, Jamieson, Faussett, Brown Commentary: "husband of one wife -- confuting the celibacy of Rome's priesthood. Though the Jews practiced polygamy, yet as he is writing as to a Gentile Church, and as polygamy was never allowed among even laymen in the Church, (this is the part you conveniently left out) THE ANCIENT INTERPRETATION THAT THE PROHIBITION HERE IS AGAINST POLYGAMY IN A CANDIDATE BISHOP IS NOT CORRECT. It must, therefore, mean that, though LAYMEN MIGHT LAWFULLY MARRY AGAIN, candidates for the episcopate or presbytery were better to have been married only once. As in 1Ti 5:9, "wife of one man," IMPLIES A WOMAN MARRIED BUT ONCE; so "husband of one wife" here MUST MEAN THE SAME. The feeling which prevailed among the Gentiles, as well as the Jews (compare as to Anna, Lu 2:36,37), against a second marriage would, on the ground of expediency and conciliation in matters indifferent and not involving compromise of principle, account for Paul's prohibition here in the case of one in so prominent a sphere as a bishop or a deacon. Hence the STRESS THAT IS LAID IN THE CONTEXT on the repute in which the candidate for orders is held among those over whom he is to preside (Tit 1:16). The Council of Laodicea and the apostolic canons discountenanced second marriages, especially in the case of candidates for ordination. Of course second marriage being lawful, the undesirableness of it holds good only under special circumstances. It is implied here also, that he who has a wife and virtuous family, is to be PREFERRED TO A BACHELOR; for he who is himself bound to discharge the domestic duties mentioned here, is likely to be MORE ATTRACTIVE to those who have similar ties, for he teaches them not only by precept, but also BY EXAMPLE (1Ti 3:4,5). The Jews teach, a priest should be neither unmarried nor childless, lest he be unmerciful [BENGEL]. So in the synagogue, "no one shall offer up prayer in public, unless he be married" [in Colbo, ch. 65; VITRINGA, Synagogue and Temple]." [Emphasis mine] Guess what? Even with adding the part you left out and all I have said here, we are STILL under the 5000 word limit! Imagine that! retxar |
||||||
52 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | retxar | 68998 | ||
When my wife turned 40 I told her she was so grand that I thought I could probably trade her in on 2 twenty year olds! But she told me I wasn't wired for 2-20, so I scrapped the idea! :-) retxar |
||||||
53 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | retxar | 68971 | ||
Speaking of words being twisted and taken out of context, are you going to deal with the Jamieson, Faussett, Brown Commentary "quote" you posted the other day? Was this an honest mistake on your part, or did you get a little too zealous trying give your agenda some credibility? Did you really think we would buy that without checking out your source? Forgive me, but you seem to avoid all the hard questions, and keep repeating the same answers over and ever. Also, do you also take the stand that a women can have more than one husband. If not, why not? retxar |
||||||
54 | What is Pentecost a Revelation of ...??? | Lev 23:16 | retxar | 68935 | ||
Pentecost (from the word pentekostos, meaning 50th) took place 50 days after Passover (Lev 23:15-21) and was the Jewish feast of the first fruits of the wheat harvest (Num 28:26). Jewish tradition teaches that Moses received the Law on the day Pentecost. So on the same day Israel received the Law in the OT, the Church received God’s grace in all it’s fullness in the NT, and thus the church was born! retxar |
||||||
55 | making wine.Did Jesus make a mistake. | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 68736 | ||
Thanks bro. That's the way I see it too; we are kings and priest and that position will be fully realized when we are with Jesus. Thanks for your exchange with me on this issue and for considering the point I was trying to make; our conduct is important because Jesus has put us in a position of influence and obligation as kings and priest. I am glad you see what I have presented as wise guidelines to follow and that they do apply to us. Like I have already said, I will not be dogmatic about this, and I will not impose what I accept as a command for myself, on others who see it as only a guideline. God bless my friend, retxar |
||||||
56 | making wine.Did Jesus make a mistake. | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 68713 | ||
Are we kings and priest? | ||||||
57 | Do you own a TNIV? | 2 Sam 21:19 | retxar | 68663 | ||
Are you posting in tongues now bro? :-) Tell me what you know about the NIrV. Is this the same as the TNIV or is the TNIV an update or replacement for the NIrV? I had a NIrV about a year ago that I gave away, and when the TNIV came out, I thought it was probally just an update of the NIrV, as they both seem to be for the same market and see no need in both. I know it is also a resent translation, and from what I remember, it seemed to be along the same lines as the TNIV is spoken of. thanks, retxar |
||||||
58 | making wine.Did Jesus make a mistake. | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 68659 | ||
Thanks Hank, The morrier you post, the funnier you get! retxar |
||||||
59 | making wine.Did Jesus make a mistake. | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 68657 | ||
John, Thanks for answering my question bro. I guess I was looking for a verse that spoke of the actual consumption of alcohol being a good thing, rather than what the wine was used as to represent as being a good thing tho. Wine, after all, represents the blood of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, so of coarse that is a good thing! I was not clear on what I meant, so thank you for the verses you provided. Let me comment on the Luke reference you gave: You said: “Evidently Jesus did not condemn wine, for He said: Luke 5:39 "And no one, after drinking old wine wishes for new; for he says, 'The old is good enough.” This has nothing to do with whether Jesus approved of did not approve of the consumption of alcoholic wine. Just because He used it in His illustration does not say anything in anyway concerning the matter. He used the illustration of old wine/new wine to drive home the point of the parables He was teaching. The message He was preaching was that a new work in the Spirit (new wine) would not work in the hearts of those who were hung up on the traditions of men (old wine shins). The old wine represented the traditions they were hung up on. The new wine represented the new work that Jesus wanted to do in their life. Jesus said “The old is good enough” to tell us that some will chose the traditions of men over the new work of the Spirit that God wants to do in their heart, because they automatically assume (falsely) that the old has to be better. The church even has a song they sing that confirms what Jesus was talking about. It’s called, “Give me that old time religion, it’s good enough for me!” So, unless you have a better take on this passage than me, it has nothing to do with Jesus’s opinion of the evils/virtues of alcohol, only the hearts of men. I guess the only other question I had to ask was the question Tim has already asked you concerning the biblical definition of “not much” wine. How could anyone possible know where that line is unless they had crossed it at least once? I will review you response to Tim more thoroughly, but a, “well he just knows”, does not seem quite right to me. This seems like it might work for an experienced person who has consumed “not much” wine for a while, but I don’t see how this is going to work with those who want to drink and are just starting out. Seems to me he would have to do quite a bit of drinking before he got the hang of it. And to avoid sin he would have to work his way up to that line, instead of working his way back, as is usually the case. As I said, I will study your response further. Anyway, John, thanks for bringing Rom14 into this discussion. Where I live, there is no way around the fact that alcohol consumption by a Christian will offend both believer and non-believer alike, so Rom14 has to be a consideration to anyone, regardless which side of the issue one takes. As I have already said, I will not be dogmatic about this, and will not judge you or anyone else concerning this. I have spoken here as I would plead to those in my own family concerning the issue of alcohol consumption, so forgive me if I have seemed judgmental in anyway. This issue, as you said, is indeed one of individual choice, I just see no good that can come out of consuming alcohol, and see much harm that can, and does, result from it. The issue of our obligation as kings and priest by Jesus is something I would like you to consider, as this has not been addressed by you or anyone else.. “Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another.” (Rom 14:19) retxar |
||||||
60 | making wine.Did Jesus make a mistake. | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 68645 | ||
Thanks my friend, Thanks you for your insight and knowledge you bring into this discussion. retxar |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [28] >> |