Results 421 - 440 of 553
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Tamara Brewington Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
421 | psychic vs prophet difference | 1 Cor 14:3 | Tamara Brewington | 205804 | ||
Dear Steve, Thanks Steve, will consider... Thanks everyone else who took the time and patience to email me too, much fuzzy love to you all:)))))))) Tam |
||||||
422 | what is the realy massage of christ? | 1 Cor 15:3 | Tamara Brewington | 203741 | ||
The message that Christ proclaimed was repent of your sins for the kingdom of God is in your midst(meaning He was in their midst)and to belive that Jesus was God. Christ is a revelation of God's existence and that revelation was progressive starting with the prophecies of Him comming in the Old Testament and progressing to His advent on earth and then the revelation of Christ progressed after He was rejected and killed and then rose from the dead. Then the message of salvation progressed to that, Jesus is the Lord God, He died and rose again on the third day for our sins and if you believe this in your heart and confess it with your mouth, you will be saved, see Romans 10:9,10 to see what you have to do to be saved, which I stated here. All you have to do is repent and believe in Jesus and you are a Christian, there is nothing good you can do to earn salvation, by grace you are saved and that not of yourselves, you are saved by faith alone, by grace alone. | ||||||
423 | Matthew vs Mark | 2 Cor 4:3 | Tamara Brewington | 203752 | ||
In both accounts Jesus fulfills 350 prophecies from the Old Testament that came true about the place and exact time of His birth, about him being the deliverer and Immanuel (God is with us), about the miracles He preformed, about the circumstance of His death, burial, and resurrection. Mathew wrote about the coming of the kingdom of God in Jesus, Mark wrote about the diety of Jesus as God. Principle of interpretation; Each writer wrote to a different audience from a different point of view. Question, if you heard from two different people what happened at a party would they tell the same stories with the same details? No, niether do these writers. For instance take the end account where in Mathew, Mark, Luke and John; there are two angels and then one angel at the tomb, and there is one woman, two women and a bunch of women at the tomb, then the angel sat on the stone, there was one inside, there was one outside, there were two inside, and on and on. Principle of interpretation; just because only one angel is mentioned in one account and two in another does not mean there weren't two there, it means one writer was only interested in writing about the particular angel that spoke, and all the women were there, but the writer only mentioned the one who was spoken to. You have to think carefuly to reconcile the different accounts but it can be done because scripture is inerrant and cannot contradict itself. | ||||||
424 | Strong's context of verse in passage? | 2 Cor 5:14 | Tamara Brewington | 204144 | ||
What is the context of the verse in light of the Strong's translation of the word control and also in light of the whole passage from start to finish? | ||||||
425 | Strong's context of verse in passage? | 2 Cor 5:14 | Tamara Brewington | 204340 | ||
Dear Doc, Came across another intreptation since you last wrote me about this... Here goes; The word control in II Corinthians 5:14 can aslo be translated as pushed out. From verses 15-19 Paul talks about who he will recognize, moves on to being a new creature, and then to the reconciliation to Christ. Then concludes this part of his discourse which section of the passage he began in verses 11-13 where he was talking about giving those to whom he preaches and teaches an occaission to be proud of him for doing so. See then down in II Corinithians 5:20,21 where it talks about him being an ambassador for Christ? See also verse 13 where he talks about being beside himself or of sound mind and how that is referring to being made manifest up in verse 11 and giving them an occaison to be proud of Pauls efforts as an apostle? Verse 14 talks in the second half and in verse 15 about the gospel that Paul has been made manifest for (verses 11,12) and that he is being "pushed out" to go preach as an ambassador of Christ (verse 20). What do you think of that interpretation Doc? Respectfuly the hat lady |
||||||
426 | Strong's context of verse in passage? | 2 Cor 5:14 | Tamara Brewington | 204393 | ||
Yep, crack the books, to hit the mark, works every time, glory to God only. II Timothy 4:2 preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction. Don't ever stop teaching people how to learn Pastor Moran. God Bless, the hat lady |
||||||
427 | How to Understand andApply this Passage? | 2 Cor 10:12 | Tamara Brewington | 205976 | ||
Dear forum members, How do you think this passage should be understood and applied? God's Day To You, Tamara |
||||||
428 | Progressive Revelation | Eph 1:10 | Tamara Brewington | 204719 | ||
Progressive Revelation is the revealance to man of God through various forms. Progressive Revelation is not the gradual evolving development of history. Progressive Revelation builds upon latter revelations being built on the earlier revelations. One example is the sacrifices required by God in the OT resulting in the final sacrifice of Christ. Another is the General Revelation of what God has created as a witness to man that God is and then the Special Revelation of miraculous manifestations of God to man with Christ being the most special and ending with the Bible. A next form are the seven dispensations. Another form are the prophetic revelations from the OT resulting in Christ Jesus as the final revelations. Progressive revelation was first coined as a phrase by the Dispensational Camp. But the concept has been around since Paul wrote Romans where you find the first example of what a General Revelation is in chapter 1 and then Special Revelation as Christ in chapters 3-6. The concept of this then appeared in a certain form in the Epistle of Barnabas. Then elements appeared in the Dialogue of Tryphos by Justin Martyr. Elements appear in the writtings of the following church fathers as varying forms of Dispensationalism; Justin Martyr (A.D. 110-165) Iranaeus (A.D. 130-200) Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 150-220) Augustine (A.D. 354-430) The next persons to show elements of Progressive Revelation where; Joachin of Fiore Pierot Poiret John Edwards The persons who coined the term and see Progressive Revelation as only the seven dispensations; Charles Ryrie Isac Watts John Darby C.I.Scoffield The term has been much abused since the advent of dispensationalism. Systematic theologians see Progressive Revelation as the total of all the forms mentioned above and not just as Dispensationalism. There are scriptures which speaks of dispensations where a word in Greek means dispensation; Ephesians 1:10 with a view to an administration (dispensation) suitable to the times, that is, the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things on earth. Ephesians 3:9 and to bring to light what is the administration (dispensation) of the mystery which for ages has been hidden in God who created all things. Hope this helps Tamara |
||||||
429 | Mistaken View Or False Doctrine? | Eph 1:13 | Tamara Brewington | 205281 | ||
Dear Forum Members, I have been pondering something lately, please forgive me if I seem to be bringing up something old and please bear with me. I myself have posted several things about false doctrine in here, perhaps even about one or more of these beliefs below, but the good testimonies of some people are leaving me in doubt as to whether they are just mistaken about the process. Do you think that these constitue false doctrine and what scriptures would you give to support that? I know of a few things to support what I believe already, but I am thinking about those scriptures which might shed some light on what the apostles considered to be false doctrine? I have been pondering whether or not certain teachings about Jesus plus within the process of salvation are merely mistaken views about the process or whether they are to be considered false doctrines. I have friends and family members who believe in these Jesus plus concepts about the process of salvation and some of them have been Christians for a very long time and seem to be bearing good fruit. Here are some of the views, I am leaving out the other major 4 Jesus plus beliefs because there is so much about them that is obvious false doctrine that there is no doubt in my mind; Salvation comes by repenting of sins and believing in Jesus, plus it is not completed until baptism, living a sinless life until death and staying in scripture study to keep the Holy Spirit working inside. Salvation comes by repenting of sins and believing in Jesus, plus it is not completed until baptism. Salvation comes by repenting of sins and believing in Jesus, plus tarrying at the altar to get tongues as evidence of having received the Holy Spirit as the sign of salvation. God's Day To You, Tamara |
||||||
430 | Mistaken View Or False Doctrine? | Eph 1:13 | Tamara Brewington | 205286 | ||
Dear Cheri, I have insomnia, it is usesless to lay in bed taking medication that does not work, so I get up and study to while away the time before going back to bed for more torture. I actually have class tomorrow morning, but am too restless for the bed that is why I am up. I already agreed with this point of view, the truth if you will, but was more interested in whether or not anyone in here considers it to be false doctrine or merely a mistaken belief. Thank you for answering, I was afraid that once every one saw it was suppossedly answered that they wouldn't bother, which is why I stopped posting altogether. My real question never gets addressed and the whole thing gets lost in the shuffle. No one intends me any harm, they just answer the part that interests them, or that sticks out to them as being important and skip the actual question right over, which I clearly state every time. Like I said, no one means to be short, or any harm, every one here is sincere, I truly believe that or we would not be in here trying to divide the word of God. So I will pose the question again for you; Based on what I said in the original post, are Jesus plus concepts to be considered merely mistaken views about the process of salvation, or are they false doctrines? God's Day To You, Tamara |
||||||
431 | Mistaken View Or False Doctrine? | Eph 1:13 | Tamara Brewington | 205287 | ||
Dear John, I dropped you a personal email to edify you, my dear brother in Christ. God's Day To You, Tamara |
||||||
432 | Mistaken View Or False Doctrine? | Eph 1:13 | Tamara Brewington | 205294 | ||
ohh poop, I am having trouble my computer is going to crash real soon.... I will try againg before going to school, or lying down again. |
||||||
433 | Mistaken View Or False Doctrine? | Eph 1:13 | Tamara Brewington | 205296 | ||
Dear John! Good one! But I thought false doctrine is taught by false prophets and don't they go to hell automatically!? Like I said, no harm was meant by anyone who may or may not have answere the question. I gotta watch that folks may be answering without using my language, sorry John. God's Grace Tamara |
||||||
434 | Baptiam of the Holy Spirit | Eph 1:13 | Tamara Brewington | 205762 | ||
Dear dscott1, This has been a very hot topic around here lately on various posts, but I will not get into how to go about looking up all those post right now. I will leave that for someone else to do who like pointing people to posts as a answer (no offense anyone please, go ahead and give this person the numbers for the threads, I don't have time to look them all up). Ephesians 1:13 In Him, you also, alfter listening to the message of the truth, the gosepl of your salvation - having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise. This verse according to Paul means that as soon as you believe you receive the Holy Spirit. This is the Baptism of the Holy Spirit and it happens at the momentof belief. Let's take Mark 16:17 - These signs will accompany those who have believed; in My name they will cast out demons, they will speak with new tongues. This passage is in brackets because there is a discrepancy as to whether or not it actually belongs in the NT at all according to the translators. I however believe in the essence of what the passage is saying as elements of it can be found to be said of Jesus elsewhere and this text does not contradict the whole counsel of scripture, rather it falls in line with it, which is why the translator keep leaving it in. I believe it is safe to say that all of these things did happen in Acts except the part about being poisoned. Okay, now lets' deal with Acts. Acts has been used for a very long time to uphold the belief that when one believes in Jesus there is to be a baptism of the Holy Spirit that is evidenced solely by the speaking in tongues because of the history of pneumatic infusion in Acts. However there are other schools of thought about how the Holy Spirit give evidence of Himself in the believer. There is also a discrepancy to whether or not He necessarily must give a visible evidence of any kind that He is in the believer at or near the moment of belief. Jesus sent the disciples to witness to groups of people as a commission in Acts. In Acts you will find that four groups of people received the visible sign of speaking in tongues when the apostles either preached to them, and or laid hands on them after preaching to them. In fact there were groups of people that got preached to who did not receive the Holy Spirit until the apostles showed up to do this very thing - like those who heard Philip and were baptized, yet did not yet have the Holy Spirit. The four groups are the Jews in 2 who were of the promises, the Samaritans in 8 who believed in the right God the wrong way, the Gentiles in 10 who needed to hear about who God truly was, those who only had the repentance and baptism of John in 19. Each of these four groups had to be brought into the body of Christ by the apostles and when each of thes four groups got brought in the evidence came that had received the Holy Spirit by the speaking of tongues. After Acts you do not see this same sort of activity pervasively happening because all the types of people that there are on the earth that could be brought into the body of Christ fit into these four groups and are all ready included as a group in the body of Christ, this is true even today. Either you are a Jew, or you believe in the right God the wrong way, or you are a Gentile, or you have only repented of sins and been baptized in water but you have not believed in the Christ and recieved the Holy Spirit at the moment of belief with or without evidence. There is not one group or indvidual today that would not fit in one of these four groups just as it was true then. There are instances in Acts like at the end of 2 where it does not say that there was evidence of tongues just becuase they now believed. Does not Paul say in I Corinthians 12 that not all have tongues do they, etc., but one and the same Spirit distributes the gifts severaly as He will and we are all baptized by the Spirit into the body of Christ, but not all have the same function. How then is it that tongues is the only or primary evidence that one has received the Holy Spirit when according to Paul it is not? I do not find scriptural support for the belief that the gift has passed away any where in the Bible, nor do I find any evidence in the Bible that any other gift has passed away except being an apsotle. Paul states clearly that he is the very last apostle. This is not a popular belief amonsgt confessig Evangelicals because so many of the charismatice gifts have abused and misused and misrepresented in the churches. This does not mean that these gifts don't exist for real, it means that they have misused. God's Day To you and welcome Minister dscott1, God's Day To You, Tamara |
||||||
435 | How do we get saved, by baptism? | Eph 2:8 | Tamara Brewington | 203718 | ||
What do you believe is the truth about how to get saved, do you believe that it is necessary to get baptized to get saved, or do you believe that salvation is granted as soon as you believe; base your answer on your assessment of Galatians 5:4, Romans 11:2,3, I Peter 1:4,5, Romans 8:37-39? | ||||||
436 | I agree Hank, but how do you reconcile? | Eph 2:8 | Tamara Brewington | 203720 | ||
I agree Hank,God bless you,but how would you reconcile the scriputres Galatians 5:4, Romans 11:2,3, I Peter 1:4,5, Romans 8:37,38? | ||||||
437 | Just out of curiosity. | Phil 1:23 | Tamara Brewington | 205113 | ||
Dear Lionheart, Quote from Millard J. Erickson, Introduction to Theology, pg. 378, par. 2; "One veiw which over the years has had considerable popularity is termed, "soul sleep". This is the idea that the soul, during the period between death and resurrection, reposes in a state of unconcsiousness. In the sixteenth century, many Anabaptists and Socinians apprently subscribed to this veiw. A similar position is taken today by the Seventh Day Adventists. In the case of Adventists, however, the phrase "soul sleep" is some what misleading. Hoekema suggests instead "soul extinction," in the Adventist view one does not fall asleep at death, but actually becomes completely nonexistent, nothing surviving." This then is an invention of the Anabaptists and Socinian in the sixteenth century that purported that the soul actually sleeps as a function of a bipartite (division of man as soul and body) entity, where the body disintegrates and the soul goes to sleep on some spiritual plane. This veiw got adopted and changed by the Jehovah's Witnesses, as that man is one entity without two parts, and that man's one essence being his mind and body, cease to exist at death altogether. The soul is not actually sleeping, it is gone with the mind that disentegrated. In this view of soul sleep God is so powerfull that He will raise everything that disintegrated from the dead. This veiw got adopted by the Seventh Day Adventists, who believe that the soul and body are two parts together and that the body disentegrates, but that the soul actually sleeps. God is so powerfull that He will wake the souls from the dead and reunite them to their bodies which God is so powerfull to reunite from disintegration. This view got adopted and changed by the Mormons and they believe that the body disintegrates and that the soul goes to sleep, then only the soul will be raised from the dead and receive a new spiritual body to replace the old flesh and that in this process a person becomes a god, just like Jesus and God were once men and died and received new spiritual eternal god bodies before us. God's day to you, Tamara God's Day to you, Tamara |
||||||
438 | 3 brothers descendants changed | Col 1:16 | Tamara Brewington | 205662 | ||
Dear du, Colossians 1:16 For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and the on the earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities - all things have been created through Him and by Him and for Him. We have to just trust that Jesus made everything including the that He is responsible for the nations the tongues the colors and the cultures. I was looking for two things I could not find, one that Ham was black due to a curse which I had heard before, but I cannot find in, and two that God created man with the blood of all the nations whithin him, but those are not quite the right words and I cannot find it becuase that is not quite the right phrase - perhaps if Pastor Moran is still awake he will know where this is... God's Day to YOu, tamara |
||||||
439 | 3 brothers descendants changed | Col 1:16 | Tamara Brewington | 205678 | ||
My Dearest Val, Thank you very, very much, this is exactly te verse I was looking for about the blood... Thank you for finding that, I have a feeling the curse of Ham thing is way off there, but I am not sure... Val do you no anything about this idea and whether or not it had roots in the Bible? Or is it just racist slave owner garbage? Thanks in advance, God's Day To You, Tamara |
||||||
440 | 3 brothers descendants changed | Col 1:16 | Tamara Brewington | 205691 | ||
Dear Jeff, I went looking at your scriptures first off, because I really wanted to know what the Bible says in answer to the oringinal question that got posted. Here is what I found out abuot the erroneous curse of Ham and how it got started! Quote; wikipedia; Early Jewish interpretations The Torah assigns no racial characteristics or rankings to Ham. Moses married a Cushite, one of the reputed descendants of Ham, according to the Book of Numbers, Chapter 12. Despite this, a number of early Jewish writers have interpreted the Biblical narrative of Ham in a racial way. The Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 108b states "Our Rabbis taught: Three copulated in the ark, and they were all punished — the dog, the raven, and Ham. The dog was doomed to be tied, the raven expectorates, his seed into his mate's mouth. and Ham was smitten in his skin." Talmud Bavli, Sanhedrin 108b. The nature of Ham's "smitten" skin is unexplained, but latter commentaries described this as a darkening of skin. A later note to the text states that the "smitten" skin referred to the blackness of descendents, and a later comment by rabbis in the Bereshit Rabbah asserts that Ham himself emerged from the ark black-skinned. 2, 3 The Zohar states that Ham's son Canaan "darkened the faces of mankind". 4 edit. Early and Early Modern Christian interpretations. Many pre-modern Christian sources discuss the curse of Ham in connection with race and slavery: Origen (circa 185 c. 254): “For the Egyptians are prone to a degenerate life and quickly sink to every slavery of the vices. Look at the origin of the race and you will discover that their father Cham, who had laughed at his father’s nakedness, deserved a judgment of this kind, that his son Chanaan should be a servant to his brothers, in which case the condition of bondage would prove the wickedness of his conduct. Not without merit, therefore, does the discolored posterity imitate the ignobility of the race, Non ergo immerito ignobilitatem decolor posteritas imitatur.” Homilies on Genesis 16.1 more to come, Tamara |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ] Next > Last [28] >> |