Results 461 - 480 of 500
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Reformer Joe Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
461 | Is harsh language appropriate? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 6467 | ||
So why is it okay for Paul to be so hard on the Corinthians and go on what some would call a sarcastic rant (2 Corithians 11-12) Why is it okay for Paul to call the Galatians "foolish" and to suggest that someone has them under a spell (Galatians 3:1)? Why is it okay for Jesus to call Pharisees "whitewashed tombs" and to refer to one of his own disciples as "Satan"? Let's not even start on the OT prophets! The fact is that while we should definitely speak "the truth in love" (Ephesians 4:15) that does not mean being a teddy bear when more forceful reproof is necessary. A lot of our problems in the church today with heresy stem from the fact that we place "walking on eggshells" and "being nice" above actually speaking out against what is harmful and false within our own members. --Joe! |
||||||
462 | Anyone have thoughts about Jabez? | 1 Chr 4:9 | Reformer Joe | 6466 | ||
How is it that a person writes a whole book about one verse in Scripture that is most definitely not central to Biblical theology? How does he conclude scripturally that we can claim "the Prayer of Jabez" for ourselves? --Joe! |
||||||
463 | Is Jesus the 'Eternal Father'? | Is 9:6 | Reformer Joe | 6369 | ||
Thanks for the information. Modalism, for the church, is the most serious heresy regarding the nature of God. Please remember paragraphs! --Joe! |
||||||
464 | We may be missing something here | 1 Pet 3:20 | Reformer Joe | 6365 | ||
Well, on these forums, all of us are "butting in"! Your comments are most welcome. Yes, Noah was preacher of righteousness. I didn't mean to suggest that he kept silent during this time (or even before God instructed him to build the ark). What I do contend is that God purposed to desroy humanit with the exception of eight people. Proclaiming God's truth is to reveal Him, not only to "convince" others of the truth. We see this in Philippians 1:27-28, where the Phiplippians' unity in preaching the gospel served as a "sign of destruction" for the unbelievers persecuting them. Likewise, Noah's preaching (whatever form it took -- the Bible is silent on this) could also be considered to be God's "sign of destruction" for the rest of the world. My real argument against the study materials was not that Noah preached, but rather that God was unsuccessful in convincing the unbelieving world to repent. As far as God's patience in 2 Peter 3:9, let's take a look at why he is patient. It has to do with whom he is addressing. God is patient toward "you". To whom did Peter address his letter (v. 1:1)? Other believers. Therefore, God is not being patient here toward the non-elect, but rather toward the elect who have not been regenerated (including those who had not been born like you and me). There would be no other reason for God to be patient toward believers, since those already saved would not need God to hold back the second coming of Christ and destruction of the world (which is the context of 2 Peter 3:9). The "all" here is not all mankind (since no one but universalists argue that ALL will ever be saved), but rather all of God's elect (1 Peter 1:1-5). Likewise, was God being patient toward the rest of the world, or toward Noah in the time he was building his ark? God's wrath will be poured out on sinful humanity at some point in the future, just like it was poured out on those in Noah's day. At what point does an omniscient God "decide" that enough is enough, since both Arminians and Calvinists both argue that God KNOWS who will repent? Thanks for your comments! --Joe! |
||||||
465 | Dear InHzsvc, what do you mean by that? | Rom 5:6 | Reformer Joe | 6360 | ||
So Jonathan Edwards, the Great Awakener, was a heretic? Francis Schaeffer was a heretic? John Calvin was a heretic? Charles Spurgeon was a heretic? Augustine was a heretic? Martin Luther was a heretic? Wow. A long line of "election heretics" instrumentally used by God to help establish, reform, and increase the impact of His church (not to mention defend it against true heresies). --Joe! |
||||||
466 | what is the will of God? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 6282 | ||
By knowing God's word (2 Timothy 3:16) By praying for wisdom (James 1:5) Did I mention knowing God's word is the source of Godly wisdom? "O how I love Your law! It is my meditation all the day. Your commandments make me wiser than my enemies, For they are ever mine. I have more insight than all my teachers, For Your testimonies are my meditation. I understand more than the aged, Because I have observed Your precepts. I have restrained my feet from every evil way, That I may keep Your word. I have not turned aside from Your ordinances, For You Yourself have taught me. How sweet are Your words to my taste! Yes, sweeter than honey to my mouth! From Your precepts I get understanding; Therefore I hate every false way." --Psalm 119:97-104 --Joe! |
||||||
467 | The dead bury their dead? | Matt 8:22 | Reformer Joe | 6276 | ||
Those who are not followers of Christ are spiritually dead. "And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest. But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved)" -- Ephesians 2:1-5 --Joe! |
||||||
468 | What is the secret of contentment? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 6274 | ||
Christ. "Not that I speak from want, for I have learned to be content in whatever circumstances I am. I know how to get along with humble means, and I also know how to live in prosperity; in any and every circumstance I have learned the secret of being filled and going hungry, both of having abundance and suffering need. I can do all things through Him who strengthens me." Philippians 4:11-13 |
||||||
469 | Speaking of Christ's Kenosis? | Matt 4:1 | Reformer Joe | 6197 | ||
Uh-oh. Asking me MY views will inevitably lead to LONG posts! :) Obviously, God set aside the exercise of some of his attributes when he humbled himself to an infinite degree by becoming like His creation. He did not exercise his omniscience, for example. I would imagine that Jesus did not come out of Mary's womb with the power of speech; he had to learn to talk. As a human being, he had to develop cognitively, I would imagine. I wonder what that was like without sin, don't you? No "terrible two's," no having to overcome the unbridled expression of a sinfulness that everyone else in Nazareth possessed, including his parents. One thing that we can see that Jesus did have at a very early age, however, is an innate sense of who he was. At twelve he is saying that he must be about his Father's business. Of course, Mary and Joseph would not have been taken aback by such a statement, having been there from the miraculous beginning. In short, Jesus laid aside His privileges as God the Son, but that is far different than saying he laid down His character. Christ did not stop BEING God; he only elected, for our sakes, not to utilize his divine abilities. I think the best way to put it is that He put Himself perfectly in man's position, but without sin. I would think that this included limiting himself physically (i.e. doing his signs and wonders by the power of the Spirit, like the apostles would later) and intellectually (e.g. not knowing the day nor hour of His return). In this way, he became the perfect sacrifice, His infinite holiness lived out in human form. He relied on the Spirit perfectly to follow the Father perfectly in order to be the perfect propitiation for our sins. And we did not deserve it in the slightest way! Now that is the humility Paul is talking about in Philippians 4:3-5, the same attitude that Christ Jesus had in doing all this for those who believe in Him. Quite an attitude for Paul to encourage us to imitate, huh? --Joe! |
||||||
470 | The Temptation of Christ | Matt 4:1 | Reformer Joe | 6135 | ||
No...being holy God, he is incapable of acting against his own nature. He was tempted externally to live out the sinless life and be the suitable atonement for our sins (2 Corinthians 5:21). "Let no one say when he is tempted, 'I am being tempted by God'; for God cannot be tempted by evil, and He Himself does not tempt anyone. But each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust." -- James 1:13-14 The word of God says it all! Jesus is God, and has no lust with which to be enticed or carried away. --Joe! |
||||||
471 | Does God have free will? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 5899 | ||
Contrary to whoever voted against you, I think this is a very valid question. The simple answer: God's character is unchanging. Therefore, God cannot be "un-Godly." Whatever the Scripture reveals Him to be, then we know that He will continuously act in concert with that nature. Now, then, God is the Creator and sovereign Lord, so he can do whatever he wants with us. He cannot act against His nature (for example, he cannot lie), but His hands are not tied by His creation, either. We cannot control God in any way, contrary to those who speak on TBN of the Holy Spirit as if He were the Force from Star Wars. Does this help address your question? --Joe! |
||||||
472 | Not my will? | Rom 5:6 | Reformer Joe | 5758 | ||
No we are not "puppets." We ARE, however, the creations of a sovereign God. He is in charge, not us. All humanity is sinful and deserving of an eternity in Hell. God has shown mercy to some of us, and withheld mercy from others. He can do that. He is God, and he is not obligated to save ANYONE. Why is it that so many fail to see Romans 9 as a point-blank, indubitably clear presentation of this truth? How can it be interpreted any other way? How arrogant it is for the creation to dictate terms of our own undeserved salvation to the Creator! We have been chosen before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1). that does not mean that we are born in a regenerated state. At some point in the life of every one of the elect, the Holy Spirit spiritually recreates the sinner (2 Corinthians 5:17), by His grace causing Him to accept Christ by faith, through no work of our own (Ephesians 2:8,9). Therefore, boasting is excluded (Romans 3:27). We are predestined to glory (Ephesians 1:11) from eternity past; but we are not actually regenerated and accept Christ until the Spirit makes us alive to do so. Now Christ, while he did assume human form, was in a completely diffrent category from us. He was not a slave to sin. He was not spiritually dead; he is the Bread of Life itself. Any free will Jesus may or may not have had was not hampered by sin. Thanks to our sin, we do not have that luzury. Make sense? While this is not an issue on which salvation hinges, I encourage you to examine yourself and see whether man's alleged freedom to accept Christ is a doctrine read INTO Scripture or derived FROM it. Thanks! --Joe! |
||||||
473 | Holy Spirit's power of Conviction | Rom 5:6 | Reformer Joe | 5756 | ||
When we analyze a set of four verses of Scripture (such as the four you cited), it is always best to get a broader understanding of those verses by looking at the larger context of what is being said. In this case, let us look at John 14-17 to examine exactly what John's (and moreover Christ's) understanding of both what the "world" is and what the Spirit's role is. Does the fact that the Holy Spirit will convict the world of sin mean that everyone will be enabled to accept Christ? Well, in John 14:17 says that "the world cannot receive [Him], because it does not see Him or know Him., but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you." Therefore, the world is unable to receive the Spirit, so that classifies the "world" in a different category than the disciples, whom Jesus is addressing. It says that the world does not see Him, doesn't even know Him! In John 14:26, we see that the Holy Spirit is the One who will teach the disciples all things. Therefore, the One whom the "world" doesn't even know will teach the disciples. I see no salvific interaction between the Spirit and the world yet. In John 15:18, the "world" will hate the disciples, just as it hates Christ. In the next verse, we see that the disciples are "not of the world," that Christ CHOSE them, and as a result, the world hates them. Therefore, we see reinforced a clear division between the world and the ones who are called by God. In verse 26 we see that the Spirit will testify about Christ with the disciples, but there is no indication that everyone will be free to accept the Spirit's testimony. In fact, Christ has just promised them the opposite from the world. Again in verse 16:13 we see that the Spirit will be the active guide to truth. If the Spirit is here to "try and convert everyone," why does our holy, sovereign God fail in his mission? Perhaps that isn't his mission after all... Verse 17:6 reinforces this: "I have manifested Your name to the men whom You gave me out of the world; they were Yours and You gave them to Me, and they have kept Your word." Again, God GAVE them to Him out of the world. Who is consistently the active agent in bringing people out of the world? ALl througout the Bible, we see it is God who (unaided by our "free will") chooses individuals out of the world and gives them to Christ. Therefore, contrary to your post, the world does NOT include "everyone." Conviction of sin does not lead to ability to repent and choose Christ. It is merely a declaration of guilt and judgment, which is reinforced by passages such as Philippians 1:27-28. Our presence here on earth is not to "win all the lost." It is to proclaim God's truth, to be the Holy Spirit's visible instruments through which He calls the elect, and to be the embodiment of the "sign of destruction" to those who will die and face just punishment. Finally, it is not by man's wisdom that I claim to "understand the intricate workings of GOD." I have the Holy Spirit, as I assume you do; and I can read the Bible, as I am sure you can. The Bible is the source of our revelation, which brings us back to my previous question: is the notion of even a spark of spiritual life to choose to follow Christ a product of man's wisdom which man brings to the words of the Bible; or is it clearly revealed to be a trait that man possesses? If it is the latter, please enlighten us as to the support for it and also explain away passages such as Romans 3, written after Pentecost, which clearly states that man's spiritual condition is DEAD, DEAD, DEAD. Please demosntrate how anyone dead can do anything to save himself? This debate may be old and tired to you, but it does speak fundamentally to how we view God and how we conduct evangelism. It is highly important, even though it is not a salvific issue, that we get it right. How has God revealed his intentions with regard to salvation? What does the Bible have to say on man's supposed freedom? Take away the assumption that all men are equally aided by the Holy Spirit to receive Christ and see if the entirety of the New Testament supports such a thesis. Thanks for your comments! --Joe! |
||||||
474 | Christ dying only for elect? | Rom 5:6 | Reformer Joe | 5703 | ||
Well, if you hold to election as I do, one has a real problem if he doesn't hold to limited atonement. If Christ paid for the sins of everyone, why isn't everyone going to Heaven? What I mean is that if my next door neighbor never makes a decision for Christ, how could he be punished for his sin if Christ already paid the price 2000 years ago? As others have said in this thread, the argument for limited atonement is indeed married to the doctrine of unconditional election, which finds its biggest support in Jesus' statements in John 6:35-65, Paul's analogy of the potter in Romans 9, and Paul's very clear presentation of divine choice in Ephesians 1. This is by no means the only scriptural support for election; but as it has already been made clear, there are already at least a dozen threads on that one. The doctrine of limited atonement is inseparable from unconditional election, though, for the reason stated above. In addition, why would he cause his Son to suffer for those who are going to die in their sins? Either Christ was the propitiation for the sins of only those who will believe in Him, or else both Christ AND the unbeliever will face God's wrath for exactly the same sins! Doesn't seem terribly just, does it? A final argument for limited atonement stems from the idea of God's sovereignty. If we say that Christ died for ALL the ungodly (i.e. all humanity), then the fact that there will be people in Hell demonstrates that Christ was unable to save all. He died for their sins, and yet he didn't save them? Doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Nowhere in Scripture do we find this idea that Jesus was a "potential" savior for some, but an "actual" savior for others. Anyhow, that's the way I see it! Now let me know your thoughts. --Joe! |
||||||
475 | Why is God jealous? | Ex 34:14 | Reformer Joe | 5187 | ||
Because all glory, honor and praise DO truly belong to God. Our jealousy is seeing things that other people have or exhibit that we merely want for ourselves. God's jealously comes from the fact that everything in creation is indeed his. It is more like how I jealously guard my wife against advances from others. We belong to each other, and no one else has a right to her. This is the same way Christ loves his church and the way God is possessive of all His creation and the praises of His people. --Joe! |
||||||
476 | Is a rich man doomed? | Matt 19:24 | Reformer Joe | 5186 | ||
The answer is two verses down: And looking at them Jesus said to them, "With people this is impossible, but with God all things are possible." (Matthew 19:26) Of course, the rich man's problem was not that he had wealth, but that he loved his wealth and the things of this world, and therefore rejected Christ. --Joe! |
||||||
477 | Covenants and Dispensation? | Eph 1:10 | Reformer Joe | 5180 | ||
Two very informative books to read in order to understand Dispensationalism are by Charles Ryrie, entitled _Dispensationalism Today_ and _So Great Salvation_. Likewise, John Waalvoord and Zane Hodges are also a well-respected authors among Dispensationalists. As far as understanding and getting a grip of Covenant/Reformed theology, there is no modern writer who has done more to expound clearly on this theology than R.C. Sproul. One of the best works in recent years which introduces the principal tenets of Reformed theology is Sproul's _Grace Unknown_. Also, works by the late James Montgomery Boice, J.I. Packer, Jeames R. White, and John Piper will give you a lot of insight into the distinctives of Reformed theology. Just this week, I finished reading Boice's final book, _Whatever Happened to the Gospel of Grace?_. It sums up very well the reasons why I adhere to a Calvinist/Reformed theology today, despite the fact that I have attended churches with a Dispensationalist outlook all my life (and in fact still do). Dispensationalists and Covenental types would agree on these five points: 1. Scripture alone as our source of authority 2. God's grace alone as the reason for our salvation, rather than any merit on our part 3. Faith in Christ's sinless life, substitutionary death, and resurrection as the only means of our justification; works in no way form the basis of our imputed "right standing" with God. 4. Christ's sacrifice alone is the sole mechanism by which God provides forgiveness of sins; there is "no other way" (John 14:6) 5. The glory for all of this goes completely and totally to God alone. So where is the problem? In my view, it is the emphasis or understanding that the two camps give these 5 "solas" ("sola" means "alone"). For example, most Dispensationalists stress defend the Biblical revelation of "faith alone" to the extent that most will contend that it is entirely possible to place one's faith in Christ and never be outwardly changed in the slightest as a result of the new birth. I always had a problem with the fact that Dispensationalist preachers always seemed to be uncomfortable with James 2, and especially the Gospels, where Jesus constantly tell his followers that following Christ entails obedience to him. Most Dispensationalists feel much more comfortable with John than Matthew, because John stresses that belief is the ground of our faith, but Matthew talks so much about being a disciple of Christ and eternal suffering awaiting even those who claim to be of Christ but whose deeds do not point that out. Therefore, while works are not the BASIS of salvation, true saving faith always RESULTS in works -- a concept that many Dispensationalists deny. In addition, here are other reasons why I have come to adhere to covenental theology: 1. Its strong intellectual and historical tradition, which places an emphasis not only on the "end times," but also a great emphasis on glorifying God here on earth, taking seriously the mandates God has for his church. 2. Its undeniable clinging to the sovereignty and the holiness of God, and consequently the spiritual deadness and depravity of the unregenerate. God micromanages the universe in a Reformed view, and even man's will is subjected to his control, which I think is the most clearly Biblical position. The Bible is a book primarily about God, not a book about us. 3. Dispensationalism has only come into vogue in the last 150 years or so, which doesn't make it wrong in itself; but one has to question a view that basically says that almost everyone from the earliest church Fathers through the Reformers up until the small groups in mid-1800's never adopted a pre-tribulational, Dispensationalist view. 4. I cannot be convinced that "carnal Christianity" is in the slightest a permanent condition to which God calls individuals. How does that bring glory to God? If someone asks me if James is telling us that a "dead faith" can save us, I think the context pretty clearly says "no." Therefore, the Reformer's view of faith goes beyond mere intellectual agreement with Christ's death and resurrection, but carries with it the idea of new birth (regeneration) from above, which leads to not only justification but also the bearing of fruit. But enough of me for now. Let's let someone else talk. Hope this helps start us off! --Joe! |
||||||
478 | Jesus God/God God still unclear | Matt 1:23 | Reformer Joe | 4951 | ||
I welcome you to the faith, JRM! The answer to your question has to with what is called the Trinity. The historic Christian faith has been Trinitarian, despite the fact that throughout the history of the churhc there have been cults, sects, and other aberrant groups which have distorted this central teaching of Scripture in one way or another. Since, as you say, you are a new believer, I assume that you did not spend years and years studying the Bible before trusting in Christ's sinless life and his death in our place as the payment for our sins. The word "Trinity," although not found in the Bible, is an accurate way to describe the nature of God as he is revealed to us in the pages of the New Testament. Basically, when reading the Scriptures, we come across the following things said about God: 1. There is only ONE God (you probably don't need much convincing of this one, but try reading the book of Isaiah in the Old Testament; starting at about chapter 40, he mentions this fact dozens of times). 2. God is also known as the Father (the book of John is one place to start studying the message of Jesus Christ, and he constantly refers to "the Father"). 3. However, Jesus is also referred to numerous times as God and/or the creator (John 1:1-3; Colossians 1:16, 17; Hebrews 1:8, and many other places). 4. The Holy Spirit (also called the Spirit of God in the Old Testament) is described as having personality and also God. So here is our "problem": ONE God, but the father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are also called "God." There cannot be three Gods, but three different "persons" are identified as God. Some groups today hold that this is just a way to describe God working in three different "modes" (i.e. sometimes he is acting as Father, sometimes as the Son, sometimes as the Holy Spirit). The problem with this, however, is that one can clearly see from the New Testament that all trhee exist together at the same time, and that they even interact with one another, one praying to another, one sending another, the three persons speaking to each other, etc., etc. Therefore, it is clear that while the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all fully one God; the Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Spirit, and the Spirit is not the Father. So the plot thickens... So what is the solution? The early leaders of the church, in trying to grasp all of this teaching about the nature of God, could conclude only one thing: that while there is only one God, he has always existed in three distinct "persons." Each of these persons is fully God (i.e. Jesus is not 1/3 of God), and each displays the personality, power, and characteristics of God. All three, being the one God, are worthy of our praise, worship, and obedience. A bit complicated? I would assume as a new Christian that that would be an understatement. A good starting point to undertsanding this teaching that the church labelled the "trinity" almost 1700 years ago is a very fine book by James R. White entitled _The Forgotten Trinity._ He is the president of Alpha and Omega Ministries, which you can access on the Web at (www.aomin.org). To answer your question about "calling God God," most of the writers of the Old and New Testaments, unless there was some need to make a distinction between these three persons, usually used the term God to refer to God the Father. The fact that God is a being who has revealed himself to be one Being in three Persons is hard to comprehend, since we experience nothing in creation that bears resemblence to this unique quality of God. The important thing is not whether we can draw a picture of it or put the nature of God into some comfortable category for ourselves. What is important is that we take the time to understand what the Bible does say about God's nature and accept it. I certainly hope this answer helps. It was quite a bit longer than you expected, I am sure; but it is important for all of us to know who God is and what he is like. Despite many corruptions of all sorts that we have seen in the church over the centuries, the church has at least held onto the truth of the Trinity throughout its history. --Joe! |
||||||
479 | unlimited atonement? | Bible general Archive 1 | Reformer Joe | 4928 | ||
Actually, limited atonement is tied to the Calvinist proposistion that God didn't merely respond to his foreseeing who would be saved and who would not, but rather God actively chose (predestined) some of humanity to be saved (Epehesians 1:11, for example) and left some to justly be punished for their sins. It is an interesting question you bring up if one is an Arminian. It would seem that Christ dying for only the sins of those he knew would accept him would in effect be "closing the door" from a temporal perspective, no? --Joe! |
||||||
480 | 3 commands from one person | Matt 28:19 | Reformer Joe | 4893 | ||
All variations of the Great Commission, despite the fact that the most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have the last twelve verses of Mark's gospel, indicating that most likely it was a much later addition and not penned by Mark nor inspired by the Holy Spirit. By the way, Acts 1:8 should fall in this list as well. --Joe! |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ] Next > Last [25] >> |