Results 561 - 580 of 784
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Beja Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
561 | Crusifixtion a sacrafice? John 3:16 | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 223588 | ||
Integrity, I didn't make any judgment regarding your salvation. I think my post was very restrained in the sense of making any statement of that kind. You are making a leap of logic that doesn't work. You are saying... 1. Jesus said going to hell is worse than dying. 2. Therefore seperation from God is worse than dying. 3. Therefore the real sacrifice was seperation from God. These things don't follow. If you are suggesting the true horror that Christ had to endure was going to hell for three days, then say that. If you are saying it was some other type of seperation from God other than going to hell, then that verse does not support your assertion. Second. Christ did say, "My God, my God, why have you foraken me?" That is a fact. To say that that phrase means that He and God the Father were somehow seperated is an inference. The text doesn't actually SAY that, you are inferring it from what was said. Now and inference may be correct, but we need to admit that it is what we are inferring from the text. Could it not however mean something else? If David were in a battle and was utterly defeated and cried out that exact same phrase, could he not be referring to the fact that God handed him over to defeat? The term "forsaking" need not be given some mystical meaning beyond our understanding. I hold that when Christ said those words that He meant to convey the concept of the entire Psalm which He was quoting. In Psalm 22 it describes the crucifiction event in great detail but ends in a proclamation of triumph. I think this is what Christ meant to convey. It makes far more sense than to say from this single phrase that somehow God the Father and God the Son became seperated in some mystical way. We can't even begin to understand such a suggestion or what the implications would be. So currently for your view you have an inference from a statement Christ made on the cross, and that Christ said that hell is worse than death. This is hardly a case which would give ground to make such a drastic statement that the physical death burial and ressurection of Jesus was not sufficient in and of itself. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
562 | Crusifixtion a sacrafice? John 3:16 | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 223585 | ||
Integrity, You said that there is plenty of scripture to back up what you are suggesting. I encourage you to provide that scripture. Where does it say that Christ was seperated from the Father? I do not think that "why have you forsaken me?" implies that neccesarily. Where does scripture indicate that a spiritual death is a better sacrifice? Where does Jesus say that a spiritual death was worse unless you refer to the passage that says fear not those who can take your life but Him who after taking your life can cast you into hell? If that is the case, and you are calling being thrown into hell spiritual death, then we have a much more clear definition of what you are saying. If you mean to say spiritual death is not that, then that passage doesn't support you. However, you've yet to say anything of serious error yet, but let me share what is concerning me about your thinking. If you stray into error on this, your error is going to be concerning the sufficiency of Christ's attonement. That would be a very very serious error indeed. This is why I am nervous with somebody who is reasoning that the physical suffering, death, and ressurection of Jesus alone doesn't seem to be enough. Now certainly there were spiritual implications of Christ's death. His death was an outpouring of God's wrath in a way that a typical martyr's death, for example, is not. However, it is hard for us to say anything beyond that. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
563 | Did John really baptise Jesus?? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 223568 | ||
Lightedsteps, There is so much I want to say, but let me just this time simply try to reduce it to bare logic to show that what you are saying doesn't work. 1. Sin nature (whatever it is) Came as a result of something Adam did. 2. If it came as a result of something he did, then he, and as an extension, humanity existed prior to sin nature. 3. If Humanity existed prior to sin nature, then it must be possible to be both fully human and without a sin nature. Otherwise Adam wasn't human until he sinned, and nobody believes that. (as an aside: I do not mean that it is possible for you and I right now at this time. But I simply mean to show that at some time or place Human Nature does not equal Sin nature.) 4. If it is possible to be fully human and yet without a sin nature, then it is possible for Jesus Christ to be fully human without a sin nature. 5. If it is possible for Jesus Christ to be fully human yet without a sin nature, then all your arguements of how he MUST have had a sin nature merely because he was human are therefore invalid. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
564 | Crusifixtion a sacrafice? John 3:16 | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 223565 | ||
Integrity, I would be very careful with trying to see beyond what scripture reveals. Our goal is to understand what scripture does say, not speculate on what it does not. 1Ti 1:4 nor to pay attention to myths and endless genealogies, which give rise to mere speculation rather than furthering the administration of God which is by faith. If there is one thing which scripture has said a great deal about, it is Jesus Christ. Try to understand what it is saying rather than to figure out things unsaid. Scripture consistently speaks of Christ's death on the cross as sacrifice for our sins. Read Isaiah 53. These things he underwent for us. And God the father did see it as a payment for our sins. These are things that scripture says clearly, and so with humility we believe the word of God without searching for an alternate answer. I do not know what you are about to suggest, or what you suggesting Christ suffered a spiritual death even means in your mind. But take caution, such reasonings of men born from not being content with the answers of scripture is fertile ground for birthing heresies. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
565 | Cain was cast out to the Land of Nod, | Acts 17:26 | Beja | 223540 | ||
Rodnword, From Adam. Act 17:26 And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place In Christ, Beja |
||||||
566 | Did John really baptise Jesus?? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 223535 | ||
Lightedsteps, Your mistake is basically at two points. 1.) You think sin nature is required to be tempted. As our brother Tim has pointed out this is not the case, as Adam and Eve should clearly show us. 2.) You missunderstand what sin nature implies and therefore don't realise what you are saying. Having a sin nature doesn't mean that we can be tempted, it means that we are so depraved that we will unfailingly yet freely embrace sin and rebellion against God. This Christ did not have in Him. As Doc so often reminds us, scripture teaches our actions flow from what we are, not the other way around. We sin because that is our nature, Christ did not sin because His nature is righteousness. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
567 | is gambling a sin | Hag 2:8 | Beja | 223527 | ||
Just my 2 cents, I have a hard time saying that gambling is a sin. First, I currently know of no scripture that does so. What we do know is that greed, covetousness and the love of money are sins. However, that does not necessarily mean that gambling is a sin. There have been several nights in my past that I sat with my brothers and their wives and we all played Texas Hold em' with nickles, dimes, and quarters. If after four hours of playing and laughing any individual was down two dollars it was about as horrible of a loss as we saw. Each time we all lost more money on sodas and chips consumed than the game itself. I have a very hard time looking back and saying that was sinful. So what I think is more appropriate is to identify the sins I listed earlier and be clear that those are sins. The condemnation of gambling in and of itself seems to me to be like forbidding dancing because lust is a sin. To be sure, some dancing is lustful, but there are many forms of dancing that is lighthearted, fun, and not in the least sinful. When my daughter is married I assure you I intend to dance with her. And if next new years my brothers wish to spend it playing a little Texas Hold em' I shall do that as well. But...these are just my thoughts; let each of us be convinced in their own minds. Romans 14:5 In Christ, Beja |
||||||
568 | Did John really baptise Jesus?? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 223512 | ||
Lightedsteps, You said: "Even though Jesus was without sin, when He was baptized by John, could it have been for the original sin of Adam that is upon the flesh of all men? Being 100 percent Man, and 100 percent God, Jesus had to have had the sin of Adam dwelling in his flesh, because he was born of a woman." and "Jesus had to have sin dwelling in His flesh, otherwise He could not have been tempted as we are, because the temptation would have been of a perfect deity" and "That part of Jesus that was truly flesh, had to be purged of the sin of Adam, in order for it to be said, He was without spot or blemish." Oh no no no no no no no. How you fly in the face of all of scripture! 2Co 5:21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. Does not Romans chapter 5, and 1 Cor 15 lay out for us that the second Adam is completely unlike the first adam? And yet they were both fully human. How then did they differ if not in nature to sin? How can we say that we hope to one day be in the likeness of the second Adam if it implies no freedom from our nature of sin!? Do you not also recognize that sin and falleness is not inherent to the human nature!? Was manking created fallen and sinful? Is christ in his ascended humanity fallen and sinful? How then can we say humanity of necessity is sinful? On the contrary it is a quality that is peculiar to those whom have fallen and it is an addition which is foreign to humanity even though its application is universal to all but the son of God. Christ assumed flesh, but he did not assume our sin nature. And since a nature of sin is not inherent to created humanity and only to fallen humanity Christ is able to truely be said to be fully human and yet sinless! Did not all the scriptures point to this? If not what then is the reason for a lamb without blemish? Is the blood of Lambs truely different to God or rather was it pointing forward to the sinlessness of Christ! I beg you to see that all the scriptures that you can possibly point to about the universal plight of fallen sinners is not about what it is inherent to humanity, but rather what they have universally fallen into. Therefore when christ deemed to take upon himself the nature of humanity, he did not also need to take upon himself the stain of sin! In Christ, Beja |
||||||
569 | Who gets custody of children in a divorc | Matt 19:9 | Beja | 223510 | ||
Pumpkin, Scripture does not discuss this issue. However, I would assume that whichever of the parents didn't get stoned to death would have the children. Since the only valid reason for divorce is adultery, and the penalty for adultery is stoning, it seems the logical answer. One might ask what happened in all the occassions where God's instructions weren't obeyed? For example one might say alright, neither of us committed adultery and yet we are divorcing so who gets the children according to God? The problem with that question is that God doesn't usually give out secondary instructions. He doesn't say, "assuming you don't wan't to obey do this instead." We so often keep seeking for a way to be religious and acceptable without obeying. So the end result becomes something like this: Question: According to the Bible, who gets custody of the children in a divorce? Answer: Don't divorce. I know this might not be helpful, but its the only biblical answer I have, and the one I'd give my own relatives if they asked. Oh, and I'm not saying we should stone people for it today. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
570 | Did John really baptise Jesus?? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 223506 | ||
Cecilk, Welcome to the forum! John did indeed object didn't he. Mat 3:14 But John tried to prevent Him, saying, "I have need to be baptized by You, and do You come to me?" So John testified in that to Christ's sinlessness. Though John didn't fully understand what was happening. Though even still, I certainly hope that John's words did apply to Jesus in another way! One might say, how is it that Christ can be baptized for repentence of sins? I ask you also, how is it that Christ was slain for sins? Christ performed all parts of perfect righteousness for those whom He has purchased for the Father. This is what our Lord responded. Mat 3:15 But Jesus answering said to him, "Permit it at this time; for in this way it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness." Then he *permitted Him. Christ did not merely need to accomplish death, He also needed to accomplish everything which the Father expected of you and me. If we say that Christ can not live and work for sinners, it is also a denial that He can die for sinners. But praise God that Christ has not only died in my place (substitutionary atonement) Christ has also lived out perfect righteousness on my behalf! (imputation of Christ's righteousness). And so Christ became our righteousness (1 Cor 1:30). 2Co 5:21 "He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." In Christ, Beja |
||||||
571 | ... | 2 Pet 1:20 | Beja | 223472 | ||
Thorwald, I will try to follow your points. a.) Who says that King James was anointed? You might be surprised to find out that the translators of the King James Bible actually said that it is good to use multiple translations to get the sense of scripture. Second, all the arguements that are used against the modern translations were the same arguements used against the King James translation when it was translated. The Christian's of the time argued that the perfect translation already existed, the Latin Vulgate. b.) They said they would throw them out of the synagogue, not the church. You are majorly missinterpreting that scripture. Second, if you read Deuteronomy 13, you will see that God also allows false prophets who have false visions to test the people. 1 John 4 says that we are to test such confessions against scripture. That sir is why you have been thrown out of a Church. c.) If you read the 1 Corinthians chapter 7, you will see that scripture actually says the exact opposite of what you are saying. d.) Sir your visions are to be tested by scripture, and when your visions disagree that means you are a false prophet. Your visions do not trump scripture but rather are to be corrected by scripture. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
572 | word of God from a man of God | Gen 1:1 | Beja | 223471 | ||
14 hours of D.A. Carson explaining the scriptures! There are far worse uses of your time! http://www.monergism.com/mp3/2010/07/d_a_carsons_the_god_who_is_the_1.php In Christ, Beja |
||||||
573 | What does the bib say about christians t | 1 Cor 6:1 | Beja | 223470 | ||
MyAnnointed1, You will find that in 1 Corinthians 6. And the short of it is that it would be far better to let the christian get away with wronged you than to take your brother in Christ to court. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
574 | On tribulation time | Matt 24:29 | Beja | 223467 | ||
Searcher, Good list! In interest of completeness, Amillinialism believes that the final tribulation is something christians will go through all of similiar to posttribulationist view, only they do not believe this period is a set seven years. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
575 | Why do i need to love god? | John 3:16 | Beja | 223455 | ||
Inquisitor, Gal 2:15,16 "We are Jews by nature and not sinners from among the Gentiles; nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified." Rom 3:28 For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law. Rom 4:3 For what does the Scripture say? "ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS." Rom 4:4 Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. Rom 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness, Rom 3:23-26 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed; for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. Rom 5:1,2 Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand; and we exult in hope of the glory of God. Now here are some that continue the same but also include the teaching of imputation, which is Christ giving us a righteousness that is not our own, nor from any work we do, but counting the perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ as ours through faith in Him. That is imputation. Rom 3:21,22 But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction Php 3:8,9 More than that, I count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish so that I may gain Christ, and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith, 2Co 5:21 He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. 1Co 1:30 But by His doing you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption, Our deeds are nothing and can gain us nothing! We do not even know how to begin doing good until after we are saved! Jer 13:23 "Can the Ethiopian change his skin Or the leopard his spots? Then you also can do good Who are accustomed to doing evil. On the contrary, God saves us and changes us SO THAT we can now do good works. Eph 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; Eph 2:9,10 not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them. Inquisitor, salvation and all these things come to us when we not only repent of our sins, but we also repent of any notion that we can ever do good, or fulfill a law, or satisfy his commands. We give up the notion that we in ourselves can present anything, and in utter bankruptcy we plead nothing but the blood and righteousness of Jesus Christ before God. That is placing our trust, our faith, in Jesus Christ. Please, turn from this false gospel you are preaching. We do not receive salvation through obeying his commandments, but only through faith and faith alone! In Christ, Beja |
||||||
576 | Why do i need to love god? | John 3:16 | Beja | 223448 | ||
Inquisitor, You failed to answer my question. How do we receive forgiveness and imputation of God's righteousness? This is the entire question, a lot of what you say is correct, IF it is understood with the right answer to the above question. If you are saying that we receive these things by loving God, this is a false gospel. These things were purchased for us by Christ's life, death, ressurection, but we receive these things through faith alone. Can you or can you not affirm this? If you wish to to not confuse us, simply answer that question clearly. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
577 | Why do i need to love god? | John 3:16 | Beja | 223429 | ||
Inquisitor, None of us deny that loving both God and man is important. Those are indeed the greatest two commandments. However, my concern comes from what I fear you might have been saying in your original post. The question is this: How do we receive the grace and salvation which Jesus Christ purchased for us? Your original post sounded like you were saying that we receive grace as a result of loving God/obeying Jesus' command to love. Can you and will you clearly deny such a belief so that we may not worry? In Christ, Beja |
||||||
578 | Why do i need to love god? | John 3:16 | Beja | 223412 | ||
Inquisitor, Your statements: "The biggest, most powerful reason we SHOULD love God is so we can go to Heaven." "Now God has sent His Son to fulfill a promise God made after closing down that Garden of Eden. He provided the ONLY Way for any human being to go to Heaven and that is done by obeying God's Commandments or His Son's Last Will and Testament which was executed by the Holy Spirit through His Apostles." Sir, you have just forwarded a false gospel. Perhaps you don't realise the implications of what you are saying. We go to heaven by loving God? We go to heaven by obeying his commandments? According to Romans 3:10-18 there is not a one of us who loves God. The things you describe is a result of salvation and regeneration, not the means of salvation! We are NOT saved through our obedience, we are saved through the obediance of Jesus Christ, and the death of Jesus Christ in our place. (2 Cor 5:21, Isaiah 53). God grants us HIS righteousness not from our doing any thing, but purely and solely through faith. (Romans 3:24-26; Romans 4:1-8; Gal 2:15,16; Romans 5:1,2). Please look up these verses and read them carefully. We must understand our utter bankruptcy before God with regards to our own righteousness, and put our faith (TRUST) in nothing we can do but only in that Christ has fulfilled all expectations for us and paid the price required of all our failures. HE is our rightousness before God, and nothing else. Do not mistake the passages in 1 John that explain what will unavoidably follow salvation, and confuse them for things that merit or cause salvation. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
579 | Law and Gospel | Gal 3:21 | Beja | 223271 | ||
I do regret that none of the underlines, bold letters or italics carried over from microsoft word. They had helped very much to let a reader visually organize all of that. Oh well. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
580 | Law and Gospel | Gal 3:21 | Beja | 223269 | ||
(THIS IS PART 2, MAKE SURE YOU READ PART 1 FIRST) 1. There is an instruction of morality implicit to the gospel. 1Ti 1:8-11 But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully ,realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching, according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted. Lets examine this passage carefully. First, we see that Paul is specifically discussing the Law. Second, he says it is to restrain a variety of sins. Third, Paul states that these sins are contrary to sound teaching according to the glorious gospel. The law is used to restrain sins that are contrary to the gospel. Inherent to the gospel is a system of morality. This should not surprise us. The gospel is not merely about the means of salvation. The gospel also includes declaring the need for salvation. Inherent to the gospel message is that we are all sinners facing a coming day of judgment. And that we all stand guilty. We are guilty because we have gone against the Law of God. So inherent in the gospel message is the understanding that the moral Law of God, which is expressed in the Old Testament, is in fact something we should not transgress. We see this clearly because the Lawful use of the Law is to restrain sins that are contrary to the gospel. In other words, the sins that the Law restrains, are also sins that the gospel condemns. Lets see evidence of this from another passage. Eph 4:17-24 So this I say, and affirm together with the Lord, that you walk no longer just as the Gentiles also walk, in the futility of their mind, being darkened in their understanding, excluded from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the hardness of their heart; and they, having become callous, have given themselves over to sensuality for the practice of every kind of impurity with greediness. But you did not learn Christ in this way, if indeed you have heard Him and have been taught in Him, just as truth is in Jesus, that, in reference to your former manner of life, you lay aside the old self, which is being corrupted in accordance with the lusts of deceit, and that you be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and put on the new self, which in the likeness of God has been created in righteousness and holiness of the truth. Lets simplify this passage. Paul says: 1.) Do not continue to walk as the gentiles. 2.) You did not learn Christ this way. 3.) If you have been taught Christ, you were taught to put off the old self and put on the new. This is a powerful statement by Paul. It clearly states that there is an expectation of morality implicit in somebody learning Christ. Because the gospel is not only a means of salvation, it is also a statement of condemnation of all transgression against the Laws of God. Furthermore, the gospel is a call to repentance from transgressing the laws of God. What the Law forbids, the gospel condemns. To try and suggest that you can receive salvation and yet walk happily in the sin of the Gentiles is according to Paul “not to have learned Christ.” If you have learned Christ, you were also taught to put off such old sin and walk in a renewed life. Paul continues in this passage giving practical examples of putting off the old man and putting off the new. So let me summarize what we have found. The Gospel contains an implicit condemnation of sin, and instruction in morality. The notion of morality which the gospel forwards, is the morality of the Old Testament Law. 1.) What the law forbids, is what the Gospel itself condemns. 2.) The Law is not contrary to the Gospel. 3.) The moral Law of the Old Testament is still the expected morality of the New Testament. 4.) While the Law is not nor every will be a means to salvation, it is and will remain a means of instruction as to what is sin and what is righteousness. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 ] Next > Last [40] >> |