Results 61 - 80 of 253
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Beja Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
61 | The Scripture | Deuteronomy | Beja | 232080 | ||
RondiaD, What initial thoughts/questions do you have when you prayerfully read it? In Christ, Beja |
||||||
62 | Who was Theophilus? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 232078 | ||
Loavesnfish, The word "Theophilus" literally means "Lover of God." Ofcourse there is no erotic connotation there but rather a right and due love to their creator and savior. So one possible understanding of the Luke/Acts combination is that Luke is simply addressing any Christian that gets their hands on the books. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
63 | Target language problem? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 232076 | ||
Loavesnfish, Its pretty straight forward in the greek. The "BE" that is inserted is simply a translation of an imperitive verb, a command. "Be filled" is a very normal and legitimate translation. The only possible question is what does "en pneumati" mean? Which is what I was addressing. Sorry if I missed your point. It is 1 am here at the moment so it didn't come across very clearly to me. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
64 | who was thrown out of heaven and why | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 232075 | ||
matricesmith, Though I do not think they actually refer to what many have often ascribed to them, I believe that both Isaiah and Jeremiah have the texts that are traditional suggested in answer to this question. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
65 | Our culture tends to elevate angels | Rom 1:25 | Beja | 232044 | ||
begbie, "Elevating angels above their rightful place" is vague but here are a few thoughts. 1. Your question defines it as wrong first of all. You yourself declare it as giving them a position not "rightful." 2. I can only assume you mean in some form that your culture is worshiping them. I suggest you read Romans 1:18 through the end of the chapter very carefully concerning the worship of something "created" rather than the "Creator." Second, read Hebrews chapter 1 concerning the superiority of Christ over the angels. And third read the repeated affirmations by angels themselves in scripture that they are not to be worshiped but God alone is to be worshiped. I'm not at my normal computer to use a search feature but there are numerous examples in scripture. One of them is in the book of revelations. 3. Short answer. Its idolatry. God alone is to be worshiped. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
66 | Should Ephesians 5:18 be "in Spirit" ? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 232022 | ||
I_defender, The greek preposition "Ev" is remarkably flexible. However, one thing of note is that the normal means of being filled "with" something is usually the terrain of the genitive. Grammatically the most likely effect of "Spirit" being Dative makes this a matter of agency. In other words this is most likely saying that the Spirit is doing the filling rather than saying that we are being filled up with the Spirit itself. Now, I affirm that scripture teaches the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in believers. However, from the perspective of greek syntax it is very unlikely that this is what Paul is saying in this particular verse. It is possible, just very unlikely. But making any blanket statement about "ev" would be hazardous. It functions many ways in the dative. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
67 | 'women' or 'their wives', how did NASB | 1 Tim 3:11 | Beja | 232020 | ||
HatchB, The reason is that the same word in greek is translated both woman and wife, or women and wives. Only context determines whether it is talking about a married woman or simply a woman in general. In that particular passage the debate is over if it is referring to female deacons, or the wives of deacons. If I was to venture to guess the thoughts behind the NASB translation, I think their intentions were likely not to make the exegetical decision that this refers to women deacon, but rather to let the word "Women" show the ambiguity there in the greek. That is purely my speculation however. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
68 | saved or sinners? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 231991 | ||
Goldy,, Yes, both. But I think I included both. In, Christ Beja |
||||||
69 | why was the bible written? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 231981 | ||
goldy, The Bible was written that God might be glorified. The Bible was written that God might be made revealed in His manifold splendor that He might be glorified. The Bible was written that God might be revealed in His glorious three in one state consisting of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and therefore be glorified. The Bible was written that God's holy and righteous wrath against sin might be known and through this God be glorified. The Bible was written that God's wrath on sin might drive us to seek refuge in Christ as our glorious savior who died on the cross to redeem a chosen people that God might be glorified in His unfathomable love, grace and mercy that is in Jesus Christ. The Bible was written that we might have abundant joy in all the manifold aspects of God including his holiness, great salvation, wonderful creation, and multitudes of perfections that are revealed in his word; and that through God being our all satisfying joy He be glorified. God's word was written that the people whom He had redeemed might learn what pleases the Lord and render to Him God-fearing, God-pleasing, God-enabled obedience so that that through His people rendering due, holy, and joyful obedience God would be glorified. The Bible was written that God's people would look forward in faith to the coming hope of the new creation resulting in abundant joy and hope in this life so that God would be glorified through our faith driven joy. The Bible was written for God's glory and our good. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
70 | what is inspirational about this story | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 231902 | ||
water100, Try to imagine that you are a man who is fairly comfortable in life. Your needs and many of your wants are pretty much met. You've so far managed to basically ignore the word of God's appeals to you for repentance and faith. Now read the story and see if it speaks relevantly to you. The passage reveals the turn of fate that is heading towards those who are content and in love with this world as their good now gives way to eternal torment. Second the passage calls very direct attention to the fact that no greater sign is coming, either they will respond to scripture's demand for repentance or they will continue their path until the day they lift up their eyes in hell. Think less about historical context and ask what purpose was this passage meant for in the conviction and salvation of lost sinners. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
71 | should we attend church together | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 231878 | ||
Amare, This forum is extremely limited for giving advice for such situations. This is not because God's word is limited, but rather because there are many variables that could be in play. We have no idea why your husband is leaving, nor do we know where he intends to go or whether he simply plans to abandon church altogether. Many other details could drastically effect a change in our answer. So the point being, you need to seek some solid biblical counsel in your life on this question. That being said, I will give my attempt to answer the question in the raw as it is. 1. If your husband plans to go to either no church or an unbiblical church then I would remain in your current church. 2. If your husband plans to go to a biblical church then I would stick by your husband. The only time that you should ever place anything over your submission to your husband is when that submission would mean violating a direct command for God. Attending Church is a command of God. Which particular church you attend (assuming they are both sound) is not an explicit command of God. Submission to your husband is a command of God. Further, the family united in worship is meant to be an indispensible foundation for the Christian religion. 3. Prior to doing either, I would try to lovingly discuss this decision with your husband. If your husband is a man that is serious about following Christ, there are clear biblical commands on attempting to reconcile with regards to whatever disagreement he has with the pastor's wife. Now here is especially where the details matter. For some roots of the disagreement scripture would tell your husband to say nothing and simply show Christian love despite the differences. For some there would need to be discussion and attempt at reconciliation and for yet others it would be time to confront the pastor's wife over the sin. I can't tell you which is appropriate, but I can tell you that simply getting mad and leaving is almost certainly not what his Lord would have him do. If you can not speak to him about it without it becoming a fight or without being gentle then I would simply refer you to points 1 or 2. Understand this, even if your husband is the one who is wrong, you are still called to follow him so long as he does not press you to violate clear commands of Gods (1 Peter 3:1). Be very careful of those whose advice to you is to be faithful to God by means of rebellion against God appointed authority. I hope this is of some help. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
72 | ... | 1 Pet 5:8 | Beja | 231856 | ||
LockNorth, With regards to the beginning of your post, it would help tremendously if you provided verses. For example, neither satan nor Jesus is an actual lion. At times, they are portrayed as such as a metephor for the purpose of showing something about them in -that particular context-. So without the context, we can't tell you what that passage is trying to say. With regards to why preachers would portray Satan as actively seeking to tempt the saints: I would just point you to biblical authority. 1Pe 5:8 Be of sober spirit, be on the alert. Your adversary, the devil, prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour. I would ask you why the preachers you are listening to preach contrary to this? Christ has already sealed Satan's defeat, but Satan is not yet ultimately done away with. Revelation 20 depicts his final defeat. As an Amillenialist I do believe that Satan is currently greatly restrained in his deceiving of the nations, though he is still hard at work. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
73 | Perseverance of the saints | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 231619 | ||
Dear Cas, Forgive the delay in my response. My nephew has gone into the ministry and I had the privledge of taking him to an expository preaching workshop in Texas the beginning of this week so I have been away from the computer. And thanks to Doc for giving him assurance of my reply when I was delayed. Since Doc has given you an excellent answer in terms of being precise and sound, I will rather aim for a very simple grasp of the concept. I will contrast it to how most people teach "once saved always saved" in my area. Now, it is important to understand that both views believe that a truely saved individual will never loose their salvation. However, here is were the views differ as tought in my area. "Once saved always saved" believes that we will not loose our salvation -based upon- the foundation that no matter what we might do we are alright. We might live the most terrible lives of sin, or might very well denounce Christ Himself yet we are alright because "once saved always saved." "Perseverance of the Saints" believes that we are secure, but NOT because we may do whatever we please and still be alright. After all, scripture repeatedly states that falling away from the faith is fatal. But, our security is -based on- the fact that God will through His ommipotent power will never fail to keep us in the faith and keep us growing in holiness. This is not to suggest that we wont sin, and even have brief periods of backsliding. But ultimately the saints will, by God's power in them, persevere. Now, the difference is very vividly portrayed when in how they respond to a professing Christian falling into radically gross sin, or renouncing the faith. Once saved always saved will affirm that they are fine. Perseverance of the saints will see it as a warning that they may have never belonged to Christ to begin with. Why? Because God never lets truely saved individuals ultimately/finally fall away or be completely overcome by sin. How are we to know if they are false professors or if they are truely saved individuals who have just temporarily been entangled in sin? The answer is repentance. When we see them whole heartedly repent, we breathe easy and thank God. Until they repent, we can never be assured they belong to Christ. Why? Because by God's work in us, true Christians will always eventually repent. Now lets go back to suicide. The problem with suicide is that it is a final and unreversable, unrepentable departure from the path of righteousness. There is nothing really that special about the sin itself, the especially troubling nature of suicide is ONLY that the "so-called believer" has ultimately and finally finished their race in a departure from the will of God. And that is not the picture we have in scripture of how truely saved finish their race. That is why its so troubling. I hope this helps clarify. I really pictured my post being more concise when I began! : ) In Christ, Beja |
||||||
74 | Do you go to hell if you kill yourself | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 231575 | ||
Cas, If you believe that a man can "loose" their salvation, then you probably will see suicide as causing a professing Christian to go to Hell. If you believe in the eternal security of the believer because you believe "once saved always saved," then you will probably see suicide as irrelevant to your salvation, but certainly a sad event. If you believe in the eternal security of the believer because you believe in the historical doctrine of "the perseverance of the saints," then you will likely see suicide as an extremely worrisome event that MIGHT be indicating that the person was never truely belonging to Christ. This last one is my view. But to clarify, I see suicide as a "red flag," not as a certain conclusion of their fate. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
75 | Balance: Faith and Works | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 231156 | ||
Bill, If I understood the post correctly, then it sounds like a good display of historical orthodox Christianity. There is a sense in which we may rightly say that nobody will be saved apart from holiness (Hebrews 12:14). However, we must constantly affirm with Paul, and indeed all scripture, that not one of these works hold any merit with regards to our justification before God. Renewed dispositions and resultant actions are always present with true faith because our faith does not merely unite us to the benefits of Christ's death, it also unites us to Christ in His ongoing life unto God in an ongoing manner (Romans ch 6). And indeed, we can not go on blatantly in sin because His seed abides in us (1 John 3:9). Not that I am suggesting perfection in this life (Philip 3:12-15.) So because we are not only united to the benefits of Christ's death, but by faith and by the indwelling of the Spirit of Christ (Romans 8:10) we who believe are being transformed from glory to glory (2 Cor 3:18.) But all of this ongoing conformity to the image of Christ is part of our salvation (Eph 2:8-10) NOT a means in any way of meriting salvation! Our justification before God comes through the merit and attonement of Jesus Christ to be received through faith alone. So let us speak boldly of works in that all Christians must seek to be rich in good works (1 Tim 6:18), but let us always loudly affirm that all good things that we will ever do are devoid of any merit in our justification before God. For God's acceptance of us is from faith receiving both the righteousness of Christ on our behalf, and the suffering of Christ on our behalf. God recieves us for Christ's sake and not for any good thing we do. And with regard to any man suggesting a faith that is devoid of any good works, let join James and decry that as a dead faith, a mockery of real faith. Not because works are any part of faith, not because works are needed prior to faith, not because works have any part in our justification, but only because we affirm that those who are by faith united to Christ and justified by Christ will then certainly be filled by the Spirit (Rom 8:9) and will unavoidably bear the fruit of the Spirit in due time. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
76 | Salvation if not heard of God? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 230922 | ||
Marnie, I believe scripture teaches that without hearing the gospel that there is no hope. This is because... 1. No man comes to the Father but through Christ. 2. Paul gives great care to show that all people, even those who have never heard of anything from the Judeo-Christian religious tradition are both inexcusable, and sinners. Take a careful look at the first three chapters of Romans for support for this. Paul claims natural revelation is sufficient to condemn but not to save. 3. In Romans chapter 10 Paul excludes the possibility of saving faith apart from hearing the word preached. It does not take hearing the message of the gospel to be a sinner guilty before God, however it does take the gospel to trust upon Christ and be forgiven. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
77 | Job's suffering | Job | Beja | 230899 | ||
Atterbury, Why questions like this are extremely difficult to answer unless we are given a clear reason in scripture itself, and unfortunately in this case we are not. However, both the reasons you named are good suggestions. Let me give you two more thoughts however. In one sense Job was on trial, but in another sense it was God on trial. What Satan technically said was that Job would curse God if his "lush" situation changed, what was being accused on another level was that nobody would worship God with out a materialistic bribe to do so, God in fact was being accused of not worthy of worship otherwise. So on one level what took place was a public display of the wrong headedness of that notion. The second being that while what took place might have been to teach Job something, it was written and put in scripture not for Job, who was long dead when it was done, but in order to teach those who are alive, you and I. The book of Job was provided in the wisdom of God to teach us some very meaningful things about suffering, and it is best to be seen in that light. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
78 | who was the first person jesus saved? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 230648 | ||
Pastorsma, The answer is Adam. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
79 | cussing/foul lang | Eph 5:4 | Beja | 230228 | ||
accox4, Eph 4:29 Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only such a word as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, so that it will give grace to those who hear. Eph 5:4 and there must be no filthiness and silly talk, or coarse jesting, which are not fitting, but rather giving of thanks. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
80 | What? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 230150 | ||
ewq1938, My sincere apologies. I think I see now the heart of your question. The reason I misread you is that usually when somebody new posts a question on a verse like this, it is a preface to them challenging the deity of Christ. My expectations that you might be doing such pressed my attention to the second half of the verse. So I apologize for my presuming something harsh like that. Now with regards to the other half of the verse, I presume the difficulty is that it sounds as if it is saying that the LORD the King has a redeemer as if our great Holy God could need to be redeemed. However, the word "his" would better be understood with Israel as its referant. In that light the text would be saying that the same LORD is both king and redeemer of Israel. Hope that helps. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [13] >> |