Results 61 - 65 of 65
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Ken hepting Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
61 | Is the sin nature a substance or mindset | Phil 3:9 | Ken hepting | 100439 | ||
[Please stop arguing and answer my questions. Is the sin nature a substance or a mindset? Has the sin nature been eradicated and replaced by the new nature? Or does the sin nature remain in the believer and battle against the new nature? Is the sin nature the same thing as the flesh? What is the new nature? Is it God in me or is it a part of me that is a new creation? Is the new nature a substance or a mind set?] Who's arguing? You asked Joe, not me. The Bible says the flesh wars against the Spirit therefore one needs to ask the meaning of the term "flesh". Is the "flesh" you? your soul? Are YOU just someone/something just caught in the middle ....Or are you [us] an autonomous being able to see both [clue here] "natures" when we are born again? Does John 3.3,5 enable us to see both natures as well as the kingdom of God? I think so. What do you think? [PS Ken, I'm glad you found the Keswick article helpful to you.] Yes. I was wondering if there was anybody before me who thought about things as I did. Still can't see how they strayed and went into [What I believe to be] error on somethings. |
||||||
62 | Is the sin nature a substance or mindset | Phil 3:9 | Ken hepting | 100449 | ||
Try this, Pam "Choosing to Partake of the Divine Nature" Because we have come out of the divine nature, which chooses to be divine, we must choose to be divine, to be of God, to be one with God, loving and living as he loves and lives, and so be partakers of the divine nature. Otherwise we perish. Man cannot originate this life. It must be shown him, and he must choose it. God is the Father of Jesus and of us—of every possibility of our being. But while God is the Father of his children, Jesus is the father of their sonship, for in him is made the life which is sonship to the Father—the recognition, in fact and life, that the Father has his claim upon his sons and daughters. We are not and cannot become true sons and daughters without our will willing his will, our doing following his making. It was the will of Jesus to be the thing God willed and meant him, that made him the true Son of God. He was not the Son of God because he could not help it, but because he willed to be in himself the Son that he was in the divine idea. So with us: we must be the sons we are. We must be sons and daughters in our will. And we can be sons and daughters, saved into the bliss of our being, only by choosing God for the Father he is, and doing his will—yielding ourselves true sons and daughters to the absolute Father. Therein lays human bliss—only and essential. The working out of this our salvation must involve pain, and the handing of it down to them that are below must ever involve pain. But the eternal form of the will of God in and for us is intensity of bliss….George McDonald |
||||||
63 | An Arminian Consensus in the Forum? | 1 John 2:2 | Ken hepting | 100709 | ||
I've stated this in another thread using others words. It makes a lot of sense since Jesus died for all in the world. I think in reverse when I say all are saved as a consequence but damnation comes in when you are told about Jesus and you walk away from it. John 9:41 (KJV) Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth. |
||||||
64 | Receive? | 1 John 2:2 | Ken hepting | 101349 | ||
What does this verse mean to you, Tim, and can you see application in your argument that man does always have a freewill? 1 Cor. 14:32 (NASB) and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets; Notice they are not subject to God. Elseware it is seen where men can fall away. Fall away from what? After becoming what? Ken |
||||||
65 | How would you make textual decisions? | 1 John 5:7 | Ken hepting | 99839 | ||
What you are claiming is that a reading (1 John 5:7-8), which is found in only four late manuscripts, should be included in the text of the Bible, even though thousands of earlier manuscripts do not include it. How do you reach that decision? On what basis should anyone reach this conclusion? 1. It is truth 2. And since it is how do you know there wouldn't have been agreement from the earlier writers? From the text, held in context, can you envision a difficulty? Sounds inspired to me. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 ] |