Results 61 - 80 of 3169
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: kalos Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
61 | Was Daniel and Joseph politicians? | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 165494 | ||
There is no clear verse of Scripture saying that Daniel and Joseph either were or were not politicians. What is your definition of a politician? Daniel and Joseph were both appointed, not elected. Moreover, the persons who appointed them were not elected. So what definition of "politician" might fit Daniel or Joseph? |
||||||
62 | RAPTURE | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 165562 | ||
The Rapture of the Church Question: "1.When does Rapture take place, is it before tribulation or after tribulation?" Answer: 'Following is a definition of pretribulationism and one of the prewrath position. 'Pretribulationalism 'This view was first known as "the secret" or "any moment rapture." It is a relatively new position which was first taught by the founder of the Catholic Apostolic Church, Edward Irving, in the late 1820's. It was then picked up by Plymouth Brethren pastor John Nelson Darby, and he first preached on it in 1843. It came to America in the late 1800's... 'Pretribulationists teach that the return of Christ has been imminent since the days of the early church and that the church will be raptured sometime before the seventieth week begins. Although they have no Scripture that in so many words teaches it, they teach that there are no signs and the rapture could take place at any moment. The seventieth week of Daniel is therefore considered to be a seven-year period of God's judgmental "tribulation" (hence the term pretribulation). This position generally views the seventieth week as the day of the Lord's wrath from which the church is excluded.' Prewrath 'The Prewrath position teaches that the true church will be raptured when the great tribulation by Antichrist, inspired by Satan, is cut short by God's day-of-the-Lord wrath, which will occur between the sixth and seventh seals of Revelation, sometime during the second half of the seventieth week. The persecution associated with the great tribulation of Antichrist is viewed as the wrath of Satan, whereas the events that follow, beginning with the seventh seal, are considered the wrath of God. There is another term that is sometimes expressed, "historical premillennialism," which refers back to the teaching of the early church fathers before 325 A.D. who believed that the church would face the persecution of Antichrist and Christ would then reign for 1000 years upon the earth. With the exception of two, Origen and Clement of Alexandria, who were allegorist, they all taught this view. Prewrath is plainly and simply an expansion of this view which was biblical then and biblical now.' ____________________ (www.solagroup.org) Grace to you, Kalos |
||||||
63 | RAPTURE | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 165563 | ||
A visible, noisy, glorious event... ...not some secret catching away! Question: "2.Is the rapture going a secert one or everybody will know what has taken place? I need answers supported with scriptures." Answer: 'Paul gives us even more details of the rapture of the Church. The most famous rapture passage is in 1 Thessalonians 4: 'For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we shall always be with the Lord (1 Thess. 4:15-17). 'Paul comforts the Thessalonian believers by telling them that the dead in Christ will be resurrected just before the translation of living believers. Christ will descend visibly with a shout, the archangel Michael will raise His voice, and the trumpet of God will be blown. This is a visible, noisy, glorious event, not some secret catching away!' (http://solagroup.org/articles/ endtimes/ep_0012.html) 'There are two serious problems with understanding the resurrection as a "spiritual" event. R.C. Sproul says, The first difficulty is that it [Paul's teaching in 1 Corinthians 15] involves propositions and assertions that can be neither verified nor falsified empirically. ... if one announces or predicts things that will take place in the arena of real history involving physical reality, then empirical verification becomes relevant and crucial...It is unfortunate that the apostle failed to alert the Corinthians-and us, by extension-that he was speaking of a secret, hidden, spiritual resurrection. His language certainly suggests something else, particularly as Paul so clearly conjoins the resurrection of our bodies with the resurrection of Christ's body. The resurrected Christ is the firstfruits of all who will be raised. (R.C. Sproul, The Last Days According to Jesus, Baker Books, 1998, pg 162) (www.solagroup.org/articles/ endtimes/et_0003.html) |
||||||
64 | RAPTURE | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 165582 | ||
Does the Bible Teach an "Any Moment" Rapture? 'WHAT ABOUT IMMINENCY? '...the doctrine of imminency is nowhere taught in Scripture. The concept that Christ could return at "any moment" since His departure back to heaven is simply not taught anywhere in the entire Bible. Not one of the passages used to sustain imminency, actually teach imminency. Expectancy, yes. Imminency (an any-moment rapture), no. 'If imminency had been the concept that the writers had wanted to convey, it could have and would have been clearly stated (in fact 19th century promoters of pretribulationism initially taught expectancy rather than imminency for this reason). In addition, there were many events prophesied by Christ, known throughout the Christian world at that time, that still had to occur before He could return, such as the destruction of the Temple (Lk. 21:6) and the death of Peter (Jn. 21:18-19). Imminency was an impossibility until the Temple was destroyed in 70 A.D. 'Likewise, Christ taught that His rescue of the elect of God will occur "on the same day" that His wrath will begin upon the wicked that remain (Lk 17:26-30). There is no gap of time between the rapture and His wrath. If the seventieth week of Daniel is really the wrath of God, as pretribulationism maintains, and the seventieth week begins with Israel's covenant with Antichrist (Dan. 9:27), then Israel must be back in the land AND ANTICHRIST MUST BE ON THE WORLD SCENE BEFORE the Rapture, a simple deduction which once again destroys the unbiblical concept of imminency. 'But the prewrath position has no problem with any of these passages, including Revelation 12:12, where the persecution of Antichrist against the "elect" of God during the great tribulation is not called the wrath of God, but rather, the wrath of Satan. Pretribulationism makes Antichrist's persecution of God's elect the wrath of God. Prewrath rapturism sees this great persecution as the wrath of Satan (Rev. 12:12). Antichrist's persecution of God's elect is never the wrath of God (Mt. 24:21-22; Rev. 12:7; 13:7; 14:12-13).' ____________________ Questions for a Pretribulationist (Emphasis added.) 'By Robert Van Kampen and Rev. Roger Best (www.solagroup.org/ articles/endtimes/et_0006.html) |
||||||
65 | RAPTURE | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 165585 | ||
Will there be a second and third coming of Christ? ____________________ "There is not a distinct second and a third coming, rather one coming, one Parousia at which time God "sum[s] up ... all things in Christ" (Eph. 1:10)" ____________________ "Awaiting and looking for the [fulfillment, the realization of our] blessed hope, even the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Christ Jesus (the Messiah, the Anointed One)," Titus 2:13 (Amplified Bible). 'Two examples corroborating the teaching that the church is present through some portion of the persecution and therefore not removed from the earth in a secret coming prior to the 70th Week are Irenaeus (the disciple of Polycarp, a disciple of the apostle John) and Justin Martyr. Irenaeus wrote, "And they [the ten kings] ... shall give their kingdom to the beast, and put the Church to flight." (Against Heresies 5:26.1) 'Justin Martyr wrote, "The man of apostasy [Antichrist] ... shall venture to do unlawful deeds on the earth against us the Christians." (Trypho cx) 'The early church fathers understood there to be only one coming of Christ. They never separated His coming into the idea that He would come first in a secret coming for His church and then later (perhaps seven years) with His church to pour out His wrath on wicked mankind. 'For the above reasons, to understand that a difference was intended in Titus 2:13 between "the blessed hope" being the (secret) Rapture of the saints and "the appearing of...Christ Jesus" as the Revelation of Christ at the end of the 70th Week, is to incorrectly understand the verse. Therefore, there is not a distinct second and a third coming, rather one coming, one Parousia at which time God "sum[s] up ... all things in Christ" (Eph. 1:10)' ____________________ www.signministries.org/ faqs/faq019_thirdcoming.htm (See also www.solagroup.org) |
||||||
66 | RAPTURE | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 165587 | ||
'ARE THERE TWO PAROUSIAS OF CHRIST?' 'Pretribulationism sees two separate parousias (comings) of Christ, one when He comes "for His Church" and the second, when He comes "with His Church," a grammatical position with not one verse of substantiation or explanation. One second coming of Christ (parousia) is referred to, never two, never spoken of in the plural, and never differentiated by any writer, including Christ. As important as the return of Christ is, if two separate parousias were the teachings of Christ and Paul, there would be no confusion in this matter. 'What's even worse, the proof text of Christ coming "with" the Church is a singular passage given in Revelation 19. At the great and final battle of Armageddon, "the armies which are heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, were following Him [Christ] on white horses" (v.14). Simply because they are wearing white linen clothing some assume Christ's army must be the "bride of Christ," even though the angels are seen wearing the exact same clothing (Rev. 15:6). Both Christ and Paul taught that it would be His angels that accompany Christ in battle during the day of the Lord (Mt. 16:27; 2 Th. 1:7-8). The idea that the new bride of Christ is to, immediately after the marriage ceremony described earlier in the chapter, follow her bridegroom into battle stretches one's imagination, especially in the light of the other clear teachings of Scripture. The prewrath view sees only one parousia of Christ, at a time that perfectly harmonizes every passage.' ____________________ http://solagroup.org/articles/endtimes/ et_0006.html |
||||||
67 | RAPTURE | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 165588 | ||
A second and third coming of Christ? 'Will there be a second and third coming of Christ? 'By Rev. Bill Lee-Warner '"...looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus" 'Titus 2:13 is often used by pretribulationists to show that there is a difference (of time and objective) between what they refer to as "the Rapture" and "the Revelation of Christ." 'The "blessed hope" and the "glorious appearing" are said to be two different events, or in effect, two distinct comings of Christ. For the pretribulationist, the "blessed hope" is seen as the Rapture, when Christ comes (secretly) "for" the saints at the beginning of the 70th Week of Daniel while the "glorious appearing" is seen as Christ's physical return to earth "with" His saints at the end of the 70th week of Daniel, for the final judgment of the world and the setting up of the Millennial Kingdom on earth. 'For the following reasons, this passage in Titus cannot support the notion that there are two comings (parousia) of Christ: one for the saints, the "blessed hope" and one for the world, "the appearing of the glory of... Christ Jesus." (...) [Note: In the full article there are 15 paragraphs here, which have been omitted due to limitations of space. To read more go to: (www.solagroup.org/articles/ faqs/faq_0011.html) and read the entire article.] 'For the above reasons, to understand that a difference was intended in Titus 2:13 between "the blessed hope" being the (secret) Rapture of the saints and "the appearing of...Christ Jesus" as the Revelation of Christ at the end of the 70th Week, is to incorrectly understand the verse. Therefore, there is not a distinct second and a third coming, rather one coming, one Parousia at which time God "sum[s] up ... all things in Christ" (Eph. 1:10).' ____________________ To read more go to: www.solagroup.org/articles/ faqs/faq_0011.html |
||||||
68 | Does Satan Exist Part I | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 166213 | ||
Yes. | ||||||
69 | Does Satan Exist Part II | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 166215 | ||
Yes Part II | ||||||
70 | Does Satan Exist Part III | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 166217 | ||
Yes Part III | ||||||
71 | What does lament mean ? | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 166320 | ||
See Merriam-Webster Online at (http://m-w.com/) | ||||||
72 | ... | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 166448 | ||
... | ||||||
73 | ... | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 166450 | ||
... | ||||||
74 | ... | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 166452 | ||
... | ||||||
75 | ... | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 166454 | ||
... | ||||||
76 | Christians with demon oppression | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 166545 | ||
OVERSTATING THE BELIEVER’S AUTHORITY ____________________ "believers do not have the prerogative to say, "I command you, Satan (to do this or not do that)..." "Those biblical passages that do speak of believers’ authority over the demonic realm apply strictly to driving demons out of lost human beings (Matt. 10:1; Mark 6:7; Luke 10:19; Acts 8:7). They are never applied to pastoral counseling or the believer’s personal battle with the devil." ____________________ The notion that people can order Satan about when they can't even get their kids to do what they tell them is truly astonishing. ____________________ STATEMENT DA082 The Bondage Maker: Examining the Message and Method of Neil T. Anderson (Part Two: Spiritual Warfare And The "Truth Encounter") by Elliot Miller "The biblical evidence suggesting that believers have been given direct authority over the demonic realm is scantier than is usually supposed. Anderson applies Matthew 12:29 ("first binds the strong man") to believers, when it is obvious from the preceding seven verses that Jesus was referring to Himself alone. Matthew 18:18 ("bind" and "loose") refers to church discipline, not spiritual warfare, as the larger context makes entirely clear. Anderson uses Ephesians 1:18-21 (Christ is seated above all authorities and powers) combined with Ephesians 2:5-6 (believers are seated with Him) as proof of the believer’s authority over the devil. But rather than dealing with spiritual warfare, these passages speak of Christ’s exaltation by the Father and the believer’s acceptance and exaltation before the Father in Christ." One should therefore be careful not to infer too much from them. "Nowhere does Scripture state that believers have authority over Satan himself. Those biblical passages that do speak of believers’authority over the demonic realm apply strictly to driving demons out of lost human beings (Matt. 10:1; Mark 6:7; Luke 10:19; Acts 8:7). They are never applied to pastoral counseling or the believer’s personal battle with the devil. "This does not mean Christians must accept defeat in spiritual warfare. Scripture clearly teaches that Jesus has won the victory over the devil and all authority has been given to Him (Matt. 28:18; Eph. 1:20-22; Col. 2:15; 1 Pet. 3:22; etc.). While believers do not have the prerogative to say, "I command you, Satan (to do this or not do that)," Jesus does. Believers are indeed positionally seated with Him in heavenly places and are thus made partakers in His victory. They therefore can be confident that if they resist the devil, he will flee from them (James 4:7)." To read more go to: www.equip.org/search |
||||||
77 | Why so many Bibles? | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 166667 | ||
Md1234: What is your question? I'm not sure what you are asking here. I understand the situation you are describing, but what can a person do about it? There's no law decreeing that everyone must use one and only one English version of the Bible or that everyone must use the same one. I sure don't want some preacher, priest or politician telling me what translation to use. Short of that I don't know what we're supposed to do. We can't even agree on what God's Name is. Grace to you, Kalos |
||||||
78 | Destressing | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 166675 | ||
Md1234: Question: Is it wrong to take nerve pills? My answer: Christians are not exempt from diseases and disorders such as the flu, cancer, heart trouble, or diabetes. Are we somehow magically exempt from depression and anxiety and their consequences? For example, many Christians, including some pastors, have little knowledge and absolutely no understanding of clinical depression. (Although your question is not about depression, allow me to use depression as an example.) Some try to label depression as a sin. Or they say that if you had enough faith, you could be healed. To this I reply: no responsible person would tell a diabetic to have faith and quit taking his insulin, would he? In the same way, it would be very foolish and irresponsible to counsel a person being treated for depression to stop taking his prescription medications. Depression, left untreated, often leads to suicide. So my answer, based on the Bible and reason, is that no, it is not wrong to take nerve pills prescribed by a licensed physician. Grace to you, Kalos |
||||||
79 | Two House Teaching--T or F? | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 166987 | ||
. | ||||||
80 | Are these essentials for Salvation? | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 167051 | ||
Geisler writes: It is not necessary, however to believe in... "Christ's virgin birth,...Christ's bodily ascension...Christ's present service, or...Christ's second coming and final judgement as a condition for obtaining a right standing with God (justification)." Perhaps the key words here are "not necessary to believe in" these things "as a CONDITION for obtaining a right standing with God (justification). It would be difficult, if not impossible, for me to agree or disagree if I don't know what Dr. Geisler meant. I cannot know for sure what he meant unless and until I read it in context. Could he be saying that belief in these doctrines is not a prerequisite to salvation? Does he mean that one does not have to know and believe every doctrine in the Bible BEFORE one can be saved? I.e., that a person can be saved without first knowing about the doctrines Geisler lists? The following quote will, I hope, explain what I mean. Here the example is the Trinity. 'The fact that there is one God who is a Trinity is clearly essential to Christian orthodoxy, but there is no scriptural statement stating that to believe in the Trinity is necessary for salvation. However, that does not mean that denial of the Trinity is acceptable. A person can be saved without knowing about the Trinity. But, since the Trinity is a biblical truth, and the believer is indwelt by the Holy Spirit who bears witness of truth, a true Christian will not openly denounce the Trinity once he has been taught it from scripture...' (www.carm.org/church/apostacy.htm). Likewise, perhaps Geisler meant that a person can be saved without knowing about the virgin birth. But, since the virgin birth is a biblical truth, a true Christian will not openly denounce the virgin birth once he has been taught it from scripture. Grace to you, Kalos |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [159] >> |