Results 61 - 80 of 629
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Lionstrong Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
61 | Is the Law abolished? | Matt 5:17 | Lionstrong | 137630 | ||
The law of God is not abolished. Jesus says it plain enough in verse you reference. Nor does Paul say that the law is abolished. When he says that believers are not under the law he means that we are not under the law's condemnation for our sins, but we are under God's grace in Christ. Paul says that the law is holy, just, good and spiritual and is still the standard for doing good (see Romans 7:12 and following). There is no conflict between what Christ taught during his ministry on earth and what He teaches through his Apostle Paul. God's law is still the standard of how he wants his people to love him and their neighbor. It is still God's law to have no other god and not to be idolatrous: 1 Thess 1:9 For they themselves report about us what kind of a reception we had with you, and how you turned to God from idols to serve a living and true God, 1 John 5:21 Little children, guard yourselves from idols. If these laws have been abolished then it's ok to worship Zeus and to make a golden calf to help us worship God. It's still God's law to honor parents: Eph 6:1-3 Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. HONOR YOUR FATHER AND MOTHER (which is the first commandment with a promise), SO THAT IT MAY BE WELL WITH YOU, AND THAT YOU MAY LIVE LONG ON THE EARTH. You'll notice that Paul bases the command to kids on the 5th commandment. If the law were abolished for believers then it would be ok not to help your parents when they are in need. (Mark 7:10-13) The commands we find in the New Testament are either restatements of the Ten Commandments or logical extensions of them. |
||||||
62 | Human Happiness and the Will of God | 1 Cor 7:32 | Lionstrong | 136797 | ||
Human Happiness and the Will of God Human happiness is the will of God -- not that we would seek our own but that of others. For example, in 1 Cor 7:32 and following the husband seeks to please or make happy his wife and vice versa. Although this is categorized as a worldly concern it is not called sin but rather what spouses are expected and obligated to do (compare verse 3). Note, the same idea found in the OT. Newly wed men are not permitted to join the military so that they may stay home for the year and make their wives happy. (Deut. 24:5) Something worth thinking about, wouldn't you say? |
||||||
63 | Cor 13:13 And now abideth faith, hope... | Bible general Archive 2 | Lionstrong | 132357 | ||
In 1611 the Greek word agape was translated into the English word charity. In the late 20th century it was translated into the English word love. So for me the question is, does the meaning of the word "charity" as used by speakers of 17th century English reflect the meaning of the word love to 20th century English speakers. And of more importance, is the meaning of the word love to 20th century English speakers faithful to the meaning of the Greek word agape? I think it is. By the way, the New American Standard Bible is not “another book” as you seem to think. It is a translation of the same Book that you have a translation of. The KJV and the NASB are both good translations of the Word of God. Both are faithful, believing translations of the Book. |
||||||
64 | The Unity of Faith, Hope and Love | 1 Cor 13:13 | Lionstrong | 120372 | ||
Emmaus, I concede to the unifying term of virtue! I remembered that a I a had a commentary (that I’ve never read) by my favorite author. He also groups them under the words virtues and gifts. To quote: “However, the study committee who wrote the report are mistaken. This is not what Paul says. He says some will remain and some will not. In 12:28, Paul lists the gifts as apostolic authority and prophecy first. Does the Synod report wish to maintain that God has appointed some to be apostles in the tenth, fifteenth, and twentieth centuries? This would be good Romanism; but Protestants think otherwise. Surely the apostleship has ceased. Hence, the time of cessation that Paul implies is not the return of Christ, but the completion of the canon. Similarly, the verse itself does not say that all the gifts are to remain. It says only that faith, hope and love remain, these three [these three is italicized], and no others are mentioned.... “It [the use of the word “now” in this verse] can hardly refer to the remainder of the apostolic age alone, for then there would be no contrast between the charismata that are passing away and the three virtues that remain....” (First Corinthians, Gordon H. Clark, p. 215) I still resist the use of the term virtue in a moral sense as in Easton above, and my computer dictionary lets me off the hook! Its third definition says, “3. A particularly efficacious, good, or beneficial quality; advantage: a plan with the virtue of being practical.” (American Heritage Dictionary) I also resisted it because I was thinking of the terms generically, and Paul is not using them generically. He’s talking about SAVING faith, the hope OF GLORY, and the love OF GOD poured out in our hearts through the HOLY SPIRIT (Eph 2:8,9; Col 1:27; Rom 5:5). So, while this technically satisfies my query, I still look for a unifying term for the generic use of these terms. |
||||||
65 | The Unity of Faith, Hope and Love | 1 Cor 13:13 | Lionstrong | 120286 | ||
Clever! Hello Hank! Perhaps we may have to be content with "things," but perhaps not. Unifying things is what every student of the Bible does. If fact, Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, unified several important things for the church. The most comprehensive teaching on the Gospel found in one place is the Letter to the Romans. Where would we be without this great word from God through Paul? Later, the saints had to make up a word to unify what the Bible says about the Father, Son and Holy Spirit--Trinity. We "divide" the word of God in order to see its unity, what it says as a whole. |
||||||
66 | The Unity of Faith, Hope and Love | 1 Cor 13:13 | Lionstrong | 120270 | ||
Hi Emmaus, Again "virtue" sounds like Easton's "character traits" above. I ask myself what is faith, what is hope, and what is love. One can write a thick book on each subject, but whereas each is something a person has, I don't think of each as virtues or character traits. A non-Christian has faith, but not in Christ. A non-Christian has hope but not in Christ, love for self maybe but not for the God and Father of Christ. Faith has to do with what we think; hope has to do with what we look forward to; and love has to do with how we act. I think love is the end or result of the previous two, the fruit. Love is the reason for the other two. But this applies to any human being. What one believes will determine his hope, which will in turn determine whether, how, and what he loves. So, I'm looking for a term that will unite these three things, and virtues or character traits do not seem to fit. |
||||||
67 | The Unity of Faith, Hope and Love | 1 Cor 13:13 | Lionstrong | 120266 | ||
Apparently Easton classifies faith, hope, and love as "three main elements of Christian character." I've never thought of the subjects of faith, hope and love as elements of Christian character. When I think of character I think of the moral qualities of a person. I think of faithful, not faith, hopeful, not hope and loving, not love. Faithfulness is a character trait, whereas faith is the mental activity of believing or that which is believed. Do you see what I'm saying? |
||||||
68 | The Posture of The Angel | Judg 6:11 | Lionstrong | 112869 | ||
Just a thought as I read this passage: Judg 6:11 "came and sat" Interesting to imagine this celestial majestic being sitting casually under the shade of a spreading oak tree. |
||||||
69 | NT First Born? | Ex 13:12 | Lionstrong | 111636 | ||
This is not a question. These are my thoughts as I read this passage: Communion is the NT parallel to the Passover. Is there a NT parallel to the setting apart of the first borne? Maybe Rom 12:1 is the NT equivelant. Romans 12:1 (KJV) I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. |
||||||
70 | Senility 'n th'Word of God: A Meditation | Is 26:3 | Lionstrong | 108263 | ||
Thanks for your observations, Momma, Yes, I agree that believers suffer from various diseases through no fault of their own. Two things are happening: 1) We all (Christians and non-Christians) experience some degree of misery from the fall of Adam, and with few exceptions we all have or will experience death till Christ comes. 2) But some will experience temporal chastening (believers) or punishment (unbelievers) in this life as a result of our own sins. |
||||||
71 | Did God Create Man Mortal? | Gen 1:26 | Lionstrong | 108259 | ||
Thanks for your observations, Rowdy. As this is not a Debate Bible Forum I will not debate the issue with you. But if you would like to discuss this further, my public e-mail address is in my profile. |
||||||
72 | Senility 'n th'Word of God: A Meditation | Is 26:3 | Lionstrong | 104688 | ||
Senility and the Word of God: A Meditation Is 26:3 "The steadfast of mind You will keep in perfect peace, Because he trusts in You. I have a sneaking suspicion, a theory even, that some people become senile (loose their memory) in old age because they haven't remembered the Lord in their earlier years. Why should the Lord keep someone's mind if he hasn't bothered to keep the Lord on it? It is the one keeps his mind steadfast on the Lord whose mind the Lord will keep in peace. There are many passages on remembering the Lord and the things of the Lord, but I suppose the two most important are the fourth commandment and communion: Ex 20:8 "Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 1 Cor 11:25 In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me." |
||||||
73 | An Arminian Consensus in the Forum? | 1 John 2:2 | Lionstrong | 101053 | ||
OK. I give up! Play games with someone else. | ||||||
74 | An Arminian Consensus in the Forum? | 1 John 2:2 | Lionstrong | 100989 | ||
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. John 15:22 (KJV) If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloke for their sin. John 15:24 (KJV) If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin: but now have they both seen and hated both me and my Father. Proverbs 26:12 (KJV) Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit? there is more hope of a fool than of him Ken, I asked you a question. You gave me more verses. So, again, I ask you: Ken, are you saying that these passages teach that a man is saved and sinless until he hears the gospel and must choose or reject Christ? If not, what point do you wish to make with these verses? |
||||||
75 | An Arminian Consensus in the Forum? | 1 John 2:2 | Lionstrong | 100888 | ||
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. Hmmmm? Ken, are you saying that this passage teaches that a man is saved and sinless until he hears the gospel and must choose or reject Christ? This might be the logical implication of some gospel preaching I've heard, but is it Biblical? Are there other portions of Scripture which support this notion of saved and sinless until...? |
||||||
76 | Is an Un-subdued Earth Good? | Gen 1:28 | Lionstrong | 99338 | ||
3533 kabash (461b); a prim. root; to subdue, bring into bondage:--assault(1), brought them into subjection(2), forced into bondage(1), forcing(1), subdue(1), subdued(5), subjugate(1), trample(1), tread our under foot(1), under foot(1). Hummingbird, Your comment on understanding word usage is on target. But it is interesting to note that in the fourteen times the word appears in the Hebrew text, the NASB never translates "kabash" as "cultivate" or "bring under cultivation," nor does its primary meaning include the idea of cultivation. But I'm not sure where you were going with your comments on being fruitful and multiplying. My questions were not about that part of the verse. My questions stem from the idea of "subduing" the earth only. Thanks for your thoughts! |
||||||
77 | How much does salvation cost us? | Matt 13:46 | Lionstrong | 98644 | ||
Thanks for your thoughtful response, Momma, As a Bible-believer with a Reformed perspective, I very much underscore that no natural descendent of the fallen Adam seeks after God. Those who do seek God find out that it was God's drawing them to himself all along! (John 6:44 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.) Further, while true obedience to the law of God is impossible for a son of Adam or daughter of Eve, God yet commands us to seek him. Is 55:6 Seek the LORD while He may be found; Call upon Him while He is near. In answer to you question about possessing Christ, the answer is yes! He possesses us and we possess Him. This is a great theme that runs from the Old to the New Testaments. He is our God and we are his people: Ex 6:7 'Then I will take you for My people, and I will be your God; and you shall know that I am the LORD your God, who brought you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians. Lev 26:12 'I will also walk among you and be your God, and you shall be My people. Jer 7:23 "But this is what I commanded them, saying, 'Obey My voice, and I will be your God, and you will be My people; 1 Cor 1:2 To the church of God which is at Corinth, to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, saints by calling, with all who in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours: 1 Thess 3:11 Now may our God and Father Himself and Jesus our Lord direct our way to you; 1 Pet 2:10 for you once were NOT A PEOPLE, but now you are THE PEOPLE OF GOD; you had NOT RECEIVED MERCY, but now you have RECEIVED MERCY. Now the kingdom parables look at the kingdom from several perspectives; from Christ's, the Lord of the kingdom; from ours, the citizens of the kingdom; and from the perspective of the operation of the kingdom itself -- starting small like a mustard seed and growing large. One man finds the kingdom through no fault of his own. He stumbles on a treasure hidden in a field. Another man finds it by intent and purposeful seeking. Neither way rules out God's saving sovereign grace. Salvation from beginning to end totally belongs to the Lord. We all have different stories of how we came to faith, be it from childhood in a Christian home or later in life. Some of us stumbled into Christ: some of us were raised by our parents in Him. Some of us were looking for we knew not what, but found Christ, only to find out later that it was he who found us! Just because the Lord's seeking us is not found in this parable, it is still beautifully taught in other portions of Scripture. Jesus is the great Shepherd of the sheep who leaves the ninety-nine and focuses all his attention on finding just one. He calls each of all the countless stars by name. (Is 40:26) Certainly, he called you by name. |
||||||
78 | How much does salvation cost us? | Matt 13:46 | Lionstrong | 98596 | ||
Hello Momma, Thanks for your thoughts! Although I haven't read many commentaries I probably agree with them if they say that the pearl is the kingdom of God, rather than Christ's church. Like you, I have a high view of the Church, but I think this parable is not about Christ's bride for whom in love he paid the ultimate price. The particular emphasis in Matthew is the kingdom of God. (Read Matthew and see how much the Lord talks about the kingdom.) The kingdom's importance is also seen in the other two synoptic gospels. The central theme of Jesus' preaching was "Repent, for the kingdom of God is at hand." You'll also notice that this parable is part of a series of parables on the kingdom, all emphasizing the inestimable value of Christ's rule in our lives. Anyone who finds Christ, understanding who he is and what he has done, is not crazy if he gives up all to possess him as Lord and Savior. |
||||||
79 | Were Eve's desires sinful? | Gen 3:6 | Lionstrong | 92983 | ||
Thanks for you answer, Aixen, I don't entirely agree, but think your answers are quite clear. Again, I'll carry this no farther since this is a study better served under Hebrews 4, not here. |
||||||
80 | Were Eve's desires sinful? | Gen 3:6 | Lionstrong | 92891 | ||
Thanks, Aixen, I think you made some very good observations. I'd like to make one correction and ask one question. In your fifth paragraph you assumed that I meant the image of God endowed man with the knowledge of good and evil. I did not mean that. I said one question, but the one forces a second and maybe a third or more. Hebrews says, "For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin." (4:15.) In your next to last paragraph you said some confusing things. You said Jesus was not tempted (to sin) and Jesus was tempted (by Satan). (1) What does it mean, Jesus was tempted? (2) For that matter, what does it mean to be tempted? (3) What was Jesus tempted by Satan to do, if it was not to sin? (4) Hebrews says that Jesus was tempted, but are you saying that although the devil was TRYING to tempt Jesus, Jesus was not tempted? (4) So, if the devil failed to tempt Jesus, and Jesus was tempted according to Hebrews, then does Hebrews mean that Jesus was not tempted, but that all kinds of attempts were made to tempt him? (4b) Is this how you interpret the Hebrews passage? I won't press you any farther on this, because the question of the relation of Jesus and temptation might be better studied under the Hebrews passage. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [32] >> |