Results 61 - 80 of 263
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Aspiring Overseer Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
61 | Rule or Ideal? | 1 Tim 3:2 | Aspiring Overseer | 130091 | ||
Doc, Here are my "two cents" regarding the passages you reference: 1 Tim 3:1-8 3:1 It is a trustworthy statement: if any man aspires to the office of overseer, it is a fine work he desires to do. 2 An overseer, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3 not addicted to wine or pugnacious, but gentle, uncontentious, free from the love of money. 4 He must be one who manages his own household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity 5(but if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of the church of God?); 6 and not a new convert, lest he become conceited and fall into the condemnation incurred by the devil. 7 And he must have a good reputation with those outside the church, so that he may not fall into reproach and the snare of the devil. NAS Titus 1:5-9 5 For this reason I left you in Crete, that you might set in order what remains, and appoint elders in every city as I directed you, 6 namely, if any man be above reproach, the husband of one wife, having children who believe, not accused of dissipation or rebellion. 7 For the overseer must be above reproach as God's steward, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not addicted to wine, not pugnacious, not fond of sordid gain, 8 but hospitable, loving what is good, sensible, just, devout, self-controlled, 9 holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, that he may be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict. NAS What did Paul mean when he wrote of an elder being the "husband of one wife" and should this change with the norms of society? Addressing the later first, I would offer that since God does not change, those standards must remain unchanged from Paul’s original instruction. Paul’s instruction in both instances refers to men who are currently married to the only wife they have ever known. A single man could dearly love his mother, and be righteous in all other respects, yet he would not meet God’s standard as an elder. Conversely, a man who has been married and divorced has also had two wives. He would also fail to meet the standard. Why would God be so specific? My opinion was His desire for perfection within His church. The primary responsibility of an elder is to protect the congregation. As the church is to be protected from wolves in sheep’s clothing, so must the shepherds prove themselves to be the most capable and experienced men. Secondly, they set the standard for other men to follow, regardless whether those men may ever be elders themselves. They are the role models for the congregation. For contemplation and discussion at a later time, we should also consider these points: -Elders are appointed by the entire congregation with total agreement -Elders exist only where there are at least two qualified men -The children of elders must all be Christians -Elders must have the experience of converting people to the faith -An elder’s household must be run in an orderly manner -Elders must continue to actively teach -An elder’s reputation outside the church must be congruent with that within AO |
||||||
62 | Fruit vs. Works: the same or different? | Gal 5:22 | Aspiring Overseer | 130000 | ||
Hi Karen, I look forward to continuing our discussion when you are ready. AO |
||||||
63 | Fruit vs. Works: the same or different? | Gal 5:22 | Aspiring Overseer | 129888 | ||
Hi Karen, Thank you for your quick response. Is God then unjust? John 15:1-2 15:1"I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. 2"Every branch in Me (in Christ) that does not bear fruit, He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit, He prunes (disciplines) it, that it may bear more fruit. If people wish to be part of the "true vine" must they not be "in Christ"; that is to be covered by the atoning sacrifice of His blood? Why does John 15 tell us that some of those very people, who were in the "true vine"; those branches already "in Christ"; were taken away? These branches (Christians) were "in Christ" (i.e. saved and having full knowledge of the goodness of God) yet they did not bear fruit and thus lost their salvation! Why did they bear no fruit? Was not God able to perform all the works necessary in them? John 15:8-10 15:8 "By this is My Father glorified, that you bear much fruit, and so prove to be My disciples. 9 "Just as the Father has loved Me, I have also loved you; abide in My love. 10 "If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love; just as I have kept My Father's commandments, and abide in His love. NAS Should not Christians put forth the effort to prove themselves as Christ’s disciples just as Christ put forth the effort to obey God the Father? AO |
||||||
64 | Is infant baptism scriptural? | NT general Archive 1 | Aspiring Overseer | 129866 | ||
Did the member infer that those who did not agree were not welcome or that all would be welcomed, even those who practiced infant baptism? AO |
||||||
65 | why was the thief saved without baptism? | Luke 23:43 | Aspiring Overseer | 129852 | ||
It has been asked in regard to baptism, "Do we seek in Scripture ways to justify our preconceptions and misconceptions, or do we found our faith and practice solely on Scripture?". The asserted conclusion is against the need for baptism. Let’s see what scripture tells us regarding the topic of baptism. Acts 2:38 38And Peter said to them, "Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. NAS Acts 8:36 36And as they went along the road they came to some water; and the eunuch said, "Look! Water! What prevents me from being baptized?" NAS Acts 16:32-34 33And he took them that very hour of the night and washed their wounds, and immediately he was baptized, he and all his household. NAS Acts 18:7-8 8And Crispus, the leader of the synagogue, believed in the Lord with all his household, and many of the Corinthians when they heard were believing and being baptized. NAS Were these verses imprudently crafted by the author or were they commanded by God? If they are commanded by God, should we neglect these because we feel that baptism runs counter to the faith we are called to have as Christians? Is it not easy to be baptized? Is not the real fear, the fear of all proponents of man-made doctrine, that they must do something more than believe? AO |
||||||
66 | Fruit vs. Works: the same or different? | Gal 5:22 | Aspiring Overseer | 129844 | ||
Karen, What do people believe is the "fruit" mentioned in John 15:5? Is it good works; righteous attributes or something else? AO |
||||||
67 | Is The Sabbath On Sunday Or Saturday? | Lev 23:32 | Aspiring Overseer | 124282 | ||
Matt 28:1 28:1 Now after the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to look at the grave. NAS |
||||||
68 | Grace AND? | Matt 6:20 | Aspiring Overseer | 120438 | ||
Momma, Judgement day is NOT for the believer? Rom 14:10 10 But you, why do you judge your brother? Or you again, why do you regard your brother with contempt? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God. NAS AO |
||||||
69 | Treasure? | Matt 6:20 | Aspiring Overseer | 120211 | ||
Hi Momma, How does a Christian "invest in things that contribute to the salvation of the souls of the lost" without being a faithful and obedient servant? Can they do this by being disobedient? AO |
||||||
70 | How many in upper room?? | Bible general Archive 2 | Aspiring Overseer | 115256 | ||
Arrow, Remember that the chapter and verses we have in our translations today were not in the original letter. Keeping that in mind, Acts 1:26 specifically identifies the apostles. Acts 2:1-15 continues the narrative concerning the same people (and not necessarily the same or next day). How do we know the "they" in Acts 2:4 were not the 120? Aside from using proper grammatical rules, we must acknowledge that Jesus had disciples from all of the various regions He visited during His ministry. Acts 1:14 also tells us some of the disciples present were women. With these points in mind consider Acts 2:7 and Acts 2:14-15. One tells us those speaking in tongues were “all” Galileans. Would all of the 120 been Galileans? We know the apostles were. Were only Galilean disciples faithful to Jesus or would the 120 include Judean and Perean Jews, as well? Secondly, Peter acknowledges those mocked in verse 13 were all "men". If 120 people spoke in tongues, might it been unusual to separate the 12 from them so quickly and simultaneously identify the group displaying this miraculous gift as consisting solely of men? Why would Peter leave out the other 108? Was he a male chauvinist? Maybe he desired public attention only be focused on the apostles? Could it be 108 were not present? AO |
||||||
71 | Holy Spirt w/ evidence of tongues? | 1 Cor 12:10 | Aspiring Overseer | 115040 | ||
Searcher, I have read your note to Kalos, but am unsure of your meaning. If you like, please restate it for me. Thanks. AO |
||||||
72 | Why's my NASB diff. than online versions | James 1:6 | Aspiring Overseer | 115039 | ||
Lance, You have the classic NASB, which reads as follows: James 1:6 6But let him ask in faith without any doubting, for the one who doubts is like the surf of the sea driven and tossed by the wind. NAS The updated version (NASU) is what you are finding online: James 1:6 6But he must ask in faith without any doubting, for the one who doubts is like the surf of the sea, driven and tossed by the wind. NASU AO |
||||||
73 | Holy Spirt w/ evidence of tongues? | 1 Cor 12:10 | Aspiring Overseer | 114915 | ||
Kalos, P.S. I would seriously reconsider the scriptural understanding of the writer you quote if they believe the Kingdom is a future event. AO |
||||||
74 | Holy Spirt w/ evidence of tongues? | 1 Cor 12:10 | Aspiring Overseer | 114914 | ||
Kalos, I understand the author's opinion that you have shared. It might be helpful to determine whether "the perfect" in 1Co13:10 is a deity or a thing. AO |
||||||
75 | Holy Spirt w/ evidence of tongues? | 1 Cor 12:10 | Aspiring Overseer | 114775 | ||
Elmo, The miraculous gifts were established for what purpose? Was it not to confirm the validity of God's Word? Once it was obvious throughout the world that His word was the truth, there was no need for the confirmation. Thus we see even Paul's ability to use the gifts wane until they were no more. The "partial" that he mentions to the Corinthians is the need of these gifts to accompany and thereby confirm God's Word until the written form of God's Word was in place. That is "the perfect" and is, of course, here today. Complete, perfect and unchanging in every detail. As an aside, if tongues or healing existed today there would be 100 percent sucess in curing the sick and all tongues could be validated as an intelligable language. Even if we go with the suggestion that the "tongues of angels" in 1 Co 13:1, is a language unknown to man, Paul still commands that they not be spoken publically (1 Co 14:28) if there is no interpreter. This likely was a safeguard against those in the body who did not truely have the gift of tongues, but felt compelled to display it. To falsify the gift and bring others into their sin would corrupt the body, thus Paul directed it only be done in private. How someone desires to worship God in private is upon their own head. This was always the case in the NT and remains so today. AO |
||||||
76 | Christmas-Is It Christian? | NT general Archive 1 | Aspiring Overseer | 106937 | ||
Steve, I understand your position and thank you for the discussion. AO |
||||||
77 | Christmas-Is It Christian? | NT general Archive 1 | Aspiring Overseer | 106931 | ||
Tim, Thank you for the discussion! AO |
||||||
78 | Christmas-Is It Christian? | NT general Archive 1 | Aspiring Overseer | 106921 | ||
Steve, You mention, "the example of Cain is irrelevant because there is no prohibition against celebrating Christmas (or Easter, for that matter). Indeed, the lesson of Scripture seems to be that God does not limit our worship to what he has specifically commanded." Where did God command Cain to offer a blood sacrifice? Was that specifically commanded? Where does He “limit worship” to blood only? Did He prohibit an offering of the fruit of the ground? Maybe God forgot to cause Moses to record it in scripture? Of course, it is not mentioned, because it is implied. Cain knew the command, but disobeyed. Cain thought that God should accept what Cain wished to provide; like denominational Christians think God should accept what they wish to provide. God was, is and will always be, very specific in how He is worshiped. He had no regard for Cain, but unlike transgressors today, Cain received immediate feedback! Are we still unsure if God limits His worship to what is specifically commanded? Lets consider Nadab and Abihu: Lev 10:3 10:1Now Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took their respective firepans, and after putting fire in them, placed incense on it and offered strange fire before the LORD, which He had not commanded them. 2And fire came out from the presence of the LORD and consumed them, and they died before the LORD. 3Then Moses said to Aaron, "It is what the LORD spoke, saying, 'By those who come near Me I will be treated as holy,And before all the people I will be honored.'" So Aaron, therefore, kept silent. NAS The sons of Aaron were priests. They knew what was right, but decided to take a shortcut. God does not accept substitutes! Since we have clearly established God is specific in how He desires to be worshiped we could stop here, but lets continue to review your other objections. You wrote, “When God gave Samuel the victory over the Philistines in 1 Samuel 7, he didn't instruct Samuel to set up a stone named Ebenezer to celebrate. Yet Samuel, on his own, did just that (v.12). That worshipful act didn't seem to make God angry. In fact, in light of God's continued assistance against the Philistines, it seems he found Samuel's "unauthorized" worship quite acceptable. “. How do you know God did not instruct Samuel to “set up a stone”? If He had not, how do we know that it was pleasing to God? All we can agree upon is that the act, “didn’t seem to make God angry”. Many things done by God’s people He tolerated, but did not condone (Christmas is not one of them:-)). It is somewhat dangerous to base your actions on something that “seems” acceptable. Lastly, you also wrote,” More to the point, God did not command the observance of Purim (Esther 9), yet there is no expression of divine (displeasure) with the Jews for doing so. It appears that God really doesn't mind when his people go beyond what is required in honoring and praising him.”. How does removing the distinguished status as God’s People and bestowing that upon Jew and Gentile, alike, strike you as a indication of divine displeasure? Once again, we do not know how God felt about Purim, so we can either delude ourselves into thinking it was an acceptable man-made practice, or we can understand God’s unchanging nature. It’s our choice! AO |
||||||
79 | Christmas-Is It Christian? | NT general Archive 1 | Aspiring Overseer | 106917 | ||
Tim, I understand your viewpoint that it is lawful for a Christian to use something that is not specifically prohibited in Scripture. Computers and cars certainly could not be mentioned in the bible, as well as, vaccines, airplanes, submarines, etc. as they did not exist. Did anyone of that day know Jesus birthday? His mother assuredly did, maybe some of His apostles, maybe even Paul. They all lived for many years beyond the start of the Church, yet they seem to have had little influence over establishing a celebration of His birth. Could God have caused to have been written something about His desire for us to honor His son’s birth? Do you think this was an oversight on God’s part? Maybe Paul forgot to include this in his example to the churches of the day? We would have only needed one example to make it a command (unless we are talking about baptism, of course! :-)). Maybe we should approach the issue of whether it is acceptable to observe Christmas from the other direction. Is it specifically prohibited? What does scripture tell us? 1 Cor 10:14 14Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry. NAS Is idolatry acceptable during the Christian age? How would we classify nativity scenes, passion plays, angels, decorated trees, yule logs, mistletoe, December 25th, the worship of the Virgin Mary, etc.; the list is long of items not only missing from scripture, but having the distinction of “graven images”. Many will still stand by the doctrine of “Once Pagan, But Now OK”, but does God share this perspective? AO |
||||||
80 | should not enter into his rest | Heb 3:18 | Aspiring Overseer | 106813 | ||
Mes, To all those who are disobedient to God. AO |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [14] >> |