Results 61 - 80 of 97
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: alanh Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
61 | Is homosexuality actually forbidden? | Romans | alanh | 171131 | ||
1 Corithians 6.9ff says: Or know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor abusers of themselves with men, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye were washed, but ye were sanctified, but ye were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God. |
||||||
62 | how do you become saved | Romans | alanh | 171132 | ||
What if the Lord were to come right now, do you know for sure, nothing doubting, that you'd go to live with Him forever? 1. We can know 1 John 5.13 2. I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for except ye believe that I Am, ye shall die in your sins. (Joh 8.24) 3.Whose Son is He Matthew 16.13-17 4. Jesus being the Son of God...is God. John 1.1,14 5. Jesus is 100 percent man and 100 percent God Col 2.9 6. God the Father calls His own Son God Heb 1.8 7. Jesus claims to be "I Am" John 8.58 8. There are 3 persons in the Godhead Matt 3.16-17 Jesus is one of them 9. He is Mediator 1 Tim 2.5 and Heb 4.15 Why do we need a mediator? 10. What has seperated us from God? Isa 59.2 What can save us? 11. What is the power of God to save? Rom 1.16 What is the Gospel of Christ? 12. The Bible interprets itself--1 Cor 15.1-4 13. In His death we reach His blood Eph 1.7 14. He can present us how? Jude 24 Jesus takes care of our sin problem in His death. Now why was He raised for us? 15. Watch how Jesus takes care of our grave problem--1 Cor 15.20-23 16. What 2 things does the Gospel bring us? 2 Tim 1.10 Paul says it another way. 17. What can we do thru Jesus death? What can we be thru His life? Romans 5.10 18. Must we confess Christ and believe the Gospel to be saved? Is this a life-and-death statement? Rom 10.9 19. Must we change our life style? 1 Corinthians 6.9-11 Ephesians 4,17-5.7 Galatians 5.19-26 What if we do not change? 20. Are these life-and-death statements? Luke 13.3,5 21.2 Thessalonians 1.7-9 How do humans obey the Gospel? 22. Do you see the Gospel here? How do we get into His death? Romans 6.3-6,17-18 Why would God want us to get into His death? 23. Where does one actually become a Christian? Galatians 3.26-27 |
||||||
63 | What do you mean by predestined? | Romans | alanh | 171133 | ||
What do you mean by predestined? Are you saying that God has chosen who will be saved and who will be lost beforehand? | ||||||
64 | What must I do to be saved? | Rom 10:9 | alanh | 146513 | ||
What must I do to be saved? | ||||||
65 | What must I do to be saved? | Rom 10:9 | alanh | 146517 | ||
Does not the Bible also teach that baptism, repentance, and confession are necessary? Baptized for remission of sins Acts 2:38 Baptized to wash away one's sins Acts 22:16 Baptism does now save 1 Peter 3:21 Baptism plus belief equals salvation Mark16:16 We are raised from baptism to walk a new life Romans 6:4 We are baptised to put on Christ Galatians 3:26-27 God commands baptism Acts 10:47-48 Baptism authorized by Jesus Christ Matthew 28:18-20 Repentance: God commands all to repent Acts 17:30 All must come to repentance 2 Peter 3:9 Repent or perish Luke 13:3,5 Repentance to be preached to ALL Luke 24:46-47 Christ commands repentance Revelation 2:5,16 |
||||||
66 | What must I do to be saved? | Rom 10:9 | alanh | 147024 | ||
Acts 2:38 Repent and let each of you be baptized unto (eis) the remission of sins. The term eis means for or unto how does the grammar in Acts 2:38 show salvation before baptism? Acts 10 Cornelius and his household were not saved when the Holy Spirit came upon them if you read chapter 11 you will see this happened as Peter BEGAN to speak. They did not even know of Christ to believe on Him. |
||||||
67 | What must I do to be saved? | Rom 10:9 | alanh | 147026 | ||
There are only two cases of Holy Spirit baptism in the Scriptures Acts 2 w/ the apoostles and Acts 10 w/ the 1st Gentiles. Mt 28 where we are commanded to baptize is water baptism. We cannot baptize by the Hioly Spirit only Jesus did that and He did it twice and only twice. Emotionalism is not the same as baptism of the Holy Spirit. | ||||||
68 | What must I do to be saved? | Rom 10:9 | alanh | 147073 | ||
If there are only two cases of Holy Sprit baptism yet baptism is mentioned over 100 times in the New Testament you figure out the math. | ||||||
69 | What must I do to be saved? | Rom 10:9 | alanh | 147074 | ||
“baptism” is – in those passages that associate the rite with salvation – it is the same type of “baptism” in all the verses. In other words, the “baptism” of Matthew 28:19 is of the same kind as that in Acts 2:38; 22:16; Romans 6:3-4; 1 Corinthians 12:13; Galatians 3:27; Colossians 2:12; 1 Peter 3:21; etc. In view of this, consider the following: The baptism mentioned in Matthew 28:19 had human administrators. Christ commissioned the apostles to go and make disciples, baptizing them into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Inasmuch as an apostle could not baptize “in the Spirit” (only Christ could do that – Mt. 3:11), one is forced to conclude that the baptism of Matthew 28:19 is water baptism, not Spirit baptism. I am unaware of any reputable Bible scholar who contends otherwise. If, then, the other passages that mention baptism (see above) are of the same import, it follows that they likewise refer to water baptism, not Spirit baptism. Both Romans 6:3-4 and Colossians 2:12 make it clear that the baptism of these passages involves both an immersion in “something,” and a “being raised” from the same substance. This makes perfectly good sense if water baptism is in view. On the other hand, if the “Spirit” is the element of the baptism, this would suggest that one is buried in the Spirit, and subsequently “raised from” the Spirit. This would imply further that the new convert would not have the Spirit, and therefore, would not belong to the Lord (Rom. 8:9; Gal. 4:6). This conclusion obviously is wrong – thus demonstrating that the element of the baptism in Romans 6:3-4 and Colossians 2:12 is not the Holy Spirit. By default, it must be water baptism. Water is specifically associated with baptism in 1 Peter 3:21. If the allusion here, then, is to water baptism, and yet 1 Peter 3:21 refers to the same sort of baptism as the other passages cited, then clearly they speak of water baptism as well. The passage that would come closest to teaching a “Spirit” baptism would be 1 Corinthians 12:13, but, the fact is, a careful analysis of related passages reveals that not even this text teaches a baptism in the Spirit. Note the following logic: The baptism of 1 Corinthians 12:13 puts one into the one “body,” which is the same as the “church” (Eph. 1:22-23; Col. 1:18,24). But the church is identified with the kingdom of Christ (Mt. 16:18-19). Thus, the baptism of the text under consideration introduces one into the Lord’s kingdom. However, a related passage demonstrates that it is through the birth of “water” that one enters Christ’s kingdom (Jn. 3:3-5). One is forced to conclude, therefore, that the baptism of 1 Corinthians 12:13 is water baptism. In this connection, one should also carefully study Ephesians 5:26, and note the reference to the “washing of water.” Finally, there is a principle of interpretation that is paramount in sound Bible exegesis. Frequently it is the case that Bible words will form a pattern. That is, a consideration of several passages containing a term will reveal that the word has a commonly understood significance. Such being the case, that normal meaning is to be attached to the term unless an exceptional context suggests that it has taken on a special significance (i.e., a figurative sense). The term “baptize,” and its cognate “baptism,” occur together about 100 times in the New Testament. A consideration of these passages will reveal that the word may, on occasion, take on a figurative application (cf. Mt. 3:11; Lk. 12:50; Acts 1:5). Unless, though, there is clear contextual evidence that a symbolic sense has been employed, the conclusion must be that the common usage (an immersion in water) is in view. In view of this principle, there is no reason to conclude the baptism mentioned in Matthew 28:19; Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38, 22:16; Romans 6:3-4; 1 Corinthians 12:13; Galatians 3:27; Colossians 2:12, and 1 Peter 3:21 is anything other than water baptism – an act of obedience, predicated upon faith and repentance, which secures forgiveness of sins and brings one into union with Jesus Christ. To all of this we add this point. The clear cases of “water” baptism in the book of Acts (chapters 8 and 10) very obviously were not examples of Jewish ritualism. The indisputable fact is that the Mosaic law had been abolished by the cross (Eph. 2:15; Col. 2:14), and no Jewish rite was henceforth tolerated in connection with the salvation process (cf. Acts 15:1; Gal. 5:2-4). |
||||||
70 | What must I do to be saved? | Rom 10:9 | alanh | 147153 | ||
Acts 8 the Ethopian Nobleman he went down into the water and came uput is that Holy Spirit baptism or water? | ||||||
71 | What must I do to be saved? | Rom 10:9 | alanh | 147246 | ||
And that is all we can do is water. | ||||||
72 | What must I do to be saved? | Rom 10:9 | alanh | 147254 | ||
Laying on of hands to receive gifts came only by the apostles. | ||||||
73 | Are tongues a world language or not? | 1 Corinthians | alanh | 171756 | ||
Tongue speaking is definitely a foreign languages as witnessed by the dialog in Acts chapter 2. There it lists the various nations of which the Jews came from and states hear we, every man in our own language wherein we were born? The Holy Spirit gave the apostles the power to speak in tongues to confirm their word. In Acts 10 Cornelius and his household spoke in tongues as the Holy Spirit came upon them confirming that the Gentiles were also clean and the word of God was for them also. When the Holy Spirit alit upon someone there was manifest some form of miraculous gift. 1 Corinthians 12, 13, and 14 tell about these gifts in detail. One thing that must be remembered is that not everything in the NT pertains to us in the 20th century. this is true of the gift of the Holy Spirit. We do not receive the Holy Spirit today as the Christians of the first century did. In fact 1 Corinthians 13 tells of the cessation of miracles. The means by which we could receive the Holy Spirit does not exist today. If we read Scripture we find that the Holy Spirit was endowed directly on two occasians possibly 3 if Paul received the Holy Spirit directly. The other way is by the laying on of the apostles hands since there are no apostles living today the Holy Spirit is not endowed upon Christians as in the 1st century. |
||||||
74 | Cessation of the gift of tongues | 1 Cor 13:8 | alanh | 124436 | ||
The kingdom of Christ has come else how would the Colossians be "transferred...tothe kingdom of His beloved Son." All thru the Bible up until Acts 2 we are told of the kingdom coming after Acts 2 the kingdom is spoken of as a fact. The church and the kingdom are one and the same thing note Jesus words in Matthew 16 where church and kingdom of heaven are used interchangably, "Blessed are you Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. I also say to you that you are Peter(Petros), and upon this rock (petra) I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it. I will give you (plural) the keys to the kingdom of heaven (used instead of church); and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heave, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven." The miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit were designed to aid the fledgeling church in its establishment. They were not designed to continue indefinetly. When Paul said they would cease that is exactly what he meant. 1 Corinthians 13:8-10 tells when the gifts would cease; "when that which is perfect is come." This reference to that which is perfect in construction is not referring to Christ because He had already come. This passage does not say anything about coming again. The passage is referring to the completed New Testament once it had come we would no longer know in part but would know fully. As to your reference to the baptism of the Holy Spirit, this only happened twice (Acts 2 and Acts 10). The gifts of the Holy Spirit were passed on by the laying on of the apostles hands (Acts 8:14-17). If you read Acts 8 you find that Philip altho he had miraculous power could not pass it on, the apostles came from Jerusalem and laid their hands on the believers in order to impart the gofts of the Spirit. There are no apostles today to impart the gift onto believers and the belivers of the first century have long ago died. How are the gifts passed on today? Did God decide to try something new? The evidence indicates that the gifts of the Spirit have ceased. I know of no one today who speaks in a tongue (known language)not studied. |
||||||
75 | Did Jesus go to hell after dying? | Ephesians | alanh | 124720 | ||
The fact of the matter is that the KJV of the Bible mistranslates the Scripture found in Psalm 16:10; Acts 2:27,31: "For thou wilt not leave my soul in HELL; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption" (Ps 16:10) "Because Thou wilt not leave my soul in HELL, neither wilt Thou suffer Thine Holy One to see corruption...He seeing this before spake of thr resurrection of Christ, that His soul not left in HELL, neither His flesh did see corruption" (Ac 2:27,31). As you can see from above the word HELL is used 3 times in reference to Christ. Unfortunately the KJV has mistranslated the term in the original Hebrew and Greek. The term in Hebrew is "Sheol" and in Greek "Hades" and neither term means HELL but rathar means the "unseen". Jesus did not go to HELL but went to the real of the undead. To better understand this world we go to Luke 16 where Jesus tells the story (not parable) of the rich man and Lazurus. We know it is not a parable because a specific persons name is used. In the story the two men die, the rich man going to "torments" and Lazurus to "Abraham's bosom. There is "a great gulf fixed" between the two places of which it is said, "they that would pass from hence to you may not be able, and that none may cross over from thence to us." The rich man is dipcted as "in anguish" and Lazarus "comfort." This same place of comfort is where Jesus went when He died. In fact it is the same place He promised the thief on the cross he would be with Him---"And he said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To-day shalt thou be with me in Paradise" (Luke 23:43)--"Paradise" and "Abraham's bosom" both being the same place. |
||||||
76 | Did Jesus go to hell after dying? | Ephesians | alanh | 124721 | ||
Hades, on either side, is not to be depopulated until Christ returns. The dead reside in Hades until that time. Hades and Hell are not the same thing. | ||||||
77 | Did Jesus go to hell after dying? | Ephesians | alanh | 124722 | ||
The full penaty for our sins is "death" (Romans 6:23). We are not condemned to "Gehenna" (Hell) or Heaven until the judgment. Christ descended into Hades A place of the unseen, divided into two sides--"Abraham's bosom" (Luke 16:22,23), also known as "Paradise" (Luke 24:43), and "torments" (Luke 16:23), also known as "Tartarus". The divisions can be observed as follows: I. In the world innocent and saved / lost DEATH II. Sheol or Hades paradise // tartarus RESURRECTION III. Final Judgment rewarded (come to heaven) // condemned (depart to Gehenna the lake of fire) / equals gulf not fixed // equals gulf fixed |
||||||
78 | Is the bride of christ the church? | Eph 5:32 | alanh | 144459 | ||
The bride of Christ and the body of Christ are two among many metaphors used to discribe the church. The metaphor is used in the 5th chapter of Ephesians and the 21st and 22nd chapters of Revelation. | ||||||
79 | The Law has been nailrd to the cross | Col 2:14 | alanh | 171901 | ||
The question may be asked "if the Ten Commandments have been removed, how can Christians oppose worshipping idols, taking the Lord's name in vain, and committing adultery?" Our reasons for not dishonoring God and for not engaging in immoral behavior are not tied to the Ten Commandments, but to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. We can know it is wrong to commit adultery, for example--not because Moses wrote in the Ten Commandments--but because what Jesus and the apostles taught (Matt 5:28-29; 1 Cor 6:9-11). The Judaizers among the Galatian churches were seeking to bring Christians under the "yoke of bondage" (Gal 2:4; 5:1). Who can doubt that the yoke of bondage included keeping the Sabbath? The gnostics (or pre-gnostics or incipient gnostics)--teachers who had combined some Christian doctrine w/ Jewish mysticism and Greek philosophy--at Colosse were attempting to bind Sabbath keeping on the church. Paul refuted their false doctrine by arguing that the death of Christ on the cross "blotted out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us" (Col 2:14). Paul then forbad the Colossian Christians from allowing anyone to judge others on the basis of meat, or drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days (Col 2:16). If the Sabbath had been binding on the early Christians would it not have been legitimate and even mandatory yo judge others' faithfulness on the basis of Sabbath keeping? 2 Corinthians 3 provides one of the most powerful arguments concerning the removal of the law of Moses and the institution of the Gospel of Christ. The Corinthians were "manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart" (2 Cor 3:2-3). In using this language, Paul does not intend to deny the inspiration of the Old Testament (or covenant), but to show that it had been removed and the New Testament had been given to bring us to faith in Christ and to obedience to His word. The writer of Hebrews stress the same truth (Hebrews 10:9-10). The law God gave to Israel yhrough Moses included the Ten Commandments which were written "in tables of stone." The Old Testament writers speak only of the Ten Commandments as being written in tables of stone. This fact is very significant as one examines the rest of 2 Corinthians 3. In contrast to the law's being written in tables of stone, the Gospel of Christ is written in "fleshly tables of the heart." Both covenants originated in the mind of God, but the old was temporary and carnal; the new was bound on mankind to the end of the age. "For if that first covenant (or testament: diathéké same word in both contexts) had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second...In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away" (Hebrews 8:7 ,13). If the old covenant were waxing old and ready to vanish away more than 2000 years ago, how could anyone imagine it is still binding on anyone? 2 Corinthians 3 teaches plainly as any passage could that the covenant of God made w/ the Jewish people was better than any law any nation had ever known. But when it served the purpose God sent it to accomplish--"to bring us unto Christ (Galatians 3:24)--it faded away. This does not mean that Christians should not read the Old Testament, but that the precepts and the laws--including the Ten Commandments--are not binding on anyone during the Christian era. |
||||||
80 | The Law has been nailed to the cross | Col 2:14 | alanh | 171902 | ||
The question may be asked "if the Ten Commandments have been removed, how can Christians oppose worshipping idols, taking the Lord's name in vain, and committing adultery?" Our reasons for not dishonoring God and for not engaging in immoral behavior are not tied to the Ten Commandments, but to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. We can know it is wrong to commit adultery, for example--not because Moses wrote in the Ten Commandments--but because what Jesus and the apostles taught (Matt 5:28-29; 1 Cor 6:9-11). The Judaizers among the Galatian churches were seeking to bring Christians under the "yoke of bondage" (Gal 2:4; 5:1). Who can doubt that the yoke of bondage included keeping the Sabbath? The gnostics (or pre-gnostics or incipient gnostics)--teachers who had combined some Christian doctrine w/ Jewish mysticism and Greek philosophy--at Colosse were attempting to bind Sabbath keeping on the church. Paul refuted their false doctrine by arguing that the death of Christ on the cross "blotted out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us" (Col 2:14). Paul then forbad the Colossian Christians from allowing anyone to judge others on the basis of meat, or drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days (Col 2:16). If the Sabbath had been binding on the early Christians would it not have been legitimate and even mandatory yo judge others' faithfulness on the basis of Sabbath keeping? 2 Corinthians 3 provides one of the most powerful arguments concerning the removal of the law of Moses and the institution of the Gospel of Christ. The Corinthians were "manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart" (2 Cor 3:2-3). In using this language, Paul does not intend to deny the inspiration of the Old Testament (or covenant), but to show that it had been removed and the New Testament had been given to bring us to faith in Christ and to obedience to His word. The writer of Hebrews stress the same truth (Hebrews 10:9-10). The law God gave to Israel yhrough Moses included the Ten Commandments which were written "in tables of stone." The Old Testament writers speak only of the Ten Commandments as being written in tables of stone. This fact is very significant as one examines the rest of 2 Corinthians 3. In contrast to the law's being written in tables of stone, the Gospel of Christ is written in "fleshly tables of the heart." Both covenants originated in the mind of God, but the old was temporary and carnal; the new was bound on mankind to the end of the age. "For if that first covenant (or testament: diathéké same word in both contexts) had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second...In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away" (Hebrews 8:7 ,13). If the old covenant were waxing old and ready to vanish away more than 2000 years ago, how could anyone imagine it is still binding on anyone? 2 Corinthians 3 teaches plainly as any passage could that the covenant of God made w/ the Jewish people was better than any law any nation had ever known. But when it served the purpose God sent it to accomplish--"to bring us unto Christ (Galatians 3:24)--it faded away. This does not mean that Christians should not read the Old Testament, but that the precepts and the laws--including the Ten Commandments--are not binding on anyone during the Christian era. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 ] Next > Last [5] >> |