Results 61 - 80 of 567
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: disciplerami Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
61 | Identifying the born again moment | NT general Archive 1 | disciplerami | 77864 | ||
Dear Steve, I think that the moment of salvation can be pinpointed. The real crux of the matter is when God says you are saved. A lot of people will claim they have salvation, but not if they don't obey. Obedience is seen in many ways. Baptism is the moment of salvation. Baptism has no other significance. The Bible doesn't say, as some claim, that it's an "outward sign that you have been saved." Instead, baptism is an appeal to God for a clean conscience (1 Peter 3:21). Baptism is said to be the moment that you put on Christ (Gal 3:26,27). It is where you are raised to walk in newness of life (Romans 6:3-5). Doubt may still linger as to whether the person was saved, but that goes to the question of faith. But if the person takes God at His word, He will know when God cleansed his soul. Good day. Disciplerami |
||||||
62 | Identifying the born again moment | NT general Archive 1 | disciplerami | 77868 | ||
The gift of tongues was given to a donkey too, but that didn't save his soul :) The outpouring of the Spirit in Acts 10 was a sign, that's all. It's funny that you think you've made a point: "They were praising God, which unbelievers can't do (1 Cor 2:14)" Attention forum, does anyone think 'unbelievers' praise God? Raise you hands, everyone who thinks 'unbelievers' praise God?....Still looking....waiting....no hands going up yet....raise your hands if you believe 'unbelievers' praise God.... Well, I guess no one thinks that 'unbelievers' praise God. So what was your point??? If the question is can the 'unsaved' praise God? The answer is yes, they can and do. Cornelius was not saved yet, when the God heard his prayers and saw his good works (Acts 10:2,4). I assume that he was even praising God in his prayers to God, the ones the angel says God heard. And he was not yet saved (Acts 11:14). So, once again, let the forum know that Searcher56 is once again wrong. Disciplerami |
||||||
63 | Identifying the born again moment | NT general Archive 1 | disciplerami | 77952 | ||
Hide the Thread? Why? Someone help me to understand why this thread has been hidden from the main forum page? The original question seems like a legitimate one, one that should be debated. Good day. |
||||||
64 | Identifying the born again moment | NT general Archive 1 | disciplerami | 77953 | ||
Hide the Thread? Why? Someone help me to understand why this thread has been hidden from the main forum page? The original question seems like a legitimate one, one that should be debated. Good day. |
||||||
65 | Identifying the born again moment | NT general Archive 1 | disciplerami | 77959 | ||
DalPrad, I see this thread has been 'temporarily restricted' from appearing on the homepage. Do you know why? I'm curious why this would be done. Disciplerami |
||||||
66 | Cornelius - Saved in Acts 10:45 or not? | NT general Archive 1 | disciplerami | 78082 | ||
Dear Tim, Most people on this forum suggest that salvation precedes any work and that works only follow. However, Cornelius was praying and doing good deeds before Acts 10:45. My point, as you must know, was that salvation couldn't have come before Peter started preaching the word of God (unless we want to start contradicting the inspired writer). But he definitely showed he was spiritually discerning before his salvation. I was pointing this to those like Joe! who say spiritually dead means you can't spiritually discern. He's wrong because we have Cornelius example. About the last line in my previous post. Searcher56 just got through telling me "I am wrong in my thought." He attacked a made up argument -- I know of no one to suggest it -- that an unbeliever can praise God. Imagining the conversation: UNBELIEVER: "Hey God, I don't even believe in you, couldn't even tell you why I'm talking to you, but you are awesome and mighty and true!" I don't think anyone has suggested such a scenario. So for Searcher to imply that I have, then tell me that I'm wrong in my thinking, is silly and wrong. I don't mean to be unloving, but he needs to get it right. By the way, does Searcher56 have the power to remove a thread from the main page? Good day, Disciplerami |
||||||
67 | Cornelius - Saved in Acts 10:45 or not? | NT general Archive 1 | disciplerami | 78205 | ||
Yes, Rubbish. But God loved his rubbish as it arose before Him as a memorial. | ||||||
68 | Identifying the born again moment | NT general Archive 1 | disciplerami | 78206 | ||
Hi Steve, Many people are confused. God is not the author of confusion, but it still happens. I don't know when or if you were saved. If you say you are saved, fine. But God is the ultimate judge. You had better check with Him. I do know that the Holy Spirit convicted 3,000 to be baptized on Pentecost for the remission of sins. I hoping the best for you, Disciplerami |
||||||
69 | Identifying the born again moment | NT general Archive 1 | disciplerami | 78395 | ||
Dear Steve, Please don't get on the defensive. Concerning your statement: "Also, those on Pentecost were not convicted TO BE baptized for the remission of sin. They were convicted OF sin, righteous, and judgement (John 16:8-11)." Let me point out that what they were convicted TO BE and what they were convicted OF are two different things. I agree with the statement. They were convicted of sin and they were convicted to be baptized. What was your point? That you were baptized three months later than when you were taught that you were saved is something you need to look into. Since you waited that long, the PURPOSE for your being baptized is in question. The following reasons for being baptized are inadequate or are altogether without Scriptural merit. 1. 'outward sign of an inward grace [received earlier]' 2. 'out of obedience.' I would agree that it is done out of obedience, but we still disagree as to why. |
||||||
70 | Identifying the born again moment | NT general Archive 1 | disciplerami | 78856 | ||
Greetings, I don't know why you conclude that the people on the day of Pentecost WERE NOT convicted to be baptized, because something prompted 3,000 of them to go get in the water. Do you have a better word? Convicted to obey the commands of Peter sounds pretty good to me. Do you have some new understanding of the following: "so then those who had received his word were baptized..."? I'm not interested in a semantics game, so if you have some other word that expresses why they all got in the water, please give it. Disciplerami ;7) |
||||||
71 | Identifying the born again moment | NT general Archive 1 | disciplerami | 78965 | ||
Steve, It can't be any clearer. They who were convicted we convicted to repent and be baptized. Maybe I'm not understanding your meaning of the word. Verse 37 says they were pricked in the heart. Peter told them what to do. Were they not convicted to repent and be baptized? Curious. Disciplerami |
||||||
72 | This is my last post. | NT general Archive 1 | disciplerami | 79427 | ||
This is my final post. I received my "second and final" warning for being controversial. I won't wait for the third. To you who reported the 'abuse', I turn things back over to the amen choir: back over to those who believe in 'faith alone', to those who believe in a partial and biased god, back over to those who reject specific commands. I thank you for the challenge. Good day. Disciplerami |
||||||
73 | Why didn't God make people to love him? | Genesis | disciplerami | 74711 | ||
Dear Kelly, If God made people love him it would not be love. Love is a choice. That's why man did not lose his free will when Adam fell. Agape love is the purest kind of love, it is spiritual. And it just wouldn't mean as much to God if He had to make us love Him. "If you love Me, you will keep my commandments." |
||||||
74 | Why didn't God make people to love him? | Genesis | disciplerami | 74712 | ||
Hi Steve, I think you need to reread that verse. I'm not sure it says that God made them love Him. It was right for them to, it was wise for them to, but there's no guarantee they would and... THEY DIDN'T. So, I guess God didn't make them love Him. Right? Good day. |
||||||
75 | Why didn't God make people to love him? | Genesis | disciplerami | 74726 | ||
Hello, May I interject? Sure, God instilled in humankind (part of the creation) free will (Genesis 2,3). Adam, you may eat of any of the plants, but of that tree over there, you may not eat. In the day that you do, you will die. Adam, if you disobey Me, there will be eternal consequences for it. Adam disobeyed God with his eyes wide open. He knew what God commanded and he chose by his free will to do the opposite (2 Timothy 2:14). Good day. |
||||||
76 | Sin is Defined as Breaking God's Law | Gen 1:1 | disciplerami | 77677 | ||
Concerning the following verse, are you saying that it refers to the Old Law or the New? You quote: "But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed," James 1:25. AND "So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty, verse" James 2:12 AND "Blessed are they that do His commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city, Revelation 22:14." These are names for the New Covenant or Testament through Christ blood. You err in not making a distinction between the Old Law and the New Law. The Old was done away with and the New established (Heb. 8:6,7,13; 9:15-17). The Old Law was hostile to us because it pointed out sin but couldn't justify (Heb 10:4). The cross of Christ took it out of the way. "Behold he takes away the first to establish the second" (Heb 10:9). The Second was establish at the death of the Testator, Jesus (Heb 9:15-17). He did this at the cross, through the offering of His body (Col 2:14; Eph 2:15). The passages you refer to also relate to the "law of the Spirit" that Paul mentions in Romans 8:1ff. These all refer to the New Covenant. In contrast, the Old Law of Moses was done away with because it was inferior. Yes, it was "holy, righteous and good", but it served it's purpose. But what it could not do was justify. As Paul says, it could not make holy, it could not "weak as it was through the flesh." The Law required perfection. The James 2:10 passage and Galatians 5:3 show why we don't want to turn back to the Old Law. I know some try to justify following part of the Law and discarding the other; but there is no justification for doing only part of the Law. We are freed from the Law written on tablets of stones: "2 Cor 3:7 But if the ministry of death, in letters engraved on stones, came with glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading as it was, 8 how will the ministry of the Spirit fail to be even more with glory? 9 For if the ministry of condemnation has glory, much more does the ministry of righteousness abound in glory. 10 For indeed what had glory, in this case has no glory because of the glory that surpasses it." What Law is he talking about? Paul is even more specific in the Roman letter. "Rom 7:5 For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were aroused by the Law, were at work in the members of our body to bear fruit for death. 6 But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter. 7 What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? May it never be! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law; for I would not have known about coveting if the Law had not said, "YOU SHALL NOT COVET." To answer the last question people usually have when the 10 Commandments are shown to be done away with, "No, that doesn't mean you can murder, commit adultery, or worship idols." The New Testament in Christ covers such things. The references to the "law of the Spirit", "law of liberty", and "the perfect law" DO NOT refer to the Mosaic Law: they are the Law of Christ established at the Cross. The fundamental principle for salvation still remains: by grace through faith. But the Old Law was not perfect (Heb.8:7), so God established the New. Good day. Disciplerami |
||||||
77 | Without eating, would Adam die? | Gen 2:16 | disciplerami | 75745 | ||
Without eating, would Adam die? | ||||||
78 | Without eating, would Adam die? | Gen 2:16 | disciplerami | 75746 | ||
Adam was possessed with certain physical drives: the drive to eat and drink, the drive to have sexual relations, and to acheive. Without any of these drive, man would cease to exist. He was an immortal soul inside of a mortal body. He got hungry and, without food, would be malnourished. He got thirsty and, without water, would die of poisons. He had sexual urges, without which, the earth would not be populated. Without the drive to acheive, he would not contribute to his and others' welfare. What do you think? | ||||||
79 | Without eating, would Adam die? | Gen 2:16 | disciplerami | 75776 | ||
Hi, thanks for the comment, but not so. If we vegged out, or did not procreate, we would die out in a generation or two. The point being that Adam was mortal. |
||||||
80 | When is abortion right? | Ex 21:23 | disciplerami | 74723 | ||
Yeah, good answer. And his oxygenatnig blood wasn't pumping for nine months before he took that first breathe :) Good day. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [29] >> |