Results 621 - 640 of 787
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Radioman2 Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
621 | What is the morning star here? | Rev 2:28 | Radioman2 | 80720 | ||
Biblebeliever: Thank you for answering my question. Grace and peace to you. Radioman2 |
||||||
622 | What is the morning star here? | Rev 2:28 | Radioman2 | 80717 | ||
OK, if the NIV is generally a poor translation, then what would you say is the one perfect Bible translation in the English language? | ||||||
623 | MOSES WAS BURIED IN MT NEBO | Jude 1:9 | Radioman2 | 80712 | ||
Deut. 34:5-6 (ESV) So Moses the servant of the Lord died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the Lord, [6] and he buried him in the valley in the land of Moab opposite Beth-peor; but no one knows the place of his burial to this day. You write: 'Moses and Elijah still have to die.' The scripture says: "Moses the servant of the Lord died there in the land of Moab." So why does he still have to die in the Tribulation? You write: 'Moses' body was taken up by Michael right after he died.See Jude1:9.' Jude 1:9 (ESV) But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, was disputing about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a blasphemous judgment, but said, "The Lord rebuke you." OK, we've seen Jude 1:9. Where in this verse does it say a word about Moses' body being "taken up" by Michael? The verse says nothing of the kind. So what happened to the body of Moses? He was buried. Buried -- not "taken up." The Bible tells us in plain English, 'he buried him in the valley in the land of Moab.' I'll tell you what is wilder than the Bible -- it is making assertions about the Bible without any scriptural support. |
||||||
624 | What is the morning star here? | Rev 2:28 | Radioman2 | 80705 | ||
True or False? "A Tribulation saint does not have the eternal security you and I do." False What are you implying? That the condition for reception or retention of salvation is keeping the law in the OT, faith in the NT church age, and enduring to the end during the Tribulation? I've heard of dispensationalism, but this is pushing it too far. |
||||||
625 | What is the morning star here? | Rev 2:28 | Radioman2 | 80703 | ||
'Isaiah 14:12 Look how you have fallen from the sky, O shining one, son of the dawn![22] You've been cut down to the ground, O conqueror of the nations! [22] translator's note. The Hebrew text has rjv-/b llyh ("Helel son of Shachar"), which is probably a name for the the morning star (Venus) or the crescent moon.' (New English Translation www.netbible.com) You write: "ignore the niv in Isaiah 14:12 calling Lucifer the morning star.this is a poor translation" Prove it. What, if any, evidence do you have to show that Isa. 14:12 in the NIV is a poor translation -- i.e., what evidence other than your own personal bias, your dislike of it? No one should translate scripture to fit their own doctrinal preconceptions. |
||||||
626 | 2 Corinthians- What is 'suffering' | 2 Cor 1:5 | Radioman2 | 80694 | ||
Joe: Thanks for pointing out once again the error of WOF teaching. Actually nothing ever could create a theological problem for WOF disciples, the reason being that, properly understood, they have no theology. It would appear that WOF followers never were persuaded of their beliefs by sound scriptural evidence, but rather by the charisma and oratorical skills of their prophets. Otherwise, why is it that when one challenges them to provide scriptural support, they don't have any? All they can do is attack the character of those who de-bunk WOF doctrine. By the way, opponents of WOF doctrine need not and do not attack the character of WOF preachers and prophets. Opponents of WOF have scriptural evidence to prove what they assert. The only one who launches ad hominem attacks are the defenders of WOF. Radioman2 |
||||||
627 | Do you have to be baptized to be saved? | Rom 6:3 | Radioman2 | 80693 | ||
The reason you don't see water salvation in the Bible is that it simply is not there. The only way to extract that erroneous teaching is to take a few verses out of context, isolate them and completely ignore what the entire rest of the Bible has to say on the subject of salvation and the sole condition for salvation -- which is faith. | ||||||
628 | holy spirit guide men to write bible | 2 Tim 3:16 | Radioman2 | 80678 | ||
Ray: I would say that "Morning Star" would be a sound choice for the words in 2 Peter 1:19. In fact, the Amplified Bible, in that verse, has it: "Morning Star." AMPLIFIED 2 Peter 1:19 And we have the prophetic word [made] firmer still. You will do well to pay close attention to it as to a lamp shining in a dismal (squalid and dark) place, until the day breaks through [the gloom] and the Morning Star rises (comes into being) in your hearts. It seems that Morning Star in 2 Peter 1:19 refers to the same person, Jesus Christ, who is also the Morning Star of Revelation 22:16. Notice, too, that both passages are in reference to the Second Coming. New King James Version Revelation 22:16 "I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things in the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, the Bright and Morning Star." Well done, Ray. I had never before until now seen the relationship of Morning Star in these two passages. Thank you for pointing this out to me. Grace and Peace, Radioman2 |
||||||
629 | shekina glory | Jer 7:18 | Radioman2 | 80673 | ||
Tim: Ditto and mega-dittos to your post. What book will people be quoting next in order to misinterpret or contradict the Bible? The Koran, Nostradamus, Mein Kampf, Alice in Wonderland? Radioman2 |
||||||
630 | why do you think that jesus went to hell | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80671 | ||
Did Christ take back the keys? Nowhere in the Bible is there a clear verse of Scripture to indicate that Christ TOOK BACK any keys or that Satan had possession of keys. In the entire King James Version of the Bible, the word "key" appears in 6 verses. The word "keys" appears in 2 verses. Thus, "key" and "keys" appear a total of 8 times in the KJV. The following is ALL the Bible has to say about key(s): Jud 3:25 And they tarried till they were ashamed: and, behold, he opened not the doors of the parlour; therefore they took a key, and opened them: and, behold, their lord was fallen down dead on the earth. Isa 22:22 And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder; so he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open. Lu 11:52 Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered. Re 3:7 And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth; Re 9:1 And the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit. Re 20:1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. Mt 16:19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Re 1:18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death. |
||||||
631 | shekina glory | Jer 7:18 | Radioman2 | 80625 | ||
The Spirit HIMSELF NASB Romans 8:26 In the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words; "Hear, O Israel, the LORD our God; the LORD is one." There is no such thing as a "Christian godess." Nonsense! gbennett76: You allege: 'Many theologians and scholars realize that the Holy Spirit written as, "Pneuma" in Greek everytime it appears in the New Testament, is a feminine being.' Many theologians and scholars? Name one. Even if you can, the mere fact that many theologians and scholars realize or believe something to be true doesn't make it true. You allege: 'Note that Pneuma is a feminine word in Greek.' No, it isn't. 'The noun "pneuma" (Strong's #4151) is neuter in Greek' (Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, W.E. Vine, Nelson, 1984). You write: 'The dove has long been a symbol of the Goddess in the Ancient Near East, and was never used to symbolize a god.' What the dove has been a symbol of in the Ancient Near East is irrelevant in this discussion. We are concerned only with what the dove is a symbol of in the Bible, which is God's only inspired revelation to man. God's complete revelation to man is the 66 books of which the Bible consists. We have no need or desire to consult books of mythology and idolatry found in the writings of ancient mystics or apochryphal writings to determine God's truth. Rather we turn to Scripture only. We don't go scavenging among garbage cans looking for a scrap of food when God has prepared for us a feast in His Word -- the Bible. The Kabbalah is not the inspired Word of God -- period. Who the goddess Sophia is or what her name means proves nothing. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob -- the God of the Bible -- does not have a wife. Neither Proverbs nor the Song of Solomon give any indication that God ever had a wife. That idolators worshipped Asherah alongside YHWH proves nothing. To identify YHWH as the lover/husband of Asherah is nothing less than blasphemy. God is spirit (John 4:24 NIV). You allege: "They agree to create, and so here we are." The notion that God needed the agreement of His "wife" before He could create is utter nonsense. Neither the term nor the concept of "God-the-Mother" appears anywhere in the Bible. To allege that Moses and Aaron carried Asherah "poles" is ludicrous. "Rabid Yahwists" is a derogatory and blasphemous term, one that, in the context of your post, shows obvious hostility to the Bible and anyone who does not believe that God is a "she." |
||||||
632 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80604 | ||
"...Codex B or Vaticanus (Vatican 1209) of the fourth century CE, which is one of the few Greek texts that actually contains punctuation." That some copyist ADDED punctuation to a COPY of the Greek text proves what? 'If you think you're on safe theological ground because of a pet verse, better look twice. Simple prooftexting has its perils.' --(Gregory Koukl, Stand to Reason) One of the Watchtower organization's favorite tactics is to isolate a verse of Scripture from it's context (and re-translate and re-interpret it to fit their teachings) in order to proof text a particular doctrine of theirs. |
||||||
633 | What was the answer? | 1 Sam 28:12 | Radioman2 | 80600 | ||
OVERSTATING THE BELIEVER’S AUTHORITY [While we are striving to separate fact from fantasy (truth from error) regarding the subject of authority, we may as well include this related information. (I address this post to you, Ed, not to take issue with you in any way, but because your post is the "primary" post in this sub-sub-thread.) ] 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. "Nowhere does Scripture state that believers have authority over Satan himself." 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 "OVERSTATING THE BELIEVER’S AUTHORITY, Anderson’s entire approach to spiritual warfare, is based on the authority of the believer over the devil. This is manifest particularly in his emphasis on "binding and loosing": "[Anderson writes:] God has granted us the authority to "bind what shall be bound in heaven" (Matthew 16:19; 18:18). In other words, we have the spiritual capacity to discern God’s will and then, confident in the finished work of Christ, proclaim it in the spiritual realm. We have authority over demons as long as we remain strong in the Lord and operate in His strength (see Ephesians 6:l0)....The effectiveness of binding the strongman (see Matthew 12:20 [sic]) is dependent upon the leading of the Holy Spirit and subject to the scope and limits of the written Word of God.’ "In his instruction on how to help others find freedom in Christ, Anderson writes that the goal: "is to avoid all demonic activity which would short-circuit their ability to participate in the process. With this in mind, I usually begin the steps to freedom with a prayer similar to this: Dear heavenly Father....I take my position with Christ, seated with Him in the heavenlies. Because all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Him. I now claim that authority over all enemies of the Lord Jesus Christ in and around this room and especially (name). You have told us that where two or three are gathered in Your name You are in our midst, and that whatever is bound on earth is bound in heaven. We agree that every evil spirit that is in or around (name) be bound to silence. They cannot inflict any pain, speak to (names)’s mind, or prevent (names) from hearing, seeing, or speaking. Now in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ I command you, Satan, and all your hosts to release (names) and remain bound and gagged so that (names) will be able to obey God." (Elliot Miller continues:) "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)." (http://www.equip.org/search/). This article first appeared in the Summer 1998 issue of the Christian Research Journal. |
||||||
634 | What was the answer? | 1 Sam 28:12 | Radioman2 | 80596 | ||
Satan's loss of authority: The Scriptural truth about who and what Satan is [Ed: I have yet to see scripture to clearly and plainly show that Satan had authority then God gave it to Adam and then Adam gave it back to Satan. I haven't seen it, have you? Here, for a change, is that which the Bible clearly tells us about Satan.] 'Satan 'The Hebrew word satan [f'f] means "an adversary, one who resists." It is translated as "Satan" eighteen times in the Old Testament, fourteen of those occurrences being in Job 1-2, the others in 1 Chronicles 21:1 and Zechariah 3:1-2. There is some dispute as to whether it should be taken as a proper name or a title. In Job and Zechariah the definite article precedes the noun (lit., "the satan" or "the accuser"). Thus some argue it should be a title, while in 1 Chronicles (no article) it should be a proper name. The word is used also of various persons in the Old Testament as "adversaries, " including David (1 Sam 29:4), Rezon of Damascus (1 Kings 11:23,25), and the angel of the Lord (Num 22:22,32). (...) '"Satan" occurs thirty-six times in the New Testament, eighteen of that number in the Gospels and Acts. The Greek term satanas [Satana'"] is a loan word from the Hebrew Old Testament, and twenty-eight of the total occurrences are accompanied by the definite article. Often in the Gospel accounts Jesus is in contact with Satan directly or indirectly. He was tempted by Satan (Mark 1:13). In the famous "Beelzebub controversy" Jesus made clear his intention to drive Satan out of people's lives and to destroy his sovereignty (Matt 12:26; Mark 3:23, 26; Luke 11:18). He liberated a woman "whom Satan (had) kept bound for eighteen long years" (Luke 13:16). Paul spoke of his being sent to turn people "from the power of Satan to God" (Acts 26:18), and that the works of the "lawless one (were) in accordance with the work of Satan, " in doing sham miracles, signs, and wonders (2 Thess 2:9). Christ will come, he wrote, to overthrow that agent of Satan. 'While the activity of Satan is carried out in "the world" (i.e., among those who do not acknowledge Christ as Lord), he also works against the followers of Christ. He influenced Peter's thinking about Jesus to the extent that Jesus said to his disciple, "Get behind me, Satan!" (Matt 16:23). He asked for all the disciples in order to severely test them (Luke 22:31). He "entered" Judas Iscariot (Luke 22:3), and "filled the heart" of Ananias (Acts 5:3). Believers can be tempted by Satan due to a lack of self-control in sexual matters (1 Cor 7:5), and he can even masquerade as "an angle of light" to accomplish his purposes (2 Cor 11:14). He tormented Paul by means of "a thorn in (his) flesh" (2 Cor 12:7). Some people even turn away from their faith to follow Satan (1 Tim 5:15). (...) 'Satan is regarded in the New Testament as "master of death and destruction, " who carries out God's wrath against sinners. Twice we read of persons "handed over to Satan" for spiritual discipline by the church (1 Cor 5:1-5; 1 Tim 1:19-20). This appears to mean that excommunication puts people out into Satan's realm, a sovereignty from which believers have been rescued (Col 1:13; cf. Heb 2:14-15). In other cases, Satan attacked the disciples of Jesus by "sifting" them (Luke 22:31), a figure that is enigmatic. It may have meant to test their faith (with the intent of destroying it), or, it may have meant "to separate off the rubbish" (I. H. Marshall). In any case, Satan was up to no good. He was able to "enter" Judas Iscariot (Luke 22:3; cf. John 13:27), resulting in that disciple becoming a betrayer of his Master. Peter's sifting may have brought about his threefold denial of Jesus. (...) 'Jesus spoke of seeing Satan "fall like lightning from heaven" (Luke 10:18), a fall not identified but spoken of within the context of demons being cast out—a sign of Satan's LOSS OF AUTHORITY. In Revelation, amid a war in heaven, Satan was "hurled to the earth" along with his angels/demons (12:9). He, the Accuser, was overcome by One stronger than he. Finally, he is bound, imprisoned in the abyss for one thousand years, then ultimately banished in the fiery lake to suffer eternal torment (20:1-3, 10; cf. Matt 25:41). (...) 'Jesus would drive out "the prince of this world" by his cross (John 12:31); the latter would have no hold on Christ, for he was without sin (14:30); and Satan stood condemned at the bar of God's judgment (16:11). While the devil has had a career of sinning "from the beginning, " the Son of God came to destroy his wicked works (1 John 3:8). Those unable to hear and receive Jesus' words belong to the devil, who is their "father" (John 8:44)—they share a family likeness to him. ...' by Walter M. Dunnett Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology (Emphasis added.) (http://bible.crosswalk.com/Dictionaries/BakersEvangelicalDictionary/) |
||||||
635 | Do you have to be baptized to be saved? | Rom 6:3 | Radioman2 | 80563 | ||
Tim: Thank you for a very good post. You point out: "The common mistake made here is to interpret 'justified' as referring to salvation . . . It has two possible meanings. "It can mean 'justified', or it can mean 'shown to be righteous'." I agree 100 percent. JUSTIFIED is used in two different ways. I have tried to get this point across several times in recent days. Yet each time I do, I get the same response: Someone repeats and repeats that it is being claimed that there are two different FAITHS. This is nonsense! My posts were never about two different faiths. Instead, they addressed the same issue you did, that "justified" has two possible meanings. It's so simple! James talks about being justified in the eyes of men. Paul talks about being justified (declared righteous) in God's eyes. The only evidence of a person's having been justified that men can see is what they see on the outside. God looks on the heart. And it is God who declares us righteous in his sight. He does so based on faith, not works. Romans 3:28 (ESV) For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law. Ephes. 2:8-9 (ESV) For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, [9] not a result of works, so that no one may boast. Moreover, it is absurd to imply that one portion of scripture (James) contradicts another (Romans). God, the Author of the Bible, does not contradict himself. Radioman2 |
||||||
636 | 2 Corinthians- What is 'suffering' | 2 Cor 1:5 | Radioman2 | 80561 | ||
'Where is Paul’s “word of faith” and “positive confession”?' - - - - - - - - - - 'Another case in point is that God allowed affliction to come upon Paul, not answering his prayer for deliverance, so that Paul would not become too high minded as a result of the visions and revelations he had (2 Corinthians 12:7-10). [Frederick] Price’s response to this passage, which is typical of the movement, is: “Now that was Paul’s estimate of the situation. God didn’t tell him that He gave him that to keep him humble, but Paul was a man who was prone to brag and boast. Therefore he took it upon himself to believe all of this that was coming upon him was going to help him to stay humble.”[3] 'In this statement we find a disturbing lack of concern for the authority of the inspired authors of Scripture. There is nothing within the context of this passage to qualify this statement of Paul’s as being merely his own, possibly errant, opinion. Paul makes the statement with the full authority that, by virtue of inspiration, was rightfully his. If by our human rationalizing that Paul was one prone to boast (which finds no basis in Scripture), we have the freedom to dismiss his declaration in verse 7 as being misguided, then we may also dismiss anything else he said that does not fit into our doctrinal scheme. Once this happens, our basis of trust in the Scripture become effectively undermined. However, we find that Paul derived this estimate of the situation from the Lord’s answer to his prayers: “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is perfected in weakness” (verse 9). 'Paul learned to be content with this abiding affliction, for the Lord taught him that at the very moment that he was weakest in himself, the power of the Lord would be most evident through him, bringing glory to God rather than Paul (verses 9, 10). This lesson desperately needs to be learned by many who are being influenced by the false unlimited healing/prosperity doctrines today. 'Affliction can certainly be a tool for good in God’s hands. In Psalm 119 we read the following: 'Verse 67: Before I was afflicted I went astray, but now I keep Thy word. 'Verse 91: It is good for me that I was afflicted, that I may learn Thy statutes 'Verse 75: I know, O LORD, that Thy judgments are righteous, and that in faithfulness Thou hast afflicted me. 'There have been times, even in the Bible, when God’s people have had to accept and live with illness. Rather than telling him to “claim his healing,” Paul gave medicinal advice to Timothy: “No longer drink water exclusively, but use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and frequent ailments” (1 Timothy 5:23). 'This verse should have special significance to all who think the Bible supports some of the extreme teachings of our day. Where is Paul’s “word of faith” and “positive confession”? By giving medicinal advice, and telling Timothy he has frequent ailments (thus acknowledging their ongoing existence rather than “speaking healing into being”) Paul is completely out of line with the current wind of doctrine.* As Kenneth Hagin puts it” “People confess their lack and build up a sense of lack in themselves. As they confess these things, these lacks gain ascendancy in their lives.”[4]' [1] Price, Frederick K. C., Is Healing For All? Harrison House, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 1976, 9. [2] Ibid., 10. [3] Ibid., 12. [4] Hagin, Kenneth E., Right and Wrong Thinking, Kenneth Hagin Evangelistic Association, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 24 (http://www.equip.org/free/DH018.htm) |
||||||
637 | 2 Corinthians- What is 'suffering' | 2 Cor 1:5 | Radioman2 | 80560 | ||
suffer -- 1 : to endure death, PAIN, or distress 3 : to be subject to DISABILITY or HANDICAP suffer defined Main Entry: suf·fer Function: verb Inflected Form(s): suf·fered; suf·fer·ing transitive senses 1 a : to submit to or be forced to endure (suffer martyrdom) b : to feel keenly : labor under (suffer thirst) 2 : UNDERGO, EXPERIENCE 3 : to put up with especially as inevitable or unavoidable 4 : to allow especially by reason of indifference (the eagle suffers little birds to sing -- Shakespeare) intransitive senses 1 : to endure death, pain, or distress 2 : to sustain loss or damage 3 : to be subject to disability or handicap synonym see BEAR - suf·fer·able adjective - suf·fer·able·ness noun - suf·fer·ably /-blE/ adverb - suf·fer·er noun (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary) |
||||||
638 | Do you have to be baptized to be saved? | Rom 6:3 | Radioman2 | 80534 | ||
Does James 2 contradict Romans 4? 'The most serious problem these verses pose is the question of what James 2:24 means: "You see that a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone." Some imagine that this contradicts Paul in Romans 3:28: "For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law." John Calvin explained this apparent difficulty: 'It appears certain that [James] is speaking of the manifestation, not of the imputation of righteousness, as if he had said, Those who are justified by faith prove their justification by obedience and good works, not by a bare and imaginary semblance of faith. In one word, he is not discussing the mode of justification, but requiring that the justification of all believers shall be operative. And as Paul contends that men are justified without the aid of works, so James will not allow any to be regarded as Justified who are destitute of good works. . . . Let them twist the words of James as they may, they will never extract out of them more than two propositions: That an empty phantom of faith does not justify, and that the believer, not contented with such an imagination, manifests his justification by good works. [Henry Beveridge, trans., John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion 3:17:12 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1966 reprint), 2: 115.] 'James is not at odds with Paul. "They are not antagonists facing each other with crossed swords; they stand back to back, confronting different foes of the gospel." [The New International Commentary on the New Testament] In 1:17-18, James affirmed that salvation is a gift bestowed according to the sovereign will of God. Now he is stressing the importance of faith's fruit--the righteous behavior that genuine faith always produces. Paul, too, saw righteous works as the necessary proof of faith. 'Those who imagine a discrepancy between James and Paul rarely observe that it was Paul who wrote, "Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? May it never be!" (Rom. 6:15); and "Having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness" (v. 18). Thus Paul condemns the same error James is exposing here. Paul never advocated any concept of dormant faith. 'When Paul writes, "by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight," (Rom. 3:20), 'he is combatting a Jewish legalism which insisted upon the need for works to be justified; James insists upon the need for works in the lives of those who have been justified by faith. Paul insists that no man can ever win justification through his own efforts. . . . James demands that a man who already claims to stand in right relationship with God through faith must by a life of good works demonstrate that he has become a new creature in Christ. With this Paul thoroughly agreed. Paul was rooting out 'works' that excluded and destroyed saving faith; James was stimulating a sluggish faith that minimized the results of saving faith in daily life. [D. Edmond Hiebert, The Epistle of James (Chicago: Moody, 1979), 175.] 'James and Paul both echo Jesus' preaching. Paul's emphasis is an echo of Matthew 5:3: "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." James's teaching has the ring of Matthew 7:21: "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven." Paul represents the beginning of the Sermon on the Mount; James the end of it. Paul declares that we are saved by faith without the deeds of the law. James declares that we are saved by faith, which shows itself in works. Both James and Paul view good works as the proof of faith--not the path to salvation. 'James could not be more explicit. He is confronting the concept of a passive, false "faith," which is devoid of the fruits of salvation. He is not arguing for works in addition to or apart from faith. He is showing why and how, true, living faith always works. He is fighting against dead orthodoxy and its tendency to abuse grace. 'The error James assails is faith without works; justification without sanctification; salvation without new life. 'Again, James echoes the Master Himself, who insisted on a theology of lordship that involved obedience, not lip-service. Jesus chided the disobedient ones who had attached themselves to Him in name only: "Why do you call Me, 'Lord, Lord,' and do not do what I say?" (Luke 6:46). Verbal allegiance, He said, will get no one to heaven: "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven" (Matt. 7:21). 'That is in perfect harmony with James: "Prove yourselves doers of the word, and not merely hearers who delude themselves" (1:22); for "faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself" (2:17). [Excerpted from Faith Works] www.gty.org/IssuesandAnswers/archive/james2.htm |
||||||
639 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80525 | ||
Gospel according to Price Joe: You have so correctly pointed out: "Things that Jesus verbalized are not any more or less true than the Psalms or Pauls' teaching in 2 Corinthians." If I may, I would like to expand a bit on your point here. - - - - - - - - - - 'Another case in point is that God allowed affliction to come upon Paul, not answering his prayer for deliverance, so that Paul would not become too high minded as a result of the visions and revelations he had (2 Corinthians 12:7-10). [Frederick] Price’s response to this passage, which is typical of the movement, is: “Now that was Paul’s estimate of the situation. God didn’t tell him that He gave him that to keep him humble, but Paul was a man who was prone to brag and boast. Therefore he took it upon himself to believe all of this that was coming upon him was going to help him to stay humble.”[3] 'In this statement we find a disturbing lack of concern for the authority of the inspired authors of Scripture. There is nothing within the context of this passage to qualify this statement of Paul’s as being merely his own, possibly errant, opinion. Paul makes the statement with the full authority that, by virtue of inspiration, was rightfully his. If by our human rationalizing that Paul was one prone to boast (which finds no basis in Scripture), we have the freedom to dismiss his declaration in verse 7 as being misguided, then we may also dismiss anything else he said that does not fit into our doctrinal scheme. Once this happens, our basis of trust in the Scripture become effectively undermined. However, we find that Paul derived this estimate of the situation from the Lord’s answer to his prayers: “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is perfected in weakness” (verse 9). 'Paul learned to be content with this abiding affliction, for the Lord taught him that at the very moment that he was weakest in himself, the power of the Lord would be most evident through him, bringing glory to God rather than Paul (verses 9, 10). This lesson desperately needs to be learned by many who are being influenced by the false unlimited healing/prosperity doctrines today. 'Affliction can certainly be a tool for good in God’s hands. In Psalm 119 we read the following: 'Verse 67: Before I was afflicted I went astray, but now I keep Thy word. 'Verse 91: It is good for me that I was afflicted, that I may learn Thy statutes 'Verse 75: I know, O LORD, that Thy judgments are righteous, and that in faithfulness Thou hast afflicted me. 'There has been times, even in the Bible, when God’s people have had to accept and live with illness. Rather than telling him to “claim his healing,” Paul gave medicinal advice to Timothy: “No longer drink water exclusively, but use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and frequent ailments” (1 Timothy 5:23). 'This verse should have special significance to all who think the Bible supports some of the extreme teachings of our day. Where is Paul’s “word of faith” and “positive confession”? By giving medicinal advice, and telling Timothy he has frequent ailments (thus acknowledging their ongoing existence rather than “speaking healing into being”) Paul is completely out of line with the current wind of doctrine.* As Kenneth Hagin puts it” “People confess their lack and build up a sense of lack in themselves. As they confess these things, these lacks gain ascendancy in their lives.”[4]' [1] Price, Frederick K. C., Is Healing For All? Harrison House, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 1976, 9. [2] Ibid., 10. [3] Ibid., 12. [4] Hagin, Kenneth E., Right and Wrong Thinking, Kenneth Hagin Evangelistic Association, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 24 (http://www.equip.org/free/DH018.htm) |
||||||
640 | Did Jesus go to hell? | 1 Peter | Radioman2 | 80500 | ||
Does God Always Heal? 'We have been made disturbingly aware of a number of problems that predictably arise wherever the healing/prosperity/confession movement spreads. It finally reached a point where we no longer had any choice but to do something about it. 'One very real problem is that the emphasis that is placed upon Christ bearing our diseases at Calvary undermines the biblical emphasis upon Christ bearing our sins. Whereas the preaching that we read in the New Testament is always centered around Christ’s death or our sins and resurrection for our justification (Romans 4:25), one finds that the preaching, and even the casual conversation of this current movement is dominated by the subject of bodily healing. Followers of the movement display practically an obsession with the topics of healing and “confession,” as though these subjects were the gospel and there’s little else in the Bible worthy of much discussion. Even if these doctrines were Biblical many who hold them would be guilty of being extremely unbalanced, not giving enough attention to many important aspects of Christian faith and living. 'Another unfortunate result of the preaching of these doctrines is that people lose their victory in Christ, and become shaken in their faith, because someone gave them a “biblical” formula for success, and it didn’t work. (...) 'To have the audacity to tell one of God’s children that if they are sick it is because of their own sin or lack of faith is to abound in presumptuousness, and be bankrupt in compassion. I’ve known of more than one person who demonstrated this insensitivity until God dealt with him by laying him flat on his back, and when none of his “principles” would work he suddenly developed an empathy of those he had once judged. We never see it portrayed in Scripture that perfect health is the sign of spirituality. To set up such a standard is to divert God’s people from the spiritual standard that Scripture does set forth (such as in 2 Peter 1:5-9). 'Ken Copeland and others teach that we must resist sickness in the same way that we resist sin. This also disturbs us. We’ve seen too many good Christians striving to “believe” their sickness away, and finally collapsing into self-condemnation and utter discouragement over their “lack of faith” or the “sin” in their lives. Most likely, there was a divine purpose for that sickness in their lives, and it would have been a lot easier on them, after they prayed in faith and nothing happened, to have ceased striving and simply rested in the comforting sovereignty of God. 'After being forced to go to this extent to prove that it is not always God’s will to heal, we do want to close on the positive note that we do believe that divine healing is for today. We see no Scriptural basis to doubt that we can expect to see healing take place here and now. Healing should be a regular part of the life of all churches (James 5:14-16). We also believe that faith plays an important part in receiving healing, and that the Church has much to learn about faith, and how to more effectively receive it for healing. We feel that many who saw this need embraced the “healing in the atonement” doctrine because it seemed to offer a more solid basis for faith. Unfortunately, however, this basis is not the Scriptural basis, and therefore it has created more problems than was hoped it would solve.' - Elliot Miller (This article has been edited due to space limitations. To read the entire article, see STATEMENT DH018, Healing: Does God Always Heal? [www.equip.org]) |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 ] Next > Last [40] >> |