Results 81 - 100 of 138
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: There Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
81 | Sorry to keep asking the same question. | Exodus | There | 20034 | ||
Thanks Steve. You gave me something more to dig into. |
||||||
82 | I agree, but I also have a question | Revelation | There | 18754 | ||
Seventh Day Adventist. | ||||||
83 | I agree, but I also have a question | Revelation | There | 18719 | ||
Okay, I understand what you mean. I'm afraid I have done some "discussing" with SDA's in the recent past and wondered if your opinion of "overcoming on the Lord's day" had something to do with Sabbath keeping. It's refeshing to hear that it isn't. | ||||||
84 | A husband's responsibility | 1 Tim 5:8 | There | 18701 | ||
My opinion of Proverbs 31 is similar to yours. I believe a "virtuous wife" is one that is "a wise steward of her husband's money and goods" and also is a dependable worker in caring for her family... not lazy. She also has a kind and generous heart, and loves God. When this subject came up... I went blank. I've never had anyone "question" this part of a husband's responsibility before... using the Bible! So I certainly appreciate your help. There |
||||||
85 | A husband's responsibility | 1 Tim 5:8 | There | 18700 | ||
Hi Lionstrong, I'm not really sure HOW his thinking goes in the case of Genesis 3, but my "guess" is that he's going strictly by "in the sweat of your face (hard word) YOU shall eat bread". Like I said, though it is a guess. His way of thinking hasn't made much sense to me either. Thank you for the scripture!! It's very much appreciated. There |
||||||
86 | God's wrath tribulational. | Revelation | There | 18663 | ||
The book "The Sign" by Robert Van Kampen is very good too. Also very intense reading! | ||||||
87 | WHY WAS JESUS | John 11:15 | There | 18306 | ||
Ray, just for the record I DON'T have a cold and I still had to read your post several times. Tonight I "finally" understood what you meant. :):) I DO have those days... And I agree. I think it is that revelation, that Jesus was not just man (small "m"), but also GOD Himself, that initially shocked me to the core of my being!! It still amazes me that HE could love ME enough to die on that cross. Since I see many lovable qualities in others, I could understand the cross for them. But for myself... well... I know exactly what the Lord saved me from. And I know I don't deserve it one bit. Tonight I read a verse that touched my heart in kind of a special way. It was 1John 5:13. The part that struck me was the last part "and that you may continue to believe in the NAME of the Son of God." The name. The name isn't just a word. When you say the name you are speaking a word that totally encompasses WHO God is. And the word "Jesus" means "JHWH-saves". "Emmanuel" means "JHWH with us". Not just God, but totally and completely GOD. He was with us in the form of the Christ, and He is the one who saves. His righteousness and His mercy are showing in every bit of His NAME. I suppose I'm off subject here, but for the past year He has been impressing on me that He will teach me something about His NAME... and I've been a rather slow learner. All this while it has seemed like what He wanted me to learn was just out of my reach. Like a child reaching for a cookie just out of their reach, the tip of the finger brushing the edge. Tonight I finally was able to lay the palm of my hand on the "cookie". How magnificent is the name of the Lord!! |
||||||
88 | Possible Lockman Forum Improvements #2 | Bible general Archive 1 | There | 18291 | ||
Thanks for clarifying those points. I still dread a "limit" being placed on the number of answers. I know I enjoy (look forward) to any and all replies that I get. To me that is "discussion". But I do understand that a mountain of responses may not be that enjoyable for everyone else, OR for new visitors coming to the forum. Anyway, thanks for elaborating! |
||||||
89 | How do we know the Bible is the truth? | Bible general Archive 1 | There | 18224 | ||
I know that Steve, but until I met Jesus... I didn't know it was true. UNTIL someone is born of the Holy Spirit, they can only "see" from a totally human perspective. I didn't mean that "truth" itself is relative. Only that as people what we perceive as truth is relative to our perspective. If we are looking from only man's perspective, then we could perceive anything we wanted as truth. (Such as your Muslim friends and the Koran.) But if we are looking from a godly perspective (through the indwelling of God's Holy Spirit), we will perceive "all truth" which is God Himself. (And of course that includes His Word too!) | ||||||
90 | How do we know the Bible is the truth? | Bible general Archive 1 | There | 18223 | ||
Absolutely! | ||||||
91 | Body/soul/spirit? | Bible general Archive 1 | There | 18222 | ||
Hi Bill, I've been sharing my "understanding" too, and I'm not sure which parts I have "right". I'm sure that point comes across. #4 in your post seems feasible, but to some degree it creates even more questions for me. That happens a lot I'm afraid. :):) As to #4, I do agree that "God designed man not to be autonimous but dependent upon God's Spirit (spiritual life) in Him". But if Adam was created with God's Spirit within him, then I would have two questions to start with. 1. Why would God put the "tree of life" in the garden with Adam... if He already had that "life"? 2) Then it would seem that we who are "born of the Spirit" could also lose or have God's Spirit removed from us for sinning just as Adam did. Yet God gives the Holy Spirit as a surety or earnest toward the completion of our salvation (2Cor. 1:22, 5:5; Eph. 1:14) [earnest - 728 "arrhabon" a pledge, i.e. part of the purchase-money or property given in advance as security for the rest.] So I'm not sure that Adam was given anything different than we were except that his "soul"(mind) reflected or resembled God at it's creation because it had never sinned. Ours doesn't, until it is born of the Spirit. Of course that thought could bring up questions possibly about an "age of reason" or "sins of the fathers" too. :) #3 though seems understandable to me. To me there are definitely 3 separate parts to man -- body/spirit/soul. My reason for saying this: 1) the body is dust and will return to dust. 2) the spirit which is immortal will return to God who gave it. [immortal is included in the meaning of the word 4151] 3) the soul (spirit of the mind - concordance also mentions "spirit") of an un-saved person will not return or go to God at a person's death. Only if it is "born of the Spirit" can it go to God. Since God "breathed into" Adam once, I assume the complete spirit package came to Adam at one time. THE spirit (of life) and the spirit of the mind (soul). Which is why I see a connection. An example to explain what I mean. If I have an orange in my hand... the whole thing is an orange. If I remove a slice from the orange, the remainder PLUS the slice are still "orange". Neither will be "whole", but they are still both "orange". And I think the spirit is kind of like that too. God gave man a spirit. A part of that spirit is the soul. PART but not the exact same thing. Another reason I think THE spirit and the soul(mind) of man are connected is that God's Word is the only thing that can divide the two. If they were not "together", they could not be divided at all. So my thoughts go like this. If God made Adam's spirit (of life)[THE spirit] "in His image", then it(spirit and soul/mind) would automatically return to God at a person's death whether or not it was "re-born". ('the spirit will return to God who gave it') Since it is the "spirit" of the mind that must be renewed, it makes sense to me that the soul(mind) which is spirit is the part that would need to be born again, or "renewed in the knowledge according to the image of Him who created him". That renewal, or new birth of the spirit of our mind is the only way man can reflect the image of God. ["image" of God actually means "resemblance" or "representative" of God.] So those are a few of my thoughts on this. God bless. |
||||||
92 | Did Adam die from eating forbidden fruit | Bible general Archive 1 | There | 18142 | ||
Oops!! I didn't mean to post it twice! | ||||||
93 | How do we know the Bible is the truth? | Bible general Archive 1 | There | 18127 | ||
Steve, to them... it would be true. Simply because man's perceptions of TRUTH are interpretive unless we have the indwelling of God's Holy Spirit. God the Creator, Jesus is TRUTH. And I don't believe we can come into "all truth" without being born-again by His Spirit. The point I was trying to make was that UNTIL I met Jesus personally, He too was not "real to me", but only a form of religious teaching from an old book. It was after meeting Him and knowing Him that Jesus and the "old book" became alive for me... in my words --- it became "real for me". I said that I agree with all the points previously stated including those you mentioned that "prove" the bible to be true and inspired by God. Yet UNTIL I met the Lord myself, I would not have recognized biblical truth. And since Muslims deny Jesus as the Son of God, they can not have the Lord Himself as their teacher of "all truth". Instead their perception of truth stems from the false teachings in the Koran perpetrated through Mohammad who was only the pawn of mere men. His teachings could not bear up under scrutiny of the Holy Spirit of God. So "if your Muslim friends say the Koran truths are "real" to them, does that make the Koran true?" Of course not. What it does mean is that they are blinded to "all truth" which is only found in Christ Jesus. |
||||||
94 | Possible Lockman Forum Improvements #2 | Bible general Archive 1 | There | 18100 | ||
I haven't been here long, so I'm not sure my vote counts. :) But I agree with Tim on this. I not only think that new people coming in might be intimidated by a summary report (as in this is the absolute correct cumulative answer), and they might feel less free to state their own opinions/understandings in the form of questions. And as one who can only make it here once a week or less, I guess there would be little point in being here at all unless it would be to "read" the summaries, or if I happened to "catch" a question while it was still only answered by 2 people. :):) I'm sorry, but to me that doesn't sound like a "discussion group". Personally, these discussions put my "understandings" to the test because I have to search scripture to prove out my beliefs. And in many ways I think it can do the same for new people. So even if there is a disagreement in understanding, the new person will at worst have a variety of scriptures to study that will allow the Lord to give them an understanding pertinent to their question from His Word. And perhaps in reality that is the "best". |
||||||
95 | WHY WAS JESUS | John 11:15 | There | 17808 | ||
Hi Ray, This is what I said in the first post: "So He could show them He truly did come from the Father by raising Lazarus from the dead. ("that you may believe" - same verse)" I'm not sure how you interpreted the above as me saying that it was for Mary and Martha's sake, but I still believe Jesus was glad that He was not there to heal Lazarus because He knew He would use the "raising of Lazarus from the dead"... so that they (people) would believe that He truly did come from the Father. And "that you would believe - same verse" was my reference as to Jesus' reason for doing it the way He did it. And could you rephrase your question because I don't understand exactly what you were asking me when you said "A comparison... if you believe in the Man, Jesus. Do you believe this?" |
||||||
96 | Can A Christian disown Christ? | Matt 10:33 | There | 15934 | ||
I can see your point, Tim. It could be a possible explanation. But I still think that Christ, as mediator between us and God, is saying that if anyone denies (rejects) Him, He will reject them before God (in judgment). To me, rejecting Christ is more than simply being an unfaithful witness. But again, you've made a good point here. |
||||||
97 | Can A Christian disown Christ? | Matt 10:33 | There | 15888 | ||
This is where I thought Tim might be going with his earlier question to me. Jesus speaks of the sower and the seed. Some believe but throw it away for various reasons. And the last group believe, understand, and produce fruit. So I do believe that some believe and fall away. I further believe that once a believer is born-again -- Spirit filled, having received the Holy Spirit of promise, we will not fall away. Ephesians 1:13-14 "In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is the "earnest" of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory. "Earnest" comes from the Greek word "arrhabon" meaning "pledge, i.e. part of the purchase-money or property given in advance as security for the rest: -- earnest". This same word is used in 2 Cor. 1:22 "who also has sealed us and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts". And again in 2Cor. 5:5 "Now he that has wrought us for the selfsame thing is God, who also has given us the earnest of the Spirit". Since God knows the final outcome before the fact, I don't believe He would give the earnest of the Holy Spirit knowing that someone would later fall away. So if one is born again of the Spirit, i.e. filled with the Spirit -- then I do not believe they would ever fall away. I sometimes think this is why some people refer to some Christians as having "head knowledge" rather than "heart knowledge" concerning following Christ. I'm not making a judgement, since I KNOW that I can't judge anyone's heart. I agree with you, obedience to the Lord and prayer can bring about miracles though, the greatest of which, in my opinion, is the salvation of a soul. |
||||||
98 | Can A Christian disown Christ? | Matt 10:33 | There | 15883 | ||
Hi Tim, "Hostis" means 'which some, i.e. any that, which same, they'. Since it is used in two separate verses/sentences, I'm not sure it needs justification. The actual Greek words used for "whosoever" in verse 32 are "pas hostis", and in verse 33 the words are "hostis an". "Pas" means all, any, every, whole, whosoever. "An" means possibility or supposition. Do you understand those pronouns to imply that both verses speak about believers? 32) Believers who confess Christ, and then 33) believers who deny (reject) Christ? I guess since I don't think anyone who rejects Christ is a believer, I would still contend that verse 33 is talking about unbelievers. After reading this, please let me know if I understood your question correctly? I can see where your question could come from two different perspectives. |
||||||
99 | Is inter-racial marriage wrong? | Bible general Archive 1 | There | 15858 | ||
I went to the article, but it doesn't give any more information than exactly what you stated. This brings up some interesting questions though. Unless I'm mistaken the Canaanites/Phoenicians had a Semitic language. I have "read" that the Semitic languages were given to the descendants of Shem at the tower of Babel. I'll have to see what else I can find on this subject. Thanks for the "motivation". :) | ||||||
100 | Is inter-racial marriage wrong? | Bible general Archive 1 | There | 15733 | ||
Thank you for sharing that information. Personally I've only met a few Ethiopians and they were black skinned. Since the writers of the bible dictionary exclude the Negroes as Ham's descendants, I wonder which of Noah's sons they think the other black people of Africa and Melanasia descended from? It would seem there are only three "biblical" choices. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ] Next > Last [7] >> |