Results 81 - 100 of 494
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: stjones Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
81 | Kathy, Is "Lifting His name" Biblical? | John 12:32 | stjones | 104084 | ||
Kathy; I've tried to make that point; perhaps you'll have a better result. I give up. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
82 | Slain or knocked down | Eph 4:14 | stjones | 104052 | ||
Yeah; old will do that. I prefer to think of myself as a curmudgeon. - Indy |
||||||
83 | Is lifting His name related to this vs? | John 12:32 | stjones | 104051 | ||
Greetings, Aixen7z4; In our church, we sing three or four "praise songs" prior to our formal worship time. Two of them talk about lifting up the name of Jesus. There may be others, but these are the only two I know. You say that songs should not "just say you are lifting him up. Lift him up. Talk of the things he has done. Describe how wonderful he is." Tell me if these songs don't do all of that: Lord, I lift your name on high. Lord, I love to sing your praises. I'm so glad you're in my life. I'm so glad you came to save us. You came from Heaven to Earth to show the way; From the Earth to the cross, my debt to pay; From the cross to the grave; From the grave to the sky. Lord, I lift your name on high. Majesty, worship His Majesty, Unto Jesus, be all glory, honor and praise! Majesty, kingdom authority, flows from His throne, Unto His own, His anthem raise. So exalt, lift up on high the name of Jesus. Magnify, come glorify Christ Jesus the King. Majesty, worship His Majesty, Jesus who died, now glorified, King of all kings. Both songs contain the essential gospel; both praise Jesus for who he is and what he has done. They are simple songs - the first something of a children's song - they aren't pretentious or sophisticated; neither is worthy of Handel or Bach. But I think their straightforward words sung with grateful hearts are pleasing to Jesus' ears: "he said: 'I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. And whoever welcomes a little child like this in my name welcomes me.'" (Matthew 18:3-5) Further, this blanket condemnation is simply false: "You used to sing, [words from traditional hymn, "How Great Thou Art"]. But you have abandoned songs like that for songs that say you are praising God when that is all they say." This is utter nonsense. We sing "How Great Thou Art" once or twice a year. During the formal worship service, we sing three hymns from the hymnal. Watts, Crosby, Spafford, the Gaithers, you name it. We also sing the Doxology. How much tradition to do you require? Praise songs may not be to your liking, or to the liking of others on this forum who seem to think that "lifting up" Jesus' name is pure heresy. But this is a matter of taste, not substance. I am amazed at the arrogance of fellow believers who presume to dictate which lyrics or which styles of music are acceptable and pleasing to God and which are not. The fact that such narrow-minded foolishness is propogated by people I normally respect is especially disheartening. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
84 | Kathy, Is "Lifting His name" Biblical? | John 12:32 | stjones | 104035 | ||
Hank and Searcher; Double posting is probably bad manners, but these comments are addressed to both of you. You guys really need to lighten up. In my church, we occasionally sing this litle chorus: Lord, I lift your name on high. Lord, I love to sing your praises. I'm so glad you're in my life. I'm so glad you came to save us. It may not be Isaac Watts or Fanny Crosby, but it simply and honestly praises Jesus. Do you actually believe that the intent or the effect of this song is to re-crucify Christ? Do you actually believe that the words violate some command or principle found anywhere in the Bible? Hank is right; we should stop "playing silly word games". All this huffing and puffing about a common English word that neither Jesus nor John ever spoke has gone way too far. The poor guy who made the mistake of separating John 12:32 from John 12:33 was thoroughly chastised in a different thread. The rest of this argument has been an exercise worthy of the Pharisees. So tell me, gentlemen, how many angels CAN dance on the head of pin? Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
85 | Kathy, Is "Lifting His name" Biblical? | John 12:32 | stjones | 104034 | ||
Hank and Searcher; Double posting is probably bad manners, but these comments are addressed to both of you. You guys really need to lighten up. In my church, we occasionally sing this litle chorus: Lord, I lift your name on high. Lord, I love to sing your praises. I'm so glad you're in my life. I'm so glad you came to save us. It may not be Isaac Watts or Fanny Crosby, but it simply and honestly praises Jesus. Do you actually believe that the intent or the effect of this song is to re-crucify Christ? Do you actually believe that the words violate some command or principle found anywhere in the Bible? Hank is right; we should stop "playing silly word games". All this huffing and puffing about a common English word that neither Jesus nor John ever spoke has gone way too far. The poor guy who made the mistake of separating John 12:32 from John 12:33 was thoroughly chastised in a different thread. The rest of this argument has been an exercise worthy of the Pharisees. So tell me, gentlemen, how many angels CAN dance on the head of pin? Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
86 | Kathy, Is "Lifting His name" Biblical? | John 12:32 | stjones | 104022 | ||
Ok, I get it. Interesting stuff; thanks. Still no mention of Maundy Wednesday or Good Thursday services in the Bible, though. So I still think that remembering the events of that night and the next day, acknowledging our own responsibility for them, and expressing our gratitude for Jesus' sacrifice - even if we have the days wrong and we've not been explicitly told to do it - pleases God. Likewise, exalting Jesus' name and calling the world's attention to him - whatever verb we choose to describe the practice - is probably pleasing as well. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
87 | Slain or knocked down | Eph 4:14 | stjones | 104020 | ||
C'mon, Hank; don't dance around it. What do you really think? Huckleberry Finn v. Benny Hinn! Thanks for a bedtime chuckle - and the wisdom within the humor. And to think I told someone in another thread that you can be grouchy sometimes. Can you ever forgive me? LOL - Indy |
||||||
88 | Kathy, Is "Lifting His name" Biblical? | John 12:32 | stjones | 103969 | ||
Um, well, hmmm; I'm pretty sure Scripture doesn't mention Good Thursday either. - Indy |
||||||
89 | Kathy, Is "Lifting His name" Biblical? | John 12:32 | stjones | 103968 | ||
You queried "are you and Ed working for the same firm?" Yep. You too. - Indy |
||||||
90 | THE MOST POWERFUL VERSE IN EVANGELISM | John 12:32 | stjones | 103961 | ||
Tim; You said: "Which is more important, spending hours proving someone is wrong in their understanding and you are right or telling someone that Jesus is alive and has paid the price for their sins." I don't think you'll get much argument about which is more important. But this is a Bible study forum, after all. "As iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another." (Proverbs 27:17) You don't learn anything when everybody in the room nods and agrees with you. When people disagree and show how God's word led them to their conclusion, you have something new to think about. God isn't double-minded. The question is not "who's right?"; the question is "what else has God said that can help resolve this paradox?" At the end of the day, we may know more about God's word and what it means. As a woodworker, I can tell you that sometimes when you sharpen iron, sparks fly, things get hot, and the iron occasionally loses its temper. To minimize the damage, everyone needs to approach the discussion with a humble heart and a measure of grace. A thick skin doesn't hurt either. I must confess that any forum old-timer who participated in the Great Evolution War or the Great Judas' Fate War can tell you that I don't always follow my own advice. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
91 | What is the most quoted verse in the Bib | Gen 1:1 | stjones | 103933 | ||
You're right. It's the way my own denomination is headed (though some of us have yanked on the emergency brake and grabbed for the wheel). - Indy |
||||||
92 | Kathy, Is "Lifting His name" Biblical? | John 12:32 | stjones | 103929 | ||
Hi, Searcher; Shucks; we can't seem to agree on anything. Maundy Thursday and Good Friday services aren't in Scripture either, but God examines the heart and I don't think he minds. It's hardly "forcing Scripture" to note that the reason we (some of us, anyway) lift up Jesus' name before the world is because he was lifted up on the cross. In fact, there's no other reason to do so. And it's the reason we must do so. The Bible doesn't claim an exclusive on ordinary words. For example, the Bible attaches special significance to the words "I am". That doesn't mean that I can't use the same words to answer the question "Who here is glad Jesus didn't come back 20 years ago?" I am; I'd have been in deep weeds - or tares if we must be strictly Biblical in all of our speech. ;-) So I'll just keep on lifting up Jesus' name in song. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
93 | What is the most quoted verse in the Bib | Gen 1:1 | stjones | 103926 | ||
Ed; That's scary. Maybe all the respondents were New Hampshire Episcopalians? (I hope that comment does not constitute "denominational bias".) Peace and grace, Steva aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
94 | THE MOST POWERFUL VERSE IN EVANGELISM | John 12:32 | stjones | 103924 | ||
Hi, Tim; I hope you won't think I'm piling on here. What I think these folks are telling you is that the interpretation you have attached to John 12:32 is different from the interpretation that John (inspired by the Holy Spirit) gave in the very next verse. Hank (who can be a little grouchy now and then) and others are simply following the example of the Bereans (Acts 17:11) and searching the Scriptures to see if what you say is true. I have to believe that the Holy Spirit inspired John to record the words that Jesus spoke in verse 32 and give the reason in verse 33. If you give a different reason, I have no choice but to conclude that your reason is wrong - not because Hank or I or anyone else on this forum says so but because the Bible says so. The Holy Spirit did not change his mind and reveal a different reason to anyone. That said, I would certainly agree that we are called to lift up ("raise" or "elevate") the name of Jesus before the world so that people can see him and be drawn to him. And it's also true that we would have no reason to lift up Jesus' name if he had not been bodily lifted up (crucified). But that was done once for all 2000 years ago and can never be done again (except in the sense of Hebrews 6:5-6). Also, there is nothing wrong with saying that the reason you feel led to evangelize is given in verse 32. After all, it is because he was lifted up on the cross that you and I and the rest of us are drawn to him in the first place. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones who, unlike Hank, is NEVER grouchy ;-) |
||||||
95 | How would you apply Deuteronomy 29:29? | Numbers | stjones | 103866 | ||
Greetings, Aixen7z4; Amen. I've enjoyed our dialogue. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
96 | The Forum Continues To Grow | Ps 119:105 | stjones | 103829 | ||
Why, thanks, Ma'am. You've been a welcome (and prolific!) addition to our little free-for-all. Indy |
||||||
97 | It isn't right to eat pig is it? | 1 Tim 4:4 | stjones | 103817 | ||
Greetings, wordoer; In Mark 7:18-19, Jesus specifically mentioned eating, not hand-washing. And he specifically said "all" foods, not ceremonially clean foods. He said these things twice (earlier in v. 14-15). Jesus drove home his point in v. 20-23: "What comes out of a man is what makes him 'unclean.' For from within, out of men's hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. All these evils come from inside and make a man 'unclean.'" Given Jesus' own explanation, it is clear that he talked about food - not hand-washing - because that's what he meant. Your reference to 1 Tim 4 was very helpful. Writing about false teachers, Paul said "They ... order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth. For everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, because it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer." (v. 3-5) Note the unqualified words "everything" and "nothing." The key is not what goes into the consumer's stomach but what was in his heart to begin with. This helps to put your objection to Makarios' use of 1 Cor 10:25-26 in context. Earlier (v. 18-21), Paul wrote about participating in both pagan feasts and the Lord's Table. His objection was not to the food but to the context: "the sacrifices of pagans are offered to demons, not to God, and I do not want you to be participants with demons." (v. 21) Paul then expands on this idea by first stating our freedom in Christ: "'Everything is permissible' - but not everything is beneficial. 'Everything is permissible' - but not everything is constructive. Nobody should seek his own good, but the good of others." (v. 23-24) It is in this context that he writes in verses 25-26 that there is no prohibition against specific foods. The food isn't the problem; the consumer's intent is the problem. In the next section, Paul returns to the subject of meat sacrificed to idols: "If some unbeliever invites you to a meal and you want to go, eat whatever is put before you without raising questions of conscience. But if anyone says to you, 'This has been offered in sacrifice,' then do not eat it, both for the sake of the man who told you and for conscience' sake - the other man's conscience, I mean, not yours...." (v. 27-29) Given what Paul wrote in 1 Tim 4:3-5, it is clear that it is the intent, not the species, that matters. The sacrificed meat is to be avoided because to eat it is would be to participate in the unbeliever's intent, that is "to be participants with demons". This may do no harm to the believer: "If I take part in the meal with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of something I thank God for?" (v. 30) But (closing the loop with v. 24) eating the meat and participating in the unbeliever's intent would work against "the good of others"; that is, it would encourage the other's unbelief and set a bad example for other believers. Add to this Peter's vision in Acts 10, and the message is very clear. Eating pork (or rattlesnake, or shrimp) can't make a believer unclean because there are no unclean foods. Jesus, Paul, and God himself speaking to Peter in his vision said so. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
98 | Explain the Holy Trinity-verysimple form | Numbers | stjones | 103801 | ||
Greetings, SQL; Interesting notion; one that Jesus himself (not to mention the entire OT) regularly contradicted. Methinks running SQL queries against Scripture is not the best way to study it. (inside computer-geek joke) Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
99 | It isn't right to eat pig is it? | 1 Tim 4:4 | stjones | 103799 | ||
I know; replying to oneself is bad form. I should have read Makarios' addedum - better yet, I should have looked up the passage and found the error myself. That's what I get for trying to knock out a quick reply. Oh, well; I too meant the passage in Mark. Or wherever it is. ;-) Indy |
||||||
100 | must be theologians? | Numbers | stjones | 103757 | ||
Greetings again; Thanks for both of your replies. I don't disagree with most of the substance of what you've said, though I might quibble with some words. So I'll reply to both here. I think the Trinity concept is confusing because terms such as "person", "being", and so on are not well-defined or are not well-suited to describing God. I assume that's the reason the term "Godhead" exists. The essential truth of the Trinity is the concept of three-in-one - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit - one God. Conventional speech seems to generally refer to the three as "persons"; they are, after all, distinct entities with their own characteristics. Whether one uses "being" or "Godhead" to refer to the one God seems to me to be not terribly important. I suspect that parts of this thread are about terminology, not doctrine. On the one hand, I think it may be disingenuous to suggest "What is God saying to us?" as a question one might seek to answer in the Bible. The question is so open-ended that the only realistic way to find an answer is to study the Bible! But on the other hand, you have identified the key qualifier for whether a Bible scholar is worth paying attention to. Modern Bible scholars (and theologians) are faced with three powerful incentives to not approach the Bible with that question in mind - "What is God saying to us?" First there ia a century-old tradition of studying the Bible in the same way one would study any other text. By seeking the motives and underlying thoughts of the authors of the text, the question becomes irrelevant, since the real author is not taken into account. Second, the more modern acadmeic cancer of deconstructionism encourages the scholar to approach the Bible with a different question in mind - "What can I find in here to support my position?" Finally, there is the problem of tenure. God may not provide the insight in time to get some articles written and published before the Tenure Committee meets. And no one ever got tenure by publishing an article that said "With regard to faith and works, Luther had it right". Finally, I don't think teaching stops at imparting skills. In my years as a teacher (computer science), I tried to develop my students' skills but I also tried to impart principles, higher-level abstractions, and even wisdom. "Abstraction" has gotten a bad name recently, even been equated to "irrelevance". But is only through the process of abstracting themes and principles in the Bible that we can understand what God's will might be for today's world. That's what a good theologian or teacher does. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [25] >> |