Results 81 - 100 of 173
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Stultis the Fool Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
81 | Commentator? | Is 14:16 | Stultis the Fool | 126953 | ||
When you say "commentator," how do you mean? Does our friend BarbaraC102 not fulfill the role of a "commentator" of the opinion this verse is speaking of Satan? | ||||||
82 | Out of curiosity? | Is 14:16 | Stultis the Fool | 126957 | ||
Out of curiosity, what is the importance of a "commentator" making agreement with the opinion in question? | ||||||
83 | Out of curiosity? | Is 14:16 | Stultis the Fool | 126962 | ||
I appologize, but you beg the question: If God is no respector of persons, and we are not to be a respector of persons, what does being "published" have to do with anything? Many people have published many things, but that most certainly does not guarantee the veracity of what they write. I will add that a fact should be established on the basis of two or three witnesses, and again, where two or three are gathered, there I am amongst you. Please understand, I am not trying to fight, but rather to gain some insight into your methodology. Do we both seem to be in agreement regarding the verse in question (Isaiah 14:16)? |
||||||
84 | The Real stature of Satan | Is 14:16 | Stultis the Fool | 126991 | ||
I certainly understand your explanation. However, I would like to point out that, in the event this is prophecy, the verses need not follow a "break," to change meaning from scripture at hand to prophecy. I believe that in every capacity this passage describes, as Isaiah intended, the King of Babylon. However, I get the impression that similar to other instances of Christ Prophecy in the Old Testament, the prophecy is incripted into the literal intent of the passage. Consider the example in Malachi 2:5 and 2:6. "My covenant with him was one of life and peace, and I gave them to him as an object of reverence; so he revered Me and stood in awe of My name. True instruction was in his mouth and unrighteousness was not found on his lips; he walked with Me in peace and uprightness, and he turned many back from iniquity." By context this passage is describing "Levi," but by implication is most certainly prophecy of the Christ. I suppose my point is this: a passage or particular verse need not be isolated in topic to be prophetic. Frequently it seems, the passage is written about something entirely unrelated. Just look to the Psalms. Anyway, I appreciate your time and thoughtfulness. Any idea why this thread is restricted. |
||||||
85 | What is this negative connotation? | Is 14:16 | Stultis the Fool | 127040 | ||
What is this negative connotation? | ||||||
86 | What does God say on blocking life? :) | Jer 1:5 | Stultis the Fool | 126236 | ||
That verse is a metaphorical comparison of the pure to impure. You will also notice that crippled individuals (even from birth) are not to enter the tent. The practical application of the Law, here, in Deuteronomy, is to express the absolute purety God demands of his chosen people. This is NOT a passage designed to condemn someone who has chosen to recieve a vasectomy, a tubal ligation, or, more contextually, a person who has been injured in there genitals. | ||||||
87 | searching for the truth | Matt 7:15 | Stultis the Fool | 126947 | ||
As best I can surmise, from the particular scriptures quoted, a "false prophet" is an individual who seeks to lead people away from "truth." The false prophets are described as kin to a wolf in sheeps clothing. This would seem to indicate that a false prophet will appear as anything seemingly benign by professing "truth." At this rate, they may well profess themselves as Christians. Fortuanately, we know a vine by its fruits, and we have the scriptures, as well as the Spirit. I hope this helps. | ||||||
88 | Who committs the unpardonable sin? | Matt 12:32 | Stultis the Fool | 128090 | ||
I believe that Both A and B are more than capable: Hebrews 10:26-31 "For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a terrifying expectation of judgment and THE FURY OF A FIRE WHICH WILL CONSUME THE ADVERSARIES. Anyone who has set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know Him who said, "VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY." And again, "THE LORD WILL JUDGE HIS PEOPLE." It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God." Also Hebrews 6:4-8 "For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame. For ground that drinks the rain which often falls on it and brings forth vegetation useful to those for whose sake it is also tilled, receives a blessing from God; but if it yields thorns and thistles, it is worthless and close to being cursed, and it ends up being burned." This matter, here pertaining to repetitious sacrifice, is concluded in Hebrews 9:27-28 "And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment, so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him." |
||||||
89 | What was this sin...? | Matt 12:32 | Stultis the Fool | 128204 | ||
Perhaps Hebrews 10:26-31 is a better refference (still contextually similar to the refference in Hebrews 6:4-6): "For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a terrifying expectation of judgment and THE FURY OF A FIRE WHICH WILL CONSUME THE ADVERSARIES. Anyone who has set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know Him who said, "VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY." And again, "THE LORD WILL JUDGE HIS PEOPLE. It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God." Consider specifically the final result of the course of sin defined in verse 29: "How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace?" Can there be any denying that the author of this passage ultimately refers to the Holy Spirit when he writes the phrase "Spirit of grace?" Based on the full passage, can there be any denying that the sin perpetrated here is unpardonable? According to the passages in Matthew, blasphemy is only "unpardonable" regarding the Holy Spirit. This passage directly refers to "insulting" the Spirit. I cannot imagine what deed the Pharisees may have performed in Matthew 12:24 that was not a direct insult to the Spirit. Now I ask: What is the answere to the question you posed, "What was this sin...?" in your previous post. |
||||||
90 | Is this an adequate description? | Matt 12:32 | Stultis the Fool | 128207 | ||
tgc, you wrote: "Yes I am one who belives in the eternal security of the beliver but more than that I firmly belive the unpardonable sin is to reject what Christ did for us on the cross. This is the ultimate blashemy of the Holy Spirit rejecting the conviction He puts on ones heart and rejecting Christ payment for ones sins." Do you feel that the following verse is an adequate description of rejecting "what Christ did for us on the cross?": "How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace?" [Hebrews 10:29] |
||||||
91 | tgc will reply to this question? | Matt 12:32 | Stultis the Fool | 128306 | ||
New Creature, thank you for the reply! I am also hoping "tgc" will reply to this question, so I am going to post it again here: tgc, you wrote: "Yes I am one who belives in the eternal security of the beliver but more than that I firmly belive the unpardonable sin is to reject what Christ did for us on the cross. This is the ultimate blashemy of the Holy Spirit rejecting the conviction He puts on ones heart and rejecting Christ payment for ones sins." Do you feel that the following verse is an adequate description of rejecting "what Christ did for us on the cross?": "How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace?" [Hebrews 10:29] |
||||||
92 | Your thoughts? | Matt 12:32 | Stultis the Fool | 128330 | ||
You wrote: "On the surface that verse (Heb 10:29) is an adequate description. But it begs the question: To whom does it rightly apply? Since the context of both Matt 12:32 and Heb 10:29 are speaking of unbelievers, it must only be unbelievers that would do such a thing." Actually, Hebrews 10:29 is part of a disertation to believers promoting the idea of assembling together: Hebrews 10:23-31 "Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful; and let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds, not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near. For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a terrifying expectation of judgment and THE FURY OF A FIRE WHICH WILL CONSUME THE ADVERSARIES. Anyone who has set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know Him who said, "VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY." And again, "THE LORD WILL JUDGE HIS PEOPLE." It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God." Matthew 12:32, by direct indication, is speaking to everyone and anyone, though it is the Pharisees that prompt the rebuke: "Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come." Take notice that Christ's words declare "WHOEVER." Additionally, though based on Christ's usage of the word "whoever" it is unneccesary to do so, I would put forth that the Pharisees, while not (to use popular nomenclature) "regenerate" believers, knew good and well just who they were speaking to. Your thoughts? |
||||||
93 | Your thoughts? | Matt 12:32 | Stultis the Fool | 128331 | ||
tgc, I am pleased you chose to respond! You wrote: "Good Afternoon Stultis, I am glad to see I was missed last night...LOL. In answer to your question I belive that Steve has done an excellent job in his post and the only thing I would add is especially in the Matthew passage 12:32 if you back up to verse 22 and read foward to verse 32 and consider the context that only an unbeliver will fit." Thus I will post to you the same response I provided for Steve. Steve Wrote: "On the surface that verse (Heb 10:29) is an adequate description. But it begs the question: To whom does it rightly apply? Since the context of both Matt 12:32 and Heb 10:29 are speaking of unbelievers, it must only be unbelievers that would do such a thing." Actually, Hebrews 10:29 is part of a disertation to believers promoting the idea of assembling together: Hebrews 10:23-31 "Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful; and let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds, not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near. For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a terrifying expectation of judgment and THE FURY OF A FIRE WHICH WILL CONSUME THE ADVERSARIES. Anyone who has set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know Him who said, "VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY." And again, "THE LORD WILL JUDGE HIS PEOPLE." It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God." Matthew 12:32, by direct indication, is speaking to everyone and anyone, though it is the Pharisees that prompt the rebuke: "Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come." Take notice that Christ's words declare "WHOEVER." Additionally, though based on Christ's usage of the word "whoever" it is unneccesary to do so, I would put forth that the Pharisees, while not (to use popular nomenclature) "regenerate" believers, knew good and well just who they were speaking to. I look forward to your response! Your thoughts? |
||||||
94 | Can God create a rock soo big? | Matt 17:20 | Stultis the Fool | 127181 | ||
Perhaps another question is more appropriate. The insinuation behind the question, "Can God create a rock so big, even he can't lift it?" is another question: "Can God contradict himself?" I put forth that the scripture that answers this question is Hebrews 13:8 "Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever." |
||||||
95 | should I avoid the appearance of evil? | Matt 18:6 | Stultis the Fool | 126452 | ||
I understand quite well the argument that The-minor is putting forth. The scriptures he is quoting denote that the act of intercourse is a consumation placing both participants in a state of marriage. See 1 Crinthians 6:16: "Or do you not know that the one who joins himself to a harlot is ONE BODY with her? For it says, "THE TWO WILL BECOME ONE FLESH."" The exact act here (between a person and a harlot), is illicit sexual intercourse (fornication between an individual and a prostitute, as Theo-minor previously defined). The result, as Paul adequately describes, is marriage. There are no vows, no passing of rings, no preacher, friends, family, bridesmaids, etc. Just a person, a prostitute, and the Lord. The bible, in no place, prescribes the tradition of marriage (exchange of rings, marriage vows, etc.) that we have today. Marriage, while it is manifested publically, is a union between a man and a woman, and not between those two and any other person. I challenge you to produce scripture that displays the modern marriage ceremony as neccessary to facilitate "marriage". You will find no such scripture. All two people need to be "married", in my opinion, based on what is or is not found in the scriptures, is a WILLINGNESS to be married. Nowhere does the scripture require pomp and circumstance or ceremony. However, I do not denegrate the modern marriage ceremony of a purpose, and gladly suggest that a marriage ceremony, a reception, preacher, vows, etc. are a fine thing and I add that there is no wrongdoing in the participation in such festivities. However, we must not enforce what is a tradition of men where it contradicts the teachings of God. Those two people, engaged and living together (assuming they are engaged in intercourse), by Biblical example (the words of Paul in 1 Corinthians 6:15-16, Gen 2:23-24, Gen 38:9, Deut 21:13, Deut 25:5], are as married as I am to my wife, you are to your wife, George W. Bush is to his wife, Augustus Caeser was to Livia, Joseph was to Mary, etc. You wrote: "When some one comes to be baptized they are saying I have repented, and turned away from sin, and want to follow Jesus and His instructions." Are you suggesting that two people, husband and wife, are to repent of foregoing a public marriage ceremony? You wrote: "Marriage is not mans standard of tradition, but is the standard the Lord has made,..." I agree, so why do we place our standards above the Lord's (as described in the passages above)? You wrote: "...it is not only sin in mans eyes, but is by Gods standard, Hebrews 13:4." Here you quote "Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled..." [Hebrew 13:4 partial]. Do you suggest that we do not honor the union God has made? Or do you not know, "that the one who joins himself to a harlot is ONE BODY with her? For it says, "THE TWO WILL BECOME ONE FLESH."" [1 Corinthians 6:16]. Finally, I insist that you retract your "Catfish" accusations. They are juvenile and horrible, and not at all the behavior I expect from one forum member to the next. If Theo-minor is wrong, and you seek to prove such, do it with scripture or humble opinion, and keep your insults to yourself. If you wish to rebuke him, use God's words [Jude verse 9], and, I insist, avoid insults. |
||||||
96 | should I avoid the appearance of evil? | Matt 18:6 | Stultis the Fool | 126456 | ||
I call myself Stultis because I am a fan of Charles Darwin (though I do not subscribe to modern Darwinism, or any other "Darwinism" for that matter), and his research. "Stultis the Fool" was Darwin's pen name amongst his friends, and I in no way quantify myself with any ancient or popular mythology regarding the name or persons of "Stultis". I am just a fan of Charles Darwin. I hope this helps! | ||||||
97 | should I avoid the appearance of evil? | Matt 18:6 | Stultis the Fool | 126461 | ||
I would like to add that my posts to this subject do NOT advocate the taking of the union of marriage lightly... On the other hand, I certainly imply that we do not take seriously enough the act of intercourse. Here it is dismissed as sin quite casually, but I believe the scriptures show that the implications of the act are much more far-reaching then some would like to admit. | ||||||
98 | Am I wrong? | Matt 18:6 | Stultis the Fool | 126463 | ||
Hank... Interesting methodology. Is this how everyone who is presumed wrong is taught the truth? I am re-posting a reply I made to another part of this thread, and adding a couple questions: "I would like to add that my posts to this subject do NOT advocate the taking of the union of marriage lightly... On the other hand, I certainly imply that we do not take seriously enough the act of intercourse. Here it is dismissed as sin quite casually, but I believe the scriptures show that the implications of the act are much more far-reaching then some would like to admit." I assume you can refute what is being posted here with some form of specific scripture. Am I wrong? |
||||||
99 | Is my assessment of them wrong? | Matt 18:6 | Stultis the Fool | 126468 | ||
I am amazed at the lack of concern dedicated to this topic. If Theo-minor is wrong, why is he not being refuted with sound, contrary scripture? I am asking, are Pauls words in 1 Corinthians 6:16 incorrect? Is my assessment of them wrong? Silencing this topic will not help those who are incorrect reach any amount of understanding, nor does it address the issue in question. |
||||||
100 | Is my assessment of them wrong? | Matt 18:6 | Stultis the Fool | 126470 | ||
Where does the scripture (not a dictionary's definition of "fornication") state that sex outside of marriage is a sin? | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [9] >> |