Results 81 - 100 of 1260
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: charis Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
81 | Does God have free will? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 6011 | ||
Dear Cephas, Your last statement was "God does not have free will in the way we have." It's like putting the cart in front of the horse. It wil move, but not very well. The sin that we have does not let us enjoy the freedom from sin that is an attribute of God. What if the answer was "No"? Does it feel better? Does it make sense? Does it strengthen your faith? Does it encourage believers and unbelievers? What if the answer was "Yes"? Does it feel better? Does it make sense? Does it strengthen your faith? Does it encourage believers and unbelievers? Philosophical questions can have merit. This particular question defies merit. (and maybe God, too.) Finally, are you so sure that you have as much free will as you assume? That you can 'choose to do good or evil' to the extent that God does not enter in as a variable? I, too, believe in the limited free will of man, but have found that God can supersede our will at any time He wishes. (unless, of course, you are one that has succeeded in blaspheming the Holy Spirit) And Praise be to the Lord that this is so! Bless you, dear Cephas, to get your answer. Then, move on, for there are a lot more important things to dwell on. In Jesus, charis |
||||||
82 | Please help. Post your comments. | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 6012 | ||
Dear EdB, I know it's good to vent, but... At least I know that I wasn't the culprit that red-flagged orthodoxy :-) I hope my advice to others was not ungodly and from the pit of hell. I pray that my motives were not an effort to esteem myself above others by making others look like fools. I still think that this is the best Christian forum I have seen. Full disclosure of voters defeats the purpose of secret ballot. Where questions are allowed, advice will be solicited. Advice from hell will probably be obvious to most of this audience. I suppose a lot of us are 'wannabe scholars.' Even the fellows with (or seeking) acronyms and abbreviations after their names :-) Then again, I trust that most want to serve God and His people by participating in this forum. Peace upon you, friend, in the name of Jesus, charis |
||||||
83 | What is the point of the flags? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 6047 | ||
Dear EdB, I guess the point is that Lockman has made available a means of expressing our feelings toward a thread of postings or an individual's opinions. After all, only one vote (per posting) was cast, and look at how easy it was to change the color with another vote :-) Some people are impervious to confrontation, some dread it. You and orthodoxy are still free to continue your thread, nobody is stopping you. We have been given the choice of replying or not, reading or not, and voting or not, none of which take away the privilege of others. Peace and blessings in Jesus' name, charis |
||||||
84 | Biblical support for animals in heaven? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 6056 | ||
Dear prayon, I think there is Biblical argument for animals in the future kingdom of God. It is a bit harder to clearly justify personal pets. But, sitting in front of my PC (Sorry, not a Mac) with my Papillon, Sophie, faithfully warming my lap, it is hard to exclude them :-) "Heaven goes by favour. If it went by merit, you would stay out and your dog would go in."—Mark Twain "I care not for a man’s religion whose dog and cat are not the better for it."—Abraham Lincoln Before you all jump on me, I know that this is a Bible forum. I also know that the people that are the most outraged don't have pets :-) Blessings in Christ Jesus, charis |
||||||
85 | Does God have free will? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 6069 | ||
Dear Cephas, I am very sorry if my English is strange. I share my communicative skills with another language, so maybe I get fuzzy at times. Please know that I was not saying that you, personally, are blaspheming the Holy Spirit. Allow me to explain myself: Please take out my parenthesis, (unless, of course, you are one that has succeeded in blaspheming the Holy Spirit). This side-thought was meant to say that if you, or anyone else, has succeeded in blaspheming the Holy Spirit, then maybe God will not supersede your will. i.e. you have declared yourself outside of his love and care. I, personally, believe it is difficult to blaspheme the Holy Spirit, thus the word 'succeeded.' Now look at my sentence below without this parenthesis, and 'Praise the Lord' should make sense, meaning that it is a good thing that the Lord can save us from the foolishness of man. "Finally, are you so sure that you have as much free will as you assume? That you can 'choose to do good or evil' to the extent that God does not enter in as a variable? I, too, believe in the limited free will of man, but have found that God can supersede our will at any time He wishes. And Praise be to the Lord that this is so!" Cephas, I truly have no intention of offending you. Please don't be so quick to think you are under attack. I really would like to know why you dwell on philosophically 'proving' God's sovereignty. Again, I ask: What if the answer was "No, God has no free will"? Does it feel better? Does it make sense? Does it strengthen your faith? Does it encourage believers and unbelievers? This was my point, with no subtle barbs. Peace upon you in Jesus' name, charis |
||||||
86 | Does God have free will? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 6070 | ||
Dear Lionstrong, For the most part I agree with you. Seeing that you addressed many of my comments in this posting, I would like to clarify my statements. I still think that the question, "Does God have free will" is a philosophical conundrum. If this were truly the study of God, then His Holy attributes would be recognized as such, not questioned or doubted. It is similar to "Is there a God?" Now, as a Christian, we define God as holy, almighty, righteous, sovereign, and yes, good. We are not talking about gods, who are notoriously similar to man. So, I do believe that the question is a philosophical one, asking about the (not accepted) attributes of God. My term, 'limited free will' is indeed ambiguous. For this I apologize. I meant by it that I don't think that God 'micro-manages' our lives. I believe that His intrinsic knowledge of the future gives Him the ability to send His angels to intervene at any moment. I doubt if He has to constantly monitor our choice of peanut butter or the like. (Though, I am sure He is able to do so if He so chooses) Please, let us not get involved in a discussion of time paradox :-) As I said earlier, I agree with most of your posting. In Christ Jesus, charis |
||||||
87 | Are you serious? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 6072 | ||
Dear Cephas, Do you seriously believe that Jesus and the Father could have separate wills? The implications of your thinking that are not very good. As to the hypothetical implications, what if...? Then the Trinity would be three Gods, or at least two, not an acceptable speculation. This would indicate doubt about the fundamental nature of the Lord God of the Bible. It would also bring us back to a fruitless argument. Peace to you in Jesus' name, charis |
||||||
88 | Is infant baptism Biblical? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 6079 | ||
Dear orthodoxy, Indeed, 'household' does appear to mean every member of the house, including slaves, also their menagerie, and the utensils. But you are still assuming the presence of children, and assuming that the people of those times did not require faith to be a part of a holy rite, but neither of these has any Biblical proof, one way or the other. As to evidence that the church has been baptizing for 1850 years, we have no such proof that all churches did so, or that this was approved by God. Even so, 150 AD is not good enough. When we ask if infant baptism is Biblical, we use the Bible as the source of the answer. Otherwise, the question becomes, "Is infant baptism traditional?" The answer to this one is 'Yes.' How many complete copies of the New Testament we have from when is irrelevant. (Just ask Josh McDowell :-) The original question was from a sincere believer seeking the opinions of this forum, but moreover seeking the leading of the Holy Spirit. I did not ridicule his baptism as a baby, or say it was meaningless or based on heretical teaching. I simply pointed out that the Bible should be the source of his decision. I still pray that he is baptized (if he so chooses) in accordance with the leading of the Spirit, not in accord with his church's tradition. Orthodoxy, I do not ridicule your opinion, I just prefer my understanding of Scripture, praying before God that it may be acceptable to Him. Blessings in Jesus' name, charis |
||||||
89 | 'Gaijins' have nothing better to do? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 6113 | ||
Dear Lionstrong, Coming from a Buddhist faith, I was taught that Christians are divisive, argumentative, unwise, and lack faith, and that the Christian God is unfair, unfeeling, unnaturally divided Himself, and arrogant to boast of all creation. (I now know that the perception about God is totally wrong, but the perception about His people is mostly right :-) Trust, friend, I have very carefully considered this, and many other possible Christian conundrums, and continue to consider them as I try to preach and portray the Gospel of faith to the nation of Japan. Getting into a philosophical discussion with the typical Oriental athiest or nominal-Buddhist is a waste of time. I guess those that live in 'primarily Judeo-Christian' environments have nothing better to do? The conclusion of my consideration is to come to a simple, foundational understanding of God's will (the Good News), believe (receive the gift of faith), and walk it out in the leading of the Holy Spirit. Yes, there are a few verses that 'seem' to say something significantly different or controversial, but the balance of Scripture is so overwhelmingly in favor of a good God, a sovereign God, an all-knowing God, one God of three Persons (Japanese - 'Ranks'), that I do not see any edification in speculating about 'twists' in His holy nature or attributes. Frankly, I sometimes wonder which is the more 'inscrutable,' the Oriental, or the 'Gaijin' Westerner :-) The 'rest of the world' seems to have a pretty good handle on the problems of Christians. I only wish we could see things as clear as they do, and clean up (simplify) our act. Blessings in Jesus' name, charis |
||||||
90 | Scripture, please? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 6127 | ||
Dear EMD, Greetings and welcome to this forum. I am not sure I understand your reasons for saying that infants will join believers in the first resurrection (unto life). What is your Bible reference to teach us this? Truly, I would hope that this is true, as I hope for salvation for all the lost. One more thing. If you don't mind, would you not use all caps in your posting, please? It is difficult to read, and according to internet convention, denotes shouting. Thanks. In Christ Jesus, charis |
||||||
91 | 'Gaijins' have nothing better to do? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 6131 | ||
Dear Lionstrong, "Would you share it with us?" ? You are right, Lionstrong, I have already given thoughtful answers on this thread, and I weary of it. Don't you have anything better to do than chase your tail? That is what a philosophical conundrum is all about. If you read carefully my above posting, you will see that I very clearly state my conclusions, and my Scriptural references are available by just doing a search on the user name 'charis' Blessings in Jesus' name, charis |
||||||
92 | Scripture, please? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 6193 | ||
Dear jim, Indeed, I Corinthians 7:14 gives hope to all believing parents. Can you find any Scripture reference that might speak of the same hope for the children of the unsaved? Though Luke 18 is often quoted, the context either speaks of parents with faith for children (vs 15) or of believer's faith being 'as a child' (vs 17). I know this is an emotional issue, and I am not trying to be cold-hearted, just true to the Word. Blessings in Christ Jesus, charis |
||||||
93 | Judgment of Infants? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 6196 | ||
Dear Nehemiah, Though Luke 18 is often quoted, the context either speaks of parents bringing their children to Jesus in faith(vs 15) or of a believer's faith to 'be as a child' (vs 17). I Corinthians 7:14 gives hope to all believing parents, even if it is only one believer. Do you know of any Scripture reference that might speak of salvation for the children of the unsaved? I know this can be an emotional issue, and I am not trying to be cold-hearted or cruel. The Bible seems to say that we are by nature children of wrath, and that Adam's sin caused all to be born in sin. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." John 3:6 NASB Thank you for your answer. In Jesus' name, charis |
||||||
94 | Judgment of Infants? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 6264 | ||
Dear Nehemiah, I am truly sorry you think I am cold. I very clearly stated, and very strongly believe that the children of (a) believing parent(s) are under a covering provided by the Lord Jesus in I Corinthians 7:14. I also believe that we are saved by grace through faith (Ephesians 2:8), and that God's grace is poured upon whomever He chooses. Please, dear friend, do not jump to conclusions, charging me with assigning 'innocent little babies to hell.' This is not my motive, at all. I have before me a MacArthur Study Bible, a Ryrie Study Bible, a Holman Master Study Bible, a 23-volume Pulpit Commentary and a modest number of Bibles, Bible Dictionaries, and Concordances. (I'm sorry, but I am not a scholar, learned in Greek or Hebrew) Many give opinions one way or the other, but not one has given me a clear, Scriptural mandate that the children of the unsaved are saved. Most agree that all are conceived under the inherited guilt and moral corruption of Adam's sin. Some say they are not culpable or blameworthy, some say they are. This is a Study Bible Forum, and I am asking this august body to consider this question and use the Bible to help me understand. Is this unreasonable? By *assuming* innocence of all children, we open the door to absolve others of 'original sin.' The 'moral incompetents' and 'the abused' and 'the hurt,' thereby exonerating just about anyone with a sad past. Another would be those that 'had no opportunity to know Jesus, even as adults.' My point is that we do not have the ability to know who is saved, except within the realm of our personal lives. (even there, only God knows in the absolute sense) We are to portray the Good News to the lost, in order that they may know Jesus. If I can do this, then these lost and their children can be found in the Lord, by His grace. Nehemiah, I want everyone saved! Not just 'innocents,' but sinners, too. But I cannot save them with my feelings. I preach the Gospel, I reach out to my neighbor, I lift up Jesus in my home, I pray earnestly, and I study and hear His Word. This is what we are told to do, right? Please don't think me an ogre :-) I assure you I am not unfeeling, and if you knew me you would know this. I live in a place that is over 99 percent non-Christian, serving the Lord hoping that He might save many. My heart breaks every time I walk out my door! Please don't accuse me of being cold. In Christ Jesus, charis |
||||||
95 | Babies in heaven when they die? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 6277 | ||
Dear JVH0212, Blessings upon you dear brother, for making the most Biblical statement thus far. (including mine) I agree that "We can be assured that God will do what is right and loving because He is the standard of rightness and love." I, personally, would have to stop at this point. Your final statement, " Yes, and therefore it is a credible assumption that a child who dies at an age too young to have made a conscious, willful rejection of Jesus Christ will be taken to be with the Lord." speaks of a 'credible assumption,' an admirable and honest summation. Thank you for a great answer. In Jesus' name, charis |
||||||
96 | NAS like the NWT??? I HOPE NOT! | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 7110 | ||
Dear roverjbh99, Where did you see this chart? That sounds ridiculous! Please do not put your NASB down, as it is widely considered to be one of the most accurate English Bibles available. (In my opinion, THE most accurate) Could it be that the JWs or Mormons made this chart? You know da kine, eh? Aloha in Christ Jesus, charis |
||||||
97 | Please help. Post your comments. | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 7185 | ||
AMEN! charis |
||||||
98 | NAS like the NWT??? I HOPE NOT! | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 7192 | ||
Dear roverjbh99, I went the link you posted, and am relieved to know that the authors of this chart are not JW or Mormon. In a way, it's worse that Bible-believing Christians can come up with yet another divisive bigotry- 'Bible Version Superiority.' These people are just another type of religious extremism, this time focusing on relatively unimportant things, and making them into a 'big deal.' I am convinced that these 'differences' that they point our are not primary, and hardly even rate secondary status. Whatever these 'KJV-is-authorized-by-God' fanatics say, the NASB is still one of the most accurate English translations of the Word. I have 23 Bibles in 11 versions, and use the KJV often. I can find no reason to call it superior, except maybe in a 'poetic' sense. The KJV is beautiful. The down-side is that few people can truly appreciate this 'poetic' beauty, and in fact makes understanding God's Word more obscure and remote to many. This does not further the spreading of the Good News of Christ Jesus. As a Christian matures, he will want to study the Bible, and certainly would want to have a KJV in his library. But to assign 'superior' or 'only' status to this translation is folly. Blessings to you, 'braddah,' in Jesus' name, charis |
||||||
99 | Will we see God's face? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 7228 | ||
Dear JVH0212, I believe that we will see Him face to face one day! "...but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away... For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I shall know fully just as I also have been fully known." 1 Corinthians 13:10-12 NASB. (I am aware that this may not be a direct reference to meeting our Lord, but one might want to capitalize 'Perfect' (Ray, take note!) in order to understand the things to come. Obviously, we have not experienced the 'perfect' anything, yet.) "Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we shall be. We know that, when He appears, we shall be like Him, because we shall see Him just as He is." 1 John 3:2 NASB. As Nolan pointed out, "No longer will we be 'imprisoned' by this body of sin that we dwell in, but Christ will be exalted!" In us! Amen! In Jesus' name, charis |
||||||
100 | Is Hollywood biblically accurate? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 7242 | ||
Dear Nolan, You actually asked two questions. 1) Is Hollywood faithful to the Bible? No. Generally speaking, Hollywood is more concerned with making money by satisfying the majority's perceived notions of the Bible, and not offending anyone, no matter how perverted they are, than being faithful to the teaching of the Word of God. 2) Is it possible to do so? Yes. There are a few Christian movies that place more emphasis on the convictions of faith than making money or a 'poll-approved' movie. Can 'Hollywood' do this? I seriously doubt it. The director and-or producer would be considered a renegade and 'heretic' for choosing faith over mammon. Finally, the definition of 'accurate' would be subject of the whims of many. This forum is (unfortunately) an excellent example of the division of opinion among Christians. You may like one of the above movies, but another may consider it an abomination. On your 'questionable' list, another might consider a movie 'valid artistic representation.' :-) Good question with a volatile answer. In Jesus' name, charis |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [63] >> |