The Lockman Foundation - Translator of the NASB, Amplified, LBLA, and NBLH Bibles (via Mowser)

Español

Bible Questions and Answers from StudyBibleForum.com

Results 1 - 10 of 3029 Type Verse Author Date (E.T.)

1 Where the priest impatient and greedy? Answer 1 Sam 2:13 skccab Fri 07/25/08, 2:45pm

Shalom remorse2
Verse 12 of that chapter tells you that they (Eli's sons) were corrupt and did not know the Lord. I don't think that their procedure was customary, that is why the worshippers would object (as in verse 16).

My 2cents worth
Cheri

2 Rejection means never knew? Answer Eph 4:3 hopalong Fri 07/25/08, 1:29pm

Are you asking me to reconcile John 6:39 with 2 Peter 2:18-22?

If so, please point out for me where I have erred.
Thanks,

Hoppy

3 Any elders in Corinth? Note 1 Cor 1:1 Thomas8 Fri 07/25/08, 1:24pm

Hi Steve,

Any ideas why there are no elders? Considering the problems in Corinth how would they have affected the situation? Was Corinthians written before the establishment of elderships?

Any speculation invited. We might not know but I'm certainly wondering about this.

4 Rejection means never knew? Note Eph 4:3 stjohn Fri 07/25/08, 1:17pm

HI Andy... I think we can safely assume that, Judas Iscariot knew Jesus Christ more intimately then the false prophets that Peter was warning us about. He knew the truth very well indeed. Would you say he had been born again to salvation and then rejected it? Or did he just profess to know the truth? Those false prophets probably never knew the truth past their heads, and it never really got to their hearts where it could have done some good. I think I'd have to say they were never really saved. There is far to much Scripture to show us this is the case. It would be hard to hold up under the, Whole counsel of Scripture, that they lost their Salvation. Once you are born again, you are indeed born again.
sólamente mi dos centavos,
(Just my two cents)
John

5 Rejection means never knew? Note Eph 4:3 hopalong Fri 07/25/08, 1:16pm

Thank you for your service to God and Country!
My nephhew left for basic training yesterday. We love you guys and gals and pray for your saftey and the success of your mission.

Matt 7:15 "Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves.
Matt 7:16 "You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they

HOPPY

6 Rejection means never knew? Note Eph 4:3 ChildofGod1988 Fri 07/25/08, 12:46pm

2 Pet 2:18 For speaking out arrogant words of vanity they entice by fleshly desires, by sensuality, those who barely escape from the ones who live in error,

2 Pet 2:19 promising them freedom while they themselves are slaves of corruption; for by what a man is overcome, by this he is enslaved.

2 Pet 2:20 For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first.

2 Pet 2:21 For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment handed on to them.

I reread the verse and it still seems to me that the author is referring to those purveyors of false doctrine, as well as believers in these doctrines who have left the true One. I also looked up the definition of the word know

1:be aware of the truth of something; have a belief or faith in something; regard as true beyond any doubt
2:be familiar or acquainted with a person or an object
When the bible says that they had "known the way of righteousness," it means they had an intimate knowledge of it. At least that is what I think.
I am still very interested in your response sir, and please know that I take your opinion very seriously. Thanks for your time, God bless!!!

CoG88 (andy)

7 Rejection means never knew? Answer Eph 4:3 humbledbyhisgrace Fri 07/25/08, 12:16pm

Greetings CG!,

It is indeed an interesting passage!

First, in regards to your statement " I disagree that "Those who reject their salvation were never born again to begin with."For one simple reason. Only God truly knows the heart, to say you do is wrong and untrue."

It is true only God and the person knows! This same truth also discounts your argument on the matter does it not? If no one knows then no one knows if they were or were not. Understand? I understand what you are saying here. But discounting the argument as you did and then using the same to validate another view is error also is it not?

Looking on to the passage you say "It CLEARLY intimates, that these false teachers knew the way (Know means that they personally knew, intimately)."

I'm not so sure it "CLEARLY intimates" what you are attributing to the false teachers. Taking a closer look at the passage could you explain the following.

1) Is verse 20 and 21 talking about the false teachers or is it talking about "those who barely escape from the ones who live in error" in verse 18?

2) Verse 19 seems to "CLEARLY" reveal the false teachers are "slaves of corruption".

Also, where in this passage do you understand the false teachers "personally knew, intimately"? Even more, where in this chapter do you understand the false teachers "personally knew, intimately"?

Steve

8 Who constitutes the church? Note Eph 4:3 hopalong Fri 07/25/08, 10:56am

Hi Tim,

Although the church generally agreed that Pelagius' teachings were not correct, Augustine's teachings were not universally accepted either. Whereas Pelagius was condemned for being too positive in his views concerning human nature, Augustine was said by some to be too negative.

Vitalis of Carthage and a community of monks at Hadrumetum, Africa (about 427 A.D.), contested some of Augustine's principles, asserting that they destroyed freedom of the will and all moral responsibility. The issue became heated in the fifth century when some monks in southern Gaul, led by John Cassian, joined in the controversy. These men objected to a number of points in the Augustinian doctrine of sin and grace, namely, the assertion of the total bondage of the will, of the priority and irresistibility of grace, and of rigid predestination. Hence a compromise was sought, leading to what later became known as "Semi-Pelagianism." On three primary points of issue, Semi-Pelagianism settled for the following positions:

1.Human nature is neither good nor bad, but injured. Just as an injured person can't quite do whatever he'd like to do, so likewise because of original sin, man's moral abilities became restricted. His free will remained, but was weakened by the Fall. Man, then, can still decide to seek and receive help.

2.Man's need for grace: Although Semi-Pelagianism believes in man's need for God's grace (for man is too weak to help himself), man by his own free will is able to decide whether he wants God's grace. Whereas Pelagius taught that salvation is totally man's own doing, and Augustine taught that salvation is totally from God, Semi-Pelagianism teaches that salvation is a combination of the efforts of both man and God. According to Semi-Pelagianism, salvation is accomplished when man decides to co-operate with God and accepts the grace God offers him. This is often viewed as a synergistic concept of salvation.

3.God's sovereignty: Semi-Pelagianism essentially maintains that the sovereignty of God is limited by man's decision to co-operate with God or not. God's gospel of salvation in Christ can be rejected by man and so return to God empty. Though God may wish to save someone, He can only do so if that person chooses to accept it and cooperate with grace.
Over the course of time, Semi-Pelagian doctrine (although couched in terms of grace) became the dominant theological perspective of the Roman Catholic Church, and essentially remains so today.
(theopedia)

I hope that the above will be helpful in our defining our terms

Hoppy

9 Who constitutes the church? Note Eph 4:3 hopalong Fri 07/25/08, 10:46am

Hi Tim,

Although the church generally agreed that Pelagius' teachings were not correct, Augustine's teachings were not universally accepted either. Whereas Pelagius was condemned for being too positive in his views concerning human nature, Augustine was said by some to be too negative.

Vitalis of Carthage and a community of monks at Hadrumetum, Africa (about 427 A.D.), contested some of Augustine's principles, asserting that they destroyed freedom of the will and all moral responsibility. The issue became heated in the fifth century when some monks in southern Gaul, led by John Cassian, joined in the controversy. These men objected to a number of points in the Augustinian doctrine of sin and grace, namely, the assertion of the total bondage of the will, of the priority and irresistibility of grace, and of rigid predestination. Hence a compromise was sought, leading to what later became known as "Semi-Pelagianism." On three primary points of issue, Semi-Pelagianism settled for the following positions:

Human nature is neither good nor bad, but injured. Just as an injured person can't quite do whatever he'd like to do, so likewise because of original sin, man's moral abilities became restricted. His free will remained, but was weakened by the Fall. Man, then, can still decide to seek and receive help.
Man's need for grace: Although Semi-Pelagianism believes in man's need for God's grace (for man is too weak to help himself), man by his own free will is able to decide whether he wants God's grace. Whereas Pelagius taught that salvation is totally man's own doing, and Augustine taught that salvation is totally from God, Semi-Pelagianism teaches that salvation is a combination of the efforts of both man and God. According to Semi-Pelagianism, salvation is accomplished when man decides to co-operate with God and accepts the grace God offers him. This is often viewed as a synergistic concept of salvation.
God's sovereignty: Semi-Pelagianism essentially maintains that the sovereignty of God is limited by man's decision to co-operate with God or not. God's gospel of salvation in Christ can be rejected by man and so return to God empty. Though God may wish to save someone, He can only do so if that person chooses to accept it and cooperate with grace.
Over the course of time, Semi-Pelagian doctrine (although couched in terms of grace) became the dominant theological perspective of the Roman Catholic Church, and essentially remains so today.
(theopedia)

I hope that the above will be helpful in our definations.

Hoppy

10 They had the knowledge of God Answer Matt 5:20 stoneslinger Fri 07/25/08, 9:10am

The reason they were hippocrites in my opinion is this: where you treasure is their your heart will also be. Their hearts were obviously very far from God. That is because they did not treasure Him. They only used Him as a way manipulate people and get power. Their whole reason for being as they were was because they were prideful, the pride forced them to believe that they deserved this kind of attention and power. Hippocrites for the fact that they kept other people from entering the narrow gate (from gross misrepresentation of the law) and yet did not enter themselves as stated by Jesus.

Pride is the key "demon" here. This is the beginning of all sin. It is not the one we want to mess with. Think of the glory that Lucifer once reflected and that one sin caused the fall of one third of the angels. Pride is also a heart hardening agent (we see this in Pharaoh). This simply means that when the Spirit of Truth speaks you simply ignore and insist that your way is best. A prolonged mentality of this fashion makes you unable to here the voice of God and you can no longer realize heavenly truth without repentance.

david